[Senate Report 116-236]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 483
116th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 116-236
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 4049]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
----------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
June 24, 2020.--Ordered to be printed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
Calendar No. 483
116th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 116-236
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 4049]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
__________
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
June 24, 2020.--Ordered to be printed
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
40-613 WASHINGTON : 2020
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi JACK REED, Rhode Island
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
TOM COTTON, Arkansas KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JONI ERNST, Iowa MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
THOM TILLIS, North Carolina TIM KAINE, Virginia
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
RICK SCOTT, Florida JOE MANCHIN, West Virginia
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri DOUG JONES, Alabama
John A. Bonsell, Staff Director
Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director
(II)
C O N T E N T S
----------
REPORT TO ACCOMPANY S. 4049
Purpose of the Bill.............................................. 1
Committee Overview............................................... 2
Budgetary Effects of This Act (Sec. 4)........................... 4
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations and Budget Authority
Implication.................................................... 4
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS................. 7
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 7
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 7
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)............... 7
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 7
Integrated Air and Missile Defense assessment (sec. 111). 7
Report and limitation on Integrated Visual Augmentation
System acquisition (sec. 112).......................... 7
Modifications to requirement for an interim cruise
missile defense capability (sec. 113).................. 8
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 8
Contract authority for Columbia-class submarine program
(sec. 121)............................................. 8
Limitation on Navy medium and large unmanned surface
vessels (sec. 122)..................................... 9
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds for
Navy waterborne security barriers (sec. 123)........... 10
Procurement authorities for certain amphibious
shipbuilding programs (sec. 124)....................... 10
Fighter force structure acquisition strategy (sec. 125).. 10
Treatment of weapon systems added by Congress in future
President's budget requests (sec. 126)................. 11
Report on carrier wing composition (sec. 127)............ 11
Report on strategy to use ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer
to ensure full spectrum electromagnetic superiority
(sec. 128)............................................. 12
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 12
Economic order quantity contracting authority for F-35
Joint Strike Fighter program (sec. 141)................ 12
Minimum aircraft levels for major mission areas (sec.
142)................................................... 12
Minimum operational squadron level (sec. 143)............ 13
Minimum Air Force bomber aircraft level (sec. 144)....... 13
F-35 gun system (sec. 145)............................... 13
Prohibition on funding for Close Air Support Integration
Group (sec. 146)....................................... 14
Limitation on divestment of KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft
(sec. 147)............................................. 14
Limitation on retirement of U-2 and RQ-4 aircraft (sec.
148)................................................... 14
Limitation on divestment of F-15C aircraft in the
European theater (sec. 149)............................ 14
Air base defense development and acquisition strategy
(sec. 150)............................................. 14
Required solution for KC-46 aircraft remote visual system
limitations (sec. 151)................................. 15
Analysis of requirements and Advanced Battle Management
System capabilities (sec. 152)......................... 15
Studies on measures to assess cost-per-effect for key
mission areas (sec. 153)............................... 16
Plan for operational test and utility evaluation of
systems for Low-Cost Attributable Aircraft Technology
program (sec. 154)..................................... 16
Prohibition on retirement or divestment of A-10 aircraft
(sec. 155)............................................. 16
Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters.... 16
Budgeting for life-cycle cost of aircraft for the Navy,
Army, and Air Force: annual plan and certification
(sec. 171)............................................. 16
Authority to use F-35 aircraft withheld from delivery to
Government of Turkey (sec. 172)........................ 17
Transfer from Commander of United States Strategic
Command to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of
responsibilities and functions relating to
electromagnetic spectrum operations (sec. 173)......... 17
Cryptographic modernization schedules (sec. 174)......... 18
Prohibition on purchase of armed overwatch aircraft (sec.
175)................................................... 18
Special Operations armed overwatch (sec. 176)............ 18
Autonomic Logistics Information System redesign strategy
(sec. 177)............................................. 19
Contract aviation services in a country or in airspace in
which a Special Federal Aviation Regulation applies
(sec. 178)............................................. 19
F-35 aircraft munitions (sec. 179)....................... 19
Airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
acquisition roadmap for United States Special
Operations Command (sec. 180).......................... 20
Requirement to accelerate the fielding and development of
counter unmanned aerial system efforts across the Joint
Force (sec. 181)....................................... 20
Joint All-Domain Command and Control requirements (sec.
182)................................................... 21
Budget Items................................................. 21
Army..................................................... 21
MQ-1................................................. 21
CH-47 Cargo Helicopter Modifications................. 21
Procurement of PAC-3 MSE missiles.................... 22
Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2...... 22
Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle........................ 22
Bradley Program Modifications........................ 23
M88 Family of Vehicle Modification................... 23
Joint Assault Bridge................................. 23
Multi-Domain Task Force Tactical Network Technology.. 23
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades
transportable tactical command communications...... 23
Multi-Domain Task Force Tactical Command
Communications..................................... 24
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades combat
communications..................................... 24
Spider Anti-Personnel Munition....................... 24
Multi-Domain Task Force Defensive Cyber Operations... 24
U.S. Africa Command unfunded requirement force
protection upgrades long haul communications....... 25
Multi-Domain Task Force Counterintelligence/Security
Countermeasures.................................... 25
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades
indirect fire protection........................... 25
Multi-Domain Task Force Electronic Warfare Tools..... 26
WMD Civil Support Team Equipping..................... 26
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades
physical security systems.......................... 26
Expeditionary Solid Waste Disposal System............ 26
Navy..................................................... 27
F-35C................................................ 27
F-35B................................................ 27
CH-53K............................................... 27
CH-53 Advanced Procurement........................... 28
MQ-4................................................. 28
Marine Corps aviator body armor vest................. 28
F-35B/C Spares....................................... 28
Tomahawk............................................. 29
LRASM................................................ 29
Surface ship torpedo defense......................... 29
MK-54 torpedo modifications.......................... 29
Submarine supplier stability......................... 29
Virginia-class submarines............................ 30
Virginia-class submarine advance procurement......... 30
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers....................... 31
Surface ship supplier stability...................... 31
LPD Flight II........................................ 31
LPD Flight II advance procurement.................... 32
LHA replacement amphibious assault ship.............. 32
Landing craft utility................................ 32
Outfitting........................................... 33
Yard patrol craft.................................... 33
LCAC service life extension.......................... 33
Hybrid electric drive................................ 33
DDG modernization.................................... 34
LCS common mission module equipment.................. 34
LCS mine countermeasures mission modules............. 34
LCS anti-submarine warfare mission modules........... 34
Small and medium unmanned underwater vehicles........ 34
Surface electronic warfare improvement program....... 35
Cooperative engagement capability.................... 35
Next generation surface search radar................. 35
Sonobuoys............................................ 35
Ground-Based Anti-Ship Missile....................... 35
Air Force................................................ 36
F-35A................................................ 36
MQ-9................................................. 36
B-1.................................................. 36
B-1B................................................. 36
F-16 Radar........................................... 37
T-38 Ejection Seat................................... 37
E-4B Survivable Super High Frequency program......... 37
E-8 (JSTARS)......................................... 37
CV-22 ABSS........................................... 38
F-35A initial spares................................. 38
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)........ 38
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)................. 38
Cobra Dane service life extension.................... 38
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local
upgrades, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command................ 39
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local
upgrades, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command................ 39
Energy efficient small shelters upgrades............. 39
Defense Wide............................................. 40
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding--
Procurement........................................ 40
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense.................. 40
SM-3 IIA procurement................................. 40
Armed Overwatch...................................... 41
DHC-8 combat loss replacement........................ 41
Aircraft maintenance support combat loss replacement. 41
Special Operations Tactical Communication/Next
Generation Tactical Communications................. 42
Multi-Mission Payload................................ 42
Syria exfiltration reconstitution.................... 42
Items of Special Interest................................ 42
A-10................................................. 42
Active Protection Systems updated plans for M2
Bradley and Stryker combat vehicles................ 43
Advanced Battle Management System bridge report...... 43
Advanced combat search and rescue capability......... 43
Air Force pilot training............................. 44
Anti-ship missile development........................ 44
Army Radio Modernization............................. 45
Assessment of Navy anti-submarine warfare training
targets............................................ 45
C-17 maintenance..................................... 46
Comptroller General report on the Supervisor of
Shipbuilding....................................... 46
Comptroller General review of Navy shipbuilding and
ship maintenance................................... 47
Counter unmanned aircraft systems matters............ 48
DDG-51 destroyer multi-year procurement.............. 49
E-8 strategy......................................... 49
E-8C modernization................................... 50
Electronic warfare red team.......................... 50
F-35 basing requirements............................. 50
Flame retardant vehicle soft armor and materiel...... 51
Future Vertical Lift long-term cost and schedule
assessment......................................... 51
Guided missile frigate............................... 51
HMMWV rollover mitigation............................ 52
Hospital ship modernization.......................... 52
Hybrid electric drive on Arleigh Burke-class
destroyers......................................... 52
Improved Turbine Engine Program...................... 53
Integrated air and missile defense in the U.S.
Central Command area of responsibility............. 53
Joint and service exercises.......................... 54
Joint electronic warfare training range.............. 54
Live-virtual-constructive and game-based training
environment training............................... 55
M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle program assessment....... 55
Marine Corps integrated air and missile defense
capabilities....................................... 55
Mission command systems.............................. 56
Mission planning and force structure for hypersonic
weapon systems..................................... 56
Mk93 machine gun mount upgrade program............... 57
Next-generation crypto key loader.................... 57
Pacific Air Force air base resiliency................ 57
Polymer based magazines.............................. 58
Preservation of Department of Defense historic
aircraft and spacecraft............................ 58
Report on availability of repair for aircraft parts.. 59
Report on Unmet ISR Requirements, RC-135 Integration,
and KC-135 Conversion.............................. 59
Requirements and budgeting for precisely geolocated
3D imagery......................................... 60
Self-propelled lightweight howitzers................. 61
Shoulder-launched munitions procurement strategy..... 61
Specialization of carrier based squadrons............ 61
Tactical Combat Training System...................... 62
Tactical wheeled vehicle industrial base............. 62
Tactical wheeled vehicle strategy.................... 62
Taser X-26 non-lethal conducted electrical weapon
upgrade............................................ 63
UH-60V Black Hawk conversions........................ 64
UH-72 Communications and Monitoring Systems.......... 64
Use of Navy and Marine Corps aircraft for NOBLE EAGLE 64
USMC Aviator Body Armor Vest......................... 65
Variable depth sonar systems......................... 65
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 67
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 67
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)............... 67
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 67
Designation and activities of senior officials for
critical technology areas supportive of the National
Defense Strategy (sec. 211)............................ 67
Governance of fifth-generation wireless networking in the
Department of Defense (sec. 212)....................... 68
Application of artificial intelligence to the defense
reform pillar of the National Defense Strategy (sec.
213)................................................... 69
Extension of authorities to enhance innovation at
Department of Defense laboratories (sec. 214).......... 70
Updates to Defense Quantum Information Science and
Technology Research and Development program (sec. 215). 70
Program of part-time and term employment at Department of
Defense science and technology reinvention laboratories
of faculty and students from institutions of higher
education (sec. 216)................................... 70
Improvements to Technology and National Security
Fellowship of Department of Defense (sec. 217)......... 71
Department of Defense research, development, and
deployment of technology to support water sustainment
(sec. 218)............................................. 71
Development and testing of hypersonic capabilities (sec.
219)................................................... 71
Disclosure requirements for recipients of Department of
Defense research and development grants (sec. 220)..... 72
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters................ 72
Assessment on United States national security emerging
biotechnology efforts and capabilities and comparison
with adversaries (sec. 231)............................ 72
Independent comparative analysis of efforts by China and
the United States to recruit and retain researchers in
national security-related fields (sec. 232)............ 73
Department of Defense demonstration of virtualized radio
access network and massive multiple input multiple
output radio arrays for fifth generation wireless
networking (sec. 233).................................. 74
Independent technical review of Federal Communications
Commission Order 20-48 (sec. 234)...................... 74
Report on and limitation on expenditure of funds for
micro nuclear reactor programs (sec. 235).............. 75
Modification to Test Resource Management Center strategic
plan reporting cycle and contents (sec. 236)........... 76
Limitation on contract awards for certain unmanned
vessels (sec. 237)..................................... 76
Documentation relating to Advanced Battle Management
System (sec. 238)...................................... 77
Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Test special
purpose adjunct to address computational thinking (sec.
239)................................................... 77
Budget Items................................................. 77
Army..................................................... 77
Artificial Intelligence Human Performance
Optimization....................................... 77
Increase in basic research, Army..................... 77
Pandemic Vaccine Response............................ 78
Hybrid additive manufacturing........................ 78
Pathfinder Air Assault............................... 79
Harnessing Emerging Research Opportunities to Empower
Soldiers Program................................... 79
Metal-based display technologies..................... 79
Pathfinder Airborne.................................. 79
Ground technology advanced manufacturing, materials,
and process technologies........................... 80
Ground Combat Vehicle Platform Electrification....... 80
Immersive virtual modeling and simulation techniques. 80
Next Generation Combat Vehicle modeling and
simulation......................................... 81
Backpackable communications intelligence system...... 81
Defense resiliency platform against extreme cold
weather............................................ 81
Multi-drone multi-sensor intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance capability...................... 82
Quantum computing based materials optimization....... 82
Composite artillery tube and propulsion prototyping.. 82
Counter Unmanned Aerial System threat research and
development........................................ 82
Counter unmanned aircraft systems research........... 83
Coronavirus nanovaccine research..................... 83
3D Advanced Manufacturing............................ 83
Cybersecurity for industrial control systems and
building automation................................ 84
Graphene applications for military engineering....... 84
High performance computing modernization............. 84
Carbon fiber and graphitic composites for Next
Generation Combat Vehicle program.................. 85
Cyber and connected vehicle innovation research...... 85
Small unit ground robotic capabilities............... 85
Virtual Experimentations Enhancement................. 86
Hyper velocity projectile extended range technologies 86
Electromagnetic effects research to support long
range precision fires and air and missile defense
cross functional teams............................. 86
Development and fielding of high energy laser
capabilities--Army................................. 86
Hypersonic hot air tunnel test environment........... 87
Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA)........... 87
Operational Fires program reduction, Army............ 87
Hypersonic program reduction, Army................... 87
Joint Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office. 88
Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems for Special
Operations Forces.................................. 88
Counter small unmanned aircraft systems operational
demonstrations..................................... 89
Next Generation Squad Weapon......................... 89
Bradley and Stryker Active Protection Systems........ 89
Integrated Data Software Pilot Program............... 90
Army cyber situational understanding capability...... 90
Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2...... 91
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle................... 91
Directed energy test and evaluation capabilities..... 91
Precision Strike Missile............................. 92
Guided Multiple-Launch Rocket System................. 92
Advanced manufacturing technologies.................. 92
Navy..................................................... 93
Defense University Research and Instrumentation
Program............................................ 93
Increase in basic research, Navy..................... 93
Predictive modeling for undersea vehicles............ 93
Direct air capture and blue carbon removal technology
program............................................ 94
Electric propulsion for military craft and advanced
planning hulls..................................... 94
Expeditionary unmanned systems launch and recovery... 94
Testbed for autonomous ship systems.................. 95
Interdisciplinary Cybersecurity Research............. 95
Humanoid robotics research........................... 95
Social networks and computational social science..... 96
Naval academic undersea vehicle research partnerships 96
Thermoplastic materials.............................. 96
Mission planning advanced technology demonstration... 96
Unmanned surface vessel development.................. 97
Advanced combat systems technology................... 98
Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures....... 98
Advanced submarine system development................ 98
Ship concept advanced design......................... 98
Large Surface Combatant preliminary design........... 99
Littoral Combat Ship................................. 99
LCS mission modules.................................. 99
Conventional munitions............................... 99
Surface Navy Laser Weapon System..................... 100
Large unmanned undersea vehicles..................... 100
Advanced undersea prototyping........................ 100
Hypersonic program reduction, Navy................... 100
Conventional prompt strike........................... 101
Submarine tactical warfare systems................... 101
Advanced degaussing.................................. 101
Lightweight torpedo development...................... 102
Submarine acoustic warfare development............... 102
Integrated surveillance system....................... 102
LCAC composite component development................. 102
G/ATOR demonstration................................. 103
Attack and utility replacement aircraft vehicle...... 103
Cyber tool development............................... 103
Air Force................................................ 104
Increase in basic research, Air Force................ 104
High Energy Synchrotron X-Ray program................ 104
Materials maturation for high mach systems........... 105
Metals Affordability Initiative...................... 105
Qualification of additive manufacturing processes.... 105
Technologies to repair fasteners..................... 106
Hypersonic materials................................. 106
Golden Horde Vanguard program reductions............. 106
Fixed-wing improvements.............................. 106
AETP/NGAP............................................ 107
Directed energy counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems
(CUAS)............................................. 107
Advanced Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon............. 107
KC-135 operational energy increases.................. 107
Polar communications................................. 108
Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology.............. 108
Long Endurance UAS................................... 108
Rapid repair of high performance materials........... 109
Small satellites..................................... 109
Air Force Open Systems Integration................... 109
SLATE/VR Training.................................... 109
Gulf Test Range modernization........................ 110
Enterprise Resource Planning Common Services......... 110
Advanced Air to Air capability....................... 110
Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System........ 110
B-1B Squadrons....................................... 110
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local
upgrades, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command................ 111
C-17 microvanes...................................... 111
Logistics Information Technology..................... 111
Small satellite mission operations center............ 111
GPS User Equipment................................... 112
National Security Space Launch technology development 112
Cobra Dane service life extension.................... 112
Commercial space domain awareness.................... 112
Global Positioning System III--Operational Control
Segment............................................ 113
Defense Wide............................................. 113
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research........................................... 113
Minerva Research Initiative.......................... 113
Traumatic brain injury medical research.............. 114
Aerospace, education, research, and innovation
activities......................................... 114
Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority
Institutions....................................... 115
Emerging biotech research............................ 115
Operational Fires program reduction, Defense-wide.... 115
Hypersonic program reduction......................... 115
Stratospheric balloon research....................... 116
Rapid prototyping using digital manufacturing........ 116
Defense supply chain technologies.................... 116
Steel Performance Initiative......................... 117
Network-Centric Warfare Technology program reduction. 117
Operational Energy Capability Improvements........... 117
Funding for long-duration demonstration initiative
and joint program.................................. 117
Advanced technologies................................ 118
Defense Modernization and Prototyping program
reduction.......................................... 118
Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii........................ 118
Next Generation Interceptor.......................... 118
PDI: Guam Defense System............................. 119
Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking and Custody Layer.. 120
Hybrid space......................................... 120
Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor....... 120
Stryker Nuclear Biological Chemical Reconnaissance
Vehicle Sensor Suite Upgrade....................... 121
Infrastructure to assess counter-small UAS commercial
solutions.......................................... 121
Telemetry range extension wave glider relay.......... 122
National Academies study on comparison of talent
programs........................................... 122
Defense Technical Information Center................. 122
Advanced machine tool research....................... 123
Cold spray manufacturing technologies................ 123
Domestic organic light emitting diode manufacturing.. 123
Implementation of radar supplier resiliency plan..... 124
Manufacturing for reuse of NdFeB magnets............. 124
Submarine Construction Workforce Training Pipeline... 124
Workforce transformation cyber initiative pilot
program............................................ 125
Cyber orchestration pilot............................ 125
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding--RDT&E... 125
Multi-Mission Payload................................ 126
Advanced satellite navigation receiver............... 126
Joint Test and Evaluation Program.................... 126
Items of Special Interest................................ 127
Advanced powertrain demonstrator..................... 127
Anti-corrosion and nano technologies................. 127
Artificial intelligence and machine learning
technologies and systems........................... 127
Carbon fiber and graphitic foam for Special
Operations Forces tactical vehicles................ 128
Carbon fiber wheels and graphitic foam for Next
Generation Combat Vehicle.......................... 129
Close Combat Lethality Task Force.................... 130
Collaboration on research to counter foreign malign
influence operations............................... 131
Comptroller General review of Artificial Intelligence
Activities of the Department of Defense............ 131
Cyber Operations for Base Resilient Architecture..... 132
Emerging biotechnology for national security......... 132
Ground Vehicle Systems Center modeling and simulation 133
High-energy laser weapons systems.................... 133
Implement National Academics of Science Army
Information Science report recommendations......... 133
Joint Artificial Intelligence Center reporting
structure.......................................... 134
Nanotechnology research.............................. 134
National Guard research, development, test and
evaluation activities.............................. 135
National Security Innovation Network................. 135
Open Systems Architecture for the Army's Future
Vertical Lift programs............................. 136
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle requirements and
acquisition strategy............................... 136
Pandemic resilience technologies..................... 137
Predictive maintenance algorithm..................... 137
Reimbursable work at Army Combat Capabilities
Development Command laboratories and engineering
centers............................................ 137
Review of barriers to innovation..................... 138
Soldier Enhancement Program.......................... 139
Strategic Capabilities Office activities............. 139
Ultra-compact hyperspectral imagery.................. 139
Unmanned Aerial Systems in Great Power Competition... 140
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 141
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 141
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)............... 141
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment........................... 141
Modifications and technical corrections to ensure
restoration of contamination by perfluorooctane
sulfonate and perfluorooctanoic acid (sec. 311)........ 141
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration
Program technical edits and clarification (sec. 312)... 141
Survey and market research of technologies for phase out
by Department of Defense of use of fluorinated aqueous
film-forming foam (sec. 313)........................... 141
Modification of authority to carry out military
installation resilience projects (sec. 314)............ 142
Native American Indian lands environmental mitigation
program (sec. 315)..................................... 142
Energy resilience and energy security measures on
military installations (sec. 316)...................... 142
Modification to availability of energy cost savings for
Department of Defense (sec. 317)....................... 142
Long-duration demonstration initiative and joint program
(sec. 318)............................................. 142
Pilot program on alternative fuel vehicle purchasing
(sec. 319)............................................. 142
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment........................ 143
Repeal of statutory requirement for notification to
Director of Defense Logistics Agency three years prior
to implementing changes to any uniform or uniform
component (sec. 331)................................... 143
Clarification of limitation on length of overseas forward
deployment of currently deployed naval vessels (sec.
332)...................................................
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 143
Report on impact of permafrost thaw on infrastructure,
facilities, and operations of the Department of Defense
(sec. 351)............................................. 143
Plans and reports on emergency response training for
military installations (sec. 352)...................... 143
Report on implementation by Department of Defense of
requirements relating to renewable fuel pumps (sec.
353)................................................... 143
Report on effects of extreme weather on Department of
Defense (sec. 354)..................................... 144
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 144
Prohibition on divestiture of manned intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft operated by
United States Special Operations Command (sec. 371).... 144
Information on overseas construction projects in support
of contingency operations using funds for operation and
maintenance (sec. 372)................................. 144
Provision of protection to the National Museum of the
Marine Corps, the National Museum of the United States
Army, the National Museum of the United States Navy,
and the National Museum of the United States Air Force
(sec. 373)............................................. 145
Inapplicability of congressional notification and dollar
limitation requirements for advanced billings for
certain background investigations (sec. 374)........... 146
Repeal of sunset for minimum annual purchase amount for
carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet
(sec. 375)............................................. 146
Improvement of the Operational Energy Capability
Improvement Fund of the Department of Defense (sec.
376)................................................... 146
Commission on the naming of items of the Department of
Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of
America or any person who served voluntarily with the
Confederate States of America. (sec. 377).............. 147
Modifications to review of proposed actions by Military
Aviation and Installation Assurance Clearinghouse (sec.
378)................................................... 147
Adjustment in availability of appropriations for unusual
cost overruns and for changes in scope of work (sec.
379)................................................... 147
Requirement that Secretary of Defense implement security
and emergency response recommendations relating to
active shooter or terrorist attacks on installations of
Department of Defense (sec. 380)....................... 147
Clarification of food ingredient requirements for food or
beverages provided by the Department of Defense (sec.
381)................................................... 147
Budget Items................................................. 148
Joint Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems initial operating
capability acceleration................................ 148
Child Development Center playground equipment and
furniture increases.................................... 148
Child Youth Service improvements......................... 148
Army Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization increase................................. 149
EUCOM and INDOPACOM Multi-Domain Task Force increases.... 149
Revitalization of Army deployment infrastructure......... 150
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades personnel
recovery/casualty evacuation........................... 150
U.S. Africa Command intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance......................................... 150
United States Africa Command personnel recovery, casualty
evacuation, and trauma care............................ 150
United States Cyber Command Access and operations........ 151
Service-wide transportation.............................. 151
Other personnel support.................................. 151
Servicewomen's commemorative partnerships................ 151
Pilot program on the remote provision by the National
Guard for cybersecurity................................ 152
PDI: Asia Pacific Regional Initiative, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command................................................ 152
PDI: Joint Task Force Indo-Pacific, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command................................................ 152
PDI: Counterterrorism Information Facility in Singapore,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.............................. 153
PDI: Countering Chinese malign influence, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command........................................ 153
USNS Mercy MTF improvements.............................. 153
Energy Security Programs Office.......................... 154
A-10 Aircraft............................................ 154
Air Force Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization increases................................ 154
Transfer to OCO.......................................... 155
Slowing Air Force KC-135 and KC-10 tanker fleet
divestment............................................. 155
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.............................. 155
Hunt Forward missions.................................... 156
Securing the Department of Defense Information Network... 156
Air Force marketing reduction............................ 156
COVID-related throughput decrease........................ 157
Syria exfiltration reconstitution........................ 157
Contractor logistics support............................. 157
U.S. Special Operations Command flying hours............. 158
Innovative Readiness Training increase................... 158
Starbase................................................. 159
Defense Contract Management Agency....................... 159
DWR restore: Congressional oversight..................... 159
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding - O&M........ 160
DWR restore: blankets for homeless program............... 160
Defense Institute of International Legal Studies......... 160
Institute for Security Governance........................ 161
PDI: Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative........... 161
PDI: Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative........... 162
Staffing of Department of Defense Education Activity
schools................................................ 163
Impact aid............................................... 163
Defense Community Infrastructure Program................. 163
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence.. 163
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup.................................. 164
Energy Resilience Readiness Exercises.................... 164
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nation-wide
human health assessment................................ 164
Funding for commission relating to Confederate symbols... 164
Cooperative program for Vietnam personnel MIA............ 165
DWR restore: Congressional background investigations..... 165
Energy performance contracts............................. 165
Personnel in the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense
Sustainment and Environment, Safety, and Occupational
Health................................................. 165
Improvement of occupational license portability for
military spouses through interstate compacts........... 166
National Cyber Director independent study funding........ 166
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative........ 166
DWR restore: support to commissions...................... 167
Biological Threat Reduction Program...................... 167
Acquisition Workforce Development Account................ 167
Operation and maintenance adjustments.................... 167
Bulk fuel adjustment..................................... 168
Foreign currency adjustment.............................. 168
Items of Special Interest.................................... 168
Adversary air............................................ 168
Air Force aerospace ground equipment..................... 169
Air Force Reserve runway infrastructure.................. 169
Air Force Special Operations Command total force
utilization............................................ 170
Assessment of potential transfer of real property,
equipment and facilities in the Assembled Chemical
Weapons Alternative Program............................ 171
Backup power technology.................................. 171
Briefing on contested logistics in support of the
National Defense Strategy.............................. 171
Briefing on microturbine technology for military
applications........................................... 172
Cold spray applications for Department of Defense
sustainment and medical activities..................... 172
Consideration for local broadcasting and traditional
media for Department of Defense advertising............ 173
Consideration of variable refrigerant flow systems....... 173
Defense Personal Property Program........................ 173
Defense Personal Property Program........................ 174
Defense Readiness Reporting Reform briefing.............. 175
Diverse training for special operations forces........... 175
Eastern Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR)............. 176
Electronic component failures............................ 176
Emerging viral threats................................... 177
Engine optimization initiatives at Tinker Air Force Base. 177
Improving depot best practice sharing.................... 178
Informing War Plans Through Accurate War Gaming.......... 179
Infrared uniform management.............................. 179
Installation energy...................................... 180
Installation Utility and Energy Authority Integration.... 180
Joint Military Information Support Operations WebOps
Center................................................. 181
Military Munitions Response Program...................... 181
Military working dogs Comptroller General review......... 181
National all-domain warfighting center................... 182
Naval expeditionary sustainment and repair............... 182
Navy Converged Enterprise Resource Planning.............. 183
Navy shipyard infrastructure optimization................ 183
Partnerships with industrial base for hypersonic and
directed energy programs............................... 184
Preservation of the Force and Families program........... 184
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration
program................................................ 185
Red Hill................................................. 185
Report on Department of Defense small arms training
system capabilities.................................... 186
Software to automate manufacturing....................... 186
Utilities privatization.................................. 187
Water and energy infrastructure.......................... 188
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 189
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 189
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)............... 189
End strength level matters (sec. 402).................... 190
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 190
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............ 190
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of
the reserves (sec. 412)................................ 190
End strengths for military technicians (dual status)
(sec. 413)............................................. 191
Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support (sec. 414)......... 191
Separate authorization by Congress of minimum end
strengths for non-temporary military technicians (dual
status) and maximum end strengths for temporary
military technicians (dual status) (sec. 415).......... 191
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 192
Military personnel (sec. 421)............................ 192
Budget Items................................................. 192
Military personnel funding changes....................... 192
Title V--Military Personnel Policy............................... 193
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 193
Repeal of codified specification of authorized strengths
of certain commissioned officers on active duty (sec.
501)................................................... 193
Temporary expansion of availability of enhanced
constructive service credit in a particular career
field upon original appointment as a commissioned
officer (sec. 502)..................................... 193
Requirement for promotion selection board recommendation
of higher placement on promotion list of officers of
particular merit (sec. 503)............................ 194
Special selection review boards for review of promotion
of officers subject to adverse information identified
after recommendation for promotion and related matters
(sec. 504)............................................. 194
Number of opportunities for consideration for promotion
under alternative promotion authority (sec. 505)....... 195
Mandatory retirement for age (sec. 506).................. 195
Clarifying and improving restatement of rules on the
retired grade of commissioned officers (sec. 507)...... 195
Repeal of authority for original appointment of regular
Navy officers designated for engineering duty,
aeronautical engineering duty, and special duty (sec.
508)................................................... 196
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management..................... 197
Exclusion of certain reserve general and flag officers on
active duty from limitations on authorized strengths
(sec. 511)............................................. 197
Subtitle C--General Service Authorities...................... 197
Increased access to potential recruits (sec. 516)........ 197
Temporary authority to order retired members to active
duty in high-demand, low-density assignments during war
or national emergency (sec. 517)....................... 198
Certificate of release or discharge from Active Duty (DD
Form 214) matters (sec. 518)........................... 198
Evaluation of barriers to minority participation in
certain units of the Armed Forces (sec. 519)........... 198
Subtitle D--Military Justice and Related Matters............. 198
Part I--Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual
Assault and Related Matters............................ 198
Modification of time required for expedited decisions
in connection with applications for change of
station or unit transfer of members who are victims
of sexual assault or related offenses (sec. 521)... 198
Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of
Sexual Misconduct (sec. 522)....................... 199
Report on ability of Sexual Assault Response
Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and
Response Victim Advocates to perform duties (sec.
523)............................................... 199
Briefing on Special Victims' Counsel program (sec.
524)............................................... 199
Accountability of leadership of the Department of
Defense for discharging the sexual harassment
policies and programs of the Department (sec. 525). 199
Safe-to-report policy applicable across the Armed
Forces (sec. 526).................................. 199
Additional bases for provision of advice by the
Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of
Sexual Misconduct (sec. 527)....................... 200
Additional matters for reports of the Defense
Advisory Committee for the Prevention of Sexual
Misconduct (sec. 528).............................. 200
Policy on separation of victim and accused at
military service academies and degree-granting
military educational institutions (sec. 529)....... 200
Briefing on placement of members of the Armed Forces
in academic status who are victims of sexual
assault onto Non-Rated Periods (sec. 530).......... 200
Part II--Other Military Justice Matters.................. 200
Right to notice of victims of offenses under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice regarding certain
post-trial motions, filings, and hearings (sec.
531)............................................... 200
Consideration of the evidence by Courts of Criminal
Appeals (sec. 532)..................................... 201
Preservation of records of the military justice system
(sec. 533)............................................. 201
Comptroller General of the United States report on
implementation by the Armed Forces of recent GAO
recommendations and statutory requirements on
assessment of racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in
the military justice system (sec. 534)................. 201
Briefing on mental health support for vicarious trauma
for certain personnel in the military justice system
(sec. 535)............................................. 201
Guardian ad litem program for minor dependents of members
of the Armed Forces (sec. 536)......................... 202
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, Transition, and
Resilience................................................. 202
Training on religious accommodation for members of the
Armed Forces (sec. 541)................................ 202
Additional elements with 2021 certifications on the
Ready, Relevant Learning initiative of the Navy (sec.
542)................................................... 202
Report on standardization and potential merger of law
enforcement training for military and civilian
personnel across the Department of Defense (sec. 543).. 202
Quarterly Report on Implementation of the Comprehensive
Review of Special Operations Forces Culture and Ethics
(sec. 544)............................................. 202
Information on nominations and applications for military
service academies (sec. 545)........................... 203
Pilot programs in connection with Senior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps units at Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and minority institutions
(sec. 546)............................................. 203
Expansion of Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
program (sec. 547)..................................... 203
Department of Defense STARBASE program (sec. 548)........ 204
Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards........................... 204
Award or presentation of decorations favorably
recommended following determination on merits of
proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a
timely fashion (sec. 551).............................. 204
Honorary promotion matters (sec. 552).................... 204
Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family
Readiness Matters.......................................... 204
Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters............ 204
Continuation of authority to assist local educational
agencies that benefit dependents of members of the
Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian
employees (sec. 561)............................... 204
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities
(sec. 562)......................................... 205
Staffing of Department of Defense Education Activity
schools to maintain maximum student-to-teacher
ratios (sec. 563).................................. 205
Matters in connection with free appropriate public
education for dependents of members of the Armed
Forces with special needs (sec. 564)............... 206
Pilot program on expanded eligibility for Department
of Defense Education Activity Virtual High School
program (sec. 565)................................. 206
Pilot program on expansion of eligibility for
enrollment at domestic dependent elementary and
secondary schools (sec. 566)....................... 206
Comptroller General of the United States report on
the structural condition of Department of Defense
Education Activity schools (sec. 567).............. 207
Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters............... 207
Responsibility for allocation of certain funds for
military child development programs (sec. 571)..... 207
Improvements to Exceptional Family Member Program
(sec. 572)......................................... 207
Procedures of the Office of Special Needs for the
development of individualized services plans for
military families with special needs (sec. 573).... 208
Restatement and clarification of authority to
reimburse members for spouse relicensing costs
pursuant to a permanent change of station (sec.
574)............................................... 208
Improvements to Department of Defense tracking of and
response to incidents of child abuse involving
military dependents on military installations (sec.
575)............................................... 208
Military child care and child development center
matters (sec. 576)................................. 208
Expansion of financial assistance under My Career
Advancement Account program (sec. 577)............. 209
Subtitle H--Other Matters.................................... 209
Removal of personally identifying and other information
of certain persons from investigative reports, the
Department of Defense Central Index of Investigations,
and other records and databases (sec. 586)............. 209
National emergency exception for timing requirements with
respect to certain surveys of members of the Armed
Forces (sec. 587)...................................... 209
Sunset and transfer of functions of the Physical
Disability Board of Review (sec. 588).................. 210
Extension of reporting deadline for the annual report on
the assessment of the effectiveness of activities of
the federal voting assistance program (sec. 589)....... 210
Pilot programs on remote provision by National Guard to
State governments and National Guards in other States
of cybersecurity technical assistance in training,
preparation, and response to cyber incidents (sec. 590) 210
Plan on performance of funeral honors details by members
of other Armed Forces when members of the Armed Force
of the deceased are unavailable (sec. 591)............. 211
Limitation on implementation of Army Combat Fitness Test
(sec. 592)............................................. 211
Items of Special Interest.................................... 211
Air Force Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Flight
Academy................................................ 211
Air Ground Operations Wings.............................. 212
Ban on unsafe products at Department of Defense Child
Development Centers.................................... 212
Briefing on current efforts to reduce non-essential
training............................................... 213
Comptroller General report on the dual status military
technician workforce................................... 213
Comptroller General review on Department of Defense's
accreditation of confinement and other detention
facilities............................................. 214
Grade of Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence
Center................................................. 214
Interagency cooperation impacting recruiting............. 215
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps computer science
and cybersecurity education............................ 215
Mental health discrimination during accession............ 215
Military Family Readiness and Command Climate Surveys.... 216
Plan for enhancement of recruitment for the Armed Forces
among rural, isolated, and native populations.......... 216
Senior officer accountability and use of "proximate
cause" standard........................................ 217
Status of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Culture and Process
Improvement Program.................................... 217
Supporting innovations for 21st century servicemember and
family readiness and resiliency........................ 218
The Veterans Metrics Initiative Study.................... 219
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 221
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 221
Reorganization of certain allowances other than travel
and transportation allowances (sec. 601)............... 221
Hazardous duty pay for members of the Armed Forces
performing duty in response to the Coronavirus Disease
2019 (sec. 602)........................................ 221
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 221
One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special
pay authorities (sec. 611)............................. 221
Increase in special and incentive pays for officers in
health professions (sec. 612).......................... 221
Subtitle C--Disability Pay, Retired Pay, and Survivor
Benefits................................................... 222
Inclusion of drill or training foregone due to emergency
travel or duty restrictions in computations of
entitlement to and amounts of retired pay for non-
regular service (sec. 621)............................. 222
Modernization and clarification of payment of certain
Reserves while on duty (sec. 622)...................... 222
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 222
Permanent authority for and enhancement of the Government
lodging program (sec. 631)............................. 222
Approval of certain activities by retired and reserve
members of the uniformed services (sec. 632)........... 223
Items of Special Interest.................................... 223
Commissary and Exchange loyalty programs................. 223
Comptroller General report on the impact of reforms in
the defense commissary system.......................... 223
Operation of commissaries during government shutdowns.... 224
Special operations special and incentive pay............. 224
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 225
Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits........... 225
Authority for Secretary of Defense to manage provider
type referral and supervision requirements under
TRICARE program (sec. 701)............................. 225
Removal of Christian Science providers as authorized
providers under the TRICARE Program (sec. 702)......... 225
Waiver of fees charged to certain civilians for emergency
medical treatment provided at military medical
treatment facilities (sec. 703)........................ 225
Mental health resources for members of the Armed Forces
and their dependents during the COVID-19 pandemic (sec.
704)................................................... 226
Transitional health benefits for certain members of the
National Guard serving under orders in response to the
coronavirus (COVID-19) (sec. 705)...................... 226
Extramedical maternal health providers demonstration
project (sec. 706)..................................... 226
Pilot program on receipt of non-generic prescription
maintenance medications under TRICARE pharmacy benefits
program (sec. 707)..................................... 226
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration....................... 227
Modifications to transfer of Army Medical Research and
Development Command and public health commands to
Defense Health Agency (sec. 721)....................... 227
Delay of applicability of administration of TRICARE
dental plans through Federal Employees Dental and
Vision Insurance Program (sec. 722).................... 227
Authority of Secretary of Defense to waive requirements
during national emergencies for purposes of provision
of health care (sec. 723).............................. 227
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................ 228
Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund (sec. 741).......................... 228
Membership of Board of Regents of Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences (sec. 742)........... 228
Military health system Clinical Quality Management
Program (sec. 743)..................................... 228
Modifications to pilot program on civilian and military
partnerships to enhance interoperability and medical
surge capability and capacity of National Disaster
Medical System (sec. 744).............................. 228
Study on force mix options and service models to enhance
readiness of medical force of the Armed Forces to
provide combat casualty care (sec. 745)................ 229
Comptroller General study on delivery of mental health
services to members of the reserve components of the
Armed Forces (sec. 746)................................ 229
Review and report on prevention of suicide among members
of the Armed Forces stationed at remote installations
outside the contiguous United States (sec. 747)........ 230
Audit of medical conditions of tenants in privatized
military housing (sec. 748)............................ 230
Comptroller General study on prenatal and postpartum
mental health conditions among members of the Armed
Forces and their dependents (sec. 749)................. 230
Plan for evaluation of flexible spending account options
for members of the uniformed services and their
families (sec. 750).................................... 230
Assessment of receipt by civilians of emergency medical
treatment at military medical treatment facilities
(sec. 751)............................................. 231
Items of Special Interest.................................... 231
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis research of the Department
of Defense............................................. 231
Clinical performance management system................... 231
Diagnostic medical devices for traumatic brain injury.... 231
Ensure eating disorder treatment for servicemembers and
dependents............................................. 232
Improve academic collaboration and streamline traumatic
brain injury funding streams........................... 232
Improvements to the TRICARE Extended Care Health Option
program................................................ 233
Military health clinical readiness....................... 233
Modification of Post Deployment Health Assessment (DD
Form 2796) to increase reporting of exposure to burn
pit smoke.............................................. 234
Musculoskeletal injury prevention........................ 234
Rare cancer research and treatment....................... 234
Remote health capabilities in the tactical environment... 235
Status of pilot program to treat post-traumatic stress
disorder resulting from sexual trauma.................. 235
Substance abuse prevention............................... 236
TBI medical research..................................... 236
Telehealth and virtual health technology implementation.. 236
Traumatic brain injury treatment......................... 237
TRICARE managed care support contract structure.......... 237
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS................................................ 238
Subtitle A--Industrial Base Matters.......................... 238
Policy recommendations for implementation of Executive
Order 13806 (Assessing and Strengthening the
Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply
Chain Resiliency) (sec. 801)........................... 238
Assessment of national security innovation base (sec.
802)................................................... 238
Improving implementation of policy pertaining to the
national technology and industrial base (sec. 803)..... 239
Modification of framework for modernizing acquisition
processes to ensure integrity of industrial base (sec.
804)................................................... 239
Assessments of industrial base capabilities and capacity
(sec. 805)............................................. 240
Analyses of certain materials and technology sectors for
action to address sourcing and industrial capacity
(sec. 806)............................................. 240
Microelectronics manufacturing strategy (sec. 807)....... 241
Additional requirements pertaining to printed circuit
boards (sec. 808)...................................... 242
Statement of policy with respect to supply of strategic
minerals and metals for Department of Defense purposes
(sec. 809)............................................. 243
Report on strategic and critical minerals and metals
(sec. 810)............................................. 243
Stabilization of shipbuilding industrial base workforce
(sec. 811)............................................. 243
Miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods
other than United States goods (sec. 812).............. 243
Use of domestically sourced star trackers in national
security satellites (sec. 813)......................... 243
Modification to small purchase threshold exception to
sourcing requirements for certain articles (sec. 814).. 244
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 244
Report on acquisition risk assessment and mitigation as
part of Adaptive Acquisition Framework implementation
(sec. 831)............................................. 244
Comptroller General report on implementation of software
acquisition reforms (sec. 832)......................... 245
Subtitle C--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations................................ 245
Authority to acquire innovative commercial products and
services using general solicitation competitive
procedures (sec. 841).................................. 245
Truth in Negotiations Act threshold for Department of
Defense contracts (sec. 842)........................... 246
Revision of proof required when using an evaluation
factor for defense contractors employing or
subcontracting with members of the selected reserve of
the reserve components of the Armed Forces (sec. 843).. 246
Contract authority for advanced development of initial or
additional prototype units (sec. 844).................. 246
Definition of business system deficiencies for contractor
business systems (sec. 845)............................ 246
Repeal of pilot program on payment of costs for denied
Government Accountability Office bid protests (sec.
846)................................................... 247
Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition
Programs................................................... 247
Implementation of Modular Open Systems Architecture
requirements (sec. 861)................................ 247
Sustainment reviews (sec. 862)........................... 247
Recommendations for future direct selections (sec. 863).. 248
Disclosures for certain shipbuilding major defense
acquisition program offers (sec. 864).................. 248
Subtitle E--Small Business Matters........................... 248
Prompt payment of contractors (sec. 871)................. 248
Extension of pilot program for streamlined awards for
innovative technology programs (sec. 872).............. 248
Subtitle F--Provisions Related to Software-Driven
Capabilities............................................... 249
Inclusion of software in government performance of
acquisition functions (sec. 881)....................... 249
Balancing security and innovation in software development
and acquisition (sec. 882)............................. 249
Comptroller General report on intellectual property
acquisition and licensing (sec. 883)................... 250
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 250
Safeguarding defense-sensitive United States intellectual
property, technology, and other data and information
(sec. 891)............................................. 250
Domestic comparative testing activities (sec. 892)....... 251
Repeal of apprenticeship program (sec. 893).............. 251
Items of Special Interest.................................... 251
Army Combat Fitness Test equipment....................... 251
Comptroller General review on the impact of small
business Federal contracting programs.................. 252
Contracting for non-traditional defense contractors...... 253
Development of domestic unmanned aircraft systems
industry............................................... 253
Domestic procurement of military working dogs............ 253
Domestic sources for corrosion control chemicals......... 254
Improving information available to contracting officials
regarding contractor workplace safety violations....... 254
Procurement Technical Assistance Program and COVID-19.... 255
Report on battery supply chain security.................. 255
Report on satellite power sourcing....................... 256
Risks associated with contractor ownership............... 256
Secure sources of supply for rare earth elements......... 257
Shipbuilding industrial base............................. 258
Sustainment of munitions................................. 258
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 261
Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related
Matters.................................................... 261
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and
Low-Intensity Conflict and related matters (sec. 901).. 261
Redesignation and codification in law of Office of
Economic Adjustment (sec. 902)......................... 262
Modernization of process used by the Department of
Defense to identify, task, and manage Congressional
reporting requirements (sec. 903)...................... 262
Inclusion of Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau as
an advisor to the Joint Requirements Oversight Council
(sec. 904)............................................. 263
Assignment of Responsibility for the Arctic region within
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (sec. 905)...... 263
Subtitle B--Department of Defense Management Reform.......... 263
Termination of position of Chief Management Officer of
the Department of Defense (sec. 911)................... 263
Report on assignment of responsibilities, duties, and
authorities of Chief Management Officer to other
officers or employees of the Department of Defense
(sec. 912)............................................. 263
Performance Improvement Officer of the Department of
Defense (sec. 913)..................................... 264
Assignment of certain responsibilities and duties to
particular officers of the Department of Defense (sec.
914)................................................... 264
Assignment of responsibilities and duties of Chief
Management Officer to officers or employees of the
Department of Defense to be designated (sec. 915)...... 265
Definition of enterprise business operations for title
10, United States Code (sec. 916)...................... 265
Annual report on enterprise business operations of the
Department of Defense (sec. 917)....................... 265
Conforming amendments (sec. 918)......................... 265
Subtitle C--Space Force Matters.............................. 265
Part I--Amendments To Integrate the Space Force Into Law. 265
Clarification of Space Force and Chief of Space
Operations authorities (sec. 931)...................... 265
Amendments to Department of the Air Force provisions in
title 10, United States Code (sec. 932)................ 265
Amendments to other provisions of title 10, United States
Code (sec. 933)........................................ 266
Amendments to provisions of law relating to pay and
allowances (sec. 934).................................. 266
Amendments relating to provisions of law on veterans'
benefits (sec. 935).................................... 266
Amendments to other provisions of the United States Code
(sec. 936)............................................. 266
Applicability to other provisions of law (sec. 937)...... 266
Part II--Other Matters................................... 266
Matters relating to reserve components for the Space
Force (sec. 941)................................... 266
Transfers of military and civilian personnel to the
Space Force (sec. 942)............................. 267
Limitation on transfer of military installations to
the jurisdiction of the Space Force (sec. 943)..... 267
Subtitle D--Organization and Management of Other Department
of Defense Offices and Elements............................ 267
Annual report on establishment of field operating
agencies (sec. 951).................................... 267
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 269
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 269
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)................... 269
Application of Financial Improvement and Audit
Remediation Plan to fiscal years following fiscal year
2020 (sec. 1002)....................................... 269
Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities........................... 269
Codification of authority for joint task forces of the
Department of Defense to support law enforcement
agencies conducting counterterrorism or counter-
transnational organized crime activities (sec. 1011)... 269
Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 269
Modification of authority to purchase used vessels with
funds in the National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1021). 269
Waiver during war or threat to national security of
restrictions on overhaul, repair, or maintenance of
vessels in foreign shipyards (sec. 1022)............... 270
Modification of waiver authority on prohibition on use of
funds for retirement of certain legacy maritime mine
countermeasure platforms (sec. 1023)................... 270
Extension of authority for reimbursement of expenses for
certain Navy mess operations afloat (sec. 1024)........ 270
Sense of Congress on actions necessary to achieve a 355-
ship Navy (sec. 1025).................................. 270
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism................................. 270
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or
release of individuals detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States
(sec. 1031)............................................ 270
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or
relinquish control of United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1032)....................... 271
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or
release of individuals detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to certain countries
(sec. 1033)............................................ 271
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to construct or
modify facilities in the United States to house
detainees transferred from United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1034)....................... 271
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 271
Inclusion of disaster-related emergency preparedness
activities among law enforcement activities authorities
for sale or donation of excess personal property of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1041)...................... 271
Expenditure of funds for Department of Defense
clandestine activities that support operational
preparation of the environment (sec. 1042)............. 272
Clarification of authority of military commissions under
chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, to punish
contempt (sec. 1043)................................... 272
Prohibition on actions to infringe upon First Amendment
rights of peaceable assembly and petition for redress
of grievances (sec. 1044).............................. 272
Arctic planning, research, and development (sec. 1045)... 272
Consideration of security risks in certain
telecommunications architecture for future overseas
basing decisions of the Department of Defense (sec.
1046).................................................. 273
Foreign military training programs (sec. 1047)........... 273
Reporting of adverse events relating to consumer products
on military installations (sec. 1048).................. 273
Inclusion of United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps among
youth and charitable organizations authorized to
receive assistance from the National Guard (sec. 1049). 273
Department of Defense policy for the regulation of
dangerous dogs (sec. 1050)............................. 273
Sense of Congress on basing of KC-46A aircraft outside
the contiguous United States (sec. 1051)............... 273
Subtitle F--Studies and Reports.............................. 274
Report on potential improvements to certain military
educational institutions of the Department of Defense
(sec. 1061)............................................ 274
Reports on status and modernization of the North Warning
System (sec. 1062)..................................... 274
Studies on the force structure for Marine Corps aviation
(sec. 1063)............................................ 274
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 274
Department of Defense strategic Arctic ports (sec. 1081). 274
Personal protective equipment matters (sec. 1082)........ 275
Estimate of damages from Federal Communications
Commission Order 20-48 (sec. 1083)..................... 275
Modernization effort (sec. 1084)......................... 276
Items of Special Interest.................................... 276
21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act
implementation......................................... 276
American Red Cross....................................... 276
Comptroller General assessment of Defense Logistics
Agency disposal of surplus equipment................... 277
COVID-19 and security forces relationships............... 277
Demonstration of current Department of Defense budget and
program data visualization (sec.)...................... 277
Enabling congressional oversight of defense-wide agency
spending (sec. )....................................... 278
Enhancing security cooperation........................... 279
Incentives to promote Department of Defense audit
activities............................................. 279
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support... 280
Inventory of systems integral to the Planning,
Programming, Budgeting, and Execution process (sec. ).. 280
Mission-based budgeting (sec. ).......................... 280
Presentation of defense budget materials by military
services............................................... 281
Reciprocity of security clearances....................... 282
Civilian casualties...................................... 282
United States Army High Containment Facility at Fort
Detrick................................................ 283
Update to Digital Modernization Strategy and investments
to improve resiliency in sustaining mission-essential
functions.............................................. 284
State Partnership Program foreign travel expenses........ 285
Strategic evaluation of the State Partnership Program.... 285
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 287
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters.................... 287
Enhanced pay authority for certain acquisition and
technology positions in the Department of Defense (sec.
1101).................................................. 287
Enhanced pay authority for certain research and
technology positions in the science and technology
reinvention laboratories of the Department of Defense
(sec. 1102)............................................ 287
Extension of enhanced appointment and compensation
authority for civilian personnel for care and treatment
of wounded and injured members of the Armed Forces
(sec. 1103)............................................ 287
Extension of overtime rate authority for Department of
the Navy employees performing work aboard or dockside
in support of the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
forward deployed in Japan (sec. 1104).................. 287
Expansion of direct hire authority for certain Department
of Defense personnel to include installation military
housing office positions supervising privatized
military housing (sec. 1105)........................... 288
Extension of sunset of inapplicability of certification
of executive qualifications by qualification
certification review board of Office of Personnel
Management for initial appointments to Senior Executive
Service positions in Department of Defense (sec. 1106). 288
Pilot program on enhanced pay authority for certain high-
level management positions in the Department of Defense
(sec. 1107)............................................ 288
Pilot program on expanded authority for appointment of
recently-retired members of the Armed Forces to
positions in the Department of Defense (sec. 1108)..... 288
Direct hire authority and relocation incentives for
positions at remote locations (sec. 1109).............. 289
Modification of direct hire authority for certain
personnel involved with Department of Defense
maintenance activities (sec. 1110)..................... 289
Fire Fighters Alternative Work Schedule demonstration
project for the Navy Region Mid-Atlantic Fire and
Emergency Services (sec. 1110A)........................ 289
Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters.......................... 289
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant
allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian
personnel on official duty in a combat zone (sec. 1111) 289
One-year extension of authority to waive annual
limitation on premium pay and aggregate limitation on
pay for Federal civilian employees working overseas
(sec. 1112)............................................ 290
Technical amendments to authority for reimbursement of
Federal, State, and local income taxes incurred during
travel, transportation, and relocation (sec. 1113)..... 290
Items of Special Interest.................................... 290
Classified ready workforce............................... 290
Report prior to transfer of Defense Finance and
Accounting Service functions........................... 290
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 293
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 293
Authority to build capacity for additional operations
(sec. 1201)............................................ 293
Authority to build capacity for air sovereignty
operations (sec. 1202)................................. 293
Modification to the Inter-European Air Forces Academy
(sec. 1203)............................................ 294
Modification to support of special operations for
irregular warfare (sec. 1204).......................... 294
Extension and modification of authority to support border
security operations of certain foreign countries (sec.
1205).................................................. 294
Modification of authority for participation in
multinational centers of excellence (sec. 1206)........ 294
Implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security Act of
2017 (sec. 1207)....................................... 294
Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies (sec.
1208).................................................. 294
Functional Center for Security Studies in Irregular
Warfare (sec. 1209).................................... 295
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan..... 295
Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement
of certain coalition nations for support provided to
United States military operations (sec. 1211).......... 295
Extension and modification of Commanders' Emergency
Response Program (sec. 1212)........................... 295
Extension and modification of support for reconciliation
activities led by the Government of Afghanistan (sec.
1213).................................................. 295
Sense of Senate on special immigrant visa program for
Afghan allies (sec. 1214).............................. 296
Sense of Senate and report on United States presence in
Afghanistan (sec. 1215)................................ 296
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran........ 296
Extension of authority and limitation on use of funds to
provide assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria (sec. 1221).................................. 296
Extension and modification of authority to provide
assistance to vetted Syrian groups and individuals
(sec. 1222)............................................ 296
Extension and modification of authority to support
operations and activities of the Office of Security
Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 1223)........................ 297
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian
Federation................................................. 297
Extension of limitation on military cooperation between
the United States and the Russian Federation (sec.
1231).................................................. 297
Prohibition on availability of funds relating to
sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea (sec.
1232).................................................. 297
Modification and extension of Ukraine Security Assistance
Initiative (sec. 1233)................................. 297
Report on capability and capacity requirements of
military forces of Ukraine and resource plan for
security assistance (sec. 1234)........................ 298
Sense of Senate on North Atlantic Treaty Organization
enhanced opportunities partner status for Ukraine (sec.
1235).................................................. 298
Extension of authority for training for Eastern European
national security forces in the course of multilateral
exercises (sec. 1236).................................. 299
Sense of Senate on Kosovo and the role of the Kosovo
Force of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (sec.
1237).................................................. 299
Sense of the Senate on strategic competition with the
Russian Federation and related activities of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1238)...................... 300
Report on Russian Federation support of racially and
ethnically motivated violent extremists (sec. 1239).... 300
Participation in European program on multilateral
exchange of surface transportation services (sec. 1240) 300
Participation in programs relating to coordination or
exchange of air refueling and air transportation
services (sec. 1241)................................... 300
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region...... 301
Pacific Deterrence Initiative (sec. 1251)................ 301
Sense of Senate on the United States-Vietnam defense
relationship (sec. 1252)............................... 302
Authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup
(sec. 1253)............................................ 302
Cooperative program with Vietnam to account for
Vietnamese personnel missing in action (sec. 1254)..... 302
Provision of goods and services at Kwajalein Atoll,
Republic of the Marshall Islands (sec. 1255)........... 302
Authority to establish a Movement Coordination Center
Pacific in the Indo-Pacific region and participate in
an Air Transport and Air-to-Air Refueling and other
Exchanges of Services program (sec. 1256).............. 303
Training of ally and partner air forces in Guam (sec.
1257).................................................. 303
Statement of policy and sense of Senate on the Taiwan
Relations Act (sec. 1258).............................. 303
Sense of Congress on port calls in Taiwan with the USNS
Comfort and USNS Mercy (sec. 1259)..................... 304
Limitation on use of funds to reduce total number of
members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty who
are deployed to the Republic of Korea (sec. 1260)...... 304
Sense of Congress on co-development with Japan of a long-
range ground-based anti-ship cruise missile system
(sec. 1261)............................................ 304
Subtitle F--Reports.......................................... 304
Review of and report on overdue acquisition and cross-
servicing agreement transactions (sec. 1271)........... 304
Report on burden sharing contributions by designated
countries (sec. 1272).................................. 304
Report on risk to personnel, equipment, and operations
due to Huawei 5G architecture in host countries (sec.
1273).................................................. 305
Subtitle G--Others Matters................................... 305
Reciprocal patient movement agreements (sec. 1281)....... 305
Extension of authorization of non-conventional assisted
recovery capabilities (sec. 1282)...................... 305
Extension of Department of Defense support for
stabilization activities in national security interest
of the United States (sec. 1283)....................... 305
Notification with respect to withdrawal of members of the
Armed Forces participating in the Multinational Force
and Observers in Egypt (sec. 1284)..................... 306
Modification to initiative to support protection of
national security academic researchers from undue
influence and other security threats (sec. 1285)....... 306
Establishment of United States-Israel Operations-
Technology Working Group (sec. 1286)................... 307
Items of Special Interest.................................... 307
Barriers to security cooperation......................... 307
Defense cooperation with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.. 307
Destabilizing activities of the Russian Federation....... 308
Forward deployed naval forces in Europe.................. 308
GAO briefing of the USMC distributed laydown............. 309
Global Engagement Center................................. 310
Increasing exchange student slots at military
institutions........................................... 310
Interagency Cooperation for Addressing Great Power
Competition in the Arctic.............................. 310
PDI: State Partnership Program........................... 311
Support for Peshmerga.................................... 311
Taiwan National Defense University feasibility report.... 312
U.S. Army force posture in Europe........................ 312
United States Africa Command............................. 313
United States Central Command forces briefing............ 314
United States Indo-Pacific Command Fusion Centers........ 314
Use of the Secretarial Designee Program for
rehabilitation of Ukrainian wounded warriors........... 315
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION......................... 317
Funding allocations for Department of Defense Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program (sec. 1301)....................... 317
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 319
Subtitle A--Military Programs................................ 319
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)........................ 319
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec.
1402).................................................. 319
Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities, Defense-
wide (sec. 1403)....................................... 319
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404).................... 319
Defense Health Program (sec. 1405)....................... 319
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home..................... 319
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces
Retirement Home (sec. 1411)............................ 319
Periodic inspections of Armed Forces Retirement Home
facilities by nationally recognized accrediting
organization (sec. 1412)............................... 320
Expansion of eligibility for residence at the Armed
Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1413)..................... 320
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 320
Authority for transfer of funds to Joint Department of
Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health
Care Center, Illinois (sec. 1421)...................... 320
Budget Items................................................. 320
Working Capital Fund reductions.......................... 320
Air Force cash corpus for energy optimization............ 321
PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West.................. 321
Pilot program on civilian and military partnerships to
enhance interoperability and medical surge capability
and capacity of National Disaster Medical System....... 323
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS......................................... 325
Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations....... 325
Purpose (sec. 1501)...................................... 325
Overseas contingency operations (sec. 1502).............. 325
Procurement (sec. 1503).................................. 325
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1504).. 325
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1505).................... 325
Military personnel (sec. 1506)........................... 325
Working capital funds (sec. 1507)........................ 325
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
wide (sec. 1508)....................................... 325
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1509).................... 326
Defense Health Program (sec. 1510)....................... 326
Subtitle B--Financial Matters................................ 326
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1521)....... 326
Special transfer authority (sec. 1522)................... 326
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 326
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1531)............. 326
Transition and enhancement of inspector general
authorities for Afghanistan reconstruction (sec. 1532). 326
Budget Items................................................. 327
Procurement of PAC-3 MSE missiles........................ 327
EDI: NATO Response Force (NRF) networks.................. 327
EDI: Improvements to living quarters for rotational
forces in Europe....................................... 327
EDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE)................... 328
EDI: Support to deterrent activities..................... 328
Commander's Emergency Response Program................... 328
EDI: Continuity of operations............................ 328
EDI: Modernizing Mission Partner Environment (MPE)....... 329
EDI: Globally Integrated Exercise 20-4/Austere Challenge
21.3................................................... 329
EDI: Marine European training program.................... 329
Transfer from base....................................... 329
Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq................... 330
Contractor logistics support............................. 330
Defense Security Cooperation Agency for Iraq Train and
Equip Requirements..................................... 331
Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and Syria Train and Equip
Fund................................................... 331
TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS... 333
Subtitle A--Space Activities................................. 333
Resilient and survivable positioning, navigation, and
timing capabilities (sec. 1601)........................ 333
Distribution of launches for phase two of acquisition
strategy for National Security Space Launch program
(sec. 1602)............................................ 333
Development efforts for National Security Space Launch
providers (sec. 1603).................................. 333
Timeline for nonrecurring design validation for
responsive space launch (sec. 1604).................... 334
Tactically responsive space launch operations (sec. 1605) 334
Conforming amendments relating to reestablishment of
Space Command (sec. 1606).............................. 335
Space Development Agency development requirements and
transfer to Space Force (sec. 1607).................... 335
Space launch rate assessment (sec. 1608)................. 335
Report on impact of acquisition strategy for National
Security Space Launch program on emerging foreign space
launch providers (sec. 1609)........................... 335
Subtitle B--Cyberspace-Related Matters....................... 335
Modification of position of Principal Cyber Advisor (sec.
1611).................................................. 335
Framework for cyber hunt forward operations (sec. 1612).. 336
Modification of scope of notification requirements for
sensitive military cyber operations (sec. 1613)........ 336
Modification of requirements for quarterly Department of
Defense cyber operations briefings for Congress (sec.
1614).................................................. 337
Rationalization and integration of parallel cybersecurity
architectures and operations (sec. 1615)............... 337
Modification of acquisition authority of Commander of
United States Cyber Command (sec. 1616)................ 338
Assessment of cyber operational planning and
deconfliction policies and processes (sec. 1617)....... 339
Pilot program on cybersecurity capability metrics (sec.
1618).................................................. 339
Assessment of effect of inconsistent timing and use of
Network Address Translation in Department of Defense
networks (sec. 1619)................................... 340
Matters concerning the College of Information and
Cyberspace at National Defense University (sec. 1620).. 341
Modification of mission of cyber command and assignment
of cyber operations forces (sec. 1621)................. 341
Integration of Department of Defense user activity
monitoring and cybersecurity (sec. 1622)............... 342
Defense industrial base cybersecurity sensor architecture
plan (sec. 1623)....................................... 342
Extension of Cyberspace Solarium Commission to track and
assess implementation (sec. 1624)...................... 343
Review of regulations and promulgation of guidance
relating to National Guard responses to cyber attacks
(sec. 1625)............................................ 344
Improvements relating to the quadrennial cyber posture
review (sec. 1626)..................................... 344
Report on enabling United States Cyber Command resource
allocation (sec. 1627)................................. 344
Evaluation of options for establishing a cyber reserve
force (sec. 1628)...................................... 345
Ensuring cyber resiliency of nuclear command and control
system (sec. 1629)..................................... 345
Modification of requirements relating to the Strategic
Cybersecurity Program and the evaluation of cyber
vulnerabilities of major weapon systems of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1630)...................... 345
Defense industrial base participation in a cybersecurity
threat intelligence sharing program (sec. 1631)........ 346
Assessment on defense industrial base cybersecurity
threat hunting (sec. 1632)............................. 346
Assessing risk to national security of quantum computing
(sec. 1633)............................................ 347
Applicability of reorientation of Big Data Platform
program to Department of Navy (sec. 1634).............. 347
Expansion of authority for access and information
relating to cyber attacks on operationally critical
contractors of the Armed Forces (sec. 1635)............ 347
Requirements for review of and limitations on the Joint
Regional Security Stacks activity (sec. 1636).......... 348
Independent assessment of establishment of a National
Cyber Director (sec. 1637)............................. 348
Modification of authority to use operation and
maintenance funds for cyber operations-peculiar
capability development projects (sec. 1638)............ 349
Personnel management authority for Commander of United
States Cyber Command and development program for
offensive cyber operations (sec. 1639)................. 349
Implementation of information operations matters (sec.
1640).................................................. 350
Report on Cyber Institutes Program (sec. 1641)........... 350
Assistance for small manufacturers in the defense
industrial supply chain on matters relating to
cybersecurity (sec. 1642).............................. 351
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces................................... 351
Modification to responsibilities of Nuclear Weapons
Council (sec. 1651).................................... 351
Responsibility of Nuclear Weapons Council in preparation
of National Nuclear Security Administration budget
(sec. 1652)............................................ 351
Modification of Government Accountability Office review
of annual reports on nuclear weapons enterprise (sec.
1653).................................................. 351
Prohibition on reduction of the intercontinental
ballistic missiles of the United States (sec. 1654).... 351
Sense of the Senate on nuclear cooperation between the
United States and the United Kingdom (sec. 1655)....... 351
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs......................... 352
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli
cooperative missile defense program co-development and
co-production (sec. 1661).............................. 352
Acceleration of the deployment of hypersonic and
ballistic tracking space sensor payload (sec. 1662).... 352
Extension of prohibition relating to missile defense
information and systems (sec. 1663).................... 353
Report on and limitation on expenditure of funds for
layered homeland missile defense system (sec. 1664).... 353
Extension of requirement for Comptroller General review
and assessment of missile defense acquisition programs
(sec. 1665)............................................ 353
Repeal of requirement for reporting structure of Missile
Defense Agency (sec. 1666)............................. 354
Ground-based midcourse defense interim capability (sec.
1667).................................................. 354
Items of Special Interest.................................... 354
Bi-static radar.......................................... 354
Clearance process for National Nuclear Security
Administration employees and contractors working on the
Long Range Stand Off Weapon............................ 354
Comptroller General review of Department of Defense
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
implementation......................................... 355
Comptroller General review of the Air Force's nuclear
certification program.................................. 355
Continued Comptroller General review of Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent program............................ 356
Continued Comptroller General review of nuclear command,
control, and communications systems.................... 356
Coordination and oversight of the Joint Cyber Warfighting
Architecture components................................ 357
Cyber training capabilities for the Department of Defense 357
Cyber vulnerability of the Air Force Satellite Control
Network................................................ 358
Demonstration of interoperability and automated
orchestration of cybersecurity systems................. 358
Department of Defense cyber hygiene...................... 359
Department of Defense network external visibility........ 360
Ground vehicle cybersecurity............................. 361
Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii............................ 361
Hybrid space infrastructure.............................. 362
Integrated Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent test plan.... 362
Long range launch and range complexes.................... 363
Maintain independence of Space Rapid Capabilities Office. 363
Matters on Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification in
annual briefings on status of framework on
cybersecurity for the United States defense industrial
base................................................... 364
Microelectronics for national security space............. 364
Missile field ground support vehicles.................... 364
Missile warning and sensor integration for the Integrated
Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment system.......... 365
National Cyber Security University....................... 366
Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared system...... 366
Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Enterprise
Center................................................. 366
Options for the future of the B83-1 gravity bomb......... 367
Organic space capability................................. 367
Pilot program for improving the cybersecurity of
disadvantaged small businesses in the defense
industrial base........................................ 367
Progress regarding cybersecurity framework for the
defense industrial base................................ 368
Qualification of the television as part of the
intercontinental ballistic missile weapons system...... 369
RAND study on space launch............................... 370
Recapitalization of the National Airborne Operations
Center................................................. 370
Satellite ground terminal network........................ 370
Small business cybersecurity compliance.................. 371
Space Force Training and Readiness Command............... 371
Space technology......................................... 371
Space testing ranges..................................... 372
Space weather............................................ 372
Training and retention of cyber mission force personnel.. 372
Transition from Minuteman III to the Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent.................................... 373
United States Space Command Headquarters................. 373
Value of inland spaceports............................... 373
Wide Area Surveillance Program Scorpion Sensor System.... 374
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 375
Summary and explanation of funding tables................ 375
Short title (sec. 2001).................................. 375
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law (sec. 2002)........................... 375
Effective date (sec. 2003)............................... 376
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................ 377
Summary.................................................. 377
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2101)................................... 377
Family housing (sec. 2102)............................... 377
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)........ 377
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2017
project at Camp Walker, Korea (sec. 2104).............. 377
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION........................... 379
Summary.................................................. 379
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2201)................................... 379
Family housing (sec. 2202)............................... 379
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203) 379
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........ 379
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION..................... 381
Summary.................................................. 381
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2301)................................... 381
Family housing (sec. 2302)............................... 381
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303) 381
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)... 381
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2018
project at Royal Air Force Lakenheath (sec. 2305)...... 382
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2019 projects (sec. 2306)......................... 382
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2020 family housing projects (sec. 2307).......... 382
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2020 projects (sec. 2308)......................... 382
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............... 383
Summary.................................................. 383
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2401)....................... 383
Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment
Program projects (sec. 2402)........................... 383
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec.
2403).................................................. 383
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................ 385
Summary.................................................. 385
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program......................................... 385
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2501)................................... 385
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........ 385
Execution of projects under the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program (Sec. 2503)... 385
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions........... 386
Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec.
2511).................................................. 386
Qatar funded construction projects (sec. 2512)........... 386
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 387
Summary.................................................. 387
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2601)....................... 387
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2602)................................... 387
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603). 387
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2604)....................... 388
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2605)....................... 388
Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and
Reserve (sec. 2606).................................... 388
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2020
project in Alabama (sec. 2607)......................... 388
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES............. 389
Summary and explanation of tables........................ 389
Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and
closure activities funded through Department of Defense
Base Closure Account (sec. 2701)....................... 389
Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and
closure (BRAC) round (sec. 2702)....................... 389
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS....... 391
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program.................... 391
Responsibility of Navy for military construction
requirements for certain Fleet Readiness Centers (sec.
2801).................................................. 391
Construction of ground-based strategic deterrent launch
facilities and launch centers for Air Force (sec. 2802) 391
Subtitle B--Military Family Housing.......................... 391
Prohibition on substandard family housing units (sec.
2821).................................................. 391
Technical corrections to privatized military housing
program (sec. 2822).................................... 392
Requirement that Secretary of Defense implement
recommendations relating to military family housing
contained in report by Inspector General of Department
of Defense (sec. 2823)................................. 392
Subtitle C--Project Management and Oversight Reforms......... 392
Promotion of energy resilience and energy security in
privatized utility systems (sec. 2841)................. 392
Consideration of energy security and energy resilience in
life-cycle cost for military construction (sec. 2842).. 392
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances................................. 393
Renewal of Fallon Range Training Complex land withdrawal
and reservation (sec. 2861)............................ 393
Renewal of Nevada Test and Training Range land withdrawal
and reservation (sec. 2862)............................ 393
Transfer of land under the administrative jurisdiction of
the Department of the Interior within Naval Support
Activity Panama City, Florida (sec. 2863).............. 393
Land conveyance, Camp Navajo, Arizona (sec. 2864)........ 393
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 394
Military family readiness considerations in basing
decisions (sec. 2881).................................. 394
Prohibition on use of funds to reduce air base resiliency
or demolish protected aircraft shelters in the European
theater without creating a similar protection from
attack (sec. 2882)..................................... 394
Prohibitions relating to closure or returning to host
nation of existing bases under the European
Consolidation Initiative (sec. 2883)................... 394
Enhancement of authority to accept conditional gifts of
real property on behalf of military museums (sec. 2884) 394
Equal treatment of insured depository institutions and
credit unions operating on military installations (sec.
2885).................................................. 395
Report on operational aviation units impacted by noise
restrictions or noise mitigation measures (sec. 2886).. 395
Items of Special Interest.................................... 395
Army demolition prioritization........................... 395
Army training range coordination in Hawaii............... 396
Clarification of the use of section 2353 of title 10,
United States Code, authority by defense contractors... 397
Enhancing MQ-9 and MH-139 training capabilities.......... 397
F-35 military construction at Dannelly Field............. 398
Importance of small arms ranges.......................... 398
Improvements to the management of historic homes......... 398
Increasing capacity at Arlington National Cemetery....... 399
Kwajalein military construction plan and hospital........ 399
Maneuver Area Training Equipment Site (MATES)............ 400
Naval Air Station Barbers Point.......................... 400
Pacific Deterrence Initiative: Planning & Design, U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command................................... 401
Strategic basing criteria briefing....................... 401
Use of O&M for MILCON without tracking dollars........... 401
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 403
Summary.................................................. 403
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2901)................................... 403
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2902)................................... 403
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2903).............. 403
Replenishment of certain military construction funds
(sec. 2904)............................................ 403
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS....................................... 405
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 405
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations.... 405
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)..... 405
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)................ 405
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)..................... 405
Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)............................... 405
Subtitle B--Budget of the National Nuclear Security
Administration............................................. 405
Review of adequacy of nuclear weapons budget (sec. 3111). 405
Treatment of budget of National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3112)............................. 406
Responsibility of Administrator for Nuclear Security for
ensuring National Nuclear Security Administration
budget satisfies nuclear weapons needs of Department of
Defense (sec. 3113).................................... 406
Participation of Secretary of Defense in planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution process of
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3114)... 406
Requirement for updated planning, programming, budgeting,
and execution guidance for National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3115)............................. 406
Cross-training in budget processes of Department of
Defense and National Nuclear Security Administration
(sec. 3116)............................................ 407
Subtitle C--Personnel Matters................................ 407
National Nuclear Security Administration Personnel System
(sec. 3121)............................................ 407
Inclusion of certain employees and contractors of
Department of Energy in definition of public safety
officer for purposes of certain death benefits (sec.
3122).................................................. 407
Reimbursement for liability insurance for nuclear
materials couriers (sec. 3123)......................... 407
Transportation and moving expenses for immediate family
of deceased nuclear materials couriers (sec. 3124)..... 407
Extension of authority for appointment of certain
scientific, engineering, and technical personnel (sec.
3125).................................................. 408
Subtitle D--Cybersecurity.................................... 408
Reporting on penetrations of networks of contractors and
subcontractors (sec. 3131)............................. 408
Clarification of responsibility for cybersecurity of
National Nuclear Security Administration facilities
(sec. 3132)............................................ 408
Subtitle E--Defense Environmental Cleanup.................... 408
Public statement of environmental liabilities for
facilities undergoing defense environmental cleanup
(sec. 3141)............................................ 408
Inclusion of missed milestones in future-years defense
environmental cleanup plan (sec. 3142)................. 409
Classification of defense environmental cleanup as
capital asset projects or operations activities (sec.
3143).................................................. 409
Continued analysis of approaches for supplemental
treatment of low-activity waste at Hanford Nuclear
Reservation (sec. 3144)................................ 409
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 410
Modifications to enhanced procurement authority to manage
supply chain risk (sec. 3151).......................... 410
Laboratory- or production facility-directed research and
development programs (sec. 3152)....................... 410
Prohibition on use of laboratory- or production facility-
directed research and development funds for general and
administrative overhead costs (sec. 3153).............. 410
Monitoring of industrial base for nuclear weapons
components, subsystems, and materials (sec. 3154)...... 411
Prohibition on use of funds for advanced naval nuclear
fuel system based on low-enriched uranium (sec. 3155).. 411
Authorization of appropriations for W93 nuclear warhead
program (sec. 3156).................................... 412
Review of future of computing beyond exascale at the
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3157)... 412
Application of requirement for independent cost estimates
and reviews to new nuclear weapons systems (sec. 3158). 412
Extension and expansion of limitations on importation of
uranium from Russian Federation (sec. 3159)............ 412
Integration of stockpile stewardship and nonproliferation
missions (sec. 3160)................................... 413
Technology development and integration program (sec.
3161).................................................. 413
Advanced manufacturing development program (sec. 3162)... 413
Materials science program (sec. 3163).................... 413
Modifications to Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and
High Yield program (sec. 3164)......................... 413
Earned value management program for life extension
programs (sec. 3165)................................... 413
Use of high performance computing capabilities for COVID-
19 research (sec. 3166)................................ 414
Availability of stockpile responsiveness funds for
projects to reduce time necessary to execute a nuclear
test (sec. 3167)....................................... 414
Budget Items................................................. 414
Cleanup activities at Los Alamos National Laboratory..... 414
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program.......... 414
Items of Special Interest.................................... 414
Comptroller General review of uncosted balances for
Atomic Energy Defense Activities....................... 414
Continued Comptroller General review of the Hanford Waste
Treatment Plant........................................ 415
Domestic uranium enrichment technologies................. 415
Responsibility for Los Alamos Plutonium Facility 4 and
Technical Area 55...................................... 416
Review of plutonium infrastructure at the National
Nuclear Security Administration........................ 417
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 419
Authorization (sec. 3201)................................ 419
Nonpublic collaborative discussions by Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3202).................... 419
Improvements to operations of Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board (sec. 3203)............................... 419
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 421
Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)...................... 421
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES....................................... 423
Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)... 423
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT........................................... 439
Procurement (sec. 4101).................................. 440
Procurement for overseas contingency operations (sec.
4102).................................................. 481
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.......... 493
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 4201).. 494
Research, development, test, and evaluation for overseas
contingency operations (sec. 4202)..................... 535
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 539
Operation and maintenance (sec. 4301).................... 540
Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency
operations (sec. 4302)................................. 564
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................................... 577
Military personnel (sec. 4401)........................... 578
Military personnel for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4402)............................................ 579
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 581
Other authorizations (sec. 4501)......................... 582
Other authorizations for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4502)............................................ 586
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................ 589
Military construction (sec. 4601)........................ 590
Military construction for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4602)............................................ 604
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS..... 607
Department of Energy national security programs (sec.
4701).................................................. 608
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS......................................... 619
Departmental Recommendations............................. 619
Committee Action......................................... 619
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate................ 622
Regulatory Impact........................................ 622
Changes in Existing Law.................................. 622
Calendar No. 483
116th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 116-236
======================================================================
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
_______
June 24, 2020.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Inhofe, from the Committee on Armed Services,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an
original bill (S. 4049) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2021 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
for military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths
for such fiscal year, an for other purposes, and recommends
that the bill does do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill would:
(1) Authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b)
research, development, test and evaluation, (c)
operation and maintenance and the revolving and
management funds of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2021;
(2) Authorize the personnel end strengths for each
military active duty component of the Armed Forces for
fiscal year 2021;
(3) Authorize the personnel end strengths for the
Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2021;
(4) Impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) Impose certain limitations with regard to
specific procurement and research, development, test
and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide
certain additional legislative authority, and make
certain changes to existing law;
(6) Authorize appropriations for military
construction programs of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2021; and
(7) Authorize appropriations for national security
programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2021.
COMMITTEE OVERVIEW
This year marks the 60th consecutive year the Senate has
fulfilled its constitutional duty to ``provide for the Common
Defense'' by passing the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA). This annual legislation provides for funding and
authorities for the U.S. military and other critical defense
priorities, and ensures our troops have what they need to
defend our nation. On June 10, 2020, the Senate Armed Services
Committee voted in overwhelming bipartisan fashion, 25-2, to
advance the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year
2021 (FY21) to the Senate floor.
Two years ago, the National Defense Strategy (NDS) outlined
our nation's preeminent challenge: strategic competition with
authoritarian adversaries that stand firmly against our shared
American values of freedom, democracy, and peace--namely, China
and Russia. These adversaries seek to shift the global order in
their favor, at our expense. In pursuit of this goal, these
nations have increased military and economic aggression, worked
to develop advanced technologies, expanded their influence
around the world, and undermined our own influence. The nature
of warfare is changing, and America's military superiority is
in decline or in danger of declining in many areas. Nowhere is
this more evident than in the Indo-Pacific. At the same time,
threats from other aggressors--rogue states like Iran and North
Korea, which seek to destabilize and antagonize, and terrorist
organizations, which threaten to re-emerge or expand not just
in the Middle East but in Africa and other parts of the world--
persist. As a nation, we must rise to these challenges.
At no time in recent memory has it been more critical to
have the personnel, equipment, training, and organization
needed to signal to our potential enemies, as former Secretary
of Defense Jim Mattis put it, ``you, militarily, cannot win
it--so don't even try.'' The FY21 NDAA rests on this simple
foundation. A credible military deterrent, however, requires
more than just having the most planes, ships, and tanks. It
requires forces in the right places, at the right time, with
the right equipment and capabilities. Posture and logistics are
equally as important as fifth-generation aircraft and advanced
weapons. Just as necessary to an asymmetric balance of power
are our alliances and partnerships, which must be strengthened
and solidified. The FY21 NDAA addresses each of these areas,
using the National Defense Strategy Commission as a roadmap and
building off the authorities and investments provided in both
the FY19 and FY20 NDAA. The FY21 NDAA boldly sets policy and
prudently aligns resources to achieve irreversible momentum in
implementation of the NDS and ensure that America is able to
prevent and, if necessary, win the wars not just of today, but
tomorrow as well.
With so much at stake, predictable, on-time, and adequate
funding remains vital to the success of our military forces, as
military leaders have told the Committee time and time again.
After years of sustained conflict, underfunding, and budgetary
uncertainty, Congress focused on rebuilding the military in the
past two NDAAs. Progress has been made, but the work is not yet
done. The National Defense Strategy calls for annual increases
of three to five percent above inflation each year, which the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 did not provide for FY21. This
year's NDAA focused heavily on prioritizing available resources
to address the most worrying shortfalls and imminent threats.
Using the National Defense Strategy as a linchpin, the FY21
National Defense Authorization Act advances four priorities:
Supporting Our Troops, Their Families, and the Civilian Workforce
The Committee's top priority is, and always has been,
supporting the more than 2.1 million men and women who bravely
serve our nation in our Armed Forces. They, along with military
families and the civilian workforce, are the backbone of
America's national security. The FY21 NDAA prioritizes their
health and wellbeing -- ensuring our troops have the resources,
equipment, and training needed to succeed in their missions.
The bill recognizes that family readiness strengthens our force
overall, and advocates for military spouses and children. It
also ensures previous reforms to the military privatized
housing program and to the military health system are
implemented to rigorous standards, and reemphasizes a focus on
training to ensure our service members can conduct their
missions safely.
Charting a Course for the National Defense Strategy Now and Into the
Future
The FY21 NDAA continues to reinforce and accelerate
implementation of the NDS. In doing so, the bill shifts our
focus even more to the Indo-Pacific, our priority theater.
Critically, the bill establishes the Pacific Deterrence
Initiative to enhance budgetary transparency and oversight,
focus resources on capability gaps, reassure allies and
partners, and restore the credibility of American deterrence in
the region. The bill also emphasizes a combat-credible forward
posture, making investments in posture, logistics, and
intelligence capabilities, and preserves our nuclear deterrent
by supporting our nuclear triad, command and control, and
infrastructure. Strategic and steady support for our partners
and allies provided for in the bill, including through security
cooperation efforts, will strengthen the capabilities of our
friends, and ensure the balance of power remains in our favor.
Building a Modern, Innovative, and Lethal Force
Our national security rests on our ability to attain and
maintain an asymmetric military advantage. Our supremacy in the
seas, in the skies, in space, in cyberspace, and on land must
be protected; and as we look to the future of warfare, joint
capabilities that ensure the protection of the joint force are
essential. The FY21 NDAA ensures the United States fields a
force of the optimal size, structure, and strategy, capable of
supporting the conflicts envisioned by the NDS. Unfortunately,
in key technologies and capabilities, we've fallen behind our
near-peer competitors. The FY21 NDAA accelerates innovation so
we can compete effectively and regain our comparative advantage
over China and Russia.
Reshaping Pentagon Management to Maximize Performance, Accountability,
and Lethality
For too long, the Pentagon has operated as a lethargic
bureaucracy. Since the FY15 NDAA, Congress has implemented
numerous reforms to make the Pentagon more efficient,
responsive, and agile. This year, the NDAA prioritizes
accountability, with flexibility, for the Department of
Defense--setting up management structure and processes that
better harness innovation, operate at the speed of relevance,
and effectively steward taxpayer dollars. The FY21 NDAA
improves the Pentagon's budget process; adjusts hiring
practices to recruit and retain top talent in critical fields
like advanced technology, acquisition, health care, management,
and more; strengthens the defense acquisition system; and
reshapes the Defense Industrial Base as a more resilient,
advanced National Security Innovation Base. The COVID-19
pandemic exposed and exacerbated supply chain deficiencies
across the government, and the FY21 NDAA takes numerous steps
to secure the supply chain--both from overreliance on foreign
nations and from infiltration by our adversaries.
Achieving the aims of the NDS is a long game, and the
Committee takes a long view. The FY21 NDAA sets us up for
success in the long term, putting our nation on an
irreversible, confident, and steady course to achieve a
peaceful, free, and prosperous world--not only for us, but for
our children and grandchildren.
BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT (SEC. 4)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the budgetary effects of this Act be determined in
accordance with the procedures established in the Statutory
Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (title I of Public Law 111-139).
SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS AND BUDGET AUTHORITY
IMPLICATION
The administration's budget request for national defense
discretionary programs within the jurisdiction of the Senate
Committee on Armed Services for fiscal year 2020 was $731.3
billion. Of this amount, $628.5 billion was requested for base
Department of Defense (DOD) programs, $26.0 billion was
requested for national security programs in the Department of
Energy (DOE), and $69.0 billion was requested for Overseas
Contingency Operations (OCO).
The committee recommends an overall discretionary
authorization of $731.3 billion in fiscal year 2020, including
$628.6 billion for base DOD programs, $25.9 billion for
national security programs in the DOE, and $69.0 billion for
OCO.
The two tables preceding the detailed program adjustments
in Division D of this bill summarize the direct discretionary
authorizations in the committee recommendation and the
equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2020 defense
programs. The first table summarizes the committee's
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation
account for fiscal year 2020 and compares these amounts to the
request. The table following those summary tables provides a
consolidated display of the committee's recommended
authorizations relating to the Pacific Deterrence Initiative,
established in Sec. 1251 of this bill.
The second table summarizes the total budget authority
implication for national defense by including national defense
funding for items that are not in the jurisdiction of the
defense committees or are already authorized.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for procurement activities at the levels
identified in section 4101 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Integrated Air and Missile Defense assessment (sec. 111)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to carry out an assessment of Integrated
Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) capabilities and capacity to
address existing and emerging air, missile, and other indirect
fire threats in support of combatant command requirements. The
provision would require a classified report of the assessment
to be delivered to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives no later than February
15, 2021.
The committee notes that recent attacks on deployed U.S.
forces, as well as advanced capabilities emerging from China
and Russia, demonstrate the increasing sophistication and
proliferation of threats from missiles, unmanned aircraft
systems, and rockets. Great-power competitors have invested
heavily in long range missiles, both in quantity and in
advanced technologies such as hypersonics, and rockets and
mortars remain weapons of choice against U.S. and partner
security forces in non-conventional operations.
The committee notes that the Army is responsible for
``conduct[ing] air and missile defense to support joint
campaigns,'' per Department of Defense directive 5100.01, and
operates the majority of the ground-based air and missile
defense capabilities in the Joint Force. Additionally, the Army
was designated Executive Agent for Counter Small Unmanned
Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) in November 2019, and stood up the
Joint C-sUAS Office in January 2020.
Report and limitation on Integrated Visual Augmentation System
acquisition (sec. 112)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, no later than August 15, 2021, on the
Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS). The report would
certify the acquisition strategy, system technology level,
production model cost, operational suitability, and soldier
acceptability, subsequent to completion of operational testing.
The provision would prohibit the obligation of expenditure of
more than 50 percent of fiscal year 2021 funds authorized for
the procurement of IVAS until the required report is submitted.
The committee commends the Army for the developmental
approach that it is pursuing and its effective collaboration
with non-traditional contractors. Furthermore, the Army has
prioritized the use of rapid prototyping, rapid fielding, and a
soldier-centered design approach that has facilitated the
delivery of cutting-edge solutions necessary to ensure that the
Army maintains its technological superiority and achieves
overmatch in future conflicts.
The committee is encouraged by the results of previous
soldier touch point events and is optimistic that those
successes will be further realized in future user evaluations.
The committee also notes that operational testing that is
essential to ensuring operational suitability and soldier
acceptability in operational conditions has not yet occurred.
Certification of the acquisition strategy subsequent to
operational testing will validate the acquisition approach, the
full rate production decision, and the commitment of
substantial resources. A successful IVAS program can serve as a
model for Army modernization efforts going forward.
Modifications to requirement for an interim cruise missile defense
capability (sec. 113)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Army to submit to the congressional defense
committees the plan to operationally deploy or forward station
in an operational theater or theaters the two batteries of
interim cruise missile defense capability required by section
112(b)(1)(A) of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232).
The provision would also modify the terms of the waiver for the
requirement for two additional batteries by September 30, 2023.
The committee notes that the Secretary of the Army has
exercised the waiver for the first two batteries since the Army
will not meet the deployment deadline of September 30, 2020.
While the committee understands the requirements for testing
and training prior to deployment, the committee still expects
the Secretary to meet the original intent of section 112--
forward stationing an interim cruise missile defense capability
to protect fixed sites from cruise missile threats with
prioritization to locations in Europe and Asia.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Contract authority for Columbia-class submarine program (sec. 121)
The committee recommends a provision that would permit the
Secretary of the Navy to enter into one contract for up to two
Columbia-class submarines (SSBN-826 and SSBN-827) and
incrementally fund such submarines.
Limitation on Navy medium and large unmanned surface vessels (sec. 122)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that certain technical conditions be met prior to Milestone B
approval for medium and large unmanned surface vessels.
The committee notes that the budget request provides for
the prototyping and testing of Medium and Large Unmanned
Surface Vessels (MUSVs and LUSVs), including procurement of up
to two additional LUSVs in conjunction with a Strategic
Capabilities Office (SCO) initiative. The committee understands
that the four LUSVs procured by the SCO beginning in fiscal
year 2018, at a cost of more than $510 million, are sufficient
to achieve the objectives of the SCO initiative, which is
scheduled to be completed in the fourth quarter of fiscal year
2021.
The committee further notes that the budget request
includes plans to award the LUSV Detail Design and Construction
(DD&C) contract in fiscal year 2022 and transition LUSV to a
program of record in fiscal year 2023.
The committee remains concerned that the budget request's
concurrent approach to LUSV design, technology development, and
integration as well as a limited understanding of the LUSV
concept of employment, requirements, and reliability for
envisioned missions pose excessive acquisition risk for
additional LUSV procurement in fiscal year 2021. The committee
is also concerned by the unclear policy implications of LUSVs,
including ill-defined international unmanned surface vessel
standards and the legal status of armed or potentially armed
LUSVs.
Additionally, the committee notes that the Navy's most
recent shipbuilding plan, ``Report to Congress on the Annual
Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels for Fiscal
Year 2020,'' acknowledges similar issues: ``Unmanned and
optionally-manned systems are not accounted for in the overall
battle force[.] . . . The physical challenges of extended
operations at sea across the spectrum of competition and
conflict, the concepts of operations for these platforms, and
the policy challenges associated with employing deadly force
from autonomous vehicles must be well understood prior to
replacing accountable battle force ships.''
The committee believes that further procurement of MUSVs
and LUSVs should occur only after the lessons learned from the
current SCO initiative have been incorporated into the system
specification and additional risk reduction actions are taken.
A specific area of technical concern for the committee is
the Navy requirement for MUSVs and LUSVs to operate
continuously at sea for at least 30 days without preventative
maintenance, corrective maintenance, or emergent repairs. The
committee is unaware of any unmanned vessel of the size or
complexity envisioned for MUSV or LUSV that has demonstrated at
least 30 days of such operation.
The committee understands that the SCO prototype vessels
that are intended to provide risk reduction for this program
have demonstrated between 2 to 3 days of continuous operation.
The committee also understands that the SCO vessels are
approximately 25 percent the size by tonnage of a LUSV, which
may limit the applicability of lessons learned and risk
reduction from the SCO vessels to the MUSV and LUSV programs.
Among other critical subsystems, the committee views the main
engines and electrical generators as key USV mechanical and
electrical subsystems whose reliability is critical to ensuring
successful operations at sea for at least 30 continuous days.
Accordingly, this provision would require at least two main
engines and electrical generators, including ancillary
equipment, to be formally qualified by the Navy, including a
successful demonstration of at least 30 days of continuous
operation prior to the LUSV or MUSV Milestone B approval and
would require the use of such engines and generators in future
USVs. The provision would also require the Senior Technical
Authority and Milestone Decision Authority to take additional
actions related to reducing the technical risk of these
programs prior to a Milestone B approval.
The committee views the qualification of these critical
subsystems as an essential prototyping step necessary to
provide a solid technical foundation for the MUSV and LUSV
programs. Rather than delaying these programs, the committee
believes that qualified engines and generators will enable the
delivery of capable, reliable, and sustainable USVs that meet
the needs of fleet commanders faster than the plan contained in
the budget request.
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds for Navy waterborne
security barriers (sec. 123)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
prohibition on availability of funds for Navy waterborne
security barriers.
Procurement authorities for certain amphibious shipbuilding programs
(sec. 124)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Navy to enter into one or more contracts for
the procurement of three San Antonio-class amphibious ships and
one America-class amphibious ship.
The committee notes that the Assistant Secretary of the
Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition testified on
March 4, 2020, that the authorities provided in this provision
would be ``tremendously beneficial'' and added, ``[W]e will
look forward to those authorities, should they come in the
[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021].''
The committee further notes that the Navy is estimating
savings of 8 to 12 percent, or roughly $1 billion, for the
multiple ship procurement of these 4 ships as compared to 4
separate ship procurement contracts.
Accordingly, this provision would provide the necessary
authorities for implementing such an approach.
Fighter force structure acquisition strategy (sec. 125)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to align the Department's fighter force
structure acquisition strategy with the results of the various
independent studies required by section 1064 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91), and not later than March 1, 2021, to transmit the new
strategy in a report to the congressional defense committees.
The committee commends the Navy on transitioning to a strategy
focused on the acquisition of 5th generation aircraft but
remains concerned that the current strike fighter shortage data
demand an increase in the annual total acquisition of fighter
aircraft. The provision would establish a minimum number of F-
35 and Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) aircraft that the
Navy and Marine Corps would be required to purchase each year
to mitigate or manage strike fighter shortfalls. Finally, the
provision would also prohibit the Department of the Navy's
deviation from this strategy in its acquisition programs and
related force structure until the Secretary of the Navy
receives a waiver and justification from the Secretary of
Defense and until 30 days after notifying the congressional
defense committees of the proposed deviation.
Treatment of weapon systems added by Congress in future President's
budget requests (sec. 126)
The committee recommends a provision that would preclude
the inclusion in future annual budget requests of a procurement
quantity of a system previously authorized and appropriated by
the Congress that was greater than the quantity of such system
requested in the President's budget request.
The committee is concerned that by presenting CVN-81 as a
ship that was procured in fiscal year 2020 (instead of as a
ship that was procured in fiscal year 2019), LPD-31 as a ship
requested for procurement in fiscal year 2021 (instead of as a
ship that was procured in fiscal year 2020), and LHA-9 as a
ship projected for procurement in fiscal year 2023 (instead of
as a ship that was procured in fiscal year 2020), the
Department of Defense, in its fiscal year 2021 budget
submission, is disregarding or mischaracterizing the actions of
Congress regarding the procurement dates of these three ships.
Report on carrier wing composition (sec. 127)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with the Chief of Naval
Operations and Commandant of the Marine Corps, to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees, not later than
May 1, 2021, on the optimal compositions of the carrier air
wing in 2030 and 2040 as well as alternative force design
concepts. In conjunction with completing the report required by
this provision, the Secretary shall provide a briefing on the
report's findings to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 1, 2021.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
recent decision to cease the procurement of legacy strike
fighters but remains concerned, based on a number of
independent analyses, that the Navy's current stated goal of a
50-50 mix of 4th and 5th generation aircraft for the future
carrier air wing will not be sufficient to meet the
requirements of the National Defense Strategy. Additionally,
the committee is concerned that the Navy lacks a strategy on
the use of unmanned aircraft and manned-unmanned teaming.
Therefore, the report required by this provision would
include: (1) The analysis and justification used by the Navy to
reach the 50-50 mix of 4th and 5th generation aircraft for
2030; (2) Analysis and justification for the optimal mix of
carrier aircraft for 2040; and (3) A plan for incorporating
unmanned aerial vehicles and associated communication
capabilities to effectively implement the future force design.
Report on strategy to use ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer to ensure full
spectrum electromagnetic superiority (sec. 128)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with the Vice Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs, to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees, no later than July 30, 2021, defining a
strategy to ensure full spectrum electromagnetic superiority
using the ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer.
The committee notes that the ALQ-249 is the only standoff
jamming capability in the Joint Force that is capable of
providing electronic warfare support in a conflict envisioned
by the National Defense Strategy (NDS). The committee is
concerned that the current strategy and force structure of
naval electronic warfare forces will not be sufficient to
meeting the needs of the joint warfighting concept.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary, using
analysis provided by the Joint Staff and in consultation with
the Vice Chairman, to provide a report detailing: (1) The
current procurement strategy of the ALQ-249 and an analysis of
its capability to meet the radio frequency ranges required in a
NDS conflict; (2) Its compatibility and ability to synchronize
non-kinetic fires with other joint electronic warfare
platforms; (3) A future model of an interlinked/interdependent
electronic warfare menu of options for commanders at the
tactical, operational, and strategic levels.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
Economic order quantity contracting authority for F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter program (sec. 141)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to award F-35 contracts to procure
material and equipment in economic order quantities for fiscal
year 2021 (Lot 15) through fiscal year 2023 (Lot 17).
Minimum aircraft levels for major mission areas (sec. 142)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
minimum number of aircraft for each major mission area in the
United States Air Force and prohibit divestment of aircraft
such that these minima are breached. The committee understands
that the Air Force is divesting legacy aircraft in order to
modernize its various fleets with modern aircraft relevant to
the National Defense Strategy. The committee remains concerned
that, historically, the divestment of legacy aircraft has not
yielded additional resources to fund modernization. As such,
the committee cautions the Air Force in taking near-term risk
with capacity and seeks the establishment of these aircraft
floors to mitigate its concern.
Minimum operational squadron level (sec. 143)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Air Force to seek to achieve, as soon as practicable after the
date of the enactment of this Act and subject to the
availability of appropriations, no fewer than 386 available
operational squadrons, or equivalent organizational units,
within the Air Force.
Minimum Air Force bomber aircraft level (sec. 144)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees, no later than 1 December, 2020, recommendations for
a minimum number of bomber aircraft, including penetrating
bombers in addition to B-52H aircraft to enable the Air Force
to carry out its long-range penetrating strike mission. The
Department should determine this floor, in part, based on what
the Air Force can uniquely provide in future conflicts--long-
range penetrating strike capability that cannot be matched by
other military services' standoff strike systems.
Despite the significant increase in individual bomber
capability, the committee remains concerned about the Nation's
overall bomber capacity shortfall. The Air Force has a total
inventory of 157 bombers, the smallest and oldest fleet of
bomber aircraft in its history. Three 2019 independent studies
of future Air Force aircraft inventory requirements, conducted
pursuant to section 1064 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), determined that
increases in the size of the bomber fleet are needed to support
the National Defense Strategy (NDS). The Air Force's own
assessment concluded: ``We require a larger proportional
increase for bombers,'' with a 56 percent increase in the
number of Air Force bomber squadrons, to execute the NDS. The
Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command has said that the
future bomber force inventory should be greater than 225.
Additionally, while Air Force standoff strike capabilities
support the NDS, the committee believes that the Department of
Defense needs to carefully assess alternatives and the cost
effectiveness of relative numbers of such standoff systems and
procuring a larger penetrating bomber force with its capacity
to carry more and less costly weapons per sortie.
F-35 gun system (sec. 145)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to begin the acquisition process for
an alternate 25mm ammunition solution that provides a true
full-spectrum target engagement capability for the F-35A. The
committee is aware of known deficiencies with the system as
well as ongoing efforts to improve the accuracy and lethality
of the gun. However, the anticipated hardware and software
solutions do not adequately address the lethality limitation of
the F-35A gun. Improvements are necessary in ammunition
performance, including the ability to penetrate hard targets as
well as the ability to achieve combined explosive,
fragmentation, and incendiary effects. The committee further
understands that the currently qualified 25mm ammunition
effectively penetrates semi-hardened armor; however, the
ammunition has limited capability against a broader range of
target sets. Additionally, the limited carriage capacity of the
F-35A gun system ammunition magazine strongly suggests that
improved performance ammunition is required for mission
success, both in air-to-ground as well as air-to-air missions.
Consequently, the committee is concerned that the current 25mm
ammunition is not effective enough to allow for successful
engagement of the full spectrum of target sets anticipated on a
typical F-35A mission.
Prohibition on funding for Close Air Support Integration Group (sec.
146)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds for the Close Air
Support Integration Group (CIG) or its subordinate units at
Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. The committee is aware that the
CIG was an attempt to establish a center of excellence for
close air support at a time when the A-10 was being considered
for divestment. Given the Air Force's strategy for the long-
term retention of the A-10, the CIG's mission is unclear and
its resources, both in manpower and aircraft currently assigned
to the CIG and its subordinate units, are better utilized
elsewhere.
Limitation on divestment of KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft (sec. 147)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the divestment of KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft in excess of the
following: in fiscal year 2021, 6 KC-10s; in fiscal year 2022,
12 KC-10s; and, in fiscal year 2023, 12 KC-10s and 14 KC-135s.
Limitation on retirement of U-2 and RQ-4 aircraft (sec. 148)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
retirement of any U-2 or RQ-4 aircraft until the Chairman of
the Joint Requirements Oversight Council certifies to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees that the
operational capabilities available to the combatant commanders
would not be affected by such a decision.
Limitation on divestment of F-15C aircraft in the European theater
(sec. 149)
The committee recommends a provision that would restrict
the divestment of F-15Cs in the European theater until the F-
15EX is integrated into the Air Force and has begun bed down
actions in the theater. The provision would also provide a
waiver from the limitation if the Secretary of Defense notifies
the congressional defense committees with appropriate
justification.
Air base defense development and acquisition strategy (sec. 150)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF), in consultation with
the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA), to produce a development
and acquisition strategy to procure a capability to protect air
bases and prepositioned sites in the contested environments
highlighted in the National Defense Strategy. The strategy
should ensure a solution that is effective against current and
emerging cruise missiles and advanced hypersonic missiles. The
provision would require the CSAF to submit the strategy to the
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2021.
Additionally, the provision would limit the obligation or
expenditure of fiscal year 2021 funds for operation and
maintenance for the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
and the Office of the Secretary of the Army to 50 percent of
those funds until 15 days after submission of the strategy
required by the provision.
Required solution for KC-46 aircraft remote visual system limitations
(sec. 151)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to develop and implement a solution
to the KC-46 remote visual system (RVS) operational
limitations. The committee is aware that the manufacturer and
the Air Force have developed a complete solution for the KC-46
RVS issue that would remove all operational limitations for
refueling operations of the aircraft. However, the committee is
concerned about the duration of time that has already elapsed
and the lack of an implementation strategy. Furthermore, the
committee is concerned regarding the potential of implementing
a phased approach to solving the RVS issue. This approach would
put unnecessary delays in a final fix and delay full operation
of the KC-46 fleet until after 2025. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to reach an agreement
with the manufacturer for a complete, one-time solution to the
KC-46 RVS issue, and to present an accompanying implementation
strategy to the congressional defense committees no later than
October 1, 2020.
Analysis of requirements and Advanced Battle Management System
capabilities (sec. 152)
The committee recommends a provision regarding the
applicability of the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
to the broader Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2)
effort. The committee is encouraged by the Air Force's effort
to link disaggregated sensors into a network of survivable and
persistent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
capabilities. The committee also commends the Air Force for
leading the Department of Defense in the development of an
architecture for the broader JADC2 effort.
However, the committee remains concerned regarding the
progress of the ABMS effort and the speed at which the ground
moving target indicator capability of the E-8 is being
replaced. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that
would require the Secretary of the Air Force to develop an
analysis of current ground moving target indicator requirements
across the combatant commands and the capability that the ABMS
will require when fielded.
Studies on measures to assess cost-per-effect for key mission areas
(sec. 153)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to conduct, or provide for the
conduct of, two studies no later than January 1, 2021, to
provide a better understanding of the cost of sustainment of
aircraft based on combat effects.
Plan for operational test and utility evaluation of systems for Low-
Cost Attributable Aircraft Technology program (sec. 154)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics to provide to the congressional
defense committees an executable plan for the operational test
and utility evaluation of the Low-Cost Attributable Aircraft
Technology (LCAAT) systems no later than October 1, 2020, and
to brief the committees on the plan by the same date. The
committee intends for this provision to support the Assistant
Secretary's intent to accelerate the LCAAT program for
collaborative pairing with manned platforms, potentially
including the F-35. The committee views the combined
application of commercial technology, autonomy, and artificial
intelligence as an innovative solution to meeting the demands
of the National Defense Strategy.
Prohibition on retirement or divestment of A-10 aircraft (sec. 155)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the divestment of A-10 aircraft for fiscal year 2021. The
committee is aware that there is a growing demand for low cost,
survivable aircraft to support disaggregated operations in
support of efforts in countering violent extremism (CVE) and to
provide close air support and combat search and rescue
capability in accordance with the National Defense Strategy.
The A-10 aircraft appears to meet all the requirements set
forth in various requests to industry. The committee
understands the fiscal need to divest legacy aircraft as new
aircraft are integrated into the Air Force but supports a 1-
year suspension on plans to retire or divest A-10s to ensure
that these aircraft support ongoing CVE efforts and provide
close air support and combat search and rescue capability.
Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters
Budgeting for life-cycle cost of aircraft for the Navy, Army, and Air
Force: annual plan and certification (sec. 171)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual plan for the
procurement of the aircraft in the Department of the Navy, the
Department of the Army, and the Department of the Air Force in
order to meet the requirements of the National Defense
Strategy.
Authority to use F-35 aircraft withheld from delivery to Government of
Turkey (sec. 172)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Air Force to utilize, modify, and operate the 6 Turkish
aircraft that were accepted by the Government of Turkey but
never delivered because Turkey was suspended from the F-35
program.
Transfer from Commander of United States Strategic Command to Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of responsibilities and functions
relating to electromagnetic spectrum operations (sec. 173)
The committee recommends a provision that would: (1)
require the Secretary of Defense to transition to the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) as a Chairman's Controlled
Activity all of the responsibilities and functions of the
Commander of United States Strategic Command that are germane
to electromagnetic spectrum operations; (2) define additional
responsibilities related to EMSO for the VCJCS; and (3) require
the combatant commanders and service chiefs to assess their
plans and programs for consistency with the Electromagnetic
Spectrum Superiority Strategy, the Joint Staff-developed
concept of operations, and operational requirements.
The committee's oversight priorities in electronic warfare
(EW) to date have been in correcting the Department of
Defense's governance gaps and in addressing its acquisition
activities. The committee recognizes, however, that the
military services and combatant commanders face operational and
tactical challenges today that have exposed the inadequacy of
the Department's concept of operations, tactics, techniques,
and procedures (TTPs), and associated capabilities, forces, and
training for electromagnetic spectrum operations (EMSO). These
issues, highlighted in a Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessment study conducted pursuant to section 255 of the John
S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2019 (Public Law 115-232), demand the formulation of a new way
of ``maneuvering within the electromagnetic spectrum,'' to use
the Department's terminology--new doctrine, operational plans,
training, capabilities, and TTPs for fighting with, against,
and through electronic warfare capabilities. This assessment
was amplified by the March 2019 report by the Institute for
Defense Analysis, ``Independent Assessment of EMS Organization
Alternatives,'' which considered a number of options to further
the Department's focus on spectrum operations from both
military service and joint commander perspectives. This report
noted, ``The panel judges this crisis [in electromagnetic
spectrum operations] to be urgent and enduring--requiring
immediate actions from the Department's top leadership to
address the urgent problem and a systemic institutional
response to address the enduring competitive challenge.''
The committee believes that the only appropriate body for
managing this modernization is the Joint Staff and thus
supports the Department's designation of the Vice Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff (VCJCS) as the senior designated
official for EW and EMSO. The VCJCS, as chairman of the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council and as a senior advisor to the
President and Secretary of Defense, possesses the seniority and
vantage point to effectively provide that critical oversight
and advocacy. In particular, the committee believes that the
VCJCS must lead the development of EMSO concepts of operations
and oversee their integration into the joint warfighting
concept, the warfighting plans of the combatant commands, and
the programs of the military services.
Cryptographic modernization schedules (sec. 174)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each of the Secretaries of the military departments and the
heads of relevant defense agencies and field activities to
establish and maintain a cryptographic modernization schedule
that specifies, for each pertinent weapon system, command and
control system, or data link: (1) The expiration date for
applicable cryptographic algorithms; (2) Anticipated key
extension requests; and (3) The funding and deployment schedule
for modernized cryptographic algorithms, keys, and equipment
over the future years defense program. The provision would also
require the Department of Defense (DOD) Chief Information
Officer (CIO) to oversee the implementation of these scheduled
investments and amend these plans, should they pose
unacceptable risk to military operations. Finally, the
provision would require the CIO to annually notify the
congressional defense committees of any failures to meet these
planned schedules.
The committee is encouraged by the Department's recent
focus on cryptographic modernization and, in particular, the
priority placed on updating cryptographic equipment, keys, and
algorithms by the CIO, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, and the Joint Staff. For too long,
the National Security Agency's warnings about obsolete
cryptography have fallen on deaf ears and the military services
have been allowed to continuously delay much-needed
modernization. The committee seeks to reinforce this priority
and ensure that it does not prove to be ephemeral. This
provision would do so by forcing the military services to
maintain schedules for cryptographic upgrades and establishing
DOD and congressional accountability mechanisms to deter and
correct schedule slips.
Prohibition on purchase of armed overwatch aircraft (sec. 175)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the purchase of aircraft for the Air Force Special Operations
Command used for the purpose of ``armed overwatch'' until such
time as the Chief of Staff of the Air Force certifies to the
congressional defense committees that general purpose forces of
the Air Force have neither the skill nor the capacity to
provide close air support and armed overwatch to U.S. forces
deployed operationally.
Special Operations armed overwatch (sec. 176)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the acquisition of armed overwatch aircraft for the United
States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in fiscal year 2021.
The provision would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and the
Commander, SOCOM, to conduct, not later than July 1, 2021, an
analysis to define the special operations-peculiar requirements
for armed overwatch aircraft and determine whether acquisition
of a new special operations-peculiar platform is the most
effective means of fulfilling such requirements.
The committee is concerned that the acquisition strategy
for an armed overwatch aircraft for SOCOM lacks a validated
requirement and an appropriate analysis of the cost-
effectiveness of acquiring a new special operations-peculiar
platform. Furthermore, the committee is concerned that the
rapid acquisition timeline being pursued by SOCOM does not
allow for adequate consideration of: the cost of operating and
sustaining the aircraft; the potential negative impacts on an
already stressed community of pilots, aircrews, and
maintainers; and how such a costly addition fits into SOCOM's
medium-to-long-term airborne intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance capability roadmap.
Autonomic Logistics Information System redesign strategy (sec. 177)
The committee recommends a provision that would address the
lack of strategy for the redesign of the Autonomic Logistics
Information System (ALIS) by requiring the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with
the F-35 Program Executive Officer, no later than October 1,
2020, to: (1) Develop a program-wide process for measuring,
collecting, and tracking information on how the ALIS is
affecting the performance of the F-35 fleet, to include, but
not be limited to, its effects on mission capability rates; and
(2) Implement a strategy for the re-design of the ALIS. The
strategy should be detailed enough to clearly identify and
assess the goals, key risks or uncertainties, and costs of
redesigning the system.
The committee is encouraged at the progress that the Joint
Program Office has made through various initiatives in
improving and redesigning the ALIS and the transition to the
Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN) but is concerned
that these initiatives and the transition to ODIN involve
differing approaches and that technical and programmatic
uncertainties are hindering the redesign effort.
Contract aviation services in a country or in airspace in which a
Special Federal Aviation Regulation applies (sec. 178)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, or a designee of the Secretary of
Defense, to designate aircraft fulfilling urgent operational
needs for the Department of Defense as State Aircraft if there
exist Special Federal Aviation Regulations that would impact
their ability to perform these missions. These aircraft are
performing military functions, and the committee therefore
believes that they should be afforded the status of State
Aircraft if required to carry out their missions.
F-35 aircraft munitions (sec. 179)
The committee recommends a provision would require the
Secretary of the Air Force and Secretary of the Navy to qualify
and certify, for the use by the U.S. military, additional
munitions for the F-35 aircraft that are already qualified for
North Atlantic Treaty Organization member F-35 partner
aircraft.
Airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance acquisition
roadmap for United States Special Operations Command (sec. 180)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
not later than December 1, 2021, the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD
SOLIC) and the Commander, United States Special Operations
Command (SOCOM), to jointly submit to the congressional defense
committees an acquisition roadmap to meet the manned and
unmanned airborne intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) requirements of United States Special
Operations Forces (SOF).
SOCOM's budget request for fiscal year 2021 and the future
years defense program includes proposals to modify the
composition of its airborne ISR fleet through the acquisition
of new platforms and the divestment of platforms currently in
its inventory. The committee is concerned that there does not
exist an overarching strategy to guide SOCOM's airborne ISR
acquisition efforts, particularly one that clearly: identifies
current or anticipated special operations-peculiar capability
gaps; describes future manned and unmanned ISR requirements,
especially those related to the ability to operate in contested
environments; describes the anticipated mix of manned and
unmanned aircraft and associated manning requirements; and
describes the extent to which service-provided manned and
unmanned airborne ISR capabilities will be required to support
SOF requirements.
The committee strongly believes that clear explanation of
the path forward is fundamental to ensuring that SOCOM's
airborne ISR capabilities are appropriate for meeting its
requirements over the mid- and long-term and to ensuring that
such acquisition programs meet the intent of the National
Defense Strategy in pursuing a more resource-efficient approach
to countering violent extremist organizations. The committee
believes that rigorous analysis and the submission of the
roadmap required by this section should precede the initiation
of any new start acquisition programs for airborne manned and
unmanned ISR capabilities for SOCOM.
Requirement to accelerate the fielding and development of counter
unmanned aerial system efforts across the Joint Force (sec.
181)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
executive agent of the Joint Counter Small Unmanned Aerial
Systems office to prioritize counter-unmanned aerial systems
(CUAS) that can be fielded in fiscal year 2021 and develop a
near-term plan to effect that fielding. As part of the
Secretary of the Army's review of CUAS efforts, the committee
encourages the Secretary to consider establishing a CUAS center
of excellence for the executive agent to coordinate service
research and development for counter-drone technologies.
Joint All-Domain Command and Control requirements (sec. 182)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) to produce Joint
All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) requirements no later
than October 1, 2020. The provision would also require,
immediately after the certification of requirements, the Chief
of Staff of the Air Force to provide a certification to the
congressional defense committees that the current JADC2
efforts, including programmatic and architecture efforts, being
led by the Air Force will meet the requirements laid out by the
JROC. Additionally, each service chief would be required to
certify to the congressional defense committees that his or her
respective service efforts in multi-domain command and control
are compatible with the Air Force-led architecture no later
than January 1, 2021. Finally, the Secretary of Defense would
be required to incorporate the expected costs for full
development and implementation across the Department of Defense
in the fiscal year 2022 budget request.
The committee commends the Department of Defense on its
efforts to date on JADC2. The committee recognizes that, in
order for JADC2 to be successful, there must be leadership and
alignment from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD),
the Joint Staff, and all the military services. The committee
is encouraged that the OSD has designated the Air Force as the
lead for design and experimentation in order to develop an
architecture that will meet the requirements set forth by the
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in his role as the
Chairman of the JROC. The committee remains concerned that the
actual requirements are not clear and, as such, that the Air
Force will not be able to coordinate with the other military
services to ensure that their own multi-domain command and
control-relevant capabilities will be compatible with the
eventual network and architecture.
Budget Items
Army
MQ-1
The budget request included $0.0 in line number 2 of
Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for MQ-1 procurement.
The committee is concerned that the temporary termination
of procurement of MQ-1s will result in significantly increased
cost in the long run and will delay the Army's meeting of its
stated requirements for unmanned fixed wing intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $165.0
million in line number 2 of APA for the purchase of additional
MQ-1 aircraft.
CH-47 Cargo Helicopter Modifications
The budget request included $15.5 million in line number 22
of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for CH-47 Cargo Helicopter
Mods.
The committee recognizes that installation of Improved
Vibration Control System on the CH-47 minimizes vibration
generated by the rotor system, improving aircraft and crew
performance and extending component service life.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in line number 22 of APA for CH-47 Cargo Helicopter
Mods.
Procurement of PAC-3 MSE missiles
The budget request included $779.8 million in line number 3
of Missile Procurement, Army (MPA), for MSE Missiles, of which
$603.2 million was included in the Army's base budget account
and $176.6 million was included in the Overseas Contingency
Operations account for the European Deterrence Initiative
(EDI).
While the committee strongly supports procurement of
additional MSE missiles to meet the global requirement,
activities funded through EDI should directly support
requirements in the U.S. European Command (EUCOM) area of
responsibility. The committee understands that the 46 MSE
missiles requested in EDI would be subject to global allocation
to the combatant commands at the discretion of the Secretary of
Defense, just as the 122 missiles requested under the Army's
base budget would be so distributed. The committee does not
believe that procurement of globally interchangeable assets,
like munitions, without a commitment that they would be
prepositioned at locations in Europe or otherwise allocated to
EUCOM upon delivery, is an appropriate use of EDI funding.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $176.6
million, for a total of $779.8 million, in line number 3 of MPA
in the base budget account.
Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2
The budget request included $106.3 million in Missile
Procurement, Army, line number 5 for Indirect Fire Protection
Capability Increment 2 (IFPC Inc 2).
The committee understands that a lower level of funding
would be sufficient to execute all planned fiscal year 2021
activities for this program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $40.5
million in Missile Procurement, Army, line number 5 for IFPC
Inc 2.
Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle
The budget request included $193.0 million in line number 2
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles (WTCV),
Army, for the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV).
The committee supports the AMPV program but notes
significant projected carryover from fiscal year 2020 and a
delayed full rate production decision.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $20.0
million in line number 2 of Procurement of WTCV, Army, for the
AMPV.
Bradley Program Modifications
The budget request included $40.0 million in line number 5
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicle (WTCV),
Army, for Bradley Program (MOD 10) Survivability Enhancements.
The committee notes substantial prior year carryover and
late fiscal year 2021 live fire testing for Underbelly Interim
Solution elements of MOD 10.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $20.0
million in line number 5 of Procurement of WTCV, Army, for
Bradley Program (MOD 10) Survivability Enhancements.
M88 Family of Vehicle Modification
The budget request included $18.4 million in line number 11
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicle (WTCV),
Army, for M88 FOV Modifications.
The committee notes an unjustified growth of government and
contractor program support costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million in line number 11 of Procurement of WTCV, Army, for M88
FOV Modifications.
Joint Assault Bridge
The budget request included $72.2 million in line number 12
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicle (WTCV),
Army, for the Joint Assault Bridge.
The committee notes a 1 year contract slip that will delay
execution of fiscal year 2021 funds.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $10.5
million in line number 12 of Procurement of WTCV, Army, for the
Joint Assault Bridge.
Multi-Domain Task Force Tactical Network Technology
The budget request included $360.4 million in line number
23 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Tactical Network
Technology Mod in Svc.
The unfunded priorities list of the Chief of Staff of the
Army identified non-program of record procurement requirements
to enable intelligence, cyber, electronic warfare, and space
operations within the Multi-Domain Task Force, including $5.0
million for scalable network node equipment.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in line number 23 of OPA for Tactical Network
Technology Mod in Svc.
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades transportable tactical
command communications
The budget request included $75.2 million in line number 30
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Transportable Tactical
Command Communications.
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
identified as an unfunded requirement the need for emergent
force protection upgrades following the terrorist attack
against U.S. personnel in Manda Bay, Kenya, and after a
theater-wide review of force protection at multiple locations
in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most immediate priorities as
establishing and upgrading fencing, communications systems, and
shelters to provide protection for Department of Defense
personnel.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0
million in line number 30 of OPA for Transportable Tactical
Command Communications.
Multi-Domain Task Force Tactical Command Communications
The budget request included $72.5 million in line number 30
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Transportable Tactical
Command Communications.
The unfunded priorities list of the Chief of Staff of the
Army identified non-program of record procurement requirements
to enable intelligence, cyber, electronic warfare, and space
operations within the Multi-Domain Task Force, including $1.4
million for scalable network node equipment.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.4
million in line number 30 of OPA for Transportable Tactical
Command Communications.
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades combat communications
The budget request included $550.8 million in line number
37 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Combat Communications
Handheld Manpack Small Form Fit.
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
identified as an unfunded requirement the need for emergent
force protection upgrades following the terrorist attack
against U.S. personnel in Manda Bay, Kenya, and after a
theater-wide review of force protection at multiple locations
in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most immediate priorities as
establishing and upgrading fencing, communications systems, and
shelters to provide protection for Department of Defense
personnel serving in select locations.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in
line number 37 of OPA for Combat Communications Handheld
Manpack Small Form Fit.
Spider Anti-Personnel Munition
The budget request included $14.0 million in line number 41
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for the Spider Family of
Networked Munitions.
The committee notes the Army's cancellation of the program
subsequent to preparation and submission of the budget request.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $14.0
million in line number 41 of OPA for the Spider Family of
Networked Munitions.
Multi-Domain Task Force Defensive Cyber Operations
The budget request included $54.8 million in line number 53
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Defensive Cyber
Operations.
The unfunded priorities list of the Chief of Staff of the
Army identified non-program of record procurement requirements
to enable intelligence, cyber, electronic warfare, and space
operations within the Multi-Domain Task Force, including
$900,000 for cyber defense and electronic warfare tools.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of
$900,000 in line number 53 of OPA for Defensive Cyber
Operations.
U.S. Africa Command unfunded requirement force protection upgrades long
haul communications
The budget request included $29.8 million in line number 57
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Long Haul Communications
Base Support Communications.
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
identified as an unfunded requirement the need for emergent
force protection upgrades following the terrorist attack
against U.S. personnel in Manda Bay, Kenya, and after a
theater-wide review of force protection at multiple locations
in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most immediate priorities as
establishing and upgrading fencing, communications systems, and
shelters to provide protection for Department of Defense
personnel serving in select locations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0
million in line number 57 of OPA for Long Haul Communications
Base Support Communications.
Multi-Domain Task Force Counterintelligence/Security Countermeasures
The budget request included $360.4 million in line number
81 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Counterintelligence/
Security Countermeasures.
The unfunded priorities list of the Chief of Staff of the
Army identified non-program of record procurement requirements
to enable intelligence, cyber, electronic warfare, and space
operations within the Multi-Domain Task Force, including $13.4
million for advanced intelligence systems for remote
collection.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $13.4
million in line number 81 of OPA for Counterintelligence/
Security Countermeasures.
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades indirect fire protection
The budget request included $37.0 million in line number 88
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Indirect Fire Protection
Family of Systems.
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
identified as an unfunded requirement the need for emergent
force protection upgrades following the terrorist attack
against U.S. personnel in Manda Bay, Kenya, and after a
theater-wide review of force protection at multiple locations
in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most immediate priorities as
establishing and upgrading fencing, communications systems, and
shelters to provide protection for Department of Defense
personnel serving in select locations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in line number 88 of OPA for Indirect Fire Protection
Family of Systems.
Multi-Domain Task Force Electronic Warfare Tools
The budget request included $17.0 million in line number
119 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for BCT Emerging
Technologies.
The unfunded priorities list of the Chief of Staff of the
Army identified non-program of record procurement requirements
to enable intelligence, cyber, electronic warfare, and space
operations within the Multi-Domain Task Force, including $3.9
million for electronic warfare tools and cyber defense.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.9
million in line number 119 of OPA for BCT Emerging
Technologies.
WMD Civil Support Team Equipping
The budget request included $28.5 million in line number
123 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) defense.
The committee recognizes the critical role that Weapons of
Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (CSTs) play in both
homeland defense and overseas contingency operations and the
importance of equipping CSTs for radiological and nuclear
hazards detection and identification.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $14.0
million in line number 123 of OPA for CBRN defense.
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades physical security systems
The budget request included $75.5 million in line number
181 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Physical Security
Systems (OPA3).
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)
identified as an unfunded requirement the need for emergent
force protection upgrades following the terrorist attack
against U.S. personnel in Manda Bay, Kenya, and after a
theater-wide review of force protection at multiple locations
in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most immediate priorities as
establishing and upgrading fencing, communications systems, and
shelters to provide protection for Department of Defense
personnel serving in select locations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0
million in line number 181 of OPA for Physical Security Systems
(OPA3).
Expeditionary Solid Waste Disposal System
The budget request included $32.4 million in line number
183 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Other Support
Equipment for modification of in-service equipment (OPA-3).
The committee concurs with the Army's budget justification
documents, which stated that the Expeditionary Solid Waste
Disposal System (ESWDS) ``will reduce the use of burn pits by
providing a cleaner solution for onsite disposal of 1,000
pounds of solid waste per day. The ESWDS will also reduce
Soldier, civilian, and local population exposure to pollutants
from open air burn pits; reduce the amount of trash that must
be backhauled, reducing Soldiers' exposure and attacks during
convoy operations; reduce the waste held onsite [which] also
deters potential vermin that could spread disease and disrupt
mission[;] and eliminate the security risk from uncontrolled
access to trash.'' However, despite this justification, the
Army requested no funds for ESWDS. The committee notes that
ESWDS could also provide a capability during pandemics to
rapidly incinerate contaminated personal protective equipment,
thereby decreasing exposure to servicemembers.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.9
million in line number 183 of OPA for ESWDS in OPA-3.
Navy
F-35C
The budget request included $2.2 billion in line number 3
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for F-35C procurement.
The committee commends the Navy and Marine Corps for
transitioning to a greater acquisition rate of 5th generation
aircraft with the planned purchase of 21 aircraft but still
believes that a higher number is required to meet the needs of
the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $200.0
million in line number 3 of APN for the purchase of 2
additional F-35Cs: 1 for the Navy and 1 for the Marine Corps.
F-35B
The budget request included $1.1 billion in line number 5
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for F-35B procurement.
The committee commends the Marine Corps for transitioning
to a greater acquisition rate of 5th generation aircraft with
the planned purchase of 10 aircraft but still believes that a
higher number is required to meet the requirements of the
National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $125.5
million in line number 5 of APN for the purchase of 2
additional F-35Bs.
CH-53K
The budget request included $813.3 million in line number 7
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for CH-53K procurement.
The Marine Corps has conducted a force design review that
includes plans to reduce the number of heavy lift squadrons by
three, and, as such, the committee is concerned that the
corresponding reduction in procurement will significantly
affect the acquisition program unit cost of the CH-53K.
Additionally, the committee is aware of potential program
delays and restructuring decisions germane to the CH-53K. Based
on the reduced total numbers, the committee is concerned about
additional non-recurring engineering costs and cost growth in
government furnished equipment.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in line number 7 of APN for CH-53K.
CH-53 Advanced Procurement
The budget request included $201.2 million in line number 8
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for CH-53K procurement.
The Marine Corps has conducted a force design review that
includes plans to reduce the number of heavy lift squadrons by
three, and, as such, the committee is concerned that the
corresponding reduction in procurement will significantly
affect the acquisition program unit cost of the CH-53K.
Additionally, the committee is aware of potential program
delays and restructuring decisions germane to the CH-53K and
potential acquisition reductions next year.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in line number 8 of APN for CH-53K.
MQ-4
The budget request included $813.3 million in line number
21 of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for MQ-4 Triton
procurement.
The Navy plans to take pause procurement until 2023. While
the committee is concerned with that decision, the Navy has
articulated the risk and mitigation efforts underway. Given the
pause, the committee believes that the current budget request
is greater than what it required to meet program requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in line number 21 of APN for MQ-4 Triton.
Marine Corps aviator body armor vest
The budget request included $40.4 million in line number 52
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for Aviation Life Support
Mods.
The committee is aware that the Marine Corps has a
requirement to replace the aviation life support equipment
(ALSE) vest system currently worn by MV-22 and CH-53 aircrews
with an aviator body armor vest (ABAV) system that improves
mobility and performance while enhancing survivability. The
committee encourages the Marine Corps to compete both
commercial off-the-shelf and government-owned designs of ABAV
systems in order to identify a system that fully meets the
Marine Corps requirement to enable and protect MV-22 and CH-53
aircrews while minimizing development costs and delays to
procurement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in line number 52 of APN for Aviation Life Support
Mods.
F-35B/C Spares
The budget request included $2.2 billion in line number 70
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for Spares and Repair
Parts.
The committee commends the Navy and Marine Corps for
acquiring 5th generation aircraft at a higher rate with the
planned purchase of 31 aircraft but still believes that a
higher number is required to meet the needs of the National
Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in line number 70 of APN for the purchase of initial
spares packages for the F-35B/C aircraft.
Tomahawk
The budget request included $277.7 million in line number 3
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for Tomahawk missiles.
The committee notes that additional funding could be used
to procure additional Tomahawk missiles for the Marine Corps in
furtherance of the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $26.0
million in line number 3 of WPN.
LRASM
The budget request included $168.8 million in line number
17 of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for 48 Long Range Anti-
Ship Missiles (LRASMs).
The committee understands that the LRASM's range,
semiautonomous targeting capability, survivability
enhancements, and other unique features will significantly
improve the carrier air wing's ability to reach and defeat
enemy surface combatants located in contested environments
while protecting itself against enemy countermeasures. The
LRASM capability will be relevant in multiple theaters, but it
will be especially useful in the Indo-Pacific, which the
Department of Defense has named its priority theater. The LRASM
provides a near-term capability enhancement that will allow the
carrier air wing to contribute to blunting a Chinese offensive
earlier in conflict, thereby directly advancing the objectives
and priorities laid out in the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $35.0
million in line number 17 of WPN for the purchase of 10 LRASMs.
Surface ship torpedo defense
The budget request included $5.8 million in line number 28
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for surface ship torpedo
defense.
The committee notes insufficient justification for acoustic
device countermeasure non-recurring costs.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.2
million in line number 28 of WPN.
MK-54 torpedo modifications
The budget request included $110.3 million in line number
31 of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for MK-54 torpedo
modifications.
The committee notes Mk 54 Mod 0 production delays.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in line number 31 of WPN.
Submarine supplier stability
The budget request included $1.1 billion in line number 2
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Columbia-class
submarine advance procurement.
The committee believes that expanding the capabilities of
the second- and third-tier contractors in the submarine
industrial base should lead to greater industrial base
stability, cost savings, and improved efficiency as production
increases to meet the Columbia-class construction schedule.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $175.0
million in line number 2 for Columbia-class submarine advance
procurement.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to notify
the congressional defense committees, in writing, within 30
days of obligating funds provided for submarine supplier
stability. The notification shall include: obligation date,
contractor name or names, location, description of the
shortfall to be addressed, actions to be undertaken, desired
end state, usable end items to be procured, period of
performance, dollar amount, projected associated savings,
including business case analysis, if applicable, contract name,
and contract number.
Virginia-class submarines
The budget request included $2.3 billion in line number 5
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement of
Virginia-class submarines.
The committee notes unjustified unit cost growth in plans
($25.0 million), modular mast ($8.8 million), propulsor ($25.6
million), and command, control, communications and information
($15.0 million) systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $74.4
million in line number 5 of SCN.
Virginia-class submarine advance procurement
The budget request included $1.9 billion in line number 6
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Virginia-class
submarine advance procurement.
The committee notes that on December 2, 2019, the Navy
awarded a contract modification to procure 9 Virginia-class
submarines in fiscal years 2019 through 2023, as authorized by
section 124 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91). This contract includes an
option for one additional submarine.
The committee supports preserving the option to procure 10
Virginia-class attack submarines in fiscal years 2019 through
2023. The committee understands that construction on this
additional submarine would not begin until March 2024, that the
typical procurement funding profile for Virginia-class
submarines consists of 2 years of advance procurement followed
by 1 year of full funding procurement, and that $272.0 million
is the minimum amount of additional advance procurement funding
required in fiscal year 2021.
The committee supports utilizing a typical procurement
funding profile and believes doing so would also provide
additional time to more fully assess previous concerns of Navy
officials regarding the ability of the submarine industrial
base to build 10 Virginia-class submarines, with 9 having the
Virginia Payload Module in this time frame.
Additionally, as noted in the Senate report accompanying S.
1790 (S. Rept. 116-48) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020, the committee still has insufficient
clarity on the Navy's intentions regarding a significant
Virginia-class submarine design change, which could occur in
the same time frame.
The committee recognizes that this additional submarine was
the Chief of Naval Operations' top unfunded priority for fiscal
year 2021. If this level of support continues, the committee
expects the Navy to budget accordingly in its fiscal year 2022
future years defense program submission.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $472.0
million in line number 6 of SCN.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
The budget request included $3.0 billion in line number 10
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement of
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
The committee notes the available prior year funds in this
line number.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.0
million in line number 10 of SCN.
Surface ship supplier stability
The budget request included $29.3 million in line number 11
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for DDG-51 advance
procurement.
The committee believes that expanding the capabilities of
the second- and third-tier contractors in the surface ship
industrial base should lead to greater industrial base
stability, cost savings, and improved efficiency as production
increases to build greater quantities of surface combatants.
The committee also notes that the Navy future years defense
program includes procurement of two Arleigh Burke-class
destroyers in fiscal year 2022, which would be procured using a
multiyear procurement contract. The committee understands that
advance procurement of long lead time material could reduce
component costs and enable improved ship construction
intervals.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $435.0
million in line number 11 for DDG-51 advance procurement.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to notify
the congressional defense committees, in writing, within 30
days of obligating funds provided for surface ship supplier
stability. The notification shall include: obligation date,
contractor name or names, location, description of the
shortfall to be addressed, actions to be undertaken, desired
end state, usable end items to be procured, period of
performance, dollar amount, projected associated savings,
including business case analysis, if applicable, contract name,
and contract number.
LPD Flight II
The budget request included $1.2 billion in line number 14
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for LPD Flight II
ships.
The committee notes that the Navy received incremental
funding authority in section 129 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) for
the LPD-31, which would be fully funded in this request.
The committee further notes that additional funding is
required in line number 15 of SCN to maximize the benefit of
the amphibious ship procurement authorities provided elsewhere
in this Act through the procurement of long lead material for
LPD-32 and LPD-33.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $250.0
million in line number 14 of SCN. This sum is added to line
number 15 of SCN elsewhere in this Report.
LPD Flight II advance procurement
The budget request included no funding in line number 15 of
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for LPD Flight II
advance procurement.
The committee notes that $500.0 million is required in line
number 15 of SCN to maximize the benefit of the amphibious ship
procurement authorities provided elsewhere in this Act through
the procurement of long lead material for LPD-32 and LPD-33.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $500.0
million in line number 15 of SCN, of which $250.0 million is a
transfer from line number 14.
LHA replacement amphibious assault ship
The budget request included no funding in line number 17 of
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for the LHA
replacement amphibious assault ship.
The committee remains concerned with the procurement
profile for large deck amphibious assault ships, which includes
a span of 6 years until the next large deck amphibious assault
ship (LHA-9) would be procured in fiscal year 2023.
The committee notes that efficiencies could be gained by
reducing this time span, including steadier workflow with an
increased learning curve, material and equipment suppliers with
more predictable delivery contracts, and a more effective
continuous improvement schedule.
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to accelerate
the construction of LHA-9, including putting the remainder of
the $350.0 million appropriated in fiscal year 2019 for this
ship on contract as soon as possible, leveraging the
incremental funding authority in section 127 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) to build LHA-9 as efficiently as possible and utilizing the
amphibious ship procurement authorities provided elsewhere in
this Act to further increase efficiency and stability in the
shipbuilding industrial base.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $250.0
million in line number 17 of SCN.
Landing craft utility
The budget request included $87.4 million in line number 23
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for the procurement
of landing craft utility (LCU 1700) vessels.
The committee notes insufficient justification to support
an increase in quantities from 4 to 5 LCU 1700 vessels, as
compared to the projection for fiscal year 2021 in the fiscal
year 2020 future years defense program.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $17.0
million in line number 23 of SCN.
Outfitting
The budget request included $825.6 million in line number
24 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for outfitting.
The committee notes unjustified cost growth on the Littoral
Combat Ship ($51.8 million) and Zumwalt-class destroyer ($26.5
million) programs.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $78.3
million in line number 24 of SCN.
Yard patrol craft
The budget request included $249.8 million in line number
26 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for service
craft.
In order to increase training opportunities for Surface
Warfare Officer candidates from all accession sources, the
committee continues to believe that the Navy should replace the
six YP-676 class craft slated for disposal with upgraded YP-703
class craft that incorporate modernization, training, and
habitability improvements derived from lessons learned with
existing YP-703 craft.
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to release a
request for proposals for the detail design and construction of
upgraded YP-703 class craft not later than fiscal year 2021.
The committee notes that the Navy's latest cost estimate for
acquisition of the first upgraded YP-703 class craft is $25.5
million.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.5
million in line number 26 of SCN.
LCAC service life extension
The budget request included $56.5 million in line number 27
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for LCAC service
life extensions.
The committee notes insufficient justification to support
an increase in funding, as compared to the projection for
fiscal year 2021 in the fiscal year 2020 future years defense
program.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $56.5
million in line number 27 of SCN.
Hybrid electric drive
The budget request included $58.5 million in line number 2
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for surface combatant hull,
mechanical, and electrical equipment.
The committee notes that the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2020 (Public Law 116-93) included $35.0 million for
``program increase--hybrid electric drive'' in this line
number. The committee understands that the purpose of this
funding was to provide for the installation of the five
previously procured hybrid electric drive (HED) ship sets.
The committee further understands that the earliest the
Navy can execute an HED installation is in fiscal year 2023 and
that, prior to installation, approximately $15 million is
required to implement engineering changes and software updates
on the 5 previously procured HED ship sets.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in line number 2 of OPN.
DDG modernization
The budget request included $547.6 million in line number 5
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for DDG modernization.
The committee notes unjustified excess unit cost growth for
installation of modernized hardware and software.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in line number 5 of OPN.
LCS common mission module equipment
The budget request included $39.70 in line number 30 of
Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for LCS common mission module
equipment.
The committee notes insufficient justification for Mine
Countermeasures containers ($13.4 million) and Mission Package
Computing Environment sonar signal processing ($8.9 million).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $22.3
million in line number 30 of OPN.
LCS mine countermeasures mission modules
The budget request included $218.8 million in line number
31 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for LCS mine
countermeasures mission modules.
The committee notes that procurement of the buried
minehunting module and remote minehunting module would occur
prior to operational testing, which is planned to be completed
in fiscal year 2022. The committee seeks to avoid excess
procurement of these systems in advance of satisfactory
testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $123.5
million in line number 31 of OPN.
LCS anti-submarine warfare mission modules
The budget request included $61.8 million in line number 32
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for LCS anti-submarine
mission modules.
The committee notes recent variable depth sonar testing
delays necessary to correct deficiencies and that the initial
operational test and evaluation period for the littoral combat
ship anti-submarine warfare mission package is scheduled for
fiscal year 2021. The committee seeks to avoid excess
procurement of these systems in advance of satisfactory
testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $57.0
million in line number 32 of OPN.
Small and medium unmanned underwater vehicles
The budget request included $67.7 million in line number 35
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for small and medium unmanned
underwater vehicles.
The committee notes that the procurement of 2 Knifefish
surface mine countermeasure unmanned undersea vehicle systems
would occur prior to operational testing, which is planned to
be completed in fiscal year 2022. The committee seeks to avoid
excess procurement of these systems in advance of satisfactory
testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.1
million in line number 35 of OPN.
Surface electronic warfare improvement program
The budget request included $387.2 million in line number
45 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for the surface electronic
warfare improvement program.
The committee notes that the following funding is early to
need: installation ($5.0 million), 2 Blocks 1B3 & 2 systems
($32.0 million), and 3 SEWIP Lite & 1B2 systems ($19.4
million).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $56.4
million in line number 45 of OPN.
Cooperative engagement capability
The budget request included $26.0 million in line number 48
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of
cooperative engagement capability systems.
The committee notes program delays with the Common Array
Block antenna.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.3
million in line number 48 of OPN.
Next generation surface search radar
The budget request included $159.8 million in line number
72 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of items
for less than $5.0 million.
The committee notes that the next generation surface search
radar program has available funds due to available prior year
installation funding ($15.6 million), late production contract
award ($33.9 million), and excess engineering change proposal
funding ($5.3 million).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $54.8
million in line number 72 of OPN.
Sonobuoys
The budget request included $237.6 million in line number
92 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for the procurement of
sonobuoys.
The committee notes that greater-than-expected sonobuoy
expenditures in fiscal year 2019 resulted in the Chief of Naval
Operations' requesting procurement of additional sonobuoys as a
fiscal year 2021 unfunded priority.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $49.1
million in line number 92 of OPN.
Ground-Based Anti-Ship Missile
The budget request included $174.7 million in line number 5
of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for Artillery Weapons
Systems.
The committee recognizes that Naval Strike Missiles (NSMs)
form the initial basis for the Ground-Based Anti-Ship Missile
(GBASM) program, which will significantly enhance the Marine
Corps' ability to perform sea denial operations. In his
unfunded priorities list, the Commandant of the Marine Corps
identified an unfunded requirement of $59.6 million for
procurement of NSMs to support the GBASM program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $59.6
million in line number 5 of PMC for GBASM.
Air Force
F-35A
The budget request included $4.6 billion in line number 1
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for F-35A
procurement.
The committee is concerned that, after repeated
Congressional plus-ups and support for increased production,
the Air Force still budgets for a quantity below the stated
production objectives of the F-35 program. Further, the
committee is concerned that the Air Force has squandered an
opportunity to capitalize on advanced procurement
appropriations by only budgeting for 48 aircraft this year
instead of the 60 aircraft that were planned and that the
advanced procurement was previously provided for by the
Congress. The committee expects the Department to execute
proper forecasting and propose appropriate budget requests
rather than to continue to rely on Congressional plus-ups.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $976.7
million in line number 1 of APAF for the purchase of 10
additional F-35As.
MQ-9
The budget request included $171.9 million in line number
20 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for MQ-9
procurement.
The committee is concerned about terminating procurement of
MQ-9s without replacement. Further, the committee is worried
that, with a reduction of MQ-9s, the Department will incur a
significantly increased cost in the long run and the Air Force
will be unable to meet combatant command requirements for
unmanned fixed wing intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in line number 20 of APAF and the use of the production
shutdown funds totaling $120.6 million from Overseas
Contingency Operations funds for the purchase of additional MQ-
9s in order to maintain the production line for another year.
B-1
The budget request included $3.9 million in line number 22
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for B-1.
The committee supports the Air Force's request to realign
funds to support certain B-1 radio cryptographic modernization
requirements within the associated Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation account rather than using procurement dollars.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $3.9
million in line number 22 of APAF.
B-1B
The budget request included $21.8 million in line number 24
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for B-1B.
The committee supports the Air Force's request to realign
funds to support certain B-1 radio cryptographic modernization
requirements within the associated Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation account.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of
$493,000 in line number 24 of APAF.
F-16 Radar
The budget request included $615.8 million in line number
30 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for F-16
modernization.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Air Force's
efforts to modernize its fourth generation fighter fleet and
equip itself with the most advanced and capable radars in
support of the National Defense Strategy. However, the
committee is concerned about the quantity and timing of
procurement of advanced radars for the entire F-16 fleet.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in line number 30 of APAF for the procurement of
additional radar sets across the entire F-16 fleet.
T-38 Ejection Seat
The budget request included $36.8 million in line number 45
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for T-38 upgrades.
The committee is aware that T-38As and T-38Bs have not been
retrofitted with modern ejection seat technology that can
support the range of heights and weights of the current Air
Force pilot population. The legacy seats lack modern
capability, which creates safety concerns for pilots during
ejection in the current operational envelope. The committee
notes that this technology is in use in all Air Education and
Training Command (AETC) T-38C Talons. The upgraded egress
system would provide a significant improvement in safety
margins for all pilots.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.7
million in line number 45 of APAF to equip T-38As and T-38Bs
with updated egress systems that provide for the safety of Air
Force pilots.
E-4B Survivable Super High Frequency program
The budget request included $58.8 million in line number 59
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the E-4B
National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC).
The committee understands that the E-4B Survivable Super
High Frequency program has been rephased to future fiscal
years.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $14.7
million in line number 59 of APAF for the E-4B NAOC.
E-8 (JSTARS)
The budget request included $11.0 million in line number 60
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for conducting
various modifications of Joint Surveillance/Target Attack Radar
System (JSTARS) aircraft.
The committee believes in the continued relevance of the
JSTARS platform and the immediate requirement for a low-cost
network that can provide multiple simultaneous data links to
and from airborne and ground-based platforms in contested
environments.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in line number 60 of APAF for installing modifications
in JSTARS aircraft to provide for secure information
transmission capability.
CV-22 ABSS
The budget request included $36.8 million in line number 70
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for CV-22 upgrades.
The CV-22 Osprey is operated by Air Force Special
Operations Command (AFSOC) to conduct special missions around
the world. The CV-22 Advanced Ballistic Stopping System (ABSS)
system provides protection for passengers in the aircraft cabin
area via floor armor and sidewall cabin armor. The AFSOC
initially procured 16 ABSS systems, but 34 aircraft remain to
be retrofitted.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in line number 70 of APAF for CV-22 ballistic
protection.
F-35A initial spares
The budget request included $926.7 million in line number
71 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for Spares and
Repair Parts.
The committee remains concerned that the initial spares
procurement accounts are not adequately resourced which
continues to affect readiness, aircraft availability, and
mission capable rates of F-35 aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in line number 71 of APAF for the purchase of initial
spares packages for the F-35 aircraft.
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)
The budget request included $476.0 million in line number 4
of Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF), for JASSM.
The committee is concerned that the Air Force has not
procured sufficient weapons to support the National Defense
Strategy and is also concerned that the mix of Long Range Anti-
Ship Missiles (LRASMs) and Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff
Missiles (JASSM) is too heavily weighted on JASSM to support
National Defense Strategy-envisioned conflicts in the Indo-
Pacific region.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $75.0
million in line number 5 of MPAF to realign weapons capability
and purchase additional LRASMs, recommended elsewhere in this
report.
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)
The budget request included $19.8 million in line number 5
of Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF), for the Long Range
Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM).
The committee is concerned that the Air Force has not
procured sufficient number of weapons to support the National
Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $75.0
million in line number 5 of Missile Procurement, Air Force
(MPAF), for procurement of additional LRASMs.
Cobra Dane service life extension
The budget request included $96.6 million in line number 17
of Procurement, Space Force (PSF), for Space Mods.
The committee notes that, because of projected delays in
fielding two homeland defense radars in the Indo-Pacific area
of responsibility, Cobra Dane will now be required to exceed
its originally planned life expectancy. The committee also
notes that this project was included on the unfunded priorities
list submitted by the Commander, U.S. Northern Command and
North American Aerospace Defense Command.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $12.5
million in line number 17 of PSF to accelerate the service life
extension of the Cobra Dane radar.
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command
The budget request included $9.3 million in line number 14
of Other Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for international
intelligence technology and architectures.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), included additional
funding for Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades to
modernize the command, control, communications, and computers
architecture in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility and
provide local systems to support and enhance operations with
allies and partners.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.5
million in line number 14 of OPAF for MPE local upgrades within
the INDOPACOM area of responsibility, specifically, the BICES-X
program.
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command
The budget request included $132.3 million in line number
49 of Other Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for base
communications infrastructure.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), included additional
funding for Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades to
modernize the command, control, communications, and computers
architecture in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility and
provide local systems to support and enhance operations with
allies and partners.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $14.0
million in line number 49 of OPAF for MPE local upgrades within
the INDOPACOM area of responsibility, specifically, the PACNET
initiative to transform the theater communications and data
architecture.
Energy efficient small shelters upgrades
The budget request included $52.0 million in line number 56
of Other Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for Mobility Equipment.
Solar shades provide energy efficiency and extended service
life of small shelters.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.7
million in line number 56 of OPAF for Mobility Equipment.
Defense Wide
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding--Procurement
The budget request included $88.7 million in line number 19
of Procurement, Defense-wide, for the Joint Regional Security
Stacks (JRSS).
The committee is aware of the operational cybersecurity
limitations of the JRSS technology as assessed by the Director,
Operational Test and Evaluation, the difficulty of training
personnel to use the JRSS, and the shortage of feasible
tactics, techniques, and procedures to make effective use of
the JRSS. The committee believes that the deployment of JRSS on
the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network is thus
inappropriate, given JRSS' limited cybersecurity capability and
the existence of alternative capabilities to execute its
network functions.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $11.1
million in line number 19 of Procurement, Defense-wide, due to
the operational cybersecurity limitations of the JRSS
technology.
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
The budget request included $495.4 million in line number
31 of Procurement, Defense-Wide (PDW), for Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and did not include funding in
line number 36 of PDW for BMDS AN/TPY-2 Radars.
The committee notes that the Army remains below its
validated requirement for THAAD batteries and that the
President's budget did not include funding for the procurement
of additional batteries. The unfunded priorities list submitted
by the Director of the Missile Defense Agency included funding
for an eighth THAAD battery. The committee further notes that
procurement of this battery in early fiscal year 2021 would be
more cost-efficient due to synchronization with an ongoing
foreign military sales case.
The committee also understands that the production line
supporting the THAAD Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks
(HEMTTs) will likely close in the near future. The Director's
unfunded priorities list also included funding for a life-of-
type buy for HEMTTs to support the existing and future force.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $106.4
million in line number 31 of PDW for the eighth battery
components ($76.3 million) and HEMTTs ($30.1 million) and an
increase of $243.3 million in line number 36 of PDW for BMDS
AN/TPY-2 Radars.
SM-3 IIA procurement
The budget request included $218.3 million in line number
37 of Procurement, Defense-Wide (PDW), for SM-3 Block IIA
missiles.
The committee believes that procuring higher quantities of
this interceptor each year (including foreign military sales)
is prudent, given existing requirements for Aegis Ashore and
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense ships, the capacity and
efficiencies of the industrial base, and the potential for
additional land-based SM-3 systems. The committee also notes
that this increased procurement was included on the unfunded
priorities list submitted by the Director of the Missile
Defense Agency.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $128.0
million in line number 37 of PDW for SM-3 Block IIA missiles.
Armed Overwatch
The budget request included $101.0 million in line number
55 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for Armed Overwatch.
The committee is concerned that the acquisition strategy
for an armed overwatch aircraft for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) lacks a validated requirement and an
appropriate analysis of the cost-effectiveness of acquiring a
new special operations-peculiar platform for this purpose.
Furthermore, the committee is concerned that the rapid
acquisition timeline being pursued by SOCOM does not allow for
adequate consideration of: the cost of operating and sustaining
the aircraft; the potential negative impacts on an already
stressed community of pilots, aircrews, and maintainers; and
how such a costly addition fits into SOCOM's medium-to-long-
term airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
capability roadmap.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $101.0
million in line number 55 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for
Armed Overwatch. The committee notes that, elsewhere in this
report, the committee recommends increases in funding to
address unfunded requirements identified by SOCOM to address
urgent needs, to include the replacement of combat loss
aircraft and other equipment.
DHC-8 combat loss replacement
The budget request included no funding in line number 56 of
Procurement, Defense-Wide, for Manned ISR.
The committee notes that a DHC-8 aircraft operated by U.S.
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) was destroyed during a
terrorist attack against forces supporting Operation Enduring
Freedom--Horn of Africa and that SOCOM identified replacement
of the combat loss as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $40.1
million in line number 56 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for
combat loss replacement of a DHC-8 aircraft.
Aircraft maintenance support combat loss replacement
The budget request included $3.8 million in line number 62
of Procurement, Defense-wide, for U-28.
The committee notes that various aircraft maintenance
spares and support equipment were destroyed during an attack on
forces supporting Operation Inherent Resolve and that U.S.
Special Operations Command identified replacement of these
items as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $24.7
million in line number 62 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for
combat loss replacement of aircraft maintenance spares and
support equipment.
Special Operations Tactical Communication/Next Generation Tactical
Communications
The budget request included $88.7 million in line number 71
of Procurement, Defense-wide, for Warrior Systems, SOF Tactical
Communications.
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) identified executability issues with the Multi-Mission
Payload-Light (MMP-Light) program due to appropriations
rescissions in fiscal year 2020. As a result, SOCOM requested
the transfer of funds from the MMP-Light to the man-pack
Capital Equipment Replacement Program for fiscal year 2021.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.4
million in line number 71 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for the
man-pack Capital Equipment Replacement Program. The decrement
associated with this transfer is reflected elsewhere in this
report.
Multi-Mission Payload
The budget request included $12.2 million in line number 77
of Procurement, Defense-wide, for Warrior Systems, Multi-
Mission Payload (MMP).
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) identified executability issues with the MMP-Light
program due to appropriations rescissions in fiscal year 2020.
As a result, SOCOM requested the transfer of funds from the
MMP-Light program to the man-pack Capital Equipment Replacement
Program for fiscal year 2021.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $12.2
million in line number 77 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for
Warrior Systems, Multi-Mission Payload (MMP). The increase
associated with this transfer is reflected elsewhere in this
report.
Syria exfiltration reconstitution
The budget request included $247.0 million in line number
81 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for Operational Enhancements.
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
identified the replacement of items destroyed in connection
with the exfiltration of forces in Syria as an unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.5
million in line number 81 of Procurement, Defense-wide, for
Syria exfiltration reconstitution.
Items of Special Interest
A-10
The committee is encouraged that the Air Force is executing
a modernization strategy for the A-10 fleet to preserve this
unique capability for CAS, FAC-A, and CSAR missions. The
committee believes that upgrades to weapons delivery,
management systems, and the electronic warfare and
communications suite that keep pace with threat advancements
and proliferation are critical to the continued success of the
weapon system. The committee notes that these enhancements and
the aircraft wing replacements, airframe refurbishment, and new
mission computers will maintain the effectiveness of the A-10C
through at least the 2030s. However, the committee is concerned
with the assumptions being made about the required total size
of the A-10 fleet in the future.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing no later than November 1, 2020, to
the committee to explain the required capacity for the unique
A-10 capability and to validate the assumptions used to
calculate the planned future fleet size of the A-10. The
briefing should address capacity required to sustain current
missions, support future missions, and to deliver rotational
forces for combatant commanders in the various mission sets of
the A-10C.
Active Protection Systems updated plans for M2 Bradley and Stryker
combat vehicles
The committee commends the successful test, integration,
and application of an active protective system on the M1 Abrams
tank but notes with concern that similar results have not been
achieved for the M2 Bradley fighting vehicle or Stryker.
Threats to combat vehicles such as the M2 Bradley and Stryker
family of vehicles are of ever-increasing lethality and
proliferating widely, and active protection systems are
integral to these vehicles' survivability.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, no later than August 1, 2020, on
the Army's updated plans to integrate active protection systems
into the M2 Bradley and Stryker family of vehicles. The
briefing should also include an assessment of the impact of the
recent reset of the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle program
on the Modular Active Protection System.
Advanced Battle Management System bridge report
The committee is aware of the Air Force's plans to invest
substantial funds into the Advanced Battle Management System
(ABMS) program to achieve future warfighting objectives.
However, the committee is concerned that there exists an
interim requirement to achieve resilient networking using
existing infrastructure and datalinks. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in conjunction with the
other military services, to submit a plan to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 1, 2021, for the
allocation of resources, along with details as to how and when
the resources will be executed, so as to either improve current
Link 16 capabilities or create an alternative solution in terms
of increased capacity, improved resilience, and techniques to
reduce probability of detection. Additionally, the plan shall
specify the path forward to improve the resiliency of Link 16
networks using existing capabilities, to include, but not
necessarily limited to, additional air, ground, sea, and space-
borne relay nodes to enhance resistance to interference and
complicate potential adversaries' targeting.
Advanced combat search and rescue capability
The committee commends the Air Force on its historical
focus on combat search and rescue (CSAR), including the
resourcing and training of specialized squadrons focused on
returning isolated personnel back to friendly forces. The
National Defense Strategy refocuses the Department of Defense's
weight of effort to preparing for near-peer warfare and, as a
result, CSAR has become even more important. Emerging
technologies, such as the Agility Prime program, and
capabilities, such as the CV-22, present new opportunities for
the CSAR mission. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to conduct an analysis, and report
to the committee, no later than February 1, 2021, on the
benefits and capabilities of these technologies and their
potential for use in contested environments and the scenarios
envisioned in the National Defense Strategy.
Air Force pilot training
The committee supports the Air Force's procurement of the
T-7A Redhawk training aircraft, recognizing the improved
capabilities that it will bring to undergraduate pilot
training. The Air Force plans to transition from the T-38C to
the T-7A at five locations: Columbus AFB, Mississippi; Laughlin
AFB, Texas; Randolph AFB, Texas; Sheppard AFB, Texas; and Vance
AFB, Oklahoma.
The committee is concerned about potential impacts that
this transition will have on the Air Force's undergraduate
pilot training pipeline, which could further exacerbate its
pilot shortage. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of Air Force to provide a plan, no later than March 1, 2021, to
the congressional defense committees on how it will transition
undergraduate pilot training from the T-38C to the T-7A. This
plan should include, at a minimum, the following: the timeline
of deliveries of T-7A aircraft; the order of beddown locations
at each of the planned training bases; details on the standup
and expansion of the T-7A instructor pilot cadre; details on
the standup of simulator operators and maintenance personnel;
impacts of the new training syllabus; an assessment of the
transition's overall impact to the undergraduate pilot training
pipeline; and an assessment of the requirement for an
additional training location if the Air Force were to determine
that the capacity at the five planned training bases is
insufficient.
Anti-ship missile development
The committee is encouraged by increased attention across
the Department of Defense to the surface warfare mission area,
including several new anti-ship missile (ASM) programs.
However, the committee desires greater clarity on Joint Force
ASM requirements, development efforts, and acquisition
strategies. The committee is interested in ensuring that
rigorous ASM requirements exist tied to specific threats and
operational concepts, development efforts are rationalized
where possible, and acquisition strategies are streamlined.
Therefore, the committee directs the Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the military departments, to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than December 1,
2020, on Joint Force ASM requirements, development efforts, and
acquisition strategies.
This report shall include the following elements: (1) A
description of Joint Requirements Oversight Council-validated
(JROC-validated) requirements for ASMs, including inventory
objectives and capabilities required for each ASM, such as
range, speed, seeker performance, and data link requirements;
(2) A description of other Department of Defense requirements
for ASMs that have not been validated by the JROC, including
inventory objectives and capabilities required for each ASM,
such as range, speed, seeker performance, and data link
requirements; (3) A description of the development efforts
supporting each ASM program listed under (1) and (2), such as
prototyping subsystems, investigating use of common components,
conducting developmental testing, conducting operational
testing, and engaging in other forms of risk reduction; and (4)
A description of the acquisition strategies, if applicable, for
each ASM program listed under (1) and (2) above.
Army Radio Modernization
The committee recognizes the challenges faced by the Army
in testing, evaluating, and fielding radio capabilities to
create an overarching integrated tactical network and is
encouraged by the Army's intent to utilize a rapid acquisition
process to separately compete each tactical radio variant for
each aircraft being outfitted under the Army's Air to Ground
Networking Radio program. Despite challenges in integration, by
encouraging the platform specific head to head competition,
rather than making a one-size-fits-all decision, the Army will
promote competition within the industry and tailor the best
solution for each aircraft. The committee encourages the Army
to quickly conduct a thorough and deliberate process to ensure
that the most effective radio is selected for each aircraft.
Assessment of Navy anti-submarine warfare training targets
The committee understands that the Navy lacks a modern
heavyweight anti-submarine warfare (ASW) target and that the
current inventory of ASW training targets is deficient in
satisfying the pre-deployment training requirements of our
submarine, surface, and aviation ASW forces. The committee
further understands that these ASW training targets are
increasingly difficult to sustain, costly to repair, limited in
capability, and have no identified replacement. The committee
is concerned that these factors may negatively impact the ASW
proficiency of deploying naval forces.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit to the congressional defense committees not later
than February 1, 2021, an assessment on the current
capabilities of Navy heavyweight ASW targets and a
modernization plan for future targets and training
capabilities. The assessment shall include, at a minimum, the
following: (1) The current inventory of anti-submarine warfare
targets, their capabilities, and age; (2) An evaluation as to
how the current inventory of heavyweight ASW targets supports
ASW training certification requirements for surface, submarine,
and aviation ASW forces, to include the number heavyweight ASW
targets required to generate a sufficient number of target
presentations during training events and the degree to which
these target presentations may be made in a manner that is
consistent with current and projected peer and near-peer threat
submarine capabilities; (3) An evaluation of existing training
target availability and the Navy's plan to replace the current
inventory of training targets with capabilities that are equal
to or better than current Navy capabilities; (4) The benefits
and risks of the 20-year service life extension plan currently
in execution beyond the current expected 30-year service life
of the MK 30 Mod 1 heavyweight ASW target; and (5) A plan to
begin replacement of the current inventory of existing training
targets no later than September 30, 2023.
This assessment shall be presented as a briefing and
submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified
annex.
C-17 maintenance
The committee is aware that the Air Force intends to
achieve cost savings by moving 100 percent of its C-17 fleet
heavy maintenance to a single depot. The Air Force has
acknowledged that this course of action would decrease
readiness, although not below an acceptable level, and that it
would take 14 years to obtain a positive return on capital
investment. The committee notes that the Air Force also found
that such a course of action would realize billions of dollars
of savings in C-17 life cycle costs and establish affordable
and effective depot maintenance and commodity repair
capability. The committee also believes that this course of
action would improve the Air Force's implementation of section
2464 of title 10, United States Code. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report, no
later than January 31, 2021, to the congressional defense
committees that details each course of action evaluated in the
business case analysis of moving C-17 heavy maintenance to a
single depot and other future product support strategies for
the C-17 aircraft.
Additionally, the committee directs the Director, Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation, to review the Secretary's
report and submit an independent assessment to the
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2021.
Comptroller General report on the Supervisor of Shipbuilding
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) concluded in a June 2018 report, Navy
Shipbuilding: Past Performance Provides Valuable Lessons for
Future Investments (GAO-18-238SP), that the Navy has
experienced significant cost increases, schedule delays, and
performance issues on its shipbuilding programs. The committee
understands that recent quality issues on a number of Navy
ships and submarines point to, among other issues, challenges
in the Navy's ability to oversee quality at the private
shipyards that build its vessels.
The committee notes that the Navy's Supervisors of
Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair (SUPSHIPS) organization is
responsible for administering contracts for new ships and
submarines, as well as nuclear repair and modernization at
private shipyards, including ensuring that shipbuilders provide
the Navy with vessels that meet quality expectations. The
committee understands that SUPSHIPS' role in this regard is
unusual, as the Defense Contract Management Agency provides
this type of contract oversight for most other Department of
Defense contracts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General to
review the Navy's SUPSHIPS organization, including an
assessment of: (1) The roles, responsibilities, procedures,
capabilities, and capacity of SUPSHIPS to ensure that ship
contracts are executed on time, at expected cost, and to
contractual and performance requirements; (2) SUPSHIPS' role in
overseeing suppliers for Navy ship programs; (3) The
effectiveness of actions taken by SUPSHIPS and its higher
chain-of-command when shipbuilders are not meeting cost,
schedule, or performance requirements; (4) SUPSHIPS' approach
to contract execution oversight and monitoring for shipbuilding
programs, as compared to that of the Defense Contract
Management Agency for other large Department of Defense
acquisition programs; and (5) Any other related matters that
the Comptroller General deems appropriate.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on the
findings of this review by December 1, 2020, with a report to
follow.
Comptroller General review of Navy shipbuilding and ship maintenance
The committee notes that the Navy is embarking on an
ambitious, expensive undertaking to develop, design, and
construct a number of new ships--both manned and unmanned--over
the coming years, which would represent the biggest increase in
fleet size in over 30 years.
The committee understands that the Navy expects vessels to
be constructed in quantities that sustain the industrial base
and expand the overall size of the Navy, which requires not
just a healthy industrial base for ship construction but also
for all of the materials, systems, and foundry work that go
into building a complete ship. Likewise, the Navy will have to
expand capability in the ship repair industrial base, which
consists of public and private shipyards that are struggling to
execute maintenance programs to sustain the current fleet of
approximately 300 battle force ships.
However, the economic consequences of the first global
pandemic in over 100 years may have significant and potentially
long-lasting ramifications on the Navy's already limited
industrial bases for shipbuilding and ship repair.
Accordingly, in order to better understand and address the
viability of future Navy ship construction and ship repair
plans, the committee directs the Comptroller General to conduct
a review of: (1) The Navy's current shipbuilding plan and the
capability of the shipbuilding industrial base to support this
plan; and (2) The ship maintenance plan and the capability of
the ship repair industrial base to support that plan.
As part of this review, the Comptroller General shall
assess the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Navy's
ability to build and maintain quality ships on time and on
schedule. This review shall also address the following
questions: (1) What plans does the Navy have in place to
execute its current shipbuilding and ship repair plans? (2) How
does the Navy evaluate the health of its shipbuilding and ship
repair industrial bases? (3) To what extent are shipbuilding
and ship repair program performance affected by COVID-related
issues? (4) How is the Navy assessing and addressing the
consequences of COVID-19 on the shipbuilding and ship repair
industrial bases, including lower-tier suppliers? (5) What
challenges related to its industrial bases will the Navy likely
face over the next decade that could present significant risk
to achieving its shipbuilding and ship repair plans? (6) What
other matters does the Comptroller General deem relevant to
highlight?
The Comptroller General shall submit this review to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives not later than March 1, 2021.
Counter unmanned aircraft systems matters
The low cost, ease of operation, and accelerating
proliferation of innovative commercial-based small unmanned
aircraft system (UAS) capabilities is rapidly expanding the
scope and complexity of the threat to U.S. forces and
infrastructure. The committee believes that countering small
UASs will be an enduring requirement for the Department of
Defense (DOD) for at least the next decade. As a result, the
committee is encouraged by the DOD's designation of the Army as
Executive Agent for Counter small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-
sUAS) in 2019, the rapid standup of the Joint C-sUAS Office
(JCO) in 2020, and the recommendation to downselect and
prioritize resources toward the most promising systems.
To further the Department's C-sUAS activities, the
committee recommends an increase in funding toward several C-
sUAS efforts, totaling approximately $73 million, noted
elsewhere in this report. These efforts include fully funding
the requirement to expedite activities of the JCO as captured
in the Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded priorities list,
providing additional funding to the JCO to increase and improve
test and evaluation activities, and providing additional
funding to U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) for
operational demonstration of C-sUAS capabilities. The committee
encourages the JCO to work closely with SOCOM to ensure that
the JCO's efforts appropriately incorporate special operations-
peculiar requirements that arise from the employment of small,
disaggregated teams in remote and austere locations and to
provide pathways to transition technologies demonstrated by
SOCOM.
The committee supports the Department's investment in
advanced technologies to enhance C-sUAS capabilities and
encourages expediting procurement and fielding of commercially
available solutions. However, the committee believes that
commercial C-sUAS proposals should demonstrate combat
capability in operationally relevant environments and be
validated by third-party entities and Department of Defense
developmental and operational test organizations, as
appropriate, before being considered and adopted by the
Department. Additionally, the committee recognizes the
leadership and innovation of multiple Federal agencies,
especially the Department of Justice (DOJ), in the development
and fielding of C-sUAS capability as well as the DOJ's focus on
and investment in test and evaluation infrastructure to support
long-term objective analytical evaluation of current and
evolving C-sUAS capabilities over the next decade.
Therefore, elsewhere in this report, the committee
recommends a provision that would require the JCO to prioritize
C-sUAS systems that can be fielded in year 2021 and would also
encourage the Secretary of the Army, as the executive agent, to
consider establishing a Counter-UAS center of excellence to
coordinate research and development of counter-drone
technologies, tactics, techniques, and procedures.
Additionally, the committee would require development of a plan
and investment in infrastructure to build the test and
evaluation framework required to deepen understanding of
countering the small, low, and slow UAS threats that the
committee believes represent an enduring threat to U.S. troops
and infrastructure.
DDG-51 destroyer multi-year procurement
The committee continues to support the national policy of
achieving at least a 355-ship fleet, as codified in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public
Law 115-91), which is integral to the National Defense Strategy
and its emphasis on near-peer competition with Russia and
China.
The committee views DDG-51 destroyers as the backbone of
the surface fleet, providing multi-mission flexibility and
increasing capability with introduction of Flight III and the
AN/SPY-6 radar. With plans for construction of a new class of
Large Surface Combatants (LSCs) toward the end of this decade
and the current multi-year procurement of DDG-51s ending in
fiscal year 2022, the committee believes that it is imperative
that the Navy award another DDG-51 multi-year contract
beginning in fiscal year 2023. This contract is critical to
ensuring that Flight III capability continues to be delivered
to the fleet and the industrial base is maintained to support
the LSC acquisition strategy.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of the Navy to make all necessary plans to
award another multi-year contract for DDG-51 Flight III
destroyers in fiscal year 2023, including long lead material
purchases in fiscal year 2022.
E-8 strategy
The committee is encouraged by the Air Force's plans to
modernize the E-8C Joint Surveillance and Target-Attack Radar
System (JSTARS) weapon system to meet combatant commander
requirements until a replacement capability is fielded.
Additionally, the committee recognizes the Secretary of the Air
Force's commitment to perform associated upgrades to meet
airworthiness and operational mandates.
The committee is concerned and disappointed, however, that
these plans have not been followed by execution to implement
upgrades on a reasonable schedule. The committee is concerned
with the history of delayed execution of funds to procure and
field modifications in a timely manner. The committee believes
the Air Force should assess what the Air Force needs to do to
ensure that E-8C JSTARS efforts are consistent with ensuring
that the Air Force can effectively sustain and advance this
weapon system's capability commensurate with combatant
commander requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by February 1, 2021, on the strategy for sustaining
the E-8C JSTARS fleet until a suitable replacement capability
and capacity is fielded. The strategy shall include: (1)
Recommended changes to the E-8C program management structure to
address funding execution shortfalls; and (2) A plan for
modifications, including schedules and associated funding
profiles, for achieving those modifications and ensuring that
combatant commander requirements are met.
E-8C modernization
The committee is encouraged by the Air Force's recognition
of the importance of E-8C Joint Surveillance and Target Attack
Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft and its efforts to modernize the
avionics and communications equipment onboard to make the
platform an integral component of the Advanced Battle
Management System. The committee is concerned that the Air
Force is considering a potential effort for re-engining the E-8
Joint JSTARS aircraft at the expense of other JSTARS
modernization programs. The committee is aware that the
business case for JSTARS re-engining would require that the
aircraft to fly well into the 2040s, which is beyond the
planned in-service date, to see a positive return on the
investment and, as such, believes that the money that might be
used for re-engining would be better spent on other JSTARS
modernization efforts, such as installing advanced avionics and
upgrading communications equipment.
Electronic warfare red team
Realistic training of blue forces in electronic warfare
requires a red force that is trained in the tactics,
techniques, and procedures of potential opponents, as informed
by timely intelligence, and that fields representative
electronic warfare equipment. The committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to brief the congressional defense
committees, no later than March 31, 2021, on progress made and
gaps remaining in training electronic warfare red forces based
on intelligence as well as the Department of Defense's ability
to field representative equipment or systems that can simulate
representative equipment to complement the tactics, techniques,
and procedures of red forces in order to better prepare the
Joint Force through realistic electronic warfare training.
F-35 basing requirements
The National Defense Strategy requires the Department of
Defense to posture ready, combat-credible forces forward
alongside allies and partners and, if necessary, to fight and
win. The Department's Indo-Pacific Strategy--which describes
the Indo-Pacific as the Department's priority theater--
emphasizes efforts to enhance Joint Force preparedness for the
most pressing scenarios, which will occur along our
competitors' peripheries, to include a fait accompli scenario.
To date, the Air Force has announced the selection of 9
operating locations for the F-35A, including locations in the
continental United States, Alaska, and Europe. It has yet to
announce plans for any F-35A operating locations forward in the
Indo-Pacific region--in other words, locations sufficiently
forward to enable immediate response in the most pressing
scenarios envisioned in the Department's foundational strategic
documents. At present, realizing any potential plan to
establish an F-35A operating location forward in the Indo-
Pacific region could take nearly a decade. Put another way,
nearly half of the Air Force's total procurement quantity of F-
35As will be delivered before the first aircraft arrives at an
operating location forward in the Department's priority
theater.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Commander, Indo-Pacific
Command, not later than December 31, 2020, to provide a
briefing to the committee on: the Air Force's current projected
timeline to establish an F-35A operating location forward in
the Indo-Pacific region; options to place a continuous
rotational F-35A force utilizing only Air National Guard
assets; options for accelerating that timeline; and an
assessment of the merit and feasibility of those options.
Flame retardant vehicle soft armor and materiel
The military services have established baseline
requirements for flame resistant uniforms, but the committee
understands that they have not developed similar requirements
for vehicle soft armor, such as spall liners, and internal
textile materials. Vehicle soft armor is often manufactured
with a broad range of materials, which may include highly
flammable plastics and glass fibers. While the primary purpose
of soft armor is to protect against fragments, a large majority
of enemy strikes result in flame incidents, which place
soldiers and marines at greater risk.
As the military services develop next generation systems
that can counter near-peer threats, the committee encourages
the Army and the Marine Corps to review requirements for combat
vehicles that include flame resistant standards. Further, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in coordination
with the Secretaries of the Navy and the Air Force, to provide
a briefing by September 30, 2020, on the feasibility and
availability of incorporating materials inside combat vehicles
that possess flame resistant properties.
Future Vertical Lift long-term cost and schedule assessment
The committee is encouraged by the Army's progress on the
Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program, including a Competitive
Demonstration Risk Reduction (CDRR) contract award for the
Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) and a Competitive
Prototype (CP) award for the Future Attack Reconnaissance
Aircraft (FARA). The committee supports the development and
procurement of these critical FVL capabilities but is concerned
about the feasibility of simultaneously procuring these
aircraft, as well as other Army modernization priorities
currently in development, given budget projections and the
Army's fielding timeline.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a report no later than February 15, 2021, to
the committee assessing the current schedule, to include
potential for sequencing procurement of the FLRAA and FARA
programs. The report shall include 10-year cost and schedule
projections, an assessment of operational and acquisition
risks, and potential mitigation measures to both FLRAA and FARA
cost and schedule profiles.
Guided missile frigate
The committee notes that a contract for up to 10 guided
missile frigates (FFG(X)) was awarded in April 2020 with a
potential cumulative value of $5.6 billion. Given that this is
a new class of ships that will have a significant role in the
Navy battle force, the committee seeks additional information
on the program.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office to submit to the congressional
defense committees, not later than October 1, 2020, a report
analyzing the FFG(X) program. The report shall include: (1) An
analysis of the estimated costs of the program in the context
of other current and past Navy shipbuilding programs; (2) An
independent cost estimate of the FFG(X) program based on the
specific winning ship design; and (3) Other related matters the
Director deems appropriate.
HMMWV rollover mitigation
The committee understands that the Army is in the process
of performing safety modifications to the Light Tactical
Vehicle fleet to mitigate rollover accidents. The committee
supports the Army's fiscal year 2021 budget request to procure
5,421 anti-lock brake system/electronic stability control
retrofit kits that will be installed through a partnership with
the Red River Army Depot. The committee understands that these
kits have successfully been installed on all new High Mobility
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs) and that the Army will
begin the retrofit of legacy HMMWVs with these life-saving
technologies.
Hospital ship modernization
The committee notes that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the
country saw a demonstration of the unique capabilities provided
by the USNS Mercy and USNS Comfort. Both of these ships are
nearing the end of their useful service lives. The committee
believes that the need for medical support capability to enable
expeditionary operations and respond to natural disasters and
other emergencies is enduring.
Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to
modernize the capability provided by these hospital ships as
soon as possible.
Hybrid electric drive on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
The committee notes that the Navy has received more than
$175.0 million to develop, procure, and install six hybrid
electric drive (HED) systems for Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
but that only one such installation, on the USS Truxton, has
occurred.
In a January 2020 report to the Congress on HED, the Navy
stated that it has yet to conduct sufficient testing and
operations to determine the utility and reliability of the
system. The committee continues to be interested in the
potential benefits of HED systems as well as how the Navy will
test, evaluate, and measure the at-sea performance and
effectiveness of the HED on the USS Truxton.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy, not later than 15 days after the fiscal year 2022 budget
request is submitted to the Congress, to provide a report to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives on the plan for HED installation, testing, and
operational use on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. This report
shall include: (1) The requirements or plan to develop
requirements for HED on naval vessels; (2) A test plan to
determine HED operational suitability and effectiveness that is
approved by the Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation
Force; (3) Details surrounding the hardware, software, or other
upgrades required before installing existing HED systems,
including the timeline for completing such upgrades; (5) The
installation schedule for existing HED systems, including
fiscal year and hull number; and (6) The HED-related funding
requirements by fiscal year and the extent to which such
requirements are fully funded in the future years defense
program.
Improved Turbine Engine Program
The Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) will enhance the
performance and operational readiness of the current Black Hawk
and Apache helicopter fleets through the production and
delivery of a more fuel efficient and powerful engine that is
capable of operating in high and hot environments. In addition,
the engine will be the government-furnished engine for the
Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program, which is
a key priority of the Army's Future Vertical Lift (FVL)
program.
The committee has supported significant Army investments in
competitive technology development programs for turbine engines
over the past decade. While the ITEP can enhance warfighting
capabilities in its delivery of improved fuel efficiencies and
mature technologies, the Army must also prioritize maintenance
and sustainment costs to ensure the continued affordability of
the ITEP and associated capabilities. Given the critical role
of this program in modernizing Army aviation, the committee
encourages the Army to pursue opportunities to accelerate the
fielding of this engine.
Integrated air and missile defense in the U.S. Central Command area of
responsibility
Recent attacks on U.S. and partner nation forces underscore
an increase in missile, rocket, and unmanned aircraft system
threats in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of
responsibility (AOR). The committee is aware that the Army and
CENTCOM have already taken significant steps to improve the
protection of U.S. troops in the region from these threats.
While the committee understands that providing integrated air
and missile defense (IAMD), counter-rocket, artillery, and
mortar (C-RAM), and counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS)
coverage for every facility and base where U.S. forces are
stationed is not practical due to resource constraints, the
committee remains concerned about IAMD and C-RAM planning,
procedures, and coverage in the CENTCOM AOR.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Commander, CENTCOM, the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Chief of Staff
of the Army, to provide a classified report to the committee no
later than September 1, 2020, on the IAMD, C-RAM, and C-UAS
posture in the CENTCOM AOR. The report shall include:
(1) An explanation of current and planned IAMD and C-
RAM capabilities and coverage in the CENTCOM AOR,
including allocation against the critical and defended
asset lists;
(2) An accounting of partner or allied forces
performing IAMD and C-RAM functions in the AOR, in
defense of their own or coalition forces and assets,
and an assessment of the effectiveness of such
capabilities;
(3) An assessment of the adequacy of current and
planned IAMD and C-RAM capabilities to meet CENTCOM
operational requirements;
(4) A description of IAMD and C-RAM gaps in coverage
that generate substantial risk to U.S. forces or
mission;
(5) An assessment of the impact on IAMD and C-RAM forces
and personnel of additional deployments to the CENTCOM AOR,
assessed in the context of global requirements; and
(6) Any other matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Joint and service exercises
The committee is concerned with the resourcing of joint and
single service exercises and the potential disconnect with the
National Defense Strategy. The committee is aware of reductions
in joint exercise accounts based on the Defense-Wide Review
that could significantly impact the ability of the military
services and combatant commanders to adequately assess and
improve joint readiness, access, basing, and overflight to set
the conditions to be successful in a conflict.
Therefore, no later than January 1, 2021, the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with each of the combatant commanders
and service chiefs, shall report to the committee on the level
of risk being assumed based on the level of resourcing
requested for the Combatant Commander Exercise, Engagement and
Training Transformation effort. The report shall specifically
address how reductions in funding have impacted: (1) Readiness;
(2) The ability to conduct joint operations; (3) The ability to
develop relationships with partners and allies; and (4) Daily
competition with adversaries to set conditions for combat
operations and work to achieve national security objectives
without kinetic conflict.
Joint electronic warfare training range
The committee recognizes the requirement for the Department
of Defense (DOD) to operate across the electromagnetic spectrum
and prevail in electronic warfare (EW) in every operational
domain. Development of capabilities needed to control the EW
battlespace requires well-developed training ranges that enable
the military services and Defense Agencies and Field Activities
to rapidly test and field new weapon systems. Increased demand
and spectrum encroachment at current EW training ranges mean
that these facilities are inadequate to meet the Department's
EW test and training needs over the next several years.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a plan for the establishment of a Joint Electronic
Warfare Training Range that: (1) Offers sufficient space for
spectrum isolation; (2) Provides for the ability to protect
sensitive technologies from detection by offering access to
large, inland space; and (3) Would be specifically dedicated to
EW activities to avoid overcrowding. This plan shall be briefed
to the congressional defense committees no later than December
1, 2020.
Live-virtual-constructive and game-based training environment training
The committee continues to recognize and support the
important role that a secure live-virtual-constructive and
game-based (LVC-G) training environment plays in improving
military capabilities and readiness to meet increasing threats
in highly contested environments.
However, the committee is concerned that, despite repeated
urging from the Congress, the Air Force and Navy have not
adequately planned for or invested in a secure LVC-G advanced
training environment to support timely development,
acquisition, and fielding of cutting-edge air combat training
systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Secretary of the Navy, to
provide a briefing to the committee no later than February 1,
2021, on its plan to develop and field LVC-G training
environments that emulate real-world operational conditions. At
a minimum, the briefing shall include: (1) The timeline and
funding plan to develop and field LVC-G training environments;
(2) Considerations regarding creation of a program of record
for secure advanced training environment systems; (3)
Recommendations for related resource allocations through the
program objective memorandum process; and (4) Description of
efforts to leverage efficiencies in the joint environment.
M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle program assessment
The recent reset of the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle
(OMFV) program will likely delay the fielding of the Army's
replacement vehicle for the M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV)
that has been in operational service for more than 30 years.
The OMFV program is a critical modernization effort for the
Army, and it is one of the signature programs under the Next
Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) Cross Functional Team (CFT).
Given the change in the OMFV acquisition strategy, the
committee wants to understand the impact of delaying the
fielding of the OMFV on the Bradley program. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to conduct an
assessment analyzing the impact of the delayed OMFV fielding on
the M2 BFV program and any changes to the Bradley program that
may be required as a result of the change in acquisition
strategy. The Army shall brief the results of this assessment
to the committee no later than August 1, 2020.
Marine Corps integrated air and missile defense capabilities
The committee supports the force design efforts of the
Commandant of the Marine Corps to better organize, equip, and
posture the Marine Corps for great power competition in the
Indo-Pacific region. The committee understands the need for
integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) for the distributed
``stand-in forces'' envisioned by the Commandant and that
effective air and missile defense requires an integrated,
layered approach across the Joint Force. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Commandant to provide a report, no later
than December 15, 2020, on the Marine Corps' plans to
integrate, vice federate, the air and missile defense
capabilities that it is developing as part of the joint IAMD
architecture.
Mission command systems
The Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Report of the Director,
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), highlighted testing
issues with the Command Post Computing Environment (CPCE). The
committee is concerned by the report's findings and the
resulting fielding limitations currently in place that
underscore the challenges the Army faces with developmental
mission command systems (MCS). Due to CPCE's performance during
operational testing and the Army's challenges with
developmental MCS, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the SASC no later than September
30, 2020, on how the Army plans to implement DOT&E's
recommendations in order to resolve deficiencies identified
during testing and possible alternative commercial solutions.
Mission planning and force structure for hypersonic weapon systems
For fiscal year 2021, the Department of Defense is
proposing to fund hypersonic Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation (RDT&E) activities at $3.5 billion, an increase of
5.9 percent over the fiscal year 2020 appropriated level of
funding. While the RDT&E funding for weapons has received much
visibility in response to near peer competitors, the committee
is concerned that mission planning, the allocation of the
weapons between combatant commands, as well as the service
force structures to support these weapons are not adequately
accounted for.
The committee understands that the original proponent for
the hypersonics requirement was the U.S. Strategic Command. At
the time, it was proposed as an alternative to nuclear
weapons--a long-range precision strike capability of a
hypersonic weapon offered a non-nuclear option to hold at risk
the same class of targets.
However, with the success to date in demonstrating these
weapons, the envisioned target sets have grown. Likewise, it is
not clear what the military services' force structure for
employing these weapons will entail. When originally conceived
by U.S. Strategic Command, there were to be a small number of
hypersonic weapons deployed on select platforms. That does not
appear to be the case today.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense
should be assessing the other parts of a complete architecture
needed to field such systems, including the need for mission
planning, weapons allocation processes, and force structure
changes.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, in coordination with the combatant commanders
and Secretaries of the military departments, to submit to the
congressional defense committees a long-term plan, no later
than March 30, 2021, describing: (1) The potential target sets
for hypersonic weapons envisioned today and the required
mission planning to support targeting by U.S. Strategic Command
and other combatant commands; (2) How synchronization of these
weapon systems will occur between the combatant commands; (3)
The required force structures needed by the military services
to support employment of these weapons against the classes of
targets that will be held at risk; and (4) In the case of the
Navy, whether such weapon systems should be deployed on both
submarines and surface combatants as well as the number of such
vessels that need to be so equipped.
Mk93 machine gun mount upgrade program
The Army continues to invest in soldier lethality
improvements that ensure that soldiers are equipped with the
best technology available, including crew-served platforms such
as the M2 .50 caliber machine gun and the Mk19 grenade machine
gun. The Army has upgraded these weapon systems to increase
their lethality and effectiveness with the intent of keeping
both weapons systems in its inventory for the foreseeable
future. However, the committee is concerned that, without
upgrades to the Army's inventory of the Mk93 machine gun mounts
utilized by the M2 and Mk19, investments in weapon optics, fire
control, enablers, and ammunition may not be fully realized or
could be undermined.
While the Army has completed necessary developmental
improvements to the Mk93 machine gun mount, the Army has not
yet implemented these upgrades across the Mk93 inventory.
Therefore, the committee directs the Army to provide a briefing
to the SASC by September 30, 2020, on its plan to implement
upgrades to its Mk93 machine gun mounts in order to realize the
benefit of these investments. The briefing should include
details on how the Army will align funding during the budget
process to synchronize the delivery and integration of Mk93
Improvement Kits with the Mounted Machine Gun Optic and 40mm
High Explosive Air Burst ammunition.
Next-generation crypto key loader
Given the increasing sophistication and proliferation of
cyber and electronic warfare threats, the committee is
concerned about the Army's delay in procuring and fielding the
next-generation crypto loader and phasing out the current
outdated device, of which 80 percent are beyond their current
service life. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Army to provide a report no later than January 31, 2021,
to the committee on the plan to field the next-generation load
device and phase out the decades-old Simple Key Loader (SKL).
The report shall also include the number and associated cost of
SKLs that the Army will purchase by year until a replacement is
fielded, and specification of opportunities to accelerate
acquisition of the next-generation load device and the
currently planned first-fielding in 2024.
Pacific Air Force air base resiliency
The committee is concerned that the U.S. force posture in
the Indo-Pacific has not sufficiently evolved to support
implementation of the National Defense Strategy or to address
the strategic and operational challenges posed by the People's
Republic of China. Specifically, it is not clear that the
Department of Defense has allocated sufficient resources to
provide for the protection of air bases to ensure their ability
to survive and operate while under attack from current and
emerging cruise missiles and advanced hypersonic missiles.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, Pacific Air
Forces, and the Director of Strategic Plans, Requirements, and
Programs, Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, to provide a
comprehensive assessment of requirements for air base
resiliency in the Indo-Pacific area of operations to the
committee no later than January 1, 2021. The report should
address the minimum amount of protection, both active and
hardening, required for main operating bases and expeditionary
operating bases envisioned in the adaptive basing concepts
currently under development.
Polymer based magazines
The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force,
Marine Corps, Special Operations Command, and a number of
allies are using a high-performing polymer magazine for their
small arms that the Army has also authorized for use. The
committee encourages the Army to integrate lessons learned from
previous testing of high-performing polymer-based magazines and
consider a Qualified Products List (QPL), similar to the Army's
Protective Eyewear List, to allow units and soldiers to select
from several approved options for magazines and include high-
performing polymer magazines.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees not later
than November 30, 2020, on the Army's plan for Next Generation
Squad Weapons (NGSW) magazines and the feasibility of having a
QPL for magazines. The briefing shall include the Army's
requirements for the NGSW magazines, such as metrics,
materials, and other characteristics (e.g., visual status
indicators).
Preservation of Department of Defense historic aircraft and spacecraft
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
lacks clear and consistent guidelines for maintaining and
disposing historic aircraft and spacecraft. The national
collection of historic military aircraft and spacecraft is an
important asset that helps honor our veterans and educates the
public about key milestones in American history and military
technology. However, there have been recent instances of
historical aircraft being destroyed or sold for scrap without
opportunity for the Department or an aviation museum to
consider their preservation. It is in the best interest of the
public to ensure that the Department has a clear process to
determine disposition of historic aircraft and spacecraft given
their historical value. The committee is also aware of the
Navy's ``Safe For Display Inspection'' program, which could
provide a model for the entire Department.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to investigate the expansion of the ``Safe For
Display Inspection'' program across all the military services
and to provide to the committee a plan for the expansion of the
program as well as an implementation timeline in a report no
later than February 1, 2021.
Report on availability of repair for aircraft parts
The Department of Defense, across the military services,
continues to employ various qualification standards and
classification processes in the determination as to whether
pitot tubes that require replacement are classified as
``consumable'' or ``repairable.'' The committee believes that,
when safety, reliability, and performance of a replacement
component are not impacted through a repair process, it is
important that such components are reviewed for qualification
as ``repairable'' in the interest of significant cost savings
and, further, that the qualification processes across the
military services are standardized in line with current
Department of Transportation standards.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense,
no later than January 1, 2021, to provide a briefing to the
committee after consulting with each of the Secretaries of the
military departments on potential cost savings and specific
actions being taken to ensure that the pitot tube component is
more widely reviewed as repairable and that applicable
classification standards and processes are updated.
Report on Unmet ISR Requirements, RC-135 Integration, and KC-135
Conversion
The committee notes the continued testimony from combatant
commanders indicating a shortfall in intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets and the ongoing
lack of capacity in comparison to demand. The committee also
notes that the Air Force has been working to research, develop,
test, field, and implement next-generation technologies, such
as those germane to the Joint All-Domain Command and Control
and Advanced Battle Management System efforts, that promise to
provide enhanced networking capability across existing and
future Air Force assets, allowing an integrated operating
picture of the battlespace to be developed. The committee
highlights that the RC-135 family of aircraft is slated to be
fielded until 2050 and provide a significant capability within
the Air Force's ISR systems, particularly as a component of
these linkages. The committee supports the Air Force's intent
to incorporate these aircraft as key elements of these next
generation sensor networks and encourages the Air Force to
continue its baseline modernization program and to fully
utilize these platforms in achieving its Next Generation ISR
Dominance Flight Plan.
The committee further notes the significant commonality
between platforms of the C-135 inventory as well as the future
availability of retiring KC-135 aircraft and past instances in
which these platforms have successfully been converted to RC-
135 ISR platforms. The committee believes that such a
conversion offers the possibility for increasing the RC-135
inventory to meet combatant commander requirements. As such,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of the Air Force, to submit to the
congressional defense committees a report detailing an analysis
of the cost, process, and timeline of converting retiring KC-
135 aircraft to RC-135V/W Rivet Joint ISR aircraft as well as
an assessment of the shortfall in the current ISR inventory and
planned integration of the RC-135 into next-generation
networks.
The report shall include: (1) An assessment of the overall
ISR shortfall based on combatant commander demand, to include
analysis of specific shortfalls and limitations imposed by the
size of the current RC-135 fleet; (2) The number of KC-135
aircraft anticipated to be retired and available for other uses
as a result of the fielding of the KC-46, delineated by fiscal
year; (3) Analysis of added efficiencies gained through growth
in the RC-135 inventory, to include impacts on maintenance and
sustainment, aircraft availability, and mission completion
rates through increased fleet size; (4) A summary analysis of
the conversion process, to include cost and estimated time for
completion per aircraft; (5) Lessons learned through previous
examples of KC-135 aircraft conversion, including past
conversion to the RC-135W Airseeker for the United Kingdom's
Royal Air Force and applicability of that process to future
conversions within the Air Force; (6) Identification of any
need for additional or replacement aircraft within the C-135
fleet for which retiring KC-135 aircraft may be suited for
conversion and for which there is a requirement, to include WC-
135 and TC-135 variants; and (7) Details on the planned
integration of the RC-135 fleet into next generation networks
and continued efforts to maintain modernization and
effectiveness.
The report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may
contain a classified annex if necessary, and shall be provided
to the committees no later than February 1, 2021.
Requirements and budgeting for precisely geolocated 3D imagery
The committee recognizes the progress that the Department
of Defense has achieved thus far in commercial solutions for
automated three-dimensional (3D) image processing and
geolocation determination to support the growing demand for
rapid targeting and other requirements for precision
geolocation. The committee is encouraged by positive steps such
as coordination among stakeholders, broad recognition that
commercial solutions can meet category 1 accuracy requirements
for targeting, and reforms of the National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency's (NGA's) certification process. However,
the committee does not believe that it is possible to meet the
scale of global and near-real time requirements using current
collection techniques. Furthermore, although the cost of
acquiring and processing all the data needed through commercial
sources is now dramatically reduced, the total budget required
is substantial. Despite the pervasive need, no single
organization has stepped forward or has been assigned to assume
leadership responsibility and budget for the cost. Nor have
user organizations or the NGA coalesced to provide a collective
cost sharing solution.
Therefore, the committee directs the Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security, and the Director of Cost Assessment
and Program Evaluation to aggregate the demand for 3D imaging
and geolocation data, develop an equitable and practical cost-
sharing or enterprise funding solution, and recommend a course
of action to the Secretary of Defense by January 1, 2021. The
Secretary of Defense shall brief the congressional defense
committees by February 1, 2021 on the results of these actions.
Self-propelled lightweight howitzers
The committee understands that the Army is reviewing the
need for self-propelled 105mm and 155mm howitzer solutions that
increase survivability through rapid emplacement, firing, and
displacement to evade enemy counterbattery fires. Since 2018,
the Army has received operational needs statements (ONSs) from
the 2nd Cavalry Regiment and 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat
Team, both forward-stationed in Europe, and capability needs
statements from I Corps and XVIII Airborne Corps, all related
to mobile 105mm and 155mm howitzer capabilities.
The committee understands that the Army will conduct a live
fire evaluation in fiscal year 2021 to compare available
foreign and domestic mobile howitzer systems that meet the
operational requirements of the 2nd Calvary Regiment ONS.
Further, Army Futures Command has directed the Fires Center of
Excellence to develop a comprehensive cannon modernization
strategy for all formations. The committee has been informed
that, once the strategy is finalized and the mobile howitzer
evaluation is completed, Army senior leadership will make a
decision on the validation of mobile howitzers in the
formations beyond the ONS requirement for the 2nd Calvary
Regiment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to deliver a briefing to the committee no later than March 1,
2021, on the Army's comprehensive cannon modernization strategy
and a status update on the mobile howitzer evaluation.
Shoulder-launched munitions procurement strategy
The committee is concerned about the increasing weight
carried by soldiers, to include weight from shoulder-launched
munitions (SLM). The committee encourages the Army to consider
employing already developed shoulder-fired weapons technology
that can address threats in a defilade position. For that
purpose, the committee expects the Army to assess and leverage
other military services' and special operations components'
requirements and solutions.
Specialization of carrier based squadrons
The committee is concerned with the current mission make-up
of the carrier air wing in light of the National Defense
Strategy (NDS) and great power competition. The committee has
received reports of carrier-based strike squadrons' decreasing
ability to adequately train across all of the missions required
to win against a near-peer adversary.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in consultation with the Chief of Naval Operations and the
Commandant of the Marine Corps, to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than February 1,
2021, as to the optimal mission make-up for carrier-based
strike fighter squadrons and the efficacy of specializing
various missions sets, such as air defense, as opposed to
strike, to better prepare for conflicts envisioned by the NDS.
Tactical Combat Training System
The committee recognizes the success of the U.S. Navy-led
Tactical Combat Training System-II and is encouraged that the
Navy and the Air Force are jointly planning to use the training
system. Any delay in fielding this capability would affect
readiness of Navy and Air Force aircrews who need a modern,
updated, and realistic training system for live, virtual, and
constructive training. Additionally, the committee notes the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation strongly endorsed
the Tactical Combat Training System-II, citing significant
commonality with the Common Range Integrated Instrumentation
System and potential cost savings of millions of dollars. The
committee encourages the continued development and expedited
fielding of the Tactical Combat Training System-II.
Tactical wheeled vehicle industrial base
The committee notes with concern that the fiscal year 2021
budget request includes a steep reduction in funding across the
tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV) fleet. Funding decreases were
most pronounced for the Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck
(HEMTT) and the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV)
programs, which rely on minimum sustaining rates (MSRs).
Ensuring that heavy and medium tactical vehicles are authorized
at or above the MSRs of production is important to maintaining
a base of responsive vendors and suppliers in order to keep
production lines active.
Furthermore, the Army's Brigade Combat Teams are
particularly reliant on the FMTV and HEMTT fleets, and overall
readiness rates may be impacted if parts and spares become
unavailable due to production breaks. Finally, compounding this
problem is the decision by the Department of Defense to
reprogram $101 million appropriated for HEMTT funding in fiscal
year 2020 to support border wall construction.
The committee is concerned that these actions risk
destabilizing the supplier base, much of which is constituted
of small businesses that require predictable funding levels.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to the SASC no later than September 30,
2020, assessing the minimum sustaining rates for the TWV fleet
and the Army's plan to support those production rates. The
briefing shall also include an evaluation of the impacts to the
industrial base if minimum sustaining rates are not achieved
and details as to whether the Army anticipates any production
breaks that could negatively impact Army readiness,
modernization, and our soldiers. Finally, the briefing should
address how the Army encourages competition within the tactical
wheeled vehicle industry to ensure that the industrial base
remains robust and viable.
Tactical wheeled vehicle strategy
The committee notes that the current tactical wheeled
vehicle (TWV) fleet consists of nearly 250,000 vehicles and
their associated trailers, generally categorized as light,
medium, and heavy. Ensuring the suitability and resiliency of
the tactical wheeled vehicle fleet is critically important to
our national defense. Furthermore, the United States automotive
and commercial truck industry has invested in vehicle
technologies, to include emissions controls, autonomous
vehicles, and electric vehicles, that could be leveraged to
upgrade the tactical fleet, some of which is built on designs
originated in the 1980s or earlier.
The Army completed a Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Strategy in
2014, but, since that time, the Department of Defense has
reoriented to prepare itself for near-peer competition with the
release of the National Defense Strategy in 2018. It is the
committee's understanding that Army Futures Command (AFC) is
currently conducting a Tactical Wheeled Vehicle study designed
to identify the capabilities required for the TWV fleet in
order to support future multi-domain operations. Furthermore,
the results of this study will be used to inform the
development of a revised TWV strategy expected to be completed
in fiscal year 2021.
The committee supports the Army's efforts to develop a
revised TWV strategy that focuses on vehicle requirements and
the capabilities necessary to ensure that the Army prevails in
a future fight. Therefore, the committee directs the Army to
provide a briefing to the SASC on the TWV fleet by December 31,
2020. The briefing should include an update on the Army's
development of a revised TWV strategy, an assessment of the
Army's current acquisition strategy for tactical wheeled
vehicles, the Army's plan to ensure the viability of the
defense industrial base, and specification of further
opportunities to encourage competition within industry.
In addition, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to assess the Army's tactical wheeled
vehicle strategy and implementation efforts. The assessment
should include an analysis of potential competitive
opportunities and whether obstacles exist that prohibit such
competition. The committee further directs the Comptroller
General to submit an interim briefing not later than March 1,
2021, on the preliminary findings of the assessment.
Taser X-26 non-lethal conducted electrical weapon upgrade
Army personnel, across all components, require access to
working non-lethal weapons in every environment in which the
Army operates, from domestic bases to forward deployed
soldiers. The committee understands that taser X-26 Conducted
Electrical Weapons (CEWs) currently fielded across the Army are
over 5 years past the recommended lifecycle for these weapons,
which could increase the likelihood of failure due to age and
deterioration. The committee is also aware that the Army's
current inventory of the taser X-26 weapons may no longer be
supported with software updates and, in some cases, hardware
parts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a briefing to the SASC by September 30, 2020, on the
status of currently fielded taser X-26 CEWs and the Army's plan
to field future non-lethal capabilities. The briefing shall
include details as to whether the Army intends to remove all
non-working taser X-26 units, details as to whether the
remaining systems should be upgraded or replaced with a newer
generation of CEW tasers, and the funding requirements to
support these options. In addition, the committee encourages
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to consider acquiring
non-lethal taser CEWs to meet the needs of National Guard and
Reserve personnel.
UH-60V Black Hawk conversions
Modernization of older model UH-60 Black Hawks through
recapitalization and upgrades to the new UH-60V models is
crucial to ensuring the continued viability of the Black Hawk
fleet. This modernization effort extends the service life of
airframes and replaces outdated analog cockpits with new
digital cockpits, ensuring that Black Hawk helicopters remain
safe and relevant for both overseas contingency operations and
domestic emergencies.
The committee supports the Army's plan to field UH-60V
Black Hawks across all components in order to maintain fleet
and mission parity within the Army. Further, the committee is
aware that the Army's modernization plan calls for
recapitalizing 48 legacy aircraft each year with a goal of
converting 760 total aircraft. The committee is concerned that
it will take the Army more than 15 years to recapitalize these
aircraft with production expected to continue through fiscal
year 2037. Concurrently, the Army is pursuing multiple aviation
modernization efforts, including the Future Long Range Assault
Aircraft (FLRAA), which could impact the Black Hawk
recapitalization effort given anticipated budget projections.
Given the importance of this modernization effort, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a
briefing to the SASC no later than March 1, 2021, detailing how
the Army intends to meet the goal of recapitalizing 48 aircraft
per year and identifying opportunities to accelerate UH-60V
Black Hawk conversions.
UH-72 Communications and Monitoring Systems
The committee understands that the UH-72A Lakota helicopter
provides general aviation support for aviation units in the
Active and Reserve components. Active Army and Army National
Guard units operate the UH-72A in a variety of missions,
including flight training, surveillance and reconnaissance,
medical evacuation, border security, senior leadership
transport, and disaster response. The committee is concerned
that the Army is not taking advantage of modern health
monitoring systems on the UH-72A. The committee is aware that
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) technology is available that
could upgrade the existing communications and health monitoring
system with a digital, lightweight, beyond-line-of-sight, push-
to-talk radio with Voice over Internet Protocol and a real-time
fleet health monitoring, recording, and next generation
satellite communications system. The committee is also aware
that these same COTS solutions could positively impact training
on the UH-72A.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the SASC no later than September 30,
2020, on the Army's health monitoring systems for the UH-72A
and existing COTS solutions that could improve the
effectiveness and lifespan of the aircraft.
Use of Navy and Marine Corps aircraft for NOBLE EAGLE
The committee is aware of the importance of the homeland
defense mission and the requirement to provide air defense of
the United States at all times irrespective of potential
conflicts in other parts of the world. It is understood that
the preponderance of aircraft assigned to the homeland air
defense mission are from the United States Air Force. The
committee is concerned that the capacity of the Air Force air
assets capable of homeland defense is becoming more and more
limited, given operational deployments to the U.S. Central
Command, U.S. European Command, and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
areas of responsibility. The committee also recognizes that
there are Navy and Marine Corps aviation units that could
potentially be assigned to the homeland defense mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Commander, U.S. Northern Command, to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees no
later than October 1, 2020, that analyzes the current and
potential further utilization of Navy and Marine Corps air
units to augment the Air Force units used to provide homeland
air defense.
USMC Aviator Body Armor Vest
The committee is aware that the current aviation life
support equipment (ALSE) flight vests worn by Marine Corps MV-
22 and CH-53 aircrews have excessive bulk that can impede the
operational performance of precision mission tasks. The
committee notes further that the Marine Corps has a requirement
to replace the ALSE flight vests currently worn by MV-22 and
CH-53 aircrews with an aviator body armor vest (ABAV) system
that improves mobility and performance while enhancing
survivability. The committee encourages the Marine Corps to
compete both commercial off-the-shelf and government-owned
designs of ABAV systems in order to identify a system that
fully meets the Marine Corps requirement to enable and protect
MV-22 and CH-53 aircrews while minimizing development costs and
delays to procurement.
Variable depth sonar systems
The committee believes that the Navy should increase its
capabilities in most mission areas, particularly in the area of
anti-submarine warfare (ASW). Given ongoing efforts by
potential adversaries to increase the capability, lethality,
and size of their respective submarine fleets, the committee
believes that expanding ASW capability on DDG-51 destroyers
would allow these ships to be more effective in conducting ASW
missions.
The Navy has been developing a variable depth sonar (VDS)
system (AN/SQS-62) that will be deployed as part of ASW mission
packages aboard Littoral Combat Ships. The committee believes
that adding VDS systems to DDG-51 destroyers could increase the
ASW capability of these ships, particularly considering that
the DDG-51s are the largest component of the Navy's surface
fleet and are central to fleet operations in peacetime and
during hostilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees no
later than December 1, 2020, on the potential benefits of
equipping DDG-51s with VDS systems. The report shall include:
(1) An assessment of current DDG-51 ASW performance, compared
to the potential ASW performance of DDG-51 destroyers outfitted
with VDS systems; (2) An assessment of current carrier strike
group (CSG) ASW performance, compared to the potential CSG ASW
performance if DDG-51 destroyers assigned to the CSG were
outfitted with VDS systems; and (3) An estimate of the costs
and manpower implications of outfitting DDG-51 destroyers with
VDS systems.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for research, development, test, and
evaluation activities at the levels identified in section 4201
of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Designation and activities of senior officials for critical technology
areas supportive of the National Defense Strategy (sec. 211)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
(USD(R&E)) to designate a group of senior Department of Defense
officials who would be responsible for coordinating research
and engineering in technology areas deemed critical to the
National Defense Strategy (NDS). Each of the designated senior
officials would be responsible for a particular technology area
and would continuously and iteratively build the pathways
necessary to develop new technologies vital to the
modernization priorities of the NDS. The officials'
responsibilities would encompass technical, logistical, and
financial dimensions and would include coordination with
international, interagency, and private sector organizations.
The provision would also require the designated senior
officials to coordinate with the appropriate intelligence
agencies to develop direct comparisons between the capabilities
of the United States and the adversaries of the United States.
The provision would also require that the USD(R&E) provide
an annual report to the congressional defense committees
regarding successful advances in research and engineering and
technology transition and adoption following the implementation
of the provision.
The committee notes the USD(R&E) has currently assigned a
group of senior officials that serve as Assistant Directors
(ADs) or Technical Directors (TDs) for the NDS modernization
priorities. The committee believes that these ADs and TDs play
a valuable role in building roadmaps to develop critical
technologies while simultaneously coordinating efforts across
the military services and the Department of Defense. The
committee further notes that the recruitment of ADs and TDs
with deep knowledge of and expertise in their designated
technology areas is key to ensuring the effective development
and coordination of these technologies' development across the
Department of Defense. The committee is encouraged by the
impressive backgrounds of the current ADs and TDs and believes
that these positions should be further formalized to
institutionalize their roles and responsibilities. The
committee believes that all DOD S&T organizations should
coordinate appropriate S&T activities with these senior
officials.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide each fiscal year, not later
than 30 days after the date on which the budget justification
materials are submitted to Congress in support of the
Department of Defense budget, until December 1, 2025, to the
congressional defense committees a briefing on the technology
roadmaps and the findings of the most recent review conducted
of the relevant research and engineering budgets, including a
list of projects and activities with unwarranted or inefficient
duplication.
Governance of fifth-generation wireless networking in the Department of
Defense (sec. 212)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
cross-functional team (CFT) for fifth-generation wireless
networking and designate the Chief Information Officer (CIO) of
the Department of Defense, in carrying out the responsibilities
established in section 142 of title 10, United States Code, to
lead the CFT and serve as the senior designated official for
fifth-generation wireless networking policy, oversight,
guidance, and coordination in the Department.
The committee commends the Department of Defense, in
particular the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering (USD(R&E)), for its efforts over the last 2 years
to develop a plan to determine how fifth-generation (5G)
wireless networking can be used in military applications, how
to gain network superiority, and how to protect 5G networks
from adversaries seeking to compromise it. The committee is
pleased with the USD(R&E)'s and the broader Department's rapid
action in developing an experimentation plan to accelerate
development of fundamental 5G dual-use technologies. The
committee is also pleased with the Department's robust
engagement with industry, through the National Spectrum
Consortium, for these testing and experimentation projects.
While the committee is impressed with the progress USD(R&E)
has made regarding 5G experimentation and believes that
USD(R&E) needs to continue to play a key role in 5G research
and development, the committee realizes that a broader
enterprise-wide approach is needed for the Department to fully
leverage and operationalize the technology effectively across
the Department. As the Department continues to execute this
experimentation plan, the committee believes that a broader,
lasting governance structure is required to advance the
development and adoption of next generation wireless
communication policies, technologies, capabilities, and
applications in a coordinated manner across the entire
Department. The committee also believes that the adoption of
these next generation wireless capabilities will be
transformational for the Department.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
identify and allocate the appropriate personnel necessary to
support the 5G CFT and the additional responsibilities of the
CIO for 5G policy, oversight, guidance, and coordination within
the Department to ensure that this critical emerging technology
becomes a competitive advantage to the warfighter. The
committee is aware of the CFT model that the Department has
employed to govern its cyber programs and policy--the
establishment of a permanent team in the office of the
Principal Cyber Advisor to support the rotating cyber CFT--and
encourages the Secretary of Defense to use a similar construct
in resourcing this implementation. The committee also expects
that, as the leader of the CFT, the CIO will regularly report
to and receive direction from the Secretary of Defense and
Deputy Secretary of Defense.
Application of artificial intelligence to the defense reform pillar of
the National Defense Strategy (sec. 213)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a set of no fewer than five
use cases of artificial intelligence capabilities that support
reform efforts consistent with the National Defense Strategy.
The provision would also require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering to pilot a technology development
and prototyping activity that leverages commercially available
artificial intelligence technologies and systems in the context
of these use cases.
The committee notes that the pilot technology development
and prototyping activity should inform, and be broadly
applicable to, an artificial intelligence (AI) engineering
approach that enables the Department to share data, algorithms,
and models to accelerate AI adoption. The committee also notes
that these efforts should be undertaken in coordination with
other appropriate stakeholders, including the Joint Artificial
Intelligence Center, elements of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, and the military departments, to ensure that
infrastructure, acquisition, and other enabling activities are
in place, that high priority activities are selected for
execution, and that effective capabilities are transitioned
into operational use.
The committee notes the compelling business case for near-
term application of AI at scale within the Department of
Defense (DOD) to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of
DOD ``back office'' business processes and business systems.
Already in wide and effective use in the commercial sector, as
well as in some DOD business functions, such applications can
have fewer technological hurdles for their transition into use
and provide significant opportunity to drive reforms and
savings by optimizing the business functions of the DOD. The
committee also believes that a comprehensive DOD AI engineering
approach would advance the analysis and use of data across the
Department in other application areas.
The committee notes that relatively simple applications of
existing AI systems would greatly improve the way in which the
Department analyzes and uses data to support management of
enterprise acquisition, personnel, audit, and financial
management functions.
Extension of authorities to enhance innovation at Department of Defense
laboratories (sec. 214)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend a
pilot program for the enhancement of the research, development,
test and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense,
established under section 233 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-9 328;
10 U.S.C. 2358 note), through September 30, 2025. The provision
would also extend a pilot program to improve incentives for
technology transfer from Department of Defense laboratories,
established under section 233 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91; 10
U.S.C. 2514 note), through September 30, 2025.
The committee commends the military services that have been
able to implement these pilot programs and encourages all the
military services to look for opportunities to fully use these
authorities. The committee notes that the Navy has indicated
that it has aggressively implemented 18 management initiatives
at technical warfare centers and labs under section 233 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public
Law 114-328) that have achieved greater efficiencies and
effectiveness by decreasing processing days for administrative
procedures by nearly 500,000 days over 18 months.
Updates to Defense Quantum Information Science and Technology Research
and Development program (sec. 215)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend the
Defense Quantum Information Science and Technology Research and
Development Program, established in section 234 of the John S.
McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019
(Public Law 115-232), by directing each of the Secretaries of
the military departments to develop more robust programs for
quantum computing capabilities.
The provision would require the Secretaries to develop and
annually update a list of problems for which quantum computers
are uniquely suited or could better resolve technical and
research challenges. The provision would also support efforts
by private sector, government, industry, and academic
researchers by connecting small and medium-sized businesses
with existing quantum computing capabilities with researchers
who can make use of existing commercial quantum computers.
The committee notes the importance of harnessing quantum
computing technologies to effectively compete in the rapidly-
changing global security climate outlined in the National
Defense Strategy.
Program of part-time and term employment at Department of Defense
science and technology reinvention laboratories of faculty and
students from institutions of higher education (sec. 216)
The committee recommends a provision that would implement a
recommendation of the National Security Commission on
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and authorize a pilot program to
permit university students and faculty to take on part-time and
term employment at Department of Defense (DOD) laboratories to
work on critical technologies and research activities.
The Commission noted that, when private sector companies
hire university faculty as summer or part-time researchers,
they ``benefit from access to a diverse group of experts that
understands and often creates the world's most cutting-edge AI.
In turn the companies provide resources, exposure to new
techniques, and financial compensation to the professors,
sometimes including funding for their university-based lab.
When the professors return to teaching, they also expose
promising students to the companies' work, creating student
awareness and excitement about the available opportunities, a
positive perception of the companies, and relationships that
encourage student employment upon graduation.'' The Commission
recommended that DOD replicate this proven technique and hire
university faculty with relevant science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics expertise to serve as part-time
researchers in laboratories. The Commission also noted that
faculty members could work during sabbaticals, summer breaks,
or limited hours throughout the year.
Improvements to Technology and National Security Fellowship of
Department of Defense (sec. 217)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 235 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to increase the pay range
for participants in the Department of Defense Technology and
National Security Fellowship, executed by the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering. The committee notes
that this fellowship is intended to bring more technology
expertise to the Department of Defense and the Congress, with a
focus on the intersection between technology and national
security policy challenges. The provision would also add new
background check requirements for fellows as a prerequisite for
participation in the program.
Department of Defense research, development, and deployment of
technology to support water sustainment (sec. 218)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to research, develop, and deploy advanced
technologies that support water sustainment with technologies
that capture ambient humidity and harvest, recycle, and reuse
water.
Development and testing of hypersonic capabilities (sec. 219)
The committee recommends a provision that would encourage
the development of hypersonics capabilities as a key element of
the National Defense Strategy. These weapons represent an area
of intense technological competition between the United States,
People's Republic of China, and Russian Federation. The
committee is concerned that there is a lack of focus on air-
launched and air-breathing hypersonic capability inside the
Department of Defense and remains concerned that more attention
needs to be focused on the expeditious development and
maturation of key hypersonic flight technologies. In addition
to the need to improve ground-based test facilities such as
wind tunnels, the Department of Defense (DOD) also needs to
increase its flight test rate to expedite the maturation and
fielding of hypersonic technologies. The combination of ground-
based testing and flight testing is critical to fully maturing
the fundamental technologies needed to field a hypersonic
flight system. High-rate hypersonic flight test programs would
help mature six critical technology areas: (1) Thermal
protection systems and high temperature flight structures; (2)
Seekers and sensors for hypersonic vehicles; (3) Advanced
navigation, guidance, and control; (4) Communications and data
links; (5) High speed aerodynamic characterization; and (6)
Advanced avionics and vehicle communication systems for
hypersonic vehicles.
Therefore, the provision would require the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering, in consultation with
the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, to provide an executable
strategy and report to the congressional defense committees, no
later than December 30, 2020, on the plan to field air-launched
and air-breathing hypersonic weapon capabilities within 3
years. The strategy would include required investment in
testing and infrastructure to address the need for both flight
and ground testing.
Disclosure requirements for recipients of Department of Defense
research and development grants (sec. 220)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 139 of title 10, United States Code, by adding a new
section on disclosure requirements for recipients of Department
of Defense research and development grants with an effective
date of October 1, 2021.
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters
Assessment on United States national security emerging biotechnology
efforts and capabilities and comparison with adversaries (sec.
231)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, through the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security, to conduct an assessment of U.S.
efforts to develop biotechnologies and biotechnology
capabilities as compared to our adversaries' efforts and
capabilities. The provision would also require the Secretary of
Defense, through the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security, to assess the ability of the
intelligence community to meet the intelligence analysis needs
of the Department of Defense with respect to emerging
biotechnologies. The Secretary of Defense would be required to
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the
assessments not later than February 1, 2021.
The committee notes the importance of biotechnology to the
evolving global security landscape as outlined in the National
Defense Strategy. Therefore, the committee expects an
assessment of the efforts to develop emerging biotechnology
capabilities for the national security purposes of the
Department, other federal government agencies, academia, and
industry. Additionally, the assessment should include an
evaluation of resourcing efforts, to include items such as
funding, workforce capabilities and recruitment capabilities,
facilities, test infrastructure, and the ability of the
industrial base to support and operationalize successful
research efforts. The assessment should also include a
description of timelines for operational deployment of emerging
biotechnologies for national security purposes.
The assessments should also analyze the overall progress
made in the field of biotechnology by the United States and our
adversaries, including the viability, deployment, and timelines
for operational deployment of new technologies and broader
efforts to ensure our competitive capabilities in the global
arena. As a nascent and dynamic emerging field of global
competition, the committee is concerned about the ability of
the intelligence community to provide in-depth and adequate
analysis to support U.S. research and development activities in
the emerging biotechnology area beyond traditional biological
weapons. As such, the assessment should include an analysis of
the adequacy of current defense academic and industrial
intelligence and security apparatus (including the Defense
Counterintelligence and Security Agency and service
counterintelligence centers) to support Department of Defense
investments in biotechnology. The assessment should also
include review of the necessary supporting functions required
for optimal intelligence community assessment of
biotechnologies, including technology forecasting,
bioinformatics tools, and technical solutions. Recommendations
for improvement should include needed upgrades to intelligence
analysis and workforce, a suggested optimal organizational
construct for the intelligence community to support the
Department's biotechnology enterprise, and potential
organizational schemes for a more effective whole-of-community
approach.
Independent comparative analysis of efforts by China and the United
States to recruit and retain researchers in national security-
related fields (sec. 232)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to
conduct a study comparing methods for recruiting and retaining
technology researchers, including financial incentives and
academic opportunities, currently used by the U.S. and Chinese
governments. The study would focus on incentives employed by
China to bring researchers in American academic and government
laboratories into Chinese talent programs and how these
incentives diverge from those offered by the United States.
The committee notes that China maintains programs such as
China's Thousand Talents, initially formed to attract Chinese
expatriates and other researchers to China and recently renamed
the National High-end Foreign Experts Recruitment Plan, to
provide funding to researchers in the United States, including
tenured American professors and researchers at federally-funded
laboratories. Through these talent programs, American
researchers are encouraged to set up labs in China and conduct
research in Chinese laboratories, granting China access to
sensitive technologies developed in the United States.
The committee notes China's efforts to close technology
gaps through intellectual property theft and the relevance of
these efforts to challenges outlined in the National Defense
Strategy (NDS). The committee also notes both the importance of
robust basic research in science and technology to NDS
implementation as well as the prevalence of foreign students in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education in
the United States.
Department of Defense demonstration of virtualized radio access network
and massive multiple input multiple output radio arrays for
fifth generation wireless networking (sec. 233)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to demonstrate virtualized radio
access network (RAN) and network core technologies and massive
multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radio array technology
for commercial use that is globally competitive in terms of
cost and performance. The provision would require that this
technology demonstration be conducted at one or more of the
sites where the DOD is deploying fifth generation (5G) network
instances.
The committee notes that leading global providers of 5G
wireless networking RAN equipment and RAN radio arrays are
foreign companies in Europe, South Korea, and China. These
providers offer vertically integrated, specialized, and
proprietary products that are highly coupled, which make it
difficult for customers to mix components from multiple
companies and results in high costs. The committee is aware
that, as in many other information technology sectors, wireless
networking technologies are being developed that replace
dedicated hardware through software virtualization on commodity
computing systems. In addition, there is an emerging set of
open standards for the interfaces among wireless networking
components and functions that complements this virtualization
technology.
The committee believes that these developments will offer
opportunities for new entrants, including existing and new U.S.
companies, to enter the wireless networking industry and
compete effectively on cost and performance in the global 5G
competition with China. The committee believes that it is
important for the Department of Defense to demonstrate the
maturity, cost, and performance of virtualized RAN technology,
in coordination with the U.S. telecommunications industry, to
ensure that this technology is a viable contender for
commercial 5G network deployments.
The committee notes that MIMO radio arrays, currently based
on specialized Gallium Nitride radio-frequency electronics,
will also be critical in developing a competitive wireless
networking solution, particularly in terms of cost, weight,
power, and performance. The committee believes that competing
effectively in 5G wireless networking technology will require
U.S. companies to bring forth significant innovation in massive
MIMO radio array technology.
Independent technical review of Federal Communications Commission Order
20-48 (sec. 234)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to
conduct an independent technical review of the Order and
Authorization adopted by the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) on April 19, 2020 (FCC 20-48). The independent technical
review would include a comparison of the two different
approaches used for evaluation of potential harmful
interference. The provision also would require the National
Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to submit a
report on the independent technical review.
The committee is aware that extensive testing performed by
9 federal agencies concluded that the Ligado proposal will
cause interference for both civilian and military Global
Positioning System (GPS) users. The committee notes that the
Department of Defense, Department of Justice, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of
Transportation, Department of Commerce, Department of Homeland
Security, Department of Energy, and Federal Aviation
Administration all strongly oppose this proposal. The committee
is also concerned that the mitigation conditions imposed on
Ligado in the FCC Order are not practical and do not adequately
protect GPS.
The committee is aware that one of the main justifications
in the FCC Order for approving Ligado's proposal involves the
methods used for determining harmful interference. The
committee believes that further technical evaluation of the
methods is warranted and therefore recommends this independent
study to review the two approaches (the Ligado-proposed and
FCC-approved criteria of harmful interference to determine how
select receivers are impacted versus the Department of
Transportation study method of determining an allowable level
of noise adjacent to the relevant spectrum) to determine which
one most effectively mitigates risk and to recommend a way
forward, including the possibility of incorporating additional
testing.
Report on and limitation on expenditure of funds for micro nuclear
reactor programs (sec. 235)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the appropriate congressional
committees a report on the Department's micro nuclear reactor
programs. The report would be required to cover operational,
safety, programmatic, diplomatic, regulatory, and legal issues,
in coordination with officials within the Department of
Defense, Department of Energy, Department of State, and Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. The provision would prohibit obligation
or expenditure of funds beyond 20 percent of those authorized
to be appropriated for such programs in fiscal year 2021 by
this Act until submission of the report.
The committee supports the Department's efforts to explore
alternative operational energy sources and also supports
innovation in reactor technology but does not believe that the
Department has considered the unique complexities associated
with nuclear energy in designing these programs. The committee
is also concerned about implications for policy and programs
outside the Department of Defense, including availability of
unobligated enriched uranium.
Modification to Test Resource Management Center strategic plan
reporting cycle and contents (sec. 236)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
Test Resource Management Center strategic plan reporting cycle
and period to be covered. It is currently a 30-year strategic
plan, re-baselined every 2 years. This provision would make the
strategic plan cover a 15-year period, to be re-baselined at
least every 4 fiscal years, with an annual update as needed.
The new strategic plan would be due not later than 1 year after
the release of the Secretary of Defense's National Defense
Strategy (NDS).
The committee notes that the current strategic plan
required by section 196 of title 10, United States Code, is not
as useful to the Congress or the Department of Defense as it
could be, due to the nature and frequency of the updates. The
committee believes that a more helpful strategic plan would be
on a 4-year cycle, with yearly updates to relay any changes,
analysis, or high visibility items determined worthy of
reporting by the Director of the Test Resource Management
Center.
Limitation on contract awards for certain unmanned vessels (sec. 237)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
submission of a certification by the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering to the congressional defense
committees prior to the Department of Defense's contracting for
certain vessels.
The committee is concerned that an excessive number of
unmanned surface and undersea vessels (USVs and UUVs) are being
acquired prematurely using Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation funds and that these vessels may include subsystems
that lack sufficient technical reliability and technological
maturity to allow the vessels to meet threshold requirements.
The committee seeks to avoid contracting for USVs and UUVs
when the technical reliability and technological maturity of
subsystems critical to propulsion and electrical distribution
or the military purposes of the vessels are either unknown or
known to be insufficient. For example, the committee notes the
Navy requirement for Medium and Large USVs (MUSV and LUSV) to
operate continuously at sea for at least 30 days without
preventative maintenance, corrective maintenance, or emergent
repairs. The committee is unaware of any unmanned vessel of the
size or complexity envisioned for MUSV or LUSV that has
demonstrated at least 30 days of such operation.
The committee understands that the Strategic Capabilities
Office (SCO) prototype vessels intended to provide risk
reduction for the Navy's LUSV program have demonstrated a
maximum of 2 to 3 days of continuous operation. The committee
also understands that the SCO vessels are approximately 25
percent the size by tonnage of a Navy LUSV. As a result, the
committee is concerned that the applicability of lessons
learned and risk reduction from the SCO vessels to the Navy
MUSV and LUSV programs will be limited.
The committee views prior and successful land-based
prototyping of individual critical subsystems as essential to
providing a solid technical foundation for USV and UUV
programs. Rather than delaying these programs, the committee
believes that a deliberate engineering-based subsystem
prototyping approach will enable the delivery of capable,
reliable, and sustainable USVs and UUVs that meet the needs of
fleet commanders faster than the plan contained in the budget
request, which assumes that several unproven or non-existent
subsystems will rapidly materialize to meet the Navy's
requirements for these vessels.
Documentation relating to Advanced Battle Management System (sec. 238)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit specific documentation
germane to the Advanced Battle Management System immediately
upon enactment of this Act.
Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Test special purpose adjunct
to address computational thinking (sec. 239)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, within 1 year of enactment of this Act,
to establish a special purpose test adjunct to the Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test to address
computational thinking skills relevant to military
applications.
Budget Items
Army
Artificial Intelligence Human Performance Optimization
The budget request included 303.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 61102A
for Defense Research Sciences.
The committee notes the importance of improving special
operations forces' individual performance optimization,
resilience, and readiness, including recent emphasis on natural
movement, full-range body motion, and gravity-aided non-
traditional suspension training exercises. The committee is
also aware that an opportunity may exist to fuse these new
health and human performance approaches with advancements in
artificial intelligence. The committee therefore encourages
development of the Human Development Ecosystem to improve the
health and well-being of individual military operators. The
committee understands that this effort will further investigate
application of AI to the physiological, cognitive, and
emotional needs of the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 61102A for AI Human Performance
Optimization.
Increase in basic research, Army
The budget request included $303.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 61102A
Defense Research Sciences.
The committee recognizes the increasingly complex security
environment detailed in the National Defense Strategy and born
from rapid technological change, challenges from adversaries in
every operating domain, and decreased readiness derivative of
the longest continuous stretch of armed conflict in U.S.
history. Accordingly, it is crucial to adequately fund,
resource, and structure the Department of Defense to conduct
RDT&E activities for critical emerging technologies to stay
ahead of our adversaries, most notably Russia and China.
Resources must be devoted and responsibly spent toward research
and development of artificial intelligence, quantum computing,
hypersonics, directed energy, biotechnology, autonomy, cyber,
space, 5G, microelectronics, and fully networked command,
control, and communications technologies. As such, the
committee encourages rapid development, prototyping, testing,
and acquisition of these emerging technologies in order to
remain ahead of our adversaries.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 61102A Defense Research Sciences
to support additional basic research.
Pandemic Vaccine Response
The budget request included $11.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62115A
Biomedical Technology.
Given the recent COVID-19 global pandemic, the committee
notes the importance of protecting warfighter populations in
the event of a global pandemic and supports expanding rapid
response vaccine capabilities and capacity to preserve force
readiness during an outbreak. The committee commends the
Department of Defense for its prior efforts to pursue novel
rapid production capabilities and encourages the Department to
pursue late-stage multi-modal platform technologies capable of
responding to pandemics such as influenza and COVID-19.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62115A for pandemic vaccine
response research.
Hybrid additive manufacturing
The budget request included $42.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62141A
Lethality Technology.
The committee notes that additive manufacturing can enable
rapid prototyping and manufacturing of missile and smart bomb
electronics, energetics, structural components, and warheads.
The committee supports the development of the next generation
of integrated hybrid additive manufacturing processes and
equipment necessary to prototype missile, rocket, and munition
materials, electronics, subsystems, and fully integrated
components to demonstrate advanced designs and capabilities.
These processes could enable the capability to combine
materials on demand and at faster production rates and has the
advantage of delivering a range of products without the need to
retool manufacturing equipment.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62141A for hybrid additive
manufacturing.
Pathfinder Air Assault
The budget request included $30.8 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62142A
Army Applied Research.
The committee notes the importance of coupling soldier
insights with basic research initiatives to expedite the
delivery of new technologies to the field. The committee
further notes that Army Futures Command (AFC) is leading the
Army Modernization Program and that the AFC University
Technology Development Directorate (UTDD) has improved the
delivery of university-based applied research outcomes to the
force through the incorporation of soldier insights. The
committee encourages the expansion of these efforts to improve
air assault operations and precision fires and the continued
co-designing of technology solutions with soldiers, ensuring
outcomes that will fulfill their needs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62142A for Pathfinder Air
Assault.
Harnessing Emerging Research Opportunities to Empower Soldiers Program
The budget request included $125.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62143A
Soldier Lethality Technology.
The committee is aware of the work being done by the Combat
Capabilities Development Command's Soldier Center in improving
the protection, survivability, mobility, and combat
effectiveness of soldiers. Among these efforts is continued
research in areas of advanced ballistic polymers for body
armor, fibers to make uniforms more fire-resistant, lightweight
structures for advanced shelters--all examples of tangible
benefits to the soldier.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 62143A for the Harnessing Emerging Research
Opportunities to Empower Soldiers program.
Metal-based display technologies
The budget request included $125.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62143A
Soldier Lethality Technology.
The committee notes the value of high efficiency and
ruggedized computer display technology, which reduces the
weight burden of extra batteries and displays and improves the
warfighter's mobility and soldier lethality.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62143A for lightweight, metal-
based display technologies.
Pathfinder Airborne
The budget request included $125.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62143A
Soldier Lethality Technology.
The committee notes the importance of enhancing Airborne
Joint Forcible Entry operations in contested areas and
fostering innovation to enable improved airborne responses to
crisis contingencies around the world. The Pathfinder Airborne
program pursues applied research projects to enable critical
Army-specific airborne missions in technologies that include:
advanced materials for soldier protection, communication, and
sensing; next-generation additive manufacturing methods and
materials; secure communications, smart wireless systems, and
5G wireless networks; visualization, simulation, and analytics
for enhanced decision-making; quantum computing, sensing, and
communications; and enhanced soldier performance.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62143A for the Pathfinder
Airborne program.
Ground technology advanced manufacturing, materials, and process
technologies
The budget request included $28.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62144A
Ground Technology.
The committee notes that the Advanced Manufacturing,
Materials, and Processes (AMMP) program located within the
Center for Agile Materials Manufacturing Science at the Army
Research Laboratory provides important tools and materials and
process technologies to the rest of the Army and accelerates
the ability of the Army to enhance its industrial base
capabilities to meet the Army's six modernization priorities.
The committee further notes that these innovations can reduce
lifecycle costs and enhance capabilities for the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62144A for ground technology
advanced manufacturing, materials, and process initiatives.
Ground Combat Vehicle Platform Electrification
The budget request included $217.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62145A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) Technology.
The committee recognizes that improving vehicle
electrification technologies is essential for overmatch on the
future battlefield and supports the Army Futures Command,
specifically the NGCV Cross-Functional Team, as it executes
experiments and builds prototypes.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62145A for ground combat vehicle
platform electrification.
Immersive virtual modeling and simulation techniques
The budget request included $217.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62145A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Technology.
The committee recognizes the importance of immersive and
virtual simulation modeling and simulation enterprise support
for the development of autonomous vehicle technologies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62145A for immersive virtual
modeling and simulation techniques.
Next Generation Combat Vehicle modeling and simulation
The budget request included $219.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62145A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Technology.
The committee notes that the Next Generation Combat Vehicle
(NGCV) cross-functional team places a high emphasis on modeling
and simulation for analyzing and evaluating vehicle platforms
and technologies. The committees notes that there is a need to
quickly perform complex trade studies on requirements, sub-
system optimizations, and portfolio investments to provide
program options in a timely fashion to decision-makers,
including through the use of advanced software, modeling, and
software-in-the-loop techniques.
The committee recommends an additional $3.0 million in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 62145A for NGCV modeling and simulation
activities.
Backpackable communications intelligence system
The budget request included $114.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62146A
Network C3I Technology.
The committee notes the importance of conducting missions
against non-state actors and near-peer competitors in highly
contested domains. The National Defense Strategy highlights the
need for maintaining capability to address non-state threats,
along with increased resources for a potential high-end
conflict against near-peer state actors. These state actors
employ high frequency communications as either backup or
primary modes for command and control. The committee notes that
backpackable communications intelligence systems are small,
covertly operable systems capable of countering some threat
communications capabilities in highly contest environments,
including locating sources of adversary wireless communications
signals.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million, in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 62146A for backpackable communications
intelligence systems.
Defense resiliency platform against extreme cold weather
The budget request included $114.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62146A
Network C3I Technology.
The committee notes the impact of extreme cold weather on
military infrastructure and the challenges that it poses for
U.S. military operations. The committee notes the value of
research in developing advanced capabilities for extreme cold
regions in increasing the Army's ability to map remote extreme
cold regions, ensuring the superiority of the U.S. Army in
extreme cold regions, and reducing the deterioration of
infrastructure due to freeze-thaw cycles. The committee further
notes that research in developing capabilities for extreme cold
regions should incorporate risk assessment, ground-based
measurements, bio-inspired innovative sensors, geospatial
mapping, and intelligent prediction capabilities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62146A for a defense resiliency
platform against extreme cold weather.
Multi-drone multi-sensor intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
capability
The budget request included $114.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62146A
Network C3I Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 62146A for multi-drone/multi-sensor
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities.
Quantum computing based materials optimization
The budget request included $114.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62146A
Network C3I Technology.
The committee notes the importance of the construction and
demonstration of quantum computing technologies for the design
and development of novel advanced materials. The committee
further notes that quantum computing-based approaches for the
rapid design of next generation materials may result in long-
term accelerated development of military systems and may
improve the rate of production of key defense technologies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62146A for quantum computing-
based materials optimization.
Composite artillery tube and propulsion prototyping
The budget request included $60.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62147A
Long Range Precision Fires Technology.
The committee recognizes the need for extended range,
greater mobility, and improved maneuverability for conventional
tube artillery. Composite tube technology will allow the use of
powerful propellants that will achieve the desired Extended
Range Cannon Artillery ranges while reducing weight and length
of tube, enabling greater combat maneuverability. The committee
notes that this will increase effectiveness and survivability
on the multi-domain battlefield. The committee believes that
research into this technology could enable shorter, lighter
tubes that can use stronger propulsion to achieve required
range, allow greater mobility, which could enable circumvention
of enemy counter fire, and increase weapon system lethality.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62147A for research and
development of composite tubes and propulsion prototyping.
Counter Unmanned Aerial System threat research and development
The budget request included $56.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62150A
Air and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee supports the Army's investment in advanced
technologies to mitigate threats from Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(UAS), especially as these threats emerge and mature rapidly.
The committee believes that it is important to leverage
existing and proven counter-UAS technologies and to investigate
ways to expand these technologies with automation and machine
learning algorithms to discretely identify, detect, and
classify emerging threat UAS systems. The committee notes that
these technologies will enable soldiers to rapidly compress
kill chain decision-making processes while increasing force
protection for ground and airborne autonomous vehicles, which
will expand soldiers' situational awareness within the battle
space. The committee believes that it is important for the Army
Research Lab to collaborate with academia and private industry
to develop commercially available counter-UAS technology for
force protection and other needs. The committee also encourages
the Army Research Lab to help inform Army requirements and
advise on technologies to fulfill Army Futures Command
objectives.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 62150A Air and Missile Defense Technology for
counter-UAS threat research.
Counter unmanned aircraft systems research
The budget request included $56.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62150A
Air and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee recognizes that the threat of unmanned aerial
systems (UASs) to U.S. forces, activities, and infrastructure
reflects a variety of UAS sizes and sophistications and is
rapidly evolving and proliferating. Developing ever-evolving
counter-UAS solutions requires nimble, collaborative research.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62150A for a counter-UAS
research activity.
Coronavirus nanovaccine research
The budget request included $95.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 62787A
Medical Technology.
The committee notes that the United States Army Medical
Research and Development Command is a key part of the whole-of-
government response to COVID-19. The National Institute of
Allergies and Infectious Diseases has identified nanovaccine
research as potentially preventing pandemic diseases with
vaccines that are more effective, are more durable, and can be
produced more quickly.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 62787A to continue Department of
Defense efforts in developing nanovaccine capabilities for
COVID-19 and directs the Army to integrate the nanovaccine
research with other coronavirus research efforts to the maximum
extent practicable.
3D Advanced Manufacturing
The budget request included $109.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63118A
for Soldier Lethality Advanced Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 63118A for 3D Advanced Manufacturing.
Cybersecurity for industrial control systems and building automation
The budget request included $14.8 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63119A
Ground Advanced Technology.
The committee understands the importance of creating
research programs that would enhance partnerships in developing
cybersecurity capabilities and strategic technical workforce
development efforts in fields critical to national security.
The committee believes that it is important to create
opportunities to study the cybersecurity vulnerabilities of
industrial and facility-related control systems, such as those
used on military installations, and to expand the scope and
cooperation of academia's current efforts with leading Federal
laboratories in cybersecurity training and assessment and
advanced control system technology implementation. The
committee encourages the Army to leverage ongoing collaboration
with Army research organizations to accomplish these efforts.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63119A for cybersecurity for
industrial control systems and building automation.
Graphene applications for military engineering
The budget request included $14.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63119A
Ground Advanced Technology.
The committee recognizes the importance of graphene and its
use in many applications. These include materials that provide
lighter logistics and stronger facilities protection, augment
concealment and cover through multispectral augmentation,
improve sensor and detection capabilities, and allow for better
ground and air mobility. These types of materials applications
align well with Army Futures Command's six modernization
priorities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63119A for graphene applications
for military engineering.
High performance computing modernization
The budget request included $188.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63461A
Army High Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPMCP).
The committee notes that the HPMCP supports the advanced
computing needs of Department of Defense acquisition,
engineering, testing, and research organizations. The committee
notes that the President's budget request routinely underfunds
investment in this capability, such that annual Congressional
increases are necessary for the HPMCP to continue normal
operations. The committee also commends the HPMCP community for
providing technical assistance to the scientific community
during the COVID-19 crisis and supporting a variety of research
activities, from modeling the movement of droplets travelling
through an aircraft to conducting virtual screenings of vaccine
alternatives.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63461A for high performance
computing modernization.
Carbon fiber and graphitic composites for Next Generation Combat
Vehicle program
The budget request included $199.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee recognizes the versatility and broad
application that carbon fiber technology provides for weight
reduction and improving the survivability of the next
generation of combat vehicles.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63462A for test and development
of carbon fiber and graphitic foam applications in the Next
Generation Combat Vehicle program.
Cyber and connected vehicle innovation research
The budget request included $199.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee recognizes the importance of identifying
vehicle cyber vulnerabilities and adaptively securing manned
and unmanned military vehicles. The committee further notes
that, by leveraging partnerships in the commercial automotive,
trucking, and defense industrial bases, the Army can bring
together traditional and non-traditional suppliers to provide
cost-effective cybersecurity solutions at manufacturing scale.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63462A for cyber and connected
vehicle research.
Small unit ground robotic capabilities
The budget request included $27.7 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that the Army's current dismounted
infantry platoons have effective parity with those of potential
adversaries. The committee is aware that our adversaries are
increasingly sophisticated in the robotic arena, which in turn
demands correspondingly capable responses to emerging threats.
The committee also notes that there is no current organization
or location that integrates dismounted infantry platoon-level
robotic capabilities. These capabilities include: the Small
Multipurpose Equipment Transport system and smaller unmanned
ground vehicles; small unmanned aircraft systems; robotic air
and small ground modular mission payloads; and technologies in
autonomy, artificial intelligence, and communications. The
committee believes that it is important that the Army extend
air and ground robotic capabilities to smaller and lighter
maneuver units, focusing initially on dismounted infantry
platoons in order to provide them with substantial advantages
over comparable potential adversary units.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63462A for small unit ground
robotic capabilities.
Virtual Experimentations Enhancement
The budget request included $199.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee recognizes the importance of automated
virtual and physical prototyping to reduce the risk and cost of
developing new technologies to support crew optimization,
autonomy, and operations in degraded visual environments.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63462A for Virtual
Experimentations Enhancement.
Hyper velocity projectile extended range technologies
The budget request included $121.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Engineering (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63464A
Long Range Precision Fires Advanced Technology.
The committee notes the importance of the development and
testing of advanced guidance technology for the Hypervelocity
Projectile--Extended Range (HVP-ER). The committee also notes
that the HVP-ER requires a terminal sensor capability to meet
Army's requirements to locate targets in Global Positioning
System-degraded and -denied environments and that successful
implementation of a terminal sensor in the HVP-ER would provide
a necessary capability to achieve objective requirements for
both the Extended Range Cannon Artillery Howitzer and the
Cannon-Delivered Area Effects Munition programs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63464A for extended range hyper
velocity projectile technologies.
Electromagnetic effects research to support long range precision fires
and air and missile defense cross functional teams
The budget request included $58.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63466A
Air and Missile Defense Advanced Technology.
The committee notes the importance of: reducing the time
required for development and testing associated with the Long
Range Precision Fires (LRPF) and Air and Missile Defense (AMD)
cross-functional teams, the ability to assess specific
electromagnetic effects associated with radar and other
electronic warfare programs, and expedited RDT&E activities in
support of the LRPF and AMD cross-functional teams.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63466A to establish
electromagnetic effects research capabilities to directly
support the LRPF and AMD cross-functional teams.
Development and fielding of high energy laser capabilities--Army
The budget request included $58.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63466A
Air and Missile Defense Advanced Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.5 million in
RDT&E, Army, for PE 63466A for support for the high energy
laser system characterization lab for the development and
fielding of high energy laser capabilities.
Hypersonic hot air tunnel test environment
The budget request included $11.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63305A
Army Missile Defense Systems Integration.
The committee notes the importance of support facilities
and propulsion methods that will demonstrate and test high
speed and hypersonic technologies. The committee also notes
that the Director of the Test Resource Management Center
identified a need for increased capacity for and capability in
ground testing of thermal protection systems to support
hypersonic programs. The committee notes that a test
environment that delivers high temperature testing available
over a full hypersonic mission profile would support the
aggressive set of hypersonics programs, prototypes, and
deployment schedules envisioned in the National Defense
Strategy and associated implementation plans.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63305A for hypersonic hot air
tunnel test environment development.
Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA)
The budget request included $327.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 63801A
Aviation--Advance Development.
The committee supports the development and procurement of
the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA), which is a
critical Army modernization priority. The committee understands
that additional funding could enable the integration of key
technologies onto the platform in order to mitigate program
risk.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 63801A to support integration
activities for the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft program.
Operational Fires program reduction, Army
The budget request included $156.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64115A
Technology Maturation Initiatives.
The committee recognizes the importance of coordinating
various service and agency hypersonics activities and is
concerned with the lack of a transition pathway for the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency's Operational Fires effort
into a funded Army acquisition or development activity.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 64115A for an Operational Fires
program reduction.
Hypersonic program reduction, Army
The budget request included $801.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64182A
Hypersonics.
The committee recognizes the importance of hypersonic
research and development, especially in light of the National
Defense Strategy and the advancing threats that it describes.
However, the committee is concerned that there has been a lack
of adequate coordination on hypersonic prototyping efforts
among the various stakeholders and service components.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 64182A.
Joint Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office
The budget request included $18.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64741A
Project FG5 Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense
designation of the Army as Executive Agent for Counter small
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) in 2019, the rapid standup
of the Joint C-sUAS Office in 2020, and the recommendation to
downselect and prioritize resources toward the most promising
systems. The Chief of Staff of the Army identified in his
unfunded priorities list a requirement of $17.5 million to:
address gaps in currently fielded C-sUAS systems, increase
capability against Group 3 unmanned aircraft systems threats,
and expand interoperability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $17.5
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 64741A Project FG5 for Counter
Unmanned Aerial Systems.
Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems for Special Operations Forces
The budget request included $18.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64741A
Project FG5 Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems.
The committee notes that deployed military personnel,
especially special operations forces (SOF) deployed to austere
locations, face an increasing threat from weaponized unmanned
aerial systems (UASs). The committee believes that counter-UAS
systems utilizing artificial intelligence, open-architecture
systems, and the ability to integrate multiple sensors to
detect, engage, and defeat threats could decrease the workload
associated with existing counter-UAS solutions and more
effectively protect small SOF teams and fixed locations. The
committee understands that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM), in partnership with the Defense Innovation Unit and
the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, successfully demonstrated
such capabilities in both a test environment and during an
overseas operational assessment. The committee is encouraged by
SOCOM's plans to conduct additional overseas operational
assessments in fiscal year 2020 and notes that, elsewhere in
this Act, the committee authorizes additional funds through the
Joint Counter-Small UAS Office and for SOCOM to support
continued advancement of these technologies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 64741A for counter-unmanned
aircraft systems.
Counter small unmanned aircraft systems operational demonstrations
The budget request included $18.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64741A
Project FG5 Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
designation of the Army as Executive Agent for Counter small
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) in 2019, the rapid standup
of the Joint C-sUAS Office in 2020, and the recommendation to
downselect and prioritize resources toward the most promising
systems. The committee expects the JCO to work closely with the
United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) on its
developmental efforts to support expeditionary, mounted, and
dismounted C-sUAS capabilities for deployed special operations
forces. The committee understands that SOCOM is conducting
operational demonstrations of C-sUAS capabilities in the United
States and overseas and believes that these efforts are
important for developing and acquiring capabilities to address
emerging unmanned aircraft system threats and filling critical
capability gaps identified by combatant commanders.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 64741A Project FG5 Counter
Unmanned Aerial Systems.
Next Generation Squad Weapon
The budget request included $265.8 million in RDT&E, Army,
for PE 64802A for Weapons and Munitions Engineering
Development, of which $30.6 million was for Small Caliber Ammo
for Next Gen Squad Weapons.
The committee understands that the Next Generation Squad
Weapon (NGSW) is a top Army modernization priority urgently
needed to increase the lethality of soldiers, marines, and
special operators in close-combat formations. The NGSW program
includes the NGSW rifle, the NGSW automatic rifle, the NGSW
fire control optic, and a common 6.8 millimeter ammunition
cartridge designed to address emerging threat capabilities and
provide overmatch against threats at ranges beyond the current
weapon systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $0.8
million, for a total of $265.6 million, for PE 64802A for
Weapons and Munitions in order to increase funding for NGSW
small caliber ammunition to incorporate more soldiers, marines,
and special operators in providing user assessment of the NGSW
system.
The committee urges the Army to keep the committee fully
apprised of progress relating to the fielding of the NGSW and
how the Army will utilize user feedback and acceptance in
determining key acquisition decisions in the program.
Bradley and Stryker Active Protection Systems
The budget request included no funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 64852A
Project XU9 for the suite of Survivability Enhancements
Systems.
The committee understands that additional funds would
enable completion of Urgent Materiel Release (UMR) testing for
the Bradley Iron Fist Light De-coupled (IFLD) and limited
characterization activities in support of Stryker and other
ground combat platform active protection systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $47.0
million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E),
Army, for PE 64852A in order to complete both the follow-on
limited characterization effort ($14.0 million) and the IFLD
UMR Phase II testing ($33.0 million).
Integrated Data Software Pilot Program
The budget request included $142.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 65013A
Information Technology Development.
The committee notes that new commercial software solutions
can be used to improve the military services' supply,
logistics, and spare parts management, increasing their combat
readiness while reducing costs. The committee is aware of the
challenges that the Army has faced in synchronizing information
management and data to maintain a digital connection between
the product data and parts information. The committee
recommends that the Army make efforts to prioritize this
integration and analysis activity and encourages its adoption
throughout the Army's logistics enterprise to increase
readiness and reduce costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 65013A for an integrated data
software pilot program.
Army cyber situational understanding capability
The budget request included $28.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 65041A
Defensive Cyber Tool Development.
The committee understands that the Army intends for the
Cyber Situational Understanding tool to provide tactical
commanders with a better understanding of their and adversary
forces' activity, maneuver, and exposure in the cyber,
electromagnetic, and broader information domains. The Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency's PlanX capability, now
transitioned to the Strategic Capabilities Office's Project IKE
program and to United States Cyber Command, was initially
developed to provide such a capability for tactical commanders.
While PlanX has been adapted through further development to
meet the specific needs of Cyber Command's planning and
operational elements and is being used today by Army cyber
protection teams, at least portions of the codebase remain
well-suited for providing the tactical-level situational
awareness that the Army seeks for its brigade- and division-
level commanders. In fact, the committee understands that the
PlanX capability is being used in such tactical applications
outside of the cyber domain today. The PlanX codebase is also
owned entirely by the government and would provide
interoperability between the Cyber Mission Forces and Army
maneuver units, making it an attractive baseline for further
development projects. This line of reasoning is also applicable
to similar Navy and Air Force initiatives to provide cyber
situational awareness to tactical commanders.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army
to assess: (1) The PlanX/Project IKE capability's ability to
meet, with further development, the Cyber Situational
Understanding tool requirements; (2) The cost-efficiency of
using the PlanX/Project IKE capability as the baseline for the
Cyber Situational Awareness tool; (3) The training and
interoperability benefits that result from acquisition and
employment of situational understanding tools with a common
baseline across the Cyber Mission Forces and tactical cyber
units; and (4) Whether or not the Cyber Situational
Understanding program should be reoriented to utilize and build
off of the PlanX/Project IKE capability. The Secretary of the
Army shall deliver a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives, detailing
the findings of the assessment and a proposed path forward, no
later than January 30, 2021.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $12.0
million for PE 65041A for the Cyber Situational Understanding
program to avoid duplication. The committee directs that the
remaining funds for this initiative be used for tailoring the
Joint Cyber Command and Control (JCC2) baseline to the Army's
specific brigade combat team application. The committee urges
the Departments of the Navy and Air Force to undertake similar
efforts to adapt the JCC2 solution to tactical-level echelons.
Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2
The budget request included $235.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 65052A
Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2 (IFPC Inc 2).
The committee understands that a lower level of funding
would be sufficient to execute all planned fiscal year 2021
activities for this program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $47.8
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 65052A for IFPC Inc 2.
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle
The budget request included $327.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 65625A
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV).
The committee supports the Army's efforts to replace the
Bradley Fighting Vehicle, which has been in service for over 30
years, but notes the OMFV program reset that occurred in
January 2020. The committee understands that the Army
terminated physical prototyping by multiple vendors planned and
budgeted for fiscal years 2020 and 2021 in favor of digital
prototyping prior to proceeding to physical prototypes.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $80.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 65625A.
Directed energy test and evaluation capabilities
The budget request included $350.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 65601A
Test Ranges and Facilities.
The committee notes that directed energy systems are a
priority within the modernization efforts to support the
National Defense Strategy. The committee further notes that the
``FY 2018-FY 2028 Strategic Plan for DOD T&E Resources'''
report indicated that the demand for directed energy test
capabilities will soon expand from ``demand for testing to
address specific objectives of laboratory demonstrations'' to
``demand for testing to address requirements for validating a
weapon system for operational use.''
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 65601A Test Ranges and
Facilities to fund directed energy test capabilities.
Precision Strike Missile
The budget request included $122.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 67134A
Long Range Precision Fires.
The committee is supportive of the Precision Strike Missile
(PrSM) program, including efforts to significantly increase
range and versatility of the missile, but notes that the
program is proceeding with a single vendor instead of two as
originally planned and programmed.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.5
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 67134A for PrSM.
Guided Multiple-Launch Rocket System
The budget request included no funds in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, to qualify a
second source for solid rocket motors (SRMs) for the Guided
Multiple-Launch Rocket System, Extended Range (GMRLRS-ER).
The committee is concerned that, as the Army transitions to
the GMLRS-ER, a sole supplier of SRMs may not have the capacity
to meet future production needs or provide a surge capacity,
thus exposing the Army to the risk of disruption via a single
point of failure.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $17.5
million in RDT&E, Army, for PE 25778A to qualify a second
source of solid rocket motors for GMLRS-ER.
Advanced manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $61.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, for PE 78045A
End Item Industrial Preparedness Activities under the
Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes that the 2019 Army Modernization
Strategy states that the Army is attempting to `` fundamentally
change the way [it] develop[s] materiel capability. Advanced
manufacturing methods and materials will be incorporated into
system design, development, production, and sustainment.''
Therefore, the committee recommends the following increases
in RDT&E, Army, for PE 78045A to support the advanced
manufacturing of weapons and systems consistent with Army
modernization priorities: $7.5 million for functional fabrics
manufacturing; $5.0 million for tungsten manufacturing for
armaments; and $5.0 million for nanoscale materials
manufacturing.
Navy
Defense University Research and Instrumentation Program
The budget request included $116.8 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 61103N
University Research Initiatives.
The committee notes the importance of the competitive grant
process managed by the Office of Naval Research (ONR), through
which the Defense University Research Instrumentation Program
(DURIP) funds the academic institutions' purchase and
development of the research equipment and infrastructure
necessary for high-quality Navy-relevant science. This
instrumentation plays a vital role in allowing Department of
Defense-critical research projects to acquire technical
resources specifically engineered to meet their requirements
and is critical in accelerating the development of operational
capabilities for the warfighter. The technologies developed and
acquired through the DURIP process ensure that the next
generation of scientists and engineers are trained with and
have access to cutting-edge equipment and infrastructure,
including in the execution of research aboard Navy-supported
academic research vessels.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 61103N for the Defense
University Research and Instrumentation Program.
Increase in basic research, Navy
The budget request included $467.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 61153N
Defense Research Sciences.
The committee recognizes the ``increasingly complex
security environment'' detailed in the National Defense
Strategy and born from rapid technological change, challenges
from adversaries in every operating domain, and decreased
readiness derivative of the longest continuous stretch of armed
conflict in U.S. history. Accordingly, it is crucial to
adequately fund, resource, and structure the Department of
Defense to conduct RDT&E activities for critical emerging
technologies to stay ahead of our adversaries, most notably
Russia and China. Resources must be devoted and responsibly
spent toward research and development of artificial
intelligence, quantum computing, hypersonics, directed energy,
biotechnology, autonomy, cyber, space, 5G, microelectronics,
and fully networked command, control, and communications
technologies. As such, the committee encourages rapid
development, prototyping, testing, and acquisition of these
emerging technologies in order to remain ahead of our
adversaries.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 61153N Defense Research Sciences
to support additional basic research.
Predictive modeling for undersea vehicles
The budget request included $467.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 61153N
Defense Research Sciences.
The committee notes that the designs of Naval undersea
systems are increasing in complexity, scope, and
sophistication. This, along with complex operating
environments, makes advanced predictive modeling and
computational tools for such systems difficult to develop.
Without validated modeling tools, underwater vehicle and
platform development relies heavily on experimentation, which
can significantly lengthen the design phase, result in costly
system-level rework, and restrict innovation.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in
RDT&E, Navy, for PE 61153N for predictive modeling for undersea
vehicles.
Direct air capture and blue carbon removal technology program
The budget request included $21.4 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$122.2 million was for PE 62123N Force Protection Applied
Research.
The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, the Secretary of Energy, and the heads of
such other Federal agencies as the Secretary of Defense
considers appropriate, to carry out a program on research,
development, testing, evaluation, study, and demonstration of
technologies related to blue carbon capture and direct air
capture.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62123N for electric propulsion
research for carbon capture.
Electric propulsion for military craft and advanced planning hulls
The budget request included $122.3 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62123N
Force Protection Applied Research.
The committee notes the ongoing, yet increasing,
operational tempo of naval special warfare maritime units such
as the Special Warfare Combatant Craft and Coastal Riverine
Force squadrons. The committee is aware that U.S. Special
Operations Command has identified mission critical capability
objectives for hybrid propulsion technologies and low signature
management that, in the face of increasingly technologically
advanced adversaries, are of substantial importance and should
be supported.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62123N for electric propulsion
for military craft and advanced planning hulls.
Expeditionary unmanned systems launch and recovery
The budget request included $122.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62123N
Force Protection Applied Research.
The committee supports the Navy's investment in advanced
fixed wing unmanned aerial vehicles and notes that, in order to
support persistent operations in austere environments,
additional investment in expeditionary launch and recovery
capabilities is warranted. The committee believes that it is
important to conduct research and development related to the
launch and recovery of expeditionary unmanned systems that
enable high-efficiency, high-payload drones to take off and
land on land and at-sea.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62123N to support expeditionary
unmanned systems launch and recovery.
Testbed for autonomous ship systems
The budget request included $122.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62123N
Force Protection Applied Research.
The committee notes that a key technology gap for long-
duration autonomous ship operation lies in the robustness and
resiliency of the hull and machinery plant. The committee also
notes that autonomous ships will be expected to operate for
months between human-assisted maintenance and that autonomous
machinery must be robust and resilient in order to avoid
failure, repair damage, or redirect platforms as needed. The
committee notes the development of digital-twin technologies
that allow for predictive or automated maintenance and improved
operations and logistics and help fill a critical gap that has
been identified in autonomous systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62123N for the development of a
testbed for autonomous ship systems.
Interdisciplinary Cybersecurity Research
The budget request included $50.6 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62131M
Marine Corps Landing Force Technology.
The committee notes the current research efforts to
understand expeditionary cyber challenges and commends the
interdisciplinary approach to developing solutions for cyber
systems and considering the role of human behavior in the
tactical cyber environment. The committee supports continued
multidisciplinary research in the areas of dynamic cyber
defense, tactical cyberspace operations and signals
intelligence, sensing, computation, and mobile communications.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62131M for interdisciplinary
cybersecurity research.
Humanoid robotics research
The budget request included $67.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62236N
Warfighter Sustainment Applied Research.
The committee recognizes the promise of autonomous humanoid
robotics for dangerous and repetitive jobs on ships designed
primarily for use by human sailors. In particular, the Navy has
identified shipboard firefighting and a number of shipboard
maintenance tasks as ideal candidates for integrating the use
of humanoid robots.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62236N for humanoid robotics
research.
Social networks and computational social science
The budget request included $67.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62236N
Warfighter Sustainment Applied Research.
The committee supports the Navy's research efforts to:
develop algorithms, methods, and tools for analysis of social
hysteria propagation and group polarization; improve methods of
information environment assessment and strategic communication;
and refine detection of adversarial information maneuvers
across social media platforms.
The committee recommends an additional $3.0 million in
RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62236N for social networks and
computational social science research.
Naval academic undersea vehicle research partnerships
The budget request included $56.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62747N
Undersea Warfare Applied Research.
The committee notes that partnerships among academia,
government, and industry are instrumental in translating
technological advances to emerging Navy undersea vehicles and
systems in cost-effective ways, training a highly skilled
workforce, and supporting increased and sustained submarine
production capacity. Undersea dominance is an enduring
capability that is a key foundation of our national defense and
a core element of strategic overmatch in an era of great power
competition.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5
million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62747N for Navy and academia
submarine partnerships.
Thermoplastic materials
The budget request included $160.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 62792N
for Innovative Naval Prototypes Applied Research.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.3 million in
RDT&E, Navy, for PE 62792N for continued development of
technology to fabricate composite aircraft and ship parts from
highly formable thermoplastic materials.
Mission planning advanced technology demonstration
The budget request included $219.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 63640M
United States Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration.
The committee supports the Department of Defense Unmanned
Systems Integrated Roadmap and notes the importance of a robust
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platform
for forward deployed operations in contested environments. The
committee encourages the development of a Mission Support
Station that allows mission plans to be created and then
dynamically updated based on available data from numerous
sources, including weather, satellite imagery, sensor feeds,
and other ISR from unmanned systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 63640M for the mission planning
advanced technology demonstration.
Unmanned surface vessel development
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$464.0 million was for PE 63178N Medium and Large Unmanned
Surface Vehicles and $38.4 million was for PE 63573N Advanced
Surface Machinery Systems.
The committee notes that the budget request provides for
the prototyping and testing of Medium and Large Unmanned
Surface Vessels (MUSVs and LUSVs), including procurement of up
to two additional LUSVs in conjunction with a Strategic
Capabilities Office (SCO) initiative. The committee understands
that the 4 LUSVs procured by the SCO beginning in fiscal year
2018, at a cost of more than $510 million, are sufficient to
achieve the objectives of the SCO initiative, which is
scheduled to be completed in the fourth quarter of fiscal year
2021.
The committee believes that further procurement of MUSVs
and LUSVs should occur only after the lessons learned from the
current SCO initiative have been incorporated into the system
specification and additional risk reduction actions are taken.
A specific area of technical concern for the committee is
the Navy requirement for MUSVs and LUSVs to operate
continuously at sea for at least 30 days without preventative
maintenance, corrective maintenance, or emergent repairs. The
committee is unaware of any unmanned vessel of the size or
complexity envisioned for MUSV or LUSV that has demonstrated at
least 30 days of such operation.
The committee understands that the SCO prototype vessels
that are intended to provide risk reduction for these programs
have demonstrated between 2 to 3 days of continuous operation.
The committee also understands that the SCO vessels are
approximately 25 percent the size by tonnage of a LUSV, which
may limit the applicability of lessons learned and risk
reduction from the SCO vessels to the MUSV and LUSV programs.
Among other critical subsystems, the committee views the main
engines and electrical generators in particular as key USV
mechanical and electrical subsystems whose reliability is
critical to ensuring successful operations at sea for at least
30 continuous days.
The committee also notes that additional funding is
necessary to accelerate completion of the Integrated Power and
Energy Systems test facility (ITF) to achieve full test
capability in fiscal year 2023, consistent with section 131 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92), as well as the qualification of silicon
carbide power modules.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $464.0
million, for a total of $0, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 63178N, and
an increase of $200.0 million, for a total of $238.4 million in
RDT&E, Navy, for PE 63573N.
The committee's intent is that the increased funding in PE
63178N be used for: the USV main engine and electrical
generator qualification testing directed elsewhere in this Act
($70.0 million); USV autonomy development, which may include
conversion of existing vessels ($45.0 million); accelerating
ITF testing ($75.0 million); and accelerating the qualification
of silicon carbide power modules ($10.0 million).
Advanced combat systems technology
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $70.2
million was for PE 63382N advanced combat systems technology.
The committee notes that project 3416 (HIJENKS) had
insufficient schedule justification ($7.0 million) and project
3422 (SHARC) would procure excess platforms ahead of
satisfactory testing ($7.1 million).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $14.1
million, for a total of $56.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63382N.
Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $52.4
million was for PE 63502N surface and shallow water mine
countermeasures.
The committee notes Barracuda (project 2989) schedule
delays, including a 2-year delay in the critical design review
and developmental testing to fiscal years 2022 and 2024
respectively. The committee is also concerned that operational
testing was removed from the program schedule and directs the
Secretary of the Navy to restore such testing.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $28.2
million, for a total of $24.2 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63502N.
Advanced submarine system development
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$185.4 million was for PE 63561N advanced submarine system
development.
The committee notes that engineering development models are
early to need in project 9710.
The committee also notes that additional funding ($20.0
million) could be used to complete procurement qualification of
out-of-autoclave bow dome technology and demonstrate other
components that utilize this technology for future use on
Virginia-class and other classes of submarines.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a net increase of
$10.0 million, for a total of $195.4 million, in RDT&E, Navy,
for PE 63561N.
Ship concept advanced design
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$126.4 million was for PE 63563N ship concept advanced design.
The committee lacks sufficient clarity on the capability
requirements to support the following ship design efforts:
Future Surface Combatant (project 2196, $19.1 million), next
generation medium amphibious ship (project 4044, $30.0
million), and next generation medium logistics ship (project
4045, $30.0 million).
The committee supports the Conditions Based Maintenance +
(CBM+) initiative, which improves the cost, schedule, and
performance outcomes in ship maintenance availabilities using
analytic tools. The committee understands that additional funds
($16.0 million) could accelerate the implementation of the CBM+
initiative.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $63.1
million, for a total of $63.3 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63563N.
Large Surface Combatant preliminary design
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $70.2
million was for PE 63564N ship preliminary design and
feasibility studies.
The committee lacks sufficient clarity on the Large Surface
Combatant (LSC) capability requirements and the program's
compliance with section 131 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to
support the start of preliminary design for the LSC program or
completion of the Capabilities Development Document (project
0411).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $41.3
million, for a total of $29.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63564N.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to submit a report with Navy's fiscal year 2022 budget
request that details the plan to comply with the requirements
of section 131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020.
Littoral Combat Ship
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $32.2
million was for PE 63581N Littoral Combat Ship.
The committee notes available prior year funds in project
3096.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million, for a total of $27.2 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63581N.
LCS mission modules
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $67.9
million was for PE 63596N LCS mission modules.
The committee notes that the Littoral Combat Ship mine
countermeasures mission package has an outdated integrated
master schedule and test and evaluation master plan (project
2550). The committee also notes available prior year funds due
to testing delays (project 2551).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $35.0
million, for a total of $32.9 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63596N.
Conventional munitions
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $9.9
million was for PE 63609N conventional munitions.
The committee notes insufficient justification to support
insensitive weapons development (project 0363).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.8
million, for a total of $2.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63609N.
Surface Navy Laser Weapon System
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$128.8 million was for PE 63925N directed energy and electric
weapon systems.
The committee notes excess engineering and sustainment
support costs for the Surface Navy Laser Weapon System (project
3402).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0
million, for a total of $113.8 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
63925N.
Large unmanned undersea vehicles
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $78.1
million was for PE 64031N large unmanned undersea vehicles.
The committee notes excess procurement ahead of Snakehead
phase 1 testing, which is scheduled for fiscal year 2022. The
committee seeks to avoid excess procurement of these systems in
advance of satisfactory testing.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $36.0
million, for a total of $42.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64031N.
Advanced undersea prototyping
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$115.9 million was for PE 64536N advanced undersea prototyping.
The committee notes that the Snakehead and Orca test
strategies require updates to enable certification by the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in accordance with
the Senate report accompanying the Department of Defense
Appropriations Bill, 2020, incorporated into the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2020 (S. Rept. 116-103). Additionally, the
committee is aware of Orca testing delays.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million, for a total of $95.9 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64536N.
Hypersonic program reduction, Navy
The budget request included $1.1 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 64659N
Precision Strike Weapons Development Program.
The committee recognizes the importance of hypersonics
research and development, especially in light of the National
Defense Strategy and the advancing threats posed by
adversaries. However, the committee is concerned that there has
been a lack of adequate coordination on hypersonics prototyping
efforts among the various stakeholders and service components.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 64659N Precision Strike Weapons
Development Program.
Conventional prompt strike
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $1.1
billion was for PE 64659N precision strike weapons development
program.
The committee notes that the budget request included
modification and installation costs for conventional prompt
strike weapons integration on two Virginia-class submarines but
included funds for the procurement of only one Virginia-class
submarine. Therefore, modification and installation costs are
early to need for one Virginia-class submarine.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $52.0
million, for a total of $1.1 billion, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64659N.
The committee supports conventional prompt strike weapons
development and the associated submarine integration. However,
the committee lacks clarity on the requirement, including the
inventory objective, for submarines capable of employing these
weapons and notes that projected funding through fiscal year
2025 will total more than $900.0 million for submarine design,
modification, and installation costs for such weapons.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Naval
Operations to submit to the congressional defense committees
not later than March 30, 2021, approved requirements, including
the inventory objective by ship class, for submarines capable
of employing conventional prompt strike weapons. The Chief of
Naval Operations shall coordinate this response with a related
report from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on
mission planning and force structure for hypersonic weapon
systems, which is required elsewhere in this Report and due on
the same date.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of Navy
to request funding required for new construction submarine
modification and installation costs associated with
conventional prompt strike weapons as part of the end cost of
each such submarine in the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
account in future budget submissions.
Submarine tactical warfare systems
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $63.9
million was for PE 64562N submarine tactical warfare systems.
The committee notes AN/BYG-1 APB17 and APB19 testing
delays.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million, for a total of $58.9 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64562N.
Advanced degaussing
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $51.9
million was for PE 64567N ship contract design.
The committee understands that, since legacy degaussing
systems for surface combatants were developed, alternative
methods for performing this function have proven to be more
capable and cost-effective.
The committee believes that conducting an installation and
demonstration of advanced degaussing capability on an existing
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer is warranted to evaluate the
utility of such a capability for further forward-fit and back-
fit on naval vessels.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $14.9
million, for a total of $66.8 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64567N.
Lightweight torpedo development
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$146.0 million was for PE 64610N lightweight torpedo
development.
The committee notes High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare
Weapon operational testing delays (project 1412) and Mk 54 Mod
2 torpedo contract delays (project 3418).
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.0
million, for a total of $116.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
64610N.
Submarine acoustic warfare development
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $69.2
million was for PE 11226N submarine acoustic warfare
development.
The committee notes that the Compact Rapid Attack Weapon
engineering design model (TI-2) is early to need.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $8.0
million, for a total of $61.2 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
11226N.
Integrated surveillance system
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which
$103.0 million was for PE 24311N integrated surveillance
system.
The committee notes that, since fiscal year 2015, the Navy
has utilized Transformational Reliable Acoustic Path Systems
(TRAPS) in anti-submarine warfare missions. The committee
understands that these deployable systems have performed
satisfactorily and comprise a critical element of the Navy's
overall integrated undersea surveillance system. The committee
is concerned that capability or capacity gaps may result if
additional spiral 1 TRAPS units are not procured in fiscal year
2021.
In addition, the committee understands that additional
funding in project 0766 could accelerate the development,
configuration, and integration of advanced sensors and
associated signal processing into representative system sensor
packages for developmental and operational testing.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million, for a total of $153.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
24311N.
LCAC composite component development
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $1.7
million was for PE 24413N amphibious tactical support units.
The committee understands that additional investment in
advanced composites manufacturing for air cushion vehicle
components, including propeller blades and composite deck house
modules, could reduce the overall acquisition and life cycle
costs of the Navy's air cushioned landing crafts.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, for a total of $6.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
24413N.
G/ATOR demonstration
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $22.2
million was for PE 24460M Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar.
The committee believes that the Joint Force, particularly
the Marine Corps, could derive significant warfighting benefits
in the integrated air and missile defense mission area from
integrating the AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/
ATOR) with Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) and the Cooperative
Engagement Capability (CEC) network.
The committee understands that a proof-of-concept
demonstration using a G/ATOR to conduct an SM-6 engagement
would require $73.6 million, which includes the procurement of
a G/ATOR that would remain a dedicated test asset.
The committee further understands that the G/ATOR is
capable of providing tracks, via the USMC Composite Tracking
Network (CTN), to the CEC network. However, changes to the CTN
are required to enable completion of an Engage On Remote
capability between Navy surface combatants and a G/ATOR.
The committee further understands it would cost
approximately $10.0 million to analyze the feasibility of a
stand-alone G/ATOR and SM-6 engagement.
The committee notes that the Marine Corps is supportive of
conducting such a demonstration and analysis, which would
consist of two tracking events and a live fire shoot,
coordinated with the Navy, in fiscal year 2022.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $83.6
million, for a total of $105.8 million, in RDT&E, Navy, for PE
24460M.
Attack and utility replacement aircraft vehicle
The budget request included $21.5 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $18.1
million was for PE 64212N, Other Helo Development, including
$11.3 million for development of an attack and utility
replacement aircraft (AURA) vehicle.
The Navy AURA program has been has been following the
Army's development of the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft
(FLRAA), applying lessons learned from the Army program, and
assessing subsystem commonality with the Army development
efforts.
The committee supports such cooperation, urges the Navy and
Army to expand these efforts, and recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 64212N for that purpose.
Cyber tool development
The budget request included $35.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, for PE 35251N
Cyber Space Operations Forces and Force Support.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Navy Cyber
Warfare Development Group (NCWDG), which benefits enormously
from its unique intelligence, prototyping, and acquisition
authorities and nesting within U.S. Fleet Cyber Command. The
committee encourages the Army and Air Force to evaluate the
authorities available to and organizational alignment of the
NCWDG and the feasibility of modeling their tool development
organizations and activities after the NCWDG. The committee
also understands that the funding for development and
acquisition of operational tools across the Navy and Army is
insufficient for the development and acquisition of
foundational tool suits, a critical component of the Joint
Cyber Warfighting Architecture.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Navy, for PE 35251N Cyber Space Operations
Forces and Force Support for cyber tool development.
Air Force
Increase in basic research, Air Force
The budget request included $315.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
61102F Defense Research Sciences.
The committee recognizes the ``increasingly complex
security environment'' detailed in the National Defense
Strategy and born from rapid technological change, challenges
from adversaries in every operating domain, and decreased
readiness derivative of the longest continuous stretch of armed
conflict in U.S. history. Accordingly, it is crucial to
adequately fund, resource, and structure the Department of
Defense to conduct RDT&E activities for critical emerging
technologies to stay ahead of our adversaries, most notably
Russia and China. Resources must be devoted and responsibly
spent toward research and development of artificial
intelligence, quantum computing, hypersonics, directed energy,
biotechnology, autonomy, cyber, space, 5G, microelectronics,
and fully networked command, control, and communications
technologies. As such, the committee encourages rapid
development, prototyping, testing, and acquisition of these
emerging technologies in order to remain ahead of our
adversaries.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 61102F Defense Research
Sciences to support additional basic research.
High Energy Synchrotron X-Ray program
The budget request included $140.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee notes the value of continued funding for
high-energy X-ray beamlines optimized for Air Force research
needs. This research capability enables Air Force Research
Laboratory researchers, collaborators, and original equipment
manufacturers to employ real-time, three-dimensional x-ray
characterization methods to test a broad range of mission-
critical structural and functional materials. The committee
notes the value of this research to high performance materials
for tactical aircraft, the understanding of metal fatigue,
processes for additive manufacturing technologies, and
scientific workforce development.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 62102F for the High Energy
Synchrotron X-Ray research program.
Materials maturation for high mach systems
The budget request included $140.8 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee notes the importance of advanced thermal
protection systems (TPSs) research to enable efficient
operation of high-speed vehicles for military and commercial
aerospace needs. The committee further notes that much
scientific and technical work remains in the exploration of the
capabilities of the high temperature materials and associated
coatings, identification of non-destructive inspection
techniques, study of initiation and progression of material
damage in severe flight environments, and transition of the
technology into advanced load-bearing TPSs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 62102F for materials
maturation for high mach systems.
Metals Affordability Initiative
The budget request included $140.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Metals
Affordability Initiative as an innovative public-private
partnership that makes metals for warfighter needs lighter,
stronger, and more affordable. Since the program's inception in
1999, the MAI has saved taxpayers over $2 billion, and has a
10:1 return on taxpayer investment, by increasing yields,
decreasing maintenance costs, and minimizing time and expense
for metals manufacturing for Air Force needs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 62102F Materials to support the Metals
Affordability Initiative.
Qualification of additive manufacturing processes
The budget request included $140.8 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee notes that Executive Order 13806, ``Assessing
and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base
and Supply Chain Resilience of the United States,'' points to
``gaps in the national-security-related domestic manufacturing
capabilities, including non-existent, extinct, threatened and
single-point-of-failure capabilities.'' The committee also
notes that a great deal of additive manufacturing research and
development is conducted openly on commercially available
systems, allowing adversaries access to substantial innovation.
The committee supports further development of additive
manufacturing processes that leverage unclassified innovations
for sensitive and classified weapon systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million, in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 62102F for qualification
of additive manufacturing processes.
Technologies to repair fasteners
The budget request included $103.3 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
63030F Air Force Foundational Development/Demos.
The committee notes that the galvanic corrosion of fastener
holes in carbon-composite and aluminum alloy airframes is a
significant maintenance burden and a source of aircraft
downtime. The committee believes that the development of
inexpensive and reliable technologies that can repair fastener
holes could reduce maintenance costs and extend the useful
lifetime of the F-22 and F-35.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million, in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 63030F for technologies to
repair fasteners.
Hypersonic materials
The budget request included $349.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
62201F Aerospace Vehicle Technologies.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to design
and test materials capable of withstanding the hypersonic
environment.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDAF for PE 62201F.
Golden Horde Vanguard program reductions
The budget request included $157.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
63032F Future AF Integrated Technology Demos.
The committee recognizes the importance of programs that
support the transition of promising innovative science and
technology programs into formal acquisition or operational use.
The committee notes that these efforts are more appropriately
funded outside of the limited funding available for science and
technology efforts themselves.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 63032F Future AF Integrated
Technology Demos for Golden Horde Vanguard program reductions.
The committee report reallocates this funding to high priority
science and technology activities in support of the National
Defense Strategy.
Fixed-wing improvements
The budget request included $199.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
63033F Next Gen Platform Dev/Demo.
The committee notes that Air Force efforts to improve B-52
flight operations resulted in a 6.6 percent performance gain,
saving 4.2 million gallons of fuel per year, and a positive
return on investment in less than 1 year. Flight data analysis
also showed that not pursuing efficiencies resulted in
increased fuel burn and costs, 350 additional maintenance hours
per year, and 41 days of non-mission capable status for landing
gear maintenance. Analysis for KC-135 aft body drag reduction
devices show savings of $7.5 million per year.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $3.0 million for B-52 pylon fairings, $3.0 million
for C-130 finlets, and $3.0 million for KC-135 aft body drag,
in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 63033F Next Gen Platform Dev/Demo.
AETP/NGAP
The budget request included $636.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
64004F Advanced Engine Development.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to develop
state of the art engine technology that has the potential to
provide expanded flight envelopes with increases in thermal and
power production at the same time. The committee encourages the
Air Force to accelerate this revolutionary technology to
achieve the increase in combat capability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in RDAF for PE 64004F.
Directed energy counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (CUAS)
The budget request included $21.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64032F Directed Energy Prototyping.
Unmanned aerial systems (UASs) pose a growing threat to
U.S. forces. The development of directed energy capabilities to
counter UASs and cruise missiles is critical, as employment of
such defensive capabilities would impose substantial costs on
adversaries.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 64032F.
Advanced Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon
The budget request included $381.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
64033F Hypersonic Prototyping.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts in
developing air-breathing hypersonic missiles but is concerned
that the Air Force has not provided sufficient resources to
successfully transition the Hypersonic Air Breathing Weapon
being developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA), in partnership with the Air Force, based on the
recent successes and acceleration of the DARPA program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $65.0
million in RDAF for PE 64033F.
KC-135 operational energy increases
The budget request included $219.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee notes that roughly 60 percent of operational
energy use occurs in the Air Force at a cost of over $5.4
billion per year. One of the greatest consumers of fuel in the
Air Force is the KC-135. Just switching from horizontal to
vertical wiper blades with a $2 million investment can save
almost $10 million each year. Using low-cost flight planning
software instead of traditional practices can decrease the
workload for flight planners by roughly 300 hours per month. In
the air, the same planning software has been shown to improve
flight efficiency by at least 10 percent, which saves $75.0
million per year.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $4.5 million for agile software development and
operations, $10.0 million for KC-135 winglets, and $2.0 million
for KC-135 vertical wipers in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 64855F
Tech Transition Program.
Polar communications
The budget request included $219.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
64858F Tech Transition.
The committee understands that strategic satellite
communication is vital to national security and that there
exists a potential 7-year gap in resilient capability coverage.
Additionally, the Commander, U.S. Northern Command, has warned
about a lack of basic and reliable communications in the
northern most latitudes, communications that the Department of
Defense will need to help respond to great power competition.
The committee is aware of recent developments in low- and
medium-earth orbit communications that could support additional
satellite capability to begin to establish more robust
communications at these northern latitudes.
Therefore, the committee recommends and increase of $46.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 64858F for strategic
satellite communications capability.
Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology
The budget request included $219.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee supports the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics' intent to
accelerate the Air Force Research Laboratory's Low-Cost
Attributable Aircraft Technology XQ-58 program for
collaborative pairing with manned platforms, potentially
including the F-35. The committee views the combined
application of commercial technology, autonomy, and artificial
intelligence as an innovative solution to meeting the demands
of the National Defense Strategy.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $128.0
million, in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 0604858F for the purchase
of additional XQ-58 aircraft and operationally relevant
testing.
Long Endurance UAS
The budget request included $219.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee supports the Air Force's effort to provide an
alternative to traditional space assets by using unmanned
vehicles to provide persistent over the horizon surveillance,
targeting, and tactical communications capability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $33.5
million in RDAF for PE 64858F for long endurance unmanned
aircraft systems.
Rapid repair of high performance materials
The budget request included $219.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee recognizes the importance of further
advancement of systems that can be used to repair high
performance materials for the Department of Defense. The
committee highly encourages further integration of portable
deployable systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million, in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 64858F for development of
technologies to enable the rapid repair of high performance
materials.
Small satellites
The budget request included $219.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64858F Technology Transition Program.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
focus on small satellite capabilities and supports the growth
and expansion of the space industry capabilities in this
critical technology area.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 64858F for small
satellites.
Air Force Open Systems Integration
The budget request included no funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
0604429F Airborne Electronic Attack.
The committee supports the Air Force's initiative to
transition the Systems of Systems Technology Integration Tool
Chain for Heterogeneous Electronic Systems (STITCHES)
capability to the 850th Electronic Warfare Group. This open
systems integration solution provides critical capability
across the Department of Defense. The committee was
disappointed to learn that the transition was authorized but
failed to capture the required funding.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in RDAF for PE 0604429F for STITCHES transition
activities.
SLATE/VR Training
The budget request included $248.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
0605223F Advanced Pilot Training.
The committee supports the effort to accelerate the
fielding of commercially developed airborne augmented reality
for: (1) In-flight learning; (2) Operational training; (3)
Advancing learning and performance assessment science and
practice by integrating and testing advanced airborne augmented
reality prototypes in Air Force training aircraft; and (4)
Active Air Force fighters through initial integration
activities for the F-16.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in RDAF for PE 0605223F.
Gulf Test Range modernization
The budget request included $208.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
64759F Major T&E Investment.
The committee notes its support for the next phase in the
Gulf Test Range telemetric modernization process.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 64759F for Gulf Test Range
modernization.
Enterprise Resource Planning Common Services
The budget request included $9.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
38602F Enterprise Information Services.
The committee remains concerned about the Air Force's
development of Enterprise Resource Planning Common Services
with respect to implementing best practices for the frequency
of capability delivery to end users and notes that the
acquisition strategy for this program is inconsistent with the
Air Force's digital modernization strategy.
The committee recommends a reduction of $7.5 million in
RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 38602F.
Advanced Air to Air capability
The budget request included $15.8 billion in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
9999999 Classified Programs.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts in
developing advanced air-to-air weapons to enable air
superiority, which is fundamental to achieving victory in any
conflict.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $62.0
million in RDAF for PE 999999.
Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System
The budget request included $27.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
65018F Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS).
The committee notes its continuing concern with AF-IPPS
implementation of best practices for frequency of capability
delivery to end users and that the acquisition strategy for
this program is inconsistent with the Air Force's digital
modernization strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 65018F.
B-1B Squadrons
The budget request included $15.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
11126F B-1B Squadrons.
The committee supports the Air Force's request to realign
funds to support certain B-1 radio cryptographic modernization
requirements within this account.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.8
million in RDAF for PE 11126F for cryptographic modernization
activities.
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command
The budget request included $13.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
35600F International Intelligence Technology and Architectures.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), included additional
funding for Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades to
modernize the command, control, communications, and computers
architecture in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility and
provide local systems to support and enhance operations with
allies and partners.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.7
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 35600F, specifically for
the BICES-X program.
C-17 microvanes
The budget request included $9.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
41130F C-17 Aircraft (IF).
The committee supports efforts to increase efficiency and
to reduce costs associated with fuel burn. The committee notes
that the Air Force estimates savings of approximately $10.0
million per year, with less than a 4-month positive return on
investment, through the use of C-17 microvanes, which have been
shown to streamline airflow and reduce drag.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 41130F for the fielding of
C-17 microvanes.
Logistics Information Technology
The budget request included $35.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for PE
78610F Logistics Information Technology (LOGIT).
The committee notes its concern with the progress of the
Item Master effort with respect to implementation of best
practices for frequency of capability delivery to end users and
that the acquisition strategy for this program is inconsistent
with the Air Force's digital modernization strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Air Force, for PE 78610F.
Small satellite mission operations center
The budget request included $139.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
1206601SF Space Technology Applied Research.
The committee believes that there is significant potential
in small satellite missions and that a central operations
center would provide synergy to the ongoing Department of
Defense efforts.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 1206601SF for a small
satellite mission operations center.
GPS User Equipment
The budget request included $390.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
1203164SF NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (User Equipment)
(SPACE).
The committee understands that the modernized Global
Positioning System user equipment program for the Space Force
has slipped by over a year and that more delays are possible.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 1203164SF.
National Security Space Launch technology development
The budget request included $561.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
1206853SF National Security Space Launch Program (SPACE)--EMD.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a provision
that would require the Secretary of the Air Force to establish
a program to develop technologies and systems to enhance phase
three National Security Space Launch requirements and enable
further advances in launch capability associated with the
insertion of national security payloads into relevant classes
of orbits.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 1206853SF. This increase
would resource this important program.
Cobra Dane service life extension
The budget request included $28.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF), for PE
1203873SF Ballistic Missile Defense Radars.
The committee notes that, because of projected delays in
fielding two homeland defense radars in the Indo-Pacific area
of responsibility, Cobra Dane will now be required to exceed
its originally planned life expectancy. The committee also
notes that this project was included on the unfunded priorities
list submitted by the Commander, U.S. Northern Command and
North American Aerospace Defense Command.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $18.5
million in RDSF for PE 120387SF to accelerate the service life
extension of the Cobra Dane radar.
Commercial space domain awareness
The budget request included $86.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
1203940SF Space Situation Awareness Operations.
The committee believes that, in an increasingly crowded
environment, the space situational awareness (SSA) mission is
essential to U.S. Government and commercial space operations.
The committee views the use of commercial data for this mission
as an important part of an integrated approach to achieving
SSA.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 1203940SF for commercial
procurement of SSA data.
Global Positioning System III--Operational Control Segment
The budget request included $482.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Space Force, for PE
1206423SF Global Positioning System III--Operational Control
Segment.
The committee believes that Global Positioning System
modernization is a critical milestone for achieving the lethal
force envisioned in the National Defense Strategy but sees this
request as excess to need.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $65.0
million in RDT&E, Space Force, for PE 1206423SF.
Defense Wide
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
The budget request included $35.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
61110D8Z Basic Research Initiatives.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Defense
Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
(DEPSCoR). The program helps increase the number of university
researchers and improve the capabilities of institutions of
higher education in eligible jurisdictions to perform
competitive research relevant to the Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 61110D8Z for DEPSCoR.
Minerva Research Initiative
The budget request included $35.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
61110D8Z Basic Research Initiatives.
The committee is concerned by the proposed divestment in
social science research programs within the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the
Army's withdrawal from Minerva Research Initiative in recent
years. At a time when peer and near-peer adversaries are
increasingly employing strategies of malign influence and
disinformation, maintaining the Nation's technological
superiority in the face of these threats requires not only
investing in physical sciences but also the integration of
cross-disciplinary research that explores the social, cultural,
behavioral, political, historical, and religious drivers of
today's increasingly complex global security environment.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $17.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 61110D8Z Basic Research
Initiatives for the Minerva research initiative.
The committee further notes that the National Academies of
Science, Engineering, and Medicine's 2020 review of Minerva's
accomplishments found that, despite facing challenges with
establishing a stable, well-functioning organizational
structure as well as resource limitations, the program has made
important contributions. The study found that the program has
had a positive impact on the amount of dialogue between the
Department of Defense and the social science community, the
number of social science researchers with an interest in
research relevant to national security, and the amount of
collaboration among researchers working on topics relevant to
national security. The committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering to review the findings of
this report and brief the congressional defense committees on
planned responses to the report's recommendations, no later
than March 1, 2021.
Traumatic brain injury medical research
The budget request included $53.7 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
61117E Basic Operational Medical Research Science.
The committee notes the importance of continued medical
research conducted by the Army Futures Command and Army
Research Laboratory to advance the prevention, detection, and
treatment of acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). The committee
notes that TBIs are associated with a variety of long-term
effects and are prevalent in military and civilian settings.
The committee supports this funding increase to help the Army
to prevent TBI incidence and ultimately develop prevention,
detection, and treatment methodologies that could be used to
protect the entire Joint Force as well as civilian populations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 61117E for traumatic
brain injury medical research.
Aerospace, education, research, and innovation activities
The budget request included $31.0 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
61228D8Z Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority
Institutions.
The committee notes the importance of fundamental research
and the pipeline of highly qualified technical talent in
support of long-term national security needs. The committee
supports increased funding for aerospace education and research
activities at Historically Black Colleges and Universities/
Minority Institutions to promote the expansion of the future
aerospace technical workforce, especially among U.S. citizens,
and to enhance research in areas such as fatigue damage
tolerance, experimental aerodynamics, and the performance of
materials and components under extreme environmental
conditions.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 61228D8Z Historically
Black Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions for
aerospace education, research, and innovation activities.
Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions
The budget request included $31.0 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
61228D8Z Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority
Institutions.
The committee notes the importance of increasing the
Department of Defense's (DOD) partnerships with Historically
Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). These HBCU
institutions can support the Department of Defense's needs for
high quality research as well as serve as a source for United
States citizens with science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics training who can support national security
technology missions.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 61228D8Z.
Emerging biotech research
The budget request included $250.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
62715E Materials and Biological Technology.
The committee recognizes the importance of protecting
warfighter populations stationed domestically and abroad in the
event of a pandemic. The committee supports expanding rapid
response vaccine capabilities and capacity that can meet the
needs of this population in the event of an outbreak. The
committee commends the Department of Defense for its prior
efforts, conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency, to pursue novel rapid production capabilities and
directs the Department to pursue late-stage multi-modal
platform technologies capable of responding to pandemics such
as influenza, COVID-19, and future infectious diseases.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $40.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 62715E for an increase
in emerging biotechnology research.
Operational Fires program reduction, Defense-wide
The budget request included $231.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63286E Advanced Aerospace Systems.
The committee recognizes the importance of coordinating
various service and agency hypersonics activities and is
concerned with the lack of a transition pathway for the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency's Operational Fires effort
into a funded Army acquisition or development activity.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63286E for a reduction
in the Operational Fires program.
Hypersonic program reduction
The budget request included $102.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
64331D8Z Rapid Prototyping Program.
The committee recognizes the importance of hypersonic
research and development, especially in light of the National
Defense Strategy and the advancing threats that it describes.
However, the committee is concerned that there has been a lack
of adequate coordination on hypersonic prototyping efforts
among the various stakeholders and service components.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64331D8Z for hypersonic
program reduction.
Stratospheric balloon research
The budget request included $133.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63338D8Z Defense Modernization and Prototyping.
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
stratospheric balloons in command, control, communications,
computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
(C4ISR) and missile defense missions. The committee is
concerned that, as projects move from the Office of Secretary
of Defense's Missile Defeat Project to elsewhere in the
Department, transition of prior research will be insufficient.
Specifically, the committee is concerned that the Trippwire
high altitude demonstration program, previously funded under
the Missile Defeat Project, lacks specific budgetary
continuity. The committee understands that the Trippwire
technologies still require testing and evaluation activities
before they can transition to the military services as a
program of record.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63338D8Z for
stratospheric balloon research.
Rapid prototyping using digital manufacturing
The budget request included $93.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63680D8Z Manufacturing Technology.
The committee notes that high performance computing, when
combined with additive manufacturing, has the potential to
significantly support the ability for forward deployed forces
and the defense industrial base to make optimal use of the
additive manufacturing capabilities. High performance computing
assets can be used to optimize design processes, support real
time monitoring of manufacturing processes and product quality,
and support detailed data analyses of critical parts. The
Department of Defense has indicated that the use of high
performance computing addresses a critical capability required
in implementation of additive manufacturing.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in
RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63680D8Z Manufacturing Technology
for rapid prototyping using digital manufacturing.
Defense supply chain technologies
The budget request included $40.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63680S Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee recognizes the potential of academic
partnership programs to increase the adoption of additive
manufacturing, automation, and robotics metal-casting
technologies among small-to-medium businesses in the defense
industrial base.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63680S for defense
supply chain technologies.
Steel Performance Initiative
The budget request included $40.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63680S Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes that failure to invest in steel
technology for advanced weapon systems threatens leadership in
commercial steel technology and in defense equipment
performance. The committee understands that steel is a critical
and enabling material for the performance of defense equipment.
Investment is needed in steel alloy development and
manufacturing technology to maintain warfighter preparedness
and a strong industrial base.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million for RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63680S.
Network-Centric Warfare Technology program reduction
The budget request included $661.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63766E Network-Centric Warfare Technology.
The committee is concerned with the coordination of service
and Strategic Capabilities Office programs and activities as
well as the absence of transition plans for some of the
proposed and ongoing research efforts.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63766E Network-Centric
Warfare Technology.
Operational Energy Capability Improvements
The budget request included $0.0 in Research, Development,
Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE 64055D8Z
Operational Energy Capability Improvement.
The committee notes that, since its creation in 2012, the
Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund (OECIF) has
served as ``seed money'' to start or consolidate promising
innovations and to demonstrate technological feasibility with
the goal of transitioning science and technology investments
into Department of Defense programs. The committee further
notes that OECIF investments are directly focused on the
capability needs expressed in the National Defense Strategy and
that OECIF's efforts have complemented, not replaced or
duplicated, investments made by the military services. The
committee is concerned that the budget request did not include
funding for the OECIF and notes its support for the program as
the Department works to rapidly address new and critical issues
arising from emerging threats to our ability to supply the
Joint Force.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $65.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64055D8Z Operational
Energy Capability Improvement.
Funding for long-duration demonstration initiative and joint program
The budget request included $61.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
63851D8Z Environmental Security Technical Certification
Program.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 63851D8Z to fund a pilot program on
long-duration energy storage established elsewhere in this Act.
Advanced technologies
The budget request included $730.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
64250D8Z Advanced Innovative Technologies.
The committee is supportive of advanced innovation but is
concerned that some of the projects planned to be undertaken in
fiscal year 2021 are outside of the charter of the Strategic
Capabilities Office--namely, the use of mature technology to
produce game-changing capability. The committee is encouraged
by the continued work on the hypervelocity gun weapon system
(HGWS) and its continued development to provide a low cost
integrated air and missile defense interceptor. The committee
encourages the continued development of the HGWS program.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $100.0
million in RDDW for PE 64250D8Z.
Defense Modernization and Prototyping program reduction
The budget request included $133.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
64331D8Z Defense Modernization and Prototyping.
The committee recognizes the importance of hypersonic
research and development, especially in light of the National
Defense Strategy and the advancing threats that it describes.
However, the committee is concerned that there has been a lack
of adequate coordination on hypersonic prototyping efforts
among the various stakeholders and service components.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64331D8Z.
Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii
The budget request did not contain funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide (RDDW), for PE
64672C Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii (HDR-H).
The committee is aware of the challenges related to site
selection for HDR-H but understands that the Missile Defense
Agency has a viable path forward if provided sufficient
funding. The committee believes that a persistent sensing
capability in this area of responsibility is critical for
homeland defense and also notes that this program was included
in the unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
Indo-Pacific Command.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $162.0
million in RDDW for PE 64672C.
Next Generation Interceptor
The budget request included $664.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
64874C Improved Homeland Defense (IHLD) Interceptors.
The committee fully supports the effort to modernize the
Ground-Based Interceptor fleet but also notes that delays in
releasing the request for proposals for the Next Generation
Interceptor (NGI) have led to a projected contract award date
that is almost 1 year later than initially planned for by the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA). These delays have also prevented
the MDA from obligating or expending the fiscal year 2020
funding that was appropriated for the two initial contract
awards.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $310.0
million in RDDW for PE 64874C for the NGI program.
PDI: Guam Defense System
The budget request did not include funding in Research,
Defense, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
64880C Land-Based SM-3 for a Guam Defense System (GDS).
The committee notes that this project was included on the
unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command, who stated that Guam is both the western-most
territory of the U.S. homeland and a critical location for
posture and operations in the Indo-Pacific area of
responsibility. The committee agrees with the Commander that
protection of U.S. assets and personnel on Guam is critical for
effective operations in the region.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $76.8
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64880C Land-Based SM-3
for GDS.
In addition, the committee expects the Missile Defense
Agency (MDA), along with U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) and
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), to continue to analyze
and refine the plan for a defense architecture against the
range of missile threats to Guam while also beginning the work
described above.
Accordingly, not later than January 31, 2021, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Director of the MDA and the Commanders, STRATCOM and INDOPACOM,
to submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment
of the architecture required for the defense of Guam from air
and missile threats, including ballistic, hypersonic, and
cruise missiles. The assessment shall include the following
elements:
(1) An analysis of existing and projected air and
missile threats to U.S. forces, assets, and
infrastructure located on Guam;
(2) An analysis of impacts to the ability of U.S.
forces to conduct operations in the INDOPACOM area of
operations if systems and assets on Guam are vulnerable
to air and missile threats;
(3) An analysis of systems currently available for
procurement or deployment that could contribute to the
defense of Guam from these threats not later than the
end of 2025;
(4) An analysis of new systems currently in
development, or modifications to existing systems, that
could enhance or substitute for existing options in
contributing to this mission;
(5) Estimated cost and schedule for the various
options studied; and
(6) Anything else the Secretary deems relevant.
Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking and Custody Layer
The budget request included $216.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
1206410SDA Space Technology Development and Prototyping.
The committee understands that the Space Development Agency
(SDA) is responsible for the development of the hypersonic and
ballistic space-based tracking and custody layer. In addition
the committee has been informed that the SDA is transferring
funds to have the Missile Defense Agency continue development
of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor as a
potential sensor for the tracking layer.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDDW for PE 1206410SDA.
Hybrid space
The budget request included $216.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
1206410SDA Space Technology Development and Prototyping.
The committee understands that the Commander, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command, Commander, U.S. European Command, and other
combatant commanders have identified the need for persistent
space-based radars in their unfunded priorities lists for
fiscal year 2021. A constellation of low earth orbit, space-
based radars, with rapid revisit rates and the capability to
maintain situational awareness of adversary activities and
providing low latency target custody, would meet the
requirements of the combatant commanders.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $130.0
million in RDDW for PE 1206410SDA.
Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor
The budget request did not include funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide (RDDW), for PE
1206895C BMDS Space Programs for a Hypersonic and Ballistic
Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS).
The committee is aware that some funding for this
capability was included in the budget request for the Space
Development Agency (SDA). The committee notes, however, that
section 1683 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Secretary of
Defense to assign primary responsibility for the development
and deployment of an HBTSS payload to the Missile Defense
Agency. Further, the amount of funding contained in the
requested SDA budget for this program is far less than what is
required to keep the HBTSS program on track, according to
fiscal year 2020 budget documentation.
The committee notes that the Commander, U.S. Strategic
Command, and Commander, U.S. Northern Command, among other
senior military and civilian officials, have stated repeatedly
that space-based sensors are the most effective path to
improving both homeland and theater missile defenses against a
wide range of missile threats. The committee is disappointed
that the Department of Defense has once again neglected to
request meaningful funding for this program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $120.0
million in RDDW in PE 1206895C for HBTSS.
Stryker Nuclear Biological Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle Sensor Suite
Upgrade
The budget request included $320.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
64384BP Chemical and Biological Defense Program--EMD, of which
$128.9 million was for Contamination Avoidance programs,
including the Stryker Nuclear Biological Chemical
Reconnaissance Vehicle Sensor Suite Upgrade (NBCRV SSU).
The committee understands that platform-mounted
reconnaissance of nuclear and radiological hazards is a key
capability for ground forces and supports the Department of
Defense's efforts to develop stand-off technology that would
protect soldiers and equipment from radiation exposure. The
committee believes that this capability would be useful on a
broader variety of platforms.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDDW for PE 64384BP for Contamination Avoidance
programs to accelerate integration activities for the Stryker
NBCRV SSU and to investigate platform-agnostic variants of the
sensor package.
Infrastructure to assess counter-small UAS commercial solutions
The budget request included $422.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
64940D8Z Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program
(CTEIP).
The committee notes the expansion of small Unmanned
Aircraft System (sUAS) threats as fueled by the proliferation
of industry-driven sUAS capabilities highlighted elsewhere in
this Act. The committee believes that the scope and complexity
of this threat will only increase over the next decade.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64940D8Z to build the
necessary test and evaluation infrastructure to assess Counter-
sUAS (C-sUAS) capabilities.
To ensure the best use of this additional funding, the
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering (USD R&E) to provide a plan for the development
of the test and evaluation infrastructure required to
appropriately assess C-sUAS solutions so as to systematically
address the long-term threat to U.S. troops and critical
infrastructure.
The committee expects future funding to be used to build
the appropriate test and evaluation infrastructure, but it will
be contingent on the efficacy of the briefed plan. The
committee recommends that the USD R&E consult with the
Department of Justice on its efforts to systematically address
C-sUAS threats using a comprehensive test and evaluation plan.
The plan shall be briefed to the congressional defense
committees no later than February 1, 2021, and shall address
the capability to: (1) Provide full time, space, and position
information on low, slow, and small targets that are either
under operator control or autonomous and that may be executing
terrain-following maneuvers; (2) Enable cyber analyses of
defeat mechanisms for autonomous and automated systems; (3)
Enable end-to-end analysis of the proposed C-sUAS kill chain
from sensor to defeat mechanism to impact on UAS functionality;
and (4) Such other matters as the USD R&E determines to be
appropriate.
Telemetry range extension wave glider relay
The budget request included $422.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
64940D8Z Central Test and Evaluation Investment Development.
The committee notes the need for investments in test ranges
in support of the capabilities called for in the National
Defense Strategy. Range extension enables range safety and
Department of Defense over-water test events of long-range
hypersonic weapons, aircraft, and sea surface platforms.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 64940D8Z.
National Academies study on comparison of talent programs
The budget request included $5.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
65151D8Z Studies and Analysis Support--OSD.
The committee recommends a provision elsewhere in this
Report to require the National Academies of Science,
Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study comparing methods
for recruiting and retaining researchers used by the U.S. and
Chinese governments. The committee notes that the People's
Republic of China maintains various well-funded talent programs
through which American researchers are encouraged to set up
labs in China and conduct research in Chinese laboratories,
providing the country access to sensitive technologies
developed in the United States.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 65151D8Z for the
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine study
on comparison of talent programs.
Defense Technical Information Center
The budget request included $59.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
65801KA Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).
The committee notes the challenges that the DTIC faces in
efficiently and effectively performing its mission to
facilitate sharing, maintain open repositories, and develop
analytics of data across the research and engineering
enterprise. The committee notes that the role of the DTIC needs
to be re-examined given the emphasis that the Department of
Defense is placing on the use of modern data collection,
distribution, and analysis techniques and technologies to
support both management and combat missions.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 65801KA.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, in coordination with the Chief Data
Officer and other appropriate officials, to brief the
congressional defense committees on a plan for the
modernization and revitalization of DTIC missions,
capabilities, and roles to support the National Defense
Strategy no later than December 31, 2021.
Advanced machine tool research
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that Executive Order 13806 (Assessing
and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base
and Supply Chain Resiliency of the United States) and the
follow-on Department of Defense report both called for
strengthening American manufacturing capabilities. The use of
non-U.S.-origin machine tools could provide openings for both
industrial and national espionage and yield degradation in
product quality and functionality. U.S. machine tool makers are
largely buying, rather than building, the tools necessary to
manufacture cutting edge machine tools.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 67210D8Z for research in
advanced machine tooling.
Cold spray manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that a January 2020 Government
Accountability Office report, titled ``Military Depots: DOD Can
Benefit from Further Sharing of Best Practices and Lessons
Learned'' (GAO-20-116), cited the potential benefits of the
application of cold spray manufacturing technologies in
sustainment activities across the Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 67210D8Z for cold spray
manufacturing technologies.
Domestic organic light emitting diode manufacturing
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee recognizes the importance of organic light
emitting diode (OLED) microdisplays as critical components in
major military aviation and ground combat programs of record.
However, the committee is concerned that the domestic OLED
manufacturing industrial base is fragile. Spare parts are very
limited, often resulting in substantial time and production
capacity loss. A single-point-of-failure for any one of these
tools can result in a complete production line halt that can
span weeks or even months.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 67210D8Z for support for
domestic OLED manufacturing.
Implementation of radar supplier resiliency plan
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee acknowledges the Department of Defense's
preparation of a Radar Supplier Resiliency Plan.
To support implementation of this plan, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in RDT&E, Defense-wide,
for PE 67210D8Z. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense
committees by April 15, 2021, on the critical deliverables that
will have a direct and measurable impact on the radar
industrial base during the first year of implementation.
Manufacturing for reuse of NdFeB magnets
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense depends
on high-performance magnets, including rare earth neodymium-
iron-boron (NdFeB), for the functioning of sophisticated weapon
systems. Section 2533c of title 10, United States Code,
requires the Department to stop using magnets from China. The
committee is also concerned about the reliability of other
sources of these magnets and the global dependence on raw
materials supplied by China.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 67210D8Z to expand
domestic manufacturing capacity for these magnets.
Submarine Construction Workforce Training Pipeline
The budget request included $9.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that, over the next decade, the
submarine shipbuilding industry must hire at least 18,000 new
skilled workers to support the production of the Columbia-class
ballistic missile submarine and the continued construction of
the Virginia-class submarine. The submarine industry has worked
closely with State and local governments, community colleges,
high schools, and community-based non-profits for the past
several years to establish new training pipelines to support
these increased hiring needs. Thus far, such pipeline training
programs have placed nearly 2,500 people in submarine industry
jobs. The committee notes that additional funding will increase
the throughput of these pipelines and expand them into
additional States to more adequately respond to the hiring
demand.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 67210D8Z for increasing
the submarine construction workforce training pipeline.
Workforce transformation cyber initiative pilot program
The budget request included $46.5 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
33140D8Z Information Systems Security Program.
The committee supports the National Security Agency (NSA)
National Cryptologic School pilot program to enable workforce
transformation certificate-based courses on cybersecurity and
artificial intelligence that are offered by Center of Academic
Excellence (CAE) universities. The committee understand that
this pilot program will develop courses and curricula with
technology partners and also provide funding for select NSA CAE
universities to offer these courses and receive tuition
reimbursement for participation in the courses.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 33140D8Z for the
workforce transformation cyber initiative pilot program.
Cyber orchestration pilot
The budget request included $8.9 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
33140K Information Systems Security Program.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to sponsor a demonstration of commercial
technologies and techniques for enabling interoperability among
cybersecurity systems and tools and for machine-to-machine
communications and automated workflow orchestration. This
demonstration should include comply-to-connect products, the
Assured Compliance Assessment Solution, the Automated
Continuous Endpoint Monitoring program, the Sharkseer perimeter
defense system, and other Department of Defense cybersecurity
systems. The committee urges the Secretary to coordinate this
demonstration with the speed metrics pilot and the
demonstration of the Systems of Systems Technology Integration
Tool Chain for Heterogeneous Electronic Systems
interoperability technology recommended elsewhere in this
report.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 33140K for the cyber
orchestration pilot program.
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding--RDT&E
The budget request included $9.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
33228K Joint Regional Security Stacks (JRSS).
The committee is aware of the operational cybersecurity
limitations of the JRSS technology as assessed by the Director,
Operational Test and Evaluation, the difficulty of training
personnel to use the JRSS, and the shortage of feasible
tactics, techniques, and procedures to make effective use of
the JRSS. The committee believes that the deployment of JRSS on
the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network is thus
inappropriate, given JRSS' limited cybersecurity capability and
the existence of alternative capabilities to execute its
network functions.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $486,000
in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 33228K due to the operational
cybersecurity limitations of the JRSS technology.
Multi-Mission Payload
The budget request included $1.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Special Operations
Command, for PE 1160431BB Warrior Systems for Multi Mission
Payload (MMP).
The committee notes that United States Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) identified executability issues with the MMP-
Light program due to appropriations rescissions in fiscal year
2020. As a result, SOCOM requested the transfer of funds from
the MMP-Light to the man-pack Capital Equipment Replacement
Program for fiscal year 2021.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $1.2
million in RDT&E, Special Operations Command, for PE 1160431BB.
The increase associated with this transfer is reflected
elsewhere in this report.
Advanced satellite navigation receiver
The budget request included $39.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
65814OTE Operational Test Activities and Analyses.
The committee notes the need for test and evaluation
activities for development of countermeasures and counter-
countermeasure capabilities. Currently, full characterization
of existing threats is limited due to the technical limitations
of current flight data systems to support high speed and
dynamic flight testing requirements.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 65814OTE to improve
threat characterization in high dynamic flight testing.
Joint Test and Evaluation Program
The budget request included $39.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for PE
65814OTE Operational Test Activities and Analyses.
The committee notes that the Joint Test and Evaluation
program focuses on joint (cross-service and cross-combatant
command) warfighter needs and rapid delivery of non-materiel
solutions, such as: joint tactics, techniques, and procedures;
concepts of operations; improved and new training packages; and
new test tools and methodologies. Over the past decade, the
program has completed 40 joint tests and 96 quick reaction
tests, sponsored primarily by the combatant commands. The
committee believes that this important work should continue.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $22.0
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, for PE 65814OTE to restore the
Department's proposed cut to the program under the Defense-Wide
Review.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced powertrain demonstrator
The committee supports the efforts of the Army in
developing and integrating modern powertrain technology to
provide leap-ahead capabilities for ground combat vehicles. The
committee notes that the Advanced Powertrain Demonstrator
initiative has successfully demonstrated improved power
density, which can provide opportunities to add capabilities to
existing ground combat vehicles, such as additional crew
members or weapons, and has provided a wider array of options
for next-generation platforms.
The committee encourages the Army to continue to progress
the Advanced Powertrain Demonstrator to higher Technology
Readiness Levels and to consider resourcing follow-on efforts,
including the Advanced Mobility Experimental Prototype, in
collaboration with the Program Executive Office for Ground
Combat Systems. In addition, the Army should continue to
leverage private sector investment in powertrain technologies
to achieve leap-ahead breakthroughs in powertrain efficiency.
Anti-corrosion and nano technologies
The committee remains concerned about the high cost of
corrosion within the Department of Defense. The military
services, particularly the Navy, face complex threats in the
Indo-Pacific region that require our military equipment and
infrastructure to be resilient and have maximum operational
availability. The committee urges the Office of Naval Research
to pursue lightweight, nanotechnology-based capabilities that
provide high corrosion resistance and other performance
properties to decrease the cost of corrosion and increase the
operational availability of military equipment and
infrastructure that enhances the ability of the Joint Force,
particularly the Navy, to operate in the Indo-Pacific area of
responsibility.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies and systems
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) is deploying artificial intelligence (AI) and machine
learning (ML) to increase warfighter capability, decrease
operational costs, and increase civilian safety. AI/ML can
realize these benefits by enabling machines to perform tasks
that have traditionally required labor-intensive human
intelligence--for example, to analyze data, image, video, and
audio files, potentially increasing capabilities to track
threats and monitor global developments.
The committee notes that the interim report from the
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence
identifies an outstanding need for distributed and
decentralized data processing capabilities, down to the
distributed team, squad, and platoon levels, where units often
cannot rely on high-bandwidth networks or heavy-duty data
processing resources. The committee notes that there may be an
opportunity to deploy AI to this distributed tactical edge
environment to enhance decision-making and to support
activities such as mapping, sensing, and mission planning. The
committee encourages the Department to develop, adopt, and
deploy such technologies, when appropriate, to gain significant
tactical and strategic advantages.
Further, the committee notes the potential use of AI/ML
technology to address a broad spectrum of DOD missions. The
committee directs the Director of the Joint Artificial
Intelligence Center (JAIC) to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, no later than March 1, 2021,
that identifies military occupational specialties and
capabilities across the military services and Defense Agencies
and Field Activities that can better leverage AI to maximize
effectiveness, mission goals, and cost savings to the Federal
Government. The committee directs that this briefing include an
identification of business processes and business information
technology systems that would directly benefit from the
immediate application of commercial AI/ML capabilities to DOD
``back office'' activities, such as financial management,
acquisition, personnel management, and the Department's audit.
The committee also notes the unique cybersecurity
vulnerabilities of AI/ML-based systems. The committee notes
that the Department's efforts to develop and deploy secure
hardware and software do not yet have a clear thrust to
mitigate threats that are unique to AI/ML-enabled capabilities.
The committee directs the Department to leverage
multidisciplinary teams, compromised of U.S. Government,
industry, and research university representatives, to urgently
develop required capabilities and infrastructure to secure the
algorithms, data, and execution of AI/ML-enabled systems.
Further, the committee encourages the Department to partner
with research universities to develop undergraduate and
graduate curricula and research fellowship opportunities
focused on threat identification and mitigation for AI/ML-
enabled systems.
The committee also encourages the JAIC to work closely with
the White House Artificial Intelligence Task Force, as well as
the National Institute for Standards and Technology, to develop
standards for the use of AI across the U.S. Government and best
practices for the Federal Government's engagement of the
private sector. The committee also urges the Secretary of
Defense to continuously review and refine a detailed code of
ethics associated with its use of AI to ensure that any future
uses respect civil rights, including privacy, and to ensure
that human decision-makers remain central to all operational
activities involving AI/ML and AI/ML-enabled capabilities.
Finally, the committee recommends that the Department
consider establishing joint U.S.-allied partner ventures, as
well as joint DOD ventures with state-level AI-based economic
development activities, that address shared needs in AI/ML-
enabled capabilities.
Carbon fiber and graphitic foam for Special Operations Forces tactical
vehicles
The committee recognizes recent efforts made by United
States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to develop low-cost,
wider application carbon fiber and graphitic foam components in
support of the Special Operations Forces (SOF) tactical vehicle
program. The committee notes that carbon fiber components may
reduce vehicle weight, reduce fuel consumption, increase
payload capacity, and could extend service life for SOF
tactical vehicles. Additionally, graphitic carbon foam may also
reduce vehicle heat signatures and improve heat dissipation
from the engine and electronics compartments and could provide
protection against blast energy, directed energy weapons, and
electromagnetic pulse threats.
The committee notes that the Defense Logistics Agency has
designated graphite/carbon fiber as a strategic material. The
committee acknowledges that the U.S. Army and SOCOM have
identified low cost mesophase pitch as a United States-based
source of graphite that can be used to produce carbon fiber,
graphitic carbon foam, and battery technologies. The committee
recognizes the versatility and broad application that carbon
fiber technology may provide for the Armed Forces by reducing
the weight of parts as compared to traditional steel
components.
Therefore, the committee encourages SOCOM continue its
efforts to test, develop, and field low cost carbon fiber and
graphitic carbon foam in support of its tactical vehicle
program and other programs, as appropriate.
Carbon fiber wheels and graphitic foam for Next Generation Combat
Vehicle
The committee commends the U.S. Army Ground Vehicle Systems
Center's (GVSC's) decision to transition into lower cost, wider
application carbon fiber composite wheels and graphitic carbon
foam research in support of the Next Generation Combat Vehicle
(NGCV). Carbon fiber wheels may reduce vehicle weight, reduce
fuel consumption, increase payload capacity, and extend service
life for the NGCV. Graphitic carbon foam may dramatically
reduce vehicle heat signatures and improve heat dissipation
from engine and electronics compartments while also protecting
against blast energy, directed energy weapons, and
electromagnetic pulse threats. Finally, these products lend
themselves to being produced at remote locations with additive
manufacturing processes in support of NGCV operation and
maintenance.
The Defense Logistics Agency has designated graphite/carbon
fiber as a strategic material. The committee notes favorably
that the U.S. Army GVSC has identified low cost mesophase pitch
as a United States-based source of graphite that can be used to
produce carbon fiber, graphitic carbon foam, and battery
technologies for the NGCV. The committee recognizes the
versatility and broad application that carbon fiber technology
provide for the Armed Forces by reducing the weight of parts by
over 50 percent, as compared to traditional steel components,
while improving survivability and performance.
The committee encourages the U.S. Army GVSC to continue to
test, develop, and field low cost mesophase pitch carbon fiber
and graphitic carbon foam components that may reduce vehicle
weight, reduce fuel consumption, increase payload capacity,
extend service life, reduce vehicle signatures, improve
survivability, and utilize additive manufacturing technology to
reduce cost and weight in the NGCV program.
Close Combat Lethality Task Force
In March 2018, the Close Combat Lethality Task Force
(CCLTF) was established by former Secretary of Defense James
Mattis, as a direct report to the Secretary, and chartered with
dramatically improving the effectiveness and survivability of
close combat formations through a combination of materiel and
non-materiel means, including innovations in recruitment,
retention, training, concepts of operation, tactics,
techniques, and procedures, and equipment. The committee agreed
with Secretary Mattis' rationale for creating the CCLTF,
specifically that close combat formations should be manned,
trained, and equipped as an elite force capable of combat
``overmatch,'' and with its designation as a Cross Functional
Team (CFT) under section 911 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114328),
leveraging the critical enabling authorities of that law.
In a memorandum dated March 27, 2020, Secretary of Defense
Mark Esper transferred the CCLTF to the Secretary of the Army
with a tasking to determine alignment of the CCLTF within the
Army hierarchy. This decision effectively ended the CCLTF's
designation as a CFT under section 911. As a result, the CCLTF
will no longer be accorded the priority of a CFT sponsored by,
and reporting directly to, the Secretary of Defense, nor will
it exercise the authorities available under section 911 and
those assigned by the Secretary of Defense.
The committee is concerned about the potential consequences
of these decisions on the close combat mission of the
Department of Defense. The Secretary of the Army has been
directed to report back to the Secretary of Defense on the
authorities, responsibilities, policy, and procedures that the
Secretary of the Army will provide for the continued operation
of the CCLTF. While the Army's senior leaders have indicated
that they remain committed to the vision and success of the
CCLTF, it is unclear whether the Army intends to pursue the
non-material initiatives that are central to dramatically
improving close combat effectiveness and survivability. In
addition, the committee notes that the Marine Corps also has
considerable equities in the CCLTF, and they are critical to
the success of this joint effort.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the SASC, not later than September 30,
2020, on the Army's plan to provide enduring support for the
materiel and non-materiel initiatives to improve close combat
lethality and survivability. The briefing shall also provide
details on the CCLTF's alignment within the Army, how the Army
will partner with the Marine Corps and Special Operations
Command on the CCLTF's initiatives, and whether the CCLTF will
continue to be organized and operated as a cross-functional
team reporting directly to a senior leader. Furthermore, the
briefing shall address the status of the lines of effort
assigned by Secretary Mattis and any changes to recruitment,
retention, training, and personnel turnover in close combat
units. Finally, the briefing shall also address whether
personnel from the Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation office,
the Offices of the Under Secretaries of Defense for Research
and Engineering, Acquisition and Sustainment, and Personnel and
Readiness, the Joint Staff, and U.S. Special Operations Command
will continue to participate in the CCLTF as outside experts.
Collaboration on research to counter foreign malign influence
operations
The committee notes that section 228 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) authorizes the Department of Defense to carry out a
research program on foreign malign influence operations as part
of the university research program.
The committee believes that countering foreign malign
influence should be a priority in the effective implementation
of the National Defense Strategy, and the committee urges the
Department to utilize this authority to the greatest extent
possible and increase its collaboration with academia,
nongovernmental organizations, and other relevant entities to
maintain an edge in identifying and countering adversarial
foreign malign influence.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives on how the
Department will implement section 228 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum: (1) Details on how the program will
enhance understanding of foreign malign influence; (2) An
identification of organizations that are collaborating on such
research as well as a description of steps being taken to
ensure appropriate inclusion of the military services' research
and cyber centers; and (3) A description of how the program
will work with universities, nongovernmental organizations, and
other relevant entities to enhance the understanding of and
development of appropriate responses to foreign malign
influence through collaborative research and the exchange of
information.
Comptroller General review of Artificial Intelligence Activities of the
Department of Defense
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) is
investing significantly in developing and acquiring artificial
intelligence (AI) tools and systems in order to develop and
deploy AI-enabled capabilities to support DOD missions. For
example, the DOD has established a Joint Artificial
Intelligence Center (JAIC) to coordinate Department-wide AI
activities, increased science and technology investments in AI,
and attempted to employ more AI experts in a variety of roles.
The DOD has historically had challenges developing modern
capabilities in a timely manner as well as coordinating
disparate activities across the Department. Given the growing
significance of AI to DOD's acquisition goals, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to
continuously monitor and report on: (1) DOD's AI-related
efforts, including science and technology, research and
development, and formal acquisition programs; (2) The status of
these efforts, including types of technologies and technology
transition strategies being used; (3) Efforts to build
expertise and infrastructure, including accessible data sets
and computational capabilities, both within the DOD and across
the Federal Government, to support DOD missions. The committee
directs the Comptroller General to provide a briefing on the
status of the effort to the committee by September 1, 2020, and
provide a report to the committee by February 1, 2021.
Cyber Operations for Base Resilient Architecture
The committee understands that the U.S. is committed to a
holistic cyber mission assurance program through investments in
defensive cyberspace operations, weapon system cyber resiliency
efforts, the Cyber Resiliency Office for Weapon Systems, and
Mission Defense Teams.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of Air
Force to continue funding and to expand the Cyber Operations
for Base Resilient Architecture pilot program in the U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command area of responsibility as part of the overall
mission assurance strategy.
Emerging biotechnology for national security
The committee notes the importance that emerging
biotechnologies will have in national security missions,
including medical response to threats, biological defense, and
bio-based manufacturing and computation.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense
should consider developing more formal organizations with
specific responsibility for maintaining critical technical
expertise in these emerging areas and facilitating adoption and
availability of these technologies for Department of Defense
missions. The committee notes that the optimal construct for
such an organization might be a network of linked
organizations, or a virtual consortium of independent
organizations, to include both public and private sector
entities. Activities of such an organization should range from
basic research to prototyping of new concepts to support for
manufacturing and production to providing technical expertise
to the Department as required.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to develop plans for the establishment
of and support for potential organizational options to advance
emerging biotechnology research, analyses, prototyping, and
manufacturing activities for national security missions. The
plan developed should address the following issues: development
and continuous modernization of fundamental tools and
technologies to advance knowledge in engineering biology;
options for governance structures, level of investment
required, a list of types of participants, intellectual
property strategies, and other considerations required to stand
up the entity or entities, including required physical and
digital infrastructure; and possible metrics to measure
progress or success.
The committee directs that the plan include a focus on
strengthening the current organization, structure, and funding
of emerging biotechnologies research and development across the
Department to allow for stronger coordination across the
military services and Defense Agencies and Field Activities and
to develop, mature, and transition biotechnology activities,
including the identification of duties of designated officials
and additional authorities required. The plan should also
address coordination with appropriate interagency and
international activities.
Not later than March 1, 2021, the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering shall provide a briefing
to the congressional defense committees on the plans, policy
recommendations, and implementation plan, strategy, and
associated funding requirements.
Ground Vehicle Systems Center modeling and simulation
The U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command
(CCDC) Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC) is developing a
robust modeling and simulation capability. The committee notes
that such a capability could assist the Next Generation Combat
Vehicle Cross Functional Team, particularly as the Army focuses
on a digital design approach to the Optionally Manned Fighting
Vehicle. This approach could leverage modern practices of the
commercial automotive industry and foster development of
important next generation capabilities. The committee supports
modeling and simulation capability development by GVSC and,
elsewhere in this report, has authorized funds to support Next
Generation Combat Vehicle technologies. The committee directs
the Director, Army Combat Capabilities Development Command, to
coordinate with the Director, Test Resource Management Center,
to ensure that relevant modeling and simulation capabilities
are available for wider use across the Department of Defense's
test and evaluation enterprise.
High-energy laser weapons systems
The committee recognizes that advancements in stabilized
gimbal systems have provided improvements in target detection,
identification, and designation on high-energy laser (HEL)
weapon systems. The committee notes that these systems can
enhance long-range tracking performance, thereby improving
success rates and enhancing the safety of servicemembers on the
battlefield. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees no later than December 31, 2020, on current actions
being taken to improve advanced tracking and targeting
capability on HEL weapon systems.
Implement National Academics of Science Army Information Science report
recommendations
The committee notes that the 2019 National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Assessment of the
Information Sciences Directorate at the Army Research Office
found that the Army is producing work of high scientific
quality with well qualified program managers and that funded
projects are of high caliber and in areas relevant to the
Army's science and technology mission with examples of
transitions of the research to the Army and to the Department
of Defense (DOD) more broadly. The study made a number of
recommendations to improve the quality of these programs,
related to: program assessment metrics and program management
expertise; management of researchers and research portfolios;
coordination of activities with other similar DOD and
interagency activities; and broadening of the researcher base.
The committee also notes that the Department of Defense's
Office of Basic Science issued a 2019 study on ``Future
Directions at the Intersection of Management Science and
Information Science'' which highlighted a number of
opportunities in these fields where research could be conducted
to improve the way that the Army and the Department as a whole
could manage business processes within technology development
organizations. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to review these two studies and provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on how the Army will address
the findings and recommendations of these two reports, no later
than January 1, 2022. This briefing shall be provided in
publicly releasable format, with a classified annex as
necessary.
Joint Artificial Intelligence Center reporting structure
The committee is aware of the recommendations made by the
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence in its
March 2020 report and appreciates its efforts to highlight a
number of areas where the Department of Defense (DOD) can
strengthen its efforts in adopting artificial intelligence
(AI). The committee is also aware that, over the past 24
months, the Joint AI Center (JAIC) has grown from a nascent
organization into the focal point of the DOD AI Strategy. Many
of the JAIC's initial AI capability development efforts have
transitioned into operational end use by the military services,
combatant commands, and several DOD components. The JAIC is now
working with organizations across the DOD to develop dozens of
new AI-enabled product lines and share lessons learned that
will support independent efforts.
The committee believes that successful AI adoption depends
on enabling capabilities across modern digital infrastructure,
data management practices, and information technology
operations. In recognition of the critical relationship between
successful digital transformation and adopting AI, the
committee understands that the Department positioned the JAIC
within the DOD CIO organization. This structure has enabled the
JAIC's success and that of the CIO organization and benefited
the DOD enterprise. However, moving forward, the committee also
understands that the JAIC's reporting directly to the Secretary
of Defense would afford to the JAIC the high visibility that
Secretary direct reports enjoy as well as high priority in the
budget request process and the ability to grant waivers from
any bureaucratic process requirements not grounded in law. The
committee encourages the Department to continue to evaluate
this balance to ensure that the JAIC appreciates from an
appropriate balance of responsibilities, authorities, and
oversight. The committee directs the Secretary to brief the
congressional defense committees no later than March 31, 2021,
on the future plans for the JAIC's alignment and reporting
structure.
Nanotechnology research
The committee notes the great advances in nanotechnology
made through Department of Defense investments in nanomaterials
and electronics in partnership with the National Nanotechnology
Initiative. Currently, nanotechnology is fielded in numerous
defense systems, including electronics, sensors, medical
technologies, coatings, and uniforms. The committee believes
that continued investment in this field is important to
supporting a variety of modernization activities consistent
with the National Defense Strategy. Therefore, the committee
directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering to provide a briefing, in publicly releasable
format, with a classified annex as necessary, on Department
activities in the research, development, and use of
nanotechnology. The briefing shall describe: applications or
proposed applications for nanotechnology in defense systems;
specific materials being evaluated; research organizations in
the U.S. Government and private sector engaged in such
research; identified funding for such activities to date; and a
description of the military services' and Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency's assessments on and plans for the use
of nanotechnology to support future defense needs and
requirements. The committee directs that this briefing be
provided to the congressional defense committees no later than
December 31, 2021.
National Guard research, development, test and evaluation activities
The committee notes that National Guard and reserve
components consist of personnel that have private sector
experience that is directly relevant to National Defense
Strategy modernization priorities. For example, these personnel
may have relevant experience in medical fields, software,
robotics, cybersecurity, and other critical technical
disciplines. In other cases, National Guard equipment and
installations are commonly used in technological development
and experimentation activities. For example, the committee is
aware that the Army has taken advantage of facilities at Fort
Pickett to conduct critical operational testing and
experimentation for the Integrated Visual Augmentation System.
In order to leverage these capabilities further, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to review and analyze the
benefits and feasibility of authorizing National Guard and
Reserve members', equipment's, and facilities' participation on
a reimbursable basis in research, development, test and
evaluation (RDT&E) projects in which their involvement furthers
the work because of a member's or unit's availability,
qualifications, experience, education, or facilities and
equipment. In this review, the Secretary should consider
requesting authority to provide reimbursement for these
activities from RDT&E accounts, subject to the availability of
appropriations. The committee directs the Secretary to brief
the congressional defense committees on a recommendation for
this proposed policy action no later than February 1, 2021.
National Security Innovation Network
The committee recognizes that the nature of security
threats are changing and notes that innovation and
entrepreneurial methodologies can generate new solutions to
national security problems. The committee notes that, while
certain programs in the Department of Defense have allowed for
more rapid acquisition, the challenge of implementing rapid
change in the Department persists. The committee further
understands that the acquisition of new talent to support the
national security workforce will be critical to achieving the
aims of the National Defense Strategy and that recruitment from
innovative sectors of the economy that have traditionally been
less engaged in the defense enterprise will be critical for
continued competitiveness.
The committee highlights the effectiveness of the National
Security Innovation Network in building a network of alliances
between the defense, academia, and venture communities whose
innovation, collaboration, and adaptability can be of crucial
service to national security. The committee expresses its
support for the program and in particular notes the ongoing
expansion of activities at universities through academic
accelerator programs and technology and national security
fellowships as an example of ways the Department of Defense can
provide new pipelines for young talent to consider in support
of the Nation's national security.
Open Systems Architecture for the Army's Future Vertical Lift programs
The committee recognizes the benefits of a Modular Open
Systems Architecture (MOSA) systems engineering approach, as
indicated by subchapter I of title 10, United States Code,
which requires its use. The committee therefore appreciates
that the Army has used it in the Future Vertical Lift Future
Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft and Future Long-Range Assault
Aircraft programs and also notes the importance of agile
contracting in a time of great power competition.
In order to capture the benefits of a MOSA, the committee
directs the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,
Logistics, and Technology to summarize lessons learned from
using MOSA approaches, to include recommendations to update
existing Department of Defense policy and guidance on MOSA
approaches, no later than December 31, 2021, and to brief the
congressional defense committees on this summary and these
recommendations. This briefing shall be conducted at the
classified level, as required. Should the Assistant Secretary
also have views for the Congress to consider regarding updates
to subchapter I of title 10, United States Code, the committee
directs that the Assistant Secretary provide them.
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle requirements and acquisition
strategy
The Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) is a priority
Army modernization program critically needed to replace the M2
Bradley fighting vehicle that has been in operational service
for more than 30 years. Earlier this year the Army cancelled
the initial OMFV solicitation and decided to revise the
acquisition strategy. It is the committee's understanding that
a reset of the program was necessary in order to establish
technologically-achievable and affordable requirements as well
as to facilitate competition.
The committee encourages the Army to complete a thorough
re-evaluation of requirements for the OMFV and to pursue a
competitive acquisition approach that will provide best quality
and price. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Army to provide a classified briefing to the SASC no later
than August 1, 2020, on OMFV requirements and the revised
acquisition strategy. The briefing shall include the threat-
basis and operational rationale for the OMFV requirements and
the plan to integrate active protection systems.
Pandemic resilience technologies
COVID-19 has exposed vulnerabilities and challenges for the
Navy's operations and logistics and maintenance enterprises.
The committee is concerned about the Navy's ability to prepare
for and respond to future pandemics. Critical gaps remain in
our understanding of how COVID-19 spreads through personnel and
platforms in Navy-specific environments and the effectiveness
of various disease identification, mitigation, and eradication
approaches under consideration.
To ensure warfighter health and ship operational
availability into the future, the committee supports a
significant applied research and development effort, in
partnership with industry and universities, into pandemic
resilience technologies and related operational protocols
tailored to the unique, contained close-quarters and secure
environments on Navy ships and shore facilities.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Navy to develop
and adopt technologies and protocols that have the potential to
prevent the spread and mitigate the impact of future pandemics
on Navy personnel and operations, including: (1) Artificial
intelligence and data-driven infectious disease modeling and
interventions; (2) Shipboard airflow management and
disinfectant technologies; (3) Personal protective equipment,
sensors, and diagnostic systems; and (4) Reduced-manning and
unmanned operation, such as resilient unmanned logistics, to
reduce human contact.
Predictive maintenance algorithm
The committee recognizes and commends the efforts of the
160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment in becoming one of
the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center's (JAIC's) first two
National Mission Initiatives through development of an
algorithm to conduct predictive maintenance (PMx), rather than
forensic or preventative maintenance, on rotary wing aircraft
engines.
The committee encourages continued study of this algorithm
and its scalability enterprise-wide and continued support of
unique partnerships between Department of Defense elements, the
JAIC, and outside stakeholders. Not later than November 30,
2020, the Secretary of Defense shall provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives. The briefing shall include details of the
following: (1) Positive lessons learned through this
partnership and program; (2) Barriers to these partnerships or
to scalability, including data availability; and (3) A detailed
description of any plans for future adaption of the PMx
algorithm for other applications.
Reimbursable work at Army Combat Capabilities Development Command
laboratories and engineering centers
The committee notes that the technical workforce and
facilities of the Army labs and engineering centers are at the
forefront of innovation and prototype development for the Army
and a number of other Federal agencies. The committee is aware
that recent restrictions on these organizations' ability to
perform reimbursable work have limited the ability for small
businesses and other companies to leverage the workforce,
equipment, and research infrastructure investments at these
labs and centers. These limitations have also limited the
ability of the Army's technical organizations to work more
closely with leaders in the private sector to adapt new
technological capabilities for Army missions.
The committee believes that the capabilities of Department
of Defense (DOD) science and technology infrastructure should
be available to Federal and industry customers, with those
partnerships managed to prioritize defense core activities and
missions. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to promulgate policy to fully implement the ``manage to
budget'' flexibilities of subsection (e) of section 2358a of
title 10, United States Code, to allow lab and center directors
to manage and optimize their reimbursable workloads and
customers without regard for funding organization or Tables of
Distribution and Allowances limitations. The committee notes
that some of the workload can be handled with technically
expert term civilian employees, using the authorities
established in section 1109 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92).
Review of barriers to innovation
The committee is aware of the report titled ``Barriers to
Innovation in Research and Engineering Activities of the
Department of Defense,'' required by section 232 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public
Law 115-91). The committee believes that it is important to
address the barriers discussed in the report. The committee
encourages the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering (USD (R&E)) to examine the feasibility of
recommendations pertaining to: broadening hiring authorities at
Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories; adjusting
reprogramming thresholds to increase the USD (R&E)'s
flexibility to shift funds within the science and technology
(S&T) budgeting activities; extending the appropriation life of
Congressional budget additions; and continued support for
authorities that encourage a competitive funding process to
help address the challenges of aging infrastructure, that
encourage acquisition at the speed of relevance, and that
encourage a culture of innovation.
Additionally, the committee directs the USD(R&E), not later
than December 31, 2021, to survey laboratories and other S&T
organization to identify existing barriers to innovation in the
research and engineering enterprise and to brief the
congressional defense committees on: (1) Any required updates
to the Department of Defense report developed in response to
section 232 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 and proposed recommendations to address
relevant findings; (2) Proposed changes in directives, rules,
regulations, and other policies that will enhance the ability
of the innovation, research, and engineering enterprise of the
Department to execute its designated missions, including a
description of how proposed changes have been coordinated with
the Secretaries of the military departments and the appropriate
heads of the Defense Agencies and Field Activities; (3) A
schedule, plan, and identification of responsible organizations
for addressing barriers identified in the review; and (4)
Actions taken to address specific issues identified in the
Department of Defense report developed in response to section
232 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2018.
Soldier Enhancement Program
Established by the Congress in 1990, the Soldier
Enhancement Program (SEP) allows the Army to quickly provide to
soldiers the necessary equipment and clothing for success on
the battlefield. It supports accelerated integration and
modernization of critical kit, including more lethal weapons,
lighter load-bearing equipment, field gear, survivability
items, communications equipment, and navigational aids. The
committee understands that, during the Army's budget
deliberations, senior Army leadership determined that funding
for the SEP should be reallocated for higher Army priorities.
Furthermore, the committee has been informed that the Army is
reviewing how to retain SEP functions with a recommendation
pending from Army Futures Command expected later this year.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to the SASC by September 30, 2020, on the
Army's plans to fulfill the critical evaluation and acquisition
role performed by the SEP.
Strategic Capabilities Office activities
The committee notes that section 233 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) mandated that the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO)
report directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense and
established two cross-functional teams to improve the technical
quality of SCO prototyping projects and to support the
transition of those projects into the military services or
Defense Agency and Department of Defense Field Activity
acquisition activities or operational use. Consistent with the
National Defense Strategy and challenges posed by Russia and
China, the committee feels that the SCO should play a key role
in responding in a timely fashion to fill the capability gaps
and operational needs identified by combatant commands by using
proven technology to produce game-changing capabilities with
responsive new systems and technologies. The committee directs
the Deputy Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2021,
on the Strategic Capabilities Office's activities to respond to
combatant command identified capability gaps, including an
identification of activities to improve the speed at which new
capabilities can be delivered and an assessment of the role
that military service acquisition activities play in
efficiently transitioning appropriate SCO programs into
operational capabilities.
Ultra-compact hyperspectral imagery
Technology that can discriminate mobility hazards and
targets in the three dimensional battle space may enable
soldiers to make quicker decisions to effectively neutralize
adversary weapon systems. The committee is aware that Ultra-
Compact Hyperspectral Imagery (UCHSI) may provide a compact and
affordable real-time imaging sensor that enables the warfighter
to detect, identify, track, and prioritize targets of interest.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to consider this
technology for possible applications that support Army
modernization priorities such as the Next Generation Combat
Vehicle, Long Range Precision Fires, Soldier Lethality, and
Future Vertical Lift.
Unmanned Aerial Systems in Great Power Competition
The committee recognizes the important role that manned and
unmanned aerial systems (UASs) serve in great power
competition. The committee further appreciates that manned and
satellite ISR platforms are costly and limited to episodic
coverage and understands that the Department of Defense needs
to develop new concepts of operations to effectively employ
platforms not inherently designed for operating in contested
environments, such as non-stealthy UASs. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, no later than November 30, 2020,
detailing the strengths and vulnerabilities of UASs in a
National Defense Strategy-envisioned environment and the
tactics, techniques, and procedures that would allow for the
survivability of UASs in scenarios pitting the United States
against near-peer adversaries.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for operation and maintenance activities at
the levels identified in section 4301 of division D of this
Act.
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment
Modifications and technical corrections to ensure restoration of
contamination by perfluorooctane sulfonate and
perfluorooctanoic acid (sec. 311)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authority for environmental restoration projects of the
National Guard and provide technical corrections and conforming
amendments to the statute governing the Defense Environmental
Restoration Program.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program technical
edits and clarification (sec. 312)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2684a of title 10, United States Code, to provide a
technical correction to the definition of an eligible entity.
Furthermore, this provision would allow funds obligated to
agreements under section 2684a of title 10, United States Code,
to be made available for use at the time of obligation and for
any subsequent amendment to the agreement.
Survey and market research of technologies for phase out by Department
of Defense of use of fluorinated aqueous film-forming foam
(sec. 313)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a survey and market research of
available firefighting technologies or substances available to
be adapted for use by the Department of Defense to facilitate
the phase-out of fluorinated aqueous film-forming foam. The
Secretary would be required to brief the congressional defense
committees on the results of the survey and market research
within 180 days of the enactment of this Act.
The committee is encouraged by recent research studies that
identify remediation technologies that can destroy per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in water that meet or exceed
Federal guidelines with only inert byproducts remaining. This
is an attractive alternative to treatment technologies that
transfer the contamination to adsorption media that then
require additional transport, disposal, or incineration. The
committee strongly encourages the Department, in cooperation
with other Federal agencies where appropriate, to explore the
use of destruction technologies at PFAS-contaminated sites. The
committee notes that PFAS destruction will reduce PFAS exposure
pathways, reduce long term operation and maintenance costs, and
eliminate concerns over disposal procedures.
Modification of authority to carry out military installation resilience
projects (sec. 314)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
clarifying amendments to sections 2815 and 2684a of title 10,
United States Code, to ensure that military installation
resilience projects can be executed to maintain, improve, or
rapidly reestablish mission assurance and prevent commercial
and residential encroachment around military installations.
Native American Indian lands environmental mitigation program (sec.
315)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 160 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to participate in a program to mitigate
the environmental effects of Department of Defense activities
on Indian lands and culturally connected locations.
Energy resilience and energy security measures on military
installations (sec. 316)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subchapter I of chapter 173 of title 10, United States Code, by
adding a section on energy resilience and energy security
measures on military installations.
Modification to availability of energy cost savings for Department of
Defense (sec. 317)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2912(a) of title 10, United States Code, to include
operational energy savings.
Long-duration demonstration initiative and joint program (sec. 318)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Environmental Security Technology Certification
Program of the Department of Defense to establish a
demonstration initiative comprised of demonstration projects
focused on the development of long-duration energy storage
technologies not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Pilot program on alternative fuel vehicle purchasing (sec. 319)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program on
alternative fuel vehicle purchasing.
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment
Repeal of statutory requirement for notification to Director of Defense
Logistics Agency three years prior to implementing changes to
any uniform or uniform component (sec. 331)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 356 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232; 10
U.S.C. 771) by repealing the requirement that a Secretary of a
military department notify the Director of the Defense
Logistics Agency at least 3 years prior to implementing changes
to any uniform or uniform component and making a technical
correction.
The committee notes that, per section 352 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328), it is still the policy of the United States that the
Secretary of Defense shall eliminate the development and
fielding of armed force-specific combat and camouflage utility
uniforms and families of uniforms in order to adopt and field a
common combat and camouflage utility uniform or family of
uniforms for specific combat environments to be used by all
members of the Armed Forces.
Clarification of limitation on length of overseas forward
deployment of currently deployed naval vessels (sec. 332)
The committee recommends a provision that would make a
clarifying amendment to section 323(b) of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232).
Subtitle D--Reports
Report on impact of permafrost thaw on infrastructure, facilities, and
operations of the Department of Defense (sec. 351)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees on the impact of changes in permafrost on
the infrastructure, facilities, assets, and operations of the
Department of Defense within 180 days of the enactment of this
Act.
Plans and reports on emergency response training for military
installations (sec. 352)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report due 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that
includes a review of each Department of Defense installation's
training protocols for coordination with local law enforcement
for active shooter training.
Report on implementation by Department of Defense of requirements
relating to renewable fuel pumps (sec. 353)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on renewable fuel pumps
to the Congress not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Report on effects of extreme weather on Department of Defense (sec.
354)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report, not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, on vulnerabilities to military
installations and combatant commander requirements resulting
from extreme weather.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Prohibition on divestiture of manned intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance aircraft operated by United States Special
Operations Command (sec. 371)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
to divest any manned intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft operated by the United States
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and prohibits the Department
of Defense from divesting any manned ISR aircraft operated by
SOCOM in fiscal year 2021.
The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act is a
provision that would require the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and the
Commander of SOCOM to jointly submit to the congressional
defense committees an acquisition roadmap to meet the manned
and unmanned airborne ISR requirements of United States Special
Operations Forces (SOF). The committee is concerned that there
does not exist an overarching strategy to guide SOCOM's
airborne ISR acquisition efforts that, among other things,
clearly identifies current or anticipated special operations-
peculiar capability gaps and describes future manned and
unmanned ISR requirements of SOF over the near-, mid-, and
long-term. Given longstanding shortfalls in the Department of
Defense's ability to fulfill geographic combatant command ISR
requirements, the committee believes that the submission of
this roadmap should precede congressional consideration of any
proposal that would result in the divestiture of ISR
capabilities or otherwise change the current composition of
SOCOM's airborne ISR fleet.
Information on overseas construction projects in support of contingency
operations using funds for operation and maintenance (sec. 372)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2805(c) of title 10, United States Code, by requiring
the Secretaries of the military departments, the Directors of
the Defense Agencies, and the heads of any other relevant
components of the Department of Defense to track and report to
the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) relevant data
regarding all overseas construction projects funded with
amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for operation
and maintenance in support of contingency operations.
Additionally, the provision would require that the Secretary of
Defense prepare, for inclusion in the annual budget submission
by the President under section 1105 of title 31, a consolidated
budget justification display, in classified and unclassified
forms, that identifies all overseas construction projects
funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available
for operation and maintenance in support of contingency
operations.
The committee is concerned about the attendant risks of
routinely using operation and maintenance (O&M) funding locally
to more quickly meet contingency construction requirements due
to perceptions that the Department of Defense (DOD) process for
executing construction projects using military construction
(MILCON) funding is too lengthy. In its September 8, 2016,
report titled Defense Infrastructure: Actions Needed to Enhance
Oversight of Construction Projects Supporting Military
Contingency Operations'' (GAO-16-406), the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) concluded the practice of using O&M
funding for contingency construction projects creates
financial, operational, and duplication risks to DOD. For
instance, the GAO found that, in 2015, officials at a base in
the CENTCOM area of responsibility used O&M funding for
temporary facilities for a squadron while in the same year
requesting MILCON funding for a permanent facility for the same
squadron, which could result in providing the same service to
the same beneficiaries.
The committee believes that the extent of this risk is not
fully known because the DOD does not track the universe and
cost of all contingency construction projects funded with O&M
appropriations. Nonetheless, the amount of O&M funds used
appears significant given that the GAO identified almost $1
billion in O&M-funded construction costs for fiscal years 2009-
12 for projects in Afghanistan alone, costs that are
significant compared with the $3.9 billion that the DOD
reported as enacted for MILCON-funded projects there in the
same period.
While the committee supports actions that the DOD has taken
to address issues raised in GAO's report--such as working to
revise authorities for construction agents in joint operational
areas--the committee believes that more action is needed.
Provision of protection to the National Museum of the Marine Corps, the
National Museum of the United States Army, the National Museum
of the United States Navy, and the National Museum of the
United States Air Force (sec. 373)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2465(b) of title 10, United States Code, by adding a
contract for the performance of on-site security guard
functions at the: Marine Corps Heritage Center at the Marine
Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, including the National Museum of
the Marine Corps; Heritage Center for the National Museum of
the United States Army at Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Heritage
Center for the National Museum of the United States Navy at
Washington, District of Columbia; and the Heritage Center for
the National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Inapplicability of congressional notification and dollar limitation
requirements for advanced billings for certain background
investigations (sec. 374)
The committee recommends a provision that would exempt the
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency from the $1
billion Department of Defense-wide limitation on advance
billings in working capital funds.
The committee understands that the Defense
Counterintelligence and Security Agency will be processing its
requests for background investigations through advance billing
for maximum efficiency. The security clearance investigation
mission did not exist at the Department of Defense when the $1
billion limitation on advance billings was instituted. Without
an exempting this mission from the cap, DOD would suffer from
an inability to employ advance billings in the traditional
areas of usage, such as disaster relief.
Repeal of sunset for minimum annual purchase amount for carriers
participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (sec. 375)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9515 of title 10, United States Code, by striking
subsection (k), which would make the minimum annual purchase
amount for carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air
Fleet (CRAF) a permanent authority.
The committee notes that the original intent of section
9515 was to protect smaller carriers amid the economic downturn
in 2008, which represented a substantial threat to the
Department of Defense. The committee further notes that,
according to the U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), the
loss of significant capacity in these small carriers would not
only have reduced the overall capacity in the CRAF program but
also would have resulted in CRAF activation occurring sooner in
the event of a crisis.
The committee understands that, given the economic downturn
brought on by COVID-19, along with the fact that section 9515
was set to sunset in December 2020, being able to guarantee
assured levels of business will help carriers make a business
case for keeping aircraft that they might otherwise dispose of
in the event of another downturn in business. In addition, this
authority would allow TRANSCOM to offer carriers a reasonable
business alternative to entering into long-term contracts with
delivery companies that effectively prohibit pledging aircraft
to the CRAF program. This authority would assist in ensuring
that the CRAF program is able to maintain sufficient capacity
in the future.
Improvement of the Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund of
the Department of Defense (sec. 376)
The committee recommends a provision that would realign the
Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund (OECIF) of the
Department of Defense under the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Sustainment.
The committee notes that, despite the pressing requirements
of fuel and logistical vulnerabilities identified in the
National Defense Strategy, the current OECIF authority
requested no funds for the OECIF, which has been increased
elsewhere in this Act. The committee believes that realignment
of this account will allow those charged with logistics and
sustainment to invest in operational energy innovations that
have a proven positive return on investment through cost
savings, making improvements to combat capabilities, and
increased readiness, thus reflecting the new reality of the
contested logistics environment.
Commission on the naming of items of the Department of Defense that
commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who
served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America.
(sec. 377)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
commission regarding the removal and renaming of certain assets
of the Department of Defense that commemorate the Confederate
States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the
Confederate States of America.
Modifications to review of proposed actions by Military Aviation and
Installation Assurance Clearinghouse (sec. 378)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 183a(c) of title 10, United States Code, to modify the
review of proposed actions by the Military Aviation and
Installation Assurance Clearinghouse.
Adjustment in availability of appropriations for unusual cost overruns
and for changes in scope of work (sec. 379)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
treatment of amounts appropriated to the Secretary of the Navy
for changes within the scope of work for a contract for ship
overhaul.
Requirement that Secretary of Defense implement security and emergency
response recommendations relating to active shooter or
terrorist attacks on installations of Department of Defense
(sec. 380)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to implement not that later than 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act the recommendations
germane to active shooter or terrorist attacks on installations
of the Department of Defense made in a series of previously
published reports.
Clarification of food ingredient requirements for food or beverages
provided by the Department of Defense (sec. 381)
The committee notes that the Defense Logistics Agency
declared the prohibition of certain ingredients from food it
purchases but did not engage other departments and agencies
with nutrition expertise, such as the Department of Agriculture
and the Food and Drug Administration, in development of this
policy. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that
would require the Department to seek comments from the public
and subject matter experts within the food supply chain before
making a final determination about food ingredients.
Budget Items
Joint Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems initial operating capability
acceleration
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $1.1 billion was for SAG 115
Land Forces Operations Support.
The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense recently
designated the Department of the Army as the executive agent of
the Joint Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems Office (JCO). The
committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense also
provided guidance to accelerate the initial operational
capability (IOC) for the JCO. The committee finally notes that,
as part of his unfunded requirements list, the Chief of Staff
of the Army requested additional funds to fund the
establishment of the JCO, hire JCO personnel, and begin to
execute its mission, which includes the development of rapid
response capability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.3
million in OMA for SAG 115 for JCO IOC acceleration.
Child Development Center playground equipment and furniture increases
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $8.2 billion was for SAG 131
Base Operations Support.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Army requested
additional funds to replace child development center (CDC)
playground equipment to address safety issues and for CDC
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E).
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $79.0
million in OMA for SAG 131 for CDC playground equipment and
furniture.
Child Youth Service improvements
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $8.2 billion was for SAG 131
Base Operations Support.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Army requested
additional funds to provide for six key Child Youth Service
(CYS) program improvements across multiple installations,
namely to: (1) Provide for further CYS classroom management
training and improved care-provider responses, intended to
reduce inappropriate care-provider incidents, for $5.0 million;
(2) Provide for updated and expanded employee training to
improve care-provider skills, certifications, and
accreditation, encouraging professional development and
employee retention for $2.5 million; (3) Provide for improved
CYS information technology and cloud service and maintenance to
improve data management and reporting performance for $5.0
million; (4) Recover unobtainable CYS reform savings, which
includes Army fee assistance to community partners for military
children not able to be accommodated on installations and
parent services that enable centralized registration, for $26.0
million; (5) Provide for additional CYS transportation (buses)
for children enrolled in before/after-school programs,
specifically to reduce transportation challenges sometimes
experienced by single/dual military member families, for $5.0
million; (6) Provide for youth computer lab life-cycle
replacement of computers and peripherals for school age and
youth programs that encourage youth participation in order to
divert from at-risk behavior for $3.5 million.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $47.0
million in OMA for SAG 131 for CYS improvements.
Army Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization increase
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $3.5 billion was for SAG 132
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization, $2.9
billion in Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR), of
which $327.1 million was for SAG 132 Facilities Sustainment,
Restoration, and Modernization, and $7.4 billion in Operation
and Maintenance, Army Reserve National Guard (OMARNG), of which
$876.0 million was for SAG 132 Facilities Sustainment,
Restoration, and Modernization.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Army requested
additional funds for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization (FSRM), which would bring Army funding up to 90
percent of its requirement.The committee understands that these
funds would alleviate current challenges in maintaining
facilities to better support existing readiness levels while
increased sustainment funding would also prevent
disproportionate restoration and modernization backlog growth.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $62.4 million in OMA for SAG 132, $5.3 million in
OMAR for SAG 132, and $11.2 million in OMARNG for SAG 132.
EUCOM and INDOPACOM Multi-Domain Task Force increases
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $3.5 billion was for SAG 132
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Army requested
additional funds for sustainment, restoration, and
modernization requirements for building renovations and Base
Operating Support expenditures to adequately house personnel
and headquarters for the Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF)
elements in the Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) and European
Command (EUCOM) theaters.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $126.8
million in OMA for SAG 132, specifically for MDTF for INDOPACOM
and EUCOM.
Revitalization of Army deployment infrastructure
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $3.5 billion was for SAG 132
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Army requested
additional funds to assist in the revitalization of Army
deployment infrastructure, including the: (1) Airfield control
group complex and rail load complex at Joint Base Lewis-
McChord, Washington; (2) Commercial truck load complex and
deployment support facility at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; (3)
Commercial truck load complex at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri;
(4) Rail load complex, hangar repair, deployment support
facility, and aerial port of embarkation support at Fort Hood,
Texas; (5) Taxiway repair at Fort Huachuca, Arizona; and (6)
Ramps repair at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $45.3
million in OMA for SAG 132 for the above projects to support
power projection restoration and modernization.
U.S. Africa Command force protection upgrades personnel recovery/
casualty evacuation
The budget request included $239.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 141 U.S. Africa Command
(AFRICOM).
The committee notes that AFRICOM identified as an unfunded
requirement the need for emergent force protection upgrades
following the terrorist attack against U.S. personnel in Manda
Bay, Kenya, and after a theater-wide review of force protection
at multiple locations in Africa. AFRICOM identified the most
immediate priorities as establishing and upgrading fencing,
communications systems, and shelters to provide protection for
Department of Defense personnel serving in select locations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in OMA for SAG 141 for personnel recovery/casualty
evacuation.
U.S. Africa Command intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
The budget request included $239.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 141 U.S. Africa Command
(AFRICOM).
The committee notes that AFRICOM is currently able to meet
30 percent of its Joint Staff-validated intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) requirements in its area
of responsibility and has identified the need to sustain this
level of ISR support in fiscal year 2021 as an unfunded
requirement.
The committee recommends an increase of $64.0 million in
OMA for SAG 141 for ISR support.
United States Africa Command personnel recovery, casualty evacuation,
and trauma care
The budget request included $239.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 141 U.S. Africa Command
(AFRICOM).
The committee notes that AFRICOM has identified shortfalls
in its ability to provide timely personnel recovery, casualty
evacuation, and trauma care to U.S. personnel operating in the
AFRICOM area of responsibility. The committee notes that
AFRICOM identified the need to address gaps in these critical
capabilities as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $36.0
million in OMA for SAG 141 for personnel recovery, casualty
evacuation, and trauma care support for AFRICOM.
United States Cyber Command Access and operations
The budget request included $314.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for SAG 15E Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM) and $430.1 million in Operation and Maintenance,
Army (OMA), for SAG 151 Cyberspace Operations.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Cyber
Mission Forces (CMF) and the increased operational demands
placed on them.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in OMAF for SAG 15E and an increase of $5.0 million in
OMA for SAG 151 in order to provide to the CMF more resources
to access, operate, and train as required to meet operational
demands as described in the unfunded priorities list of the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command.
Service-wide transportation
The budget request included $491.9 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 421.
The committee recommends a decrease of $25.0 million in OMA
for SAG 421 to reflect historical underexecution.
Other personnel support
The budget request included $701.1 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 434 for other personnel
support.
The committee recommends a decrease of $4.0 million in OMA
for SAG 434 for historical underexecution.
Servicewomen's commemorative partnerships
The budget request included $701.1 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for SAG 434 Other Personnel Support,
of which no funds were for programs at military service
memorials and museums that highlight the role of women in the
military.
The committee notes that section 2834 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) authorized the transfer of administrative jurisdiction of
an approximately 16.0 acre parcel of land in Arlington,
Virginia, from the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary
of the Army. The Secretary of the Army was directed to enter
into a memorandum of understanding to define roles and
responsibilities for the shared responsibility and resources
for operation and maintenance of the Women in Military Service
for America (WIMSA) Memorial and surrounding grounds.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in OMA for SAG 434 for WIMSA.
Pilot program on the remote provision by the National Guard for
cybersecurity
The budget request included $7.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG), of which $7.9
million was for SAG 151 Cyberspace Activities--Cyberspace
Operations. The budget request also included $6.8 billion in
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG), of which
$16.3 million was for SAG 012D Cyberspace Activities.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends pilot
programs on the National Guard's remote provision to State
governments and National Guards in other States of
cybersecurity technical assistance in training for, preparation
for, and response to cyber incidents.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in OMARNG for SAG 151 and an increase of $3.0 million
in OMANG for SAG 012D to conduct these National Guard
cybersecurity pilot programs.
PDI: Asia Pacific Regional Initiative, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
The budget request include $61.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for SAG 1CCH Combatant Commander Core
Operations, including $9.4 million for the Asia Pacific
Regional Initiative (APRI).
The committee notes that, last year, APRI funds helped to
facilitate the deployment of a Royal Thai Army infantry
battalion to the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk,
Louisiana, for a month-long training exercise alongside U.S.
Army soldiers. The committee commends this unique combined
training event as a tangible step forward for the U.S.-Thai
alliance. To the extent that the Royal Thai Army continues its
modernization on the basis of U.S. formations and equipment,
the committee encourages further opportunities for U.S.-Thai
combined training, including in the United States. Moreover, in
general, the committee encourages U.S. Indo-Pacific Command to
facilitate, as appropriate, additional training opportunities
for allies and partners in the United States.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMN for SAG 1CCH for the Asia Pacific Regional
Initiative.
PDI: Joint Task Force Indo-Pacific, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
The budget request included $102.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for SAG 1CCM Combatant Commander
Direct Mission Support.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, included additional funding for
Joint Task Force INDOPACOM (JTF-IP). The committee agrees with
the assessment of the National Defense Strategy (NDS) that U.S.
competitors and adversaries are ``using other areas of
competition short of open warfare to achieve their ends,''
including information warfare, and that ``these trends, if
unaddressed, will challenge our ability to deter aggression.''
The committee believes that increased resources for information
operations in the Indo-Pacific are important for addressing the
challenges described by the NDS.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.3
million in OMN for SAG 1CCM for Special Operations Pacific's
Joint Task Force Indo-Pacific information operations in support
of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
PDI: Counterterrorism Information Facility in Singapore, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command
The budget request included $102.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for SAG 1CCM Combatant Commander
Direct Mission Support.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, included additional funding to
assist the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in
establishing the Counterterrorism Information Facility in
Singapore.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in OMN
for SAG 1CCM for support to the establishment of the
Counterterrorism Information Facility in Singapore.
PDI: Countering Chinese malign influence, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
The budget request included $8.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for SAG 1CCS Military Information
Support Operations (MISO).
The National Defense Strategy warns that competitors and
adversaries of the United States are using areas of competition
short of open warfare, including information warfare, to
achieve their ends. If unaddressed, this trend will undermine
the ability of the United States to deter aggression. In
particular, the committee notes the urgent need for intensified
efforts to counter Chinese malign influence the Indo-Pacific
region, including through disinformation and propaganda. These
efforts will require expanded and deeper collaboration between
the Department of Defense and other Federal departments and
agencies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $17.7
million in OMN for SAG 1CCS for WebOps, force presence related
to MISO, support for Radio Free Asia, and other campaign
support activities. The committee does not recommend additional
funding for the Indo-Pacific Defense Forum.
USNS Mercy MTF improvements
The budget request included $49.7 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $99.4 million was for SAG
2C1H Expeditionary Health Services Systems.
The committee notes that, as part of his unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Naval Operations requested
additional funds to support optimization of the military
treatment facility (MTF) in conjunction with the USNS Mercy's
service-life extension program to improve the hospital ship's
ability to maintain Role 3 MTF capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $11.6
million in OMN for SAG 2C1H for USNS Mercy MTF improvements.
Energy Security Programs Office
The budget request included $49.6 billion in the Operation
and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $519.7 million was for
SAG 4B2N Planning, Engineering, and Program Support.
The committee continues to strongly support the Department
of the Navy's Energy Security Programs Office (ESPO), which has
successfully executed over 49 energy resilience projects
leveraging non-Department of Defense funding in Texas,
Tennessee, Mississippi, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia,
Georgia, South Carolina, Arizona, Nevada, California, Maryland,
New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington,
Hawaii, Italy, and Japan. These projects range from microgrids
to efforts to improve mission assurance. However, the Navy has
made funding choices insufficient to support the ESPO for
fiscal year 2021, and projects may not occur in Georgia, North
Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Maryland,
California, Hawaii, Washington, Guam, Bahrain, and Japan.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMN for SAG 4B2N for the ESPO office to ensure that
fiscal year 2021 projects are executed.
A-10 Aircraft
The budget request included $34.8 billion in Operation &
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), including $731.5 million for SAG
011A Primary Combat Forces, of which $1.4 billion was for SAG
011D Air Operations Training (OJT, Maintain Skills), $0.0 was
for SAG 011M Depot Purchase Equipment Maintenance, and $4.4
billion was for SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
The budget request assumed a reduction of A-10 aircraft and
squadrons in fiscal year 2021. The committee believes that this
reduction is premature and as such recommends restoring such
funding.
Therefore, the committee recommends the following increases
in OMAF: $1.7 million to SAG 011A Primary Combat Forces, $12.4
million to SAG 011D Air Operations Training (OJT, Maintain
Skills), $3.4 million to SAG 011M Depot Purchase Equipment
Maintenance, and $52.9 million to SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
Air Force Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
increases
The budget request included $34.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $3.2 billion was for
SAG 011R Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization, $3.4 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air
Force Reserve (OMAFR), of which $103.4 million was for SAG 011R
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization, and
$6.8 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
(OMANG), of which $323.6 million was for SAG 011R Facilities
Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.
The committee notes that, as part of his required unfunded
requirements list, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force
requested additional funds for facility maintenance and repair
investment to achieve 1.85 percent of plant replacement value
(PRV), accelerating the ramp-up to meet the Department of the
Air Force Infrastructure Investment Strategy goal of 2 percent
PRV.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $101.8 million in OMAF to SAG 011R, $4.2 million in
OMAFR to SAG 011R, and $8.9 million in OMANG to SAG 011R.
Transfer to OCO
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force, SAG 011W for Contractor Logistics
Support and System Support.
The committee recommends a decrease of $30.5 million to
transfer such funding to Operation and Maintenance, Air Force,
Overseas Contingency Operations, SAG 011W for Contractor
Logistics Support and System Support. The committee notes a
corresponding increase in that account.
Slowing Air Force KC-135 and KC-10 tanker fleet divestment
The budget request included $34.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which no funds were for SAG
011M Depot Purchase Equipment Maintenance and $4.4 billion was
for SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy of
2018 specifically calls for ``Resilient and Agile Logistics.''
The committee further notes that program delays for the KC-46
tanker have exacerbated a growing tanker capacity problem and
yet the Air Force chose to divest of crucial KC-10 and KC-135
resources. The committee notes that, according to the United
States Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), this proposed
divestment would cause significant negative impacts to
TRANSCOM's posture during wartime and daily competition and
negatively impact senior leader decision space for mobilization
if confronted with a crisis. The committee believes that the
Air Force should be planning for contested logistics while
accounting for delays in the KC-46 and other future programs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases for the KC-135 tanker fleet: $3.4 million in OMAF to
SAG 011M Depot Purchase Equipment Maintenance and $36.6 million
in OMAF to SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program. Additionally, the
committee recommends the following increases for the KC-10
tanker fleet: $48.4 million in OMAF to SAG 011M Depot Purchase
Equipment Maintenance and $16.2 million in OMAF to SAG 011Y
Flying Hour Program.
PDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command
The budget request included $34.8 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force, of which $849.8 million was for SAG 12A
Global C3I & Early Warning.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), included additional
funding for Mission Partner Environment (MPE) local upgrades to
modernize the command, control, communications, and computers
architecture in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility and
provide local systems to support and enhance operations with
allies and partners.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.8
million for SAG 12A for MPE local upgrades within the INDOPACOM
area of responsibility.
Hunt Forward missions
The budget request included $314.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for SAG 15E Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM).
The committee recognizes the importance of CYBERCOM's cyber
hunt forward missions as an integral component of the
Department's persistent engagement strategy. The committee also
notes the need for a framework to enhance consistency across
these missions, as described elsewhere in this report.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.8
million in OMAF for SAG 15E in order to provide to the Cyber
National Mission Force the capabilities it needs to implement
systems and strategies as it seeks to deter, disrupt, and
defeat cyber adversaries as reflected in the unfunded
priorities list of the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command.
Securing the Department of Defense Information Network
The budget request included $314.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for SAG 15E Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM) and $1.9 billion in Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 280 Defense Information System
Agency (DISA).
The committee recognizes the importance of CYBERCOM and
DISA's missions in securing the Department of Defense
Information Network (DODIN). The committee is encouraged by the
recent efforts of the Department to develop enterprise-wide
common security product integration frameworks to enable
interoperability and coordinated orchestration among
cybersecurity services, devices, appliances, agents,
applications, tools, command and control centers, and the
network. The committee understands that additional funding
would allow the Department to support improvements in the
situational understanding, monitoring, analytics, training, and
inspections needed to enhance cyber resiliency and readiness.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.9
million in OMAF for SAG 15E and an increase of $40.0 million in
OMDW for SAG 280 in order to enhance the Department's ability
to secure, operate, and defend mission areas of the DODIN as
described in the unfunded priorities list of the Commander,
U.S. Cyber Command.
Air Force marketing reduction
The budget request included $34.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $155.1 million was for
SAG 033A Recruiting and Advertising. The budget request also
included $3.4 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Reserve (OMAFR), of which $23.1 million was for SAG 042J
Recruiting and Advertising. Finally, the budget request
included $6.8 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air
National Guard (OMANG), of which $48.6 million was for SAG 042J
Recruiting and Advertising.
The committee notes that the Air Force Audit Agency
recently completed its review of Air Force advertising and
recruiting programs. The audit found that ``Air Force personnel
in all three components did not effectively manage marketing
and recruiting programs.'' The audit further notes that Air
Force personnel ``did not display fiscal responsibility'' and
were unable to demonstrate that the Air Force received ``fair
and reasonable pricing for over $130 million (88 percent) of
$149 million in sample contract actions reviewed.''
Additionally, the audit details numerous violations of the
basic rules of government contracting and financial management.
The committee is disappointed by such disregard for taxpayer
dollars.
While the Air Force deserves credit for taking immediate
action to correct some of the audit findings, the committee
believes that the Air Force advertising and recruiting
organization requires major reform. In response to similar
audit findings, the Army completely revamped its entire
advertising organization. The committee expects the Air Force
to dedicate similar effort in restoring the Congress' trust
that advertising dollars are being spent efficiently and
effectively.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
decreases: $20.0 million in OMAF to SAG 033A Recruiting and
Advertising, $5.0 million in OMAFR to SAG 042J Recruiting and
Advertising, and $15.0 million in OMANG to SAG 042J Recruiting
and Advertising.
COVID-related throughput decrease
The budget request included $34.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF).
The committee notes that the Air Force will likely
experience COVID-19-related throughput issues, thereby
decreasing the need for depot carryover balances funded through
the Air Force Working Capital Fund.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $75.8
million in OMAF to reflect COVID-related throughput issues.
Syria exfiltration reconstitution
The budget request included $898.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 1PL6 Special
Operations Command Combat Development Activities.
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
identified the replacement of items destroyed in connection
with the exfiltration of forces in Syria as an unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in OMDW for SAG 1PL6 for Syria exfiltration
reconstitution.
Contractor logistics support
The budget request included $685.1 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 1PL7 Special Operations
Command Maintenance.
The committees notes that the availability of intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities remains a
perennial shortfall across the geographic combatant commands.
The committee notes that, despite this, the budget request for
fiscal year 2021 cuts the contractor logistics support
necessary for the deployment of manned ISR aircraft operated by
U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) without identifying a
follow-on ISR solution to mitigate the loss in capability in
fiscal year 2021.
Additionally, the committee notes that the budget request
for fiscal year 2021 and the future years defense program
includes proposals to modify the composition of SOCOM's
airborne ISR fleet through the acquisition of new platforms and
the divestment of platforms currently in its inventory. The
committee is concerned that there does not exist an overarching
strategy to guide SOCOM's airborne ISR acquisition efforts,
particularly one that clearly identifies current or anticipated
special operations-peculiar capability gaps and describes
future manned and unmanned ISR requirements. The committee
believes that it is not prudent to divest of important ISR
capabilities without a clearly articulated strategy for how
critical ISR requirements will be satisfied in the near-, mid-,
and long-term. The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act,
there is a provision that would require the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
and the Commander, SOCOM, to jointly submit to the
congressional defense committees an acquisition roadmap to meet
the manned and unmanned airborne ISR requirements of United
States Special Operations Forces.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $22.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
1PL7 for contractor logistics support for manned ISR aircraft.
U.S. Special Operations Command flying hours
The budget request included $2.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 1PLR Special Operations
Command Theater Forces.
The committee notes that, elsewhere in this Act, there is a
provision that would prohibit the divestiture of manned
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft
operated by U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in fiscal
year 2021 due to the lack of a plan to mitigate the loss of ISR
capability in fiscal year 2021 as well as an overarching ISR
acquisition roadmap for SOCOM's airborne ISR capabilities to
meet its requirements over the near-, mid-, and long-term. The
committee believes that the submission of the required roadmap
should precede congressional consideration of any plan of SOCOM
to change the composition of its airborne ISR capabilities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.3
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
1PLR for flying hours.
Innovative Readiness Training increase
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $147.9 million was
for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
The committee notes that the $13.1 million of the request
for Civil Military Programs was for the Innovative Readiness
Training (IRT). The committee is aware that the military
services continue to face readiness challenges due to budgetary
constraints. The committee continues to recognize the value of
the IRT, which affords to the military services realistic joint
training opportunities for National Guard, Reserve, and Active-
duty servicemembers.
The committee understands that the IRT offers complex and
challenging training opportunities for domestic and
international crises. The committee is also aware that Alaska,
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana,
Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wyoming all use the IRT.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $16.9
million in OMDW for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
Starbase
The budget request included $44.6 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $148.0 million was
for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
The committee notes that the Science and Technology
Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration
(STARBASE) program is an effective program that improves the
knowledge and skills of students in kindergarten through 12th
grade in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs for the STARBASE
program.
Defense Contract Management Agency
The budget request included $1.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTO Defense Contract
Management Agency (DCMA).
The committee notes that the Congress has previously
directed that the Department of Defense centrally conduct
commercial item determinations to ensure consistency in the
application of professional judgment, as is now required under
section 2380 of Title 10 United States code. Thus, the
delegation and transfer of this function would violate the law.
The DCMA has developed the requisite subject matter expertise
to perform this function and should maintain such expertise.
The committee also notes the importance of certain contract
administration functions that the DCMA performs, including the
recovery of cancelling funds and contract closeout.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $56.4
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTO to restore proposed reductions
resulting from the Defense-Wide Review.
DWR restore: Congressional oversight
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary
of Defense.
The committee records its remarks about the Defense-Wide
Review (DWR) 1.0 elsewhere in this report. In particular, the
oversight materials produced, as well as the proposal to
transfer the burden of payment for background investigations to
the U.S. Congress, did not meet or reflect the stated goals of
the DWR.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $3.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTN for the Office of the Secretary of the Defense.
Joint Regional Security Stacks SIPR funding--O&M
The budget request included $582.6 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GU9 Defense
Information Systems Agency--CYBER.
The committee is aware of the operational cybersecurity
limitations of the Joint Regional Security Stacks (JRSS)
technology as assessed by the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation, the difficulty of training personnel to use the
JRSS, and the shortage of feasible tactics, techniques, and
procedures to make effective use of the JRSS. The committee
believes that the deployment of JRSS on the Secret Internet
Protocol Router Network is thus inappropriate, given JRSS'
limited cybersecurity capability and the existence of
alternative capabilities to execute its network functions.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $4.7
million in OMDW for SAG 4GU9 for JRSS, due to the operational
cybersecurity limitations of the JRSS technology.
DWR restore: blankets for homeless program
The budget requested included $382.1 million for Operation
and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTB Defense Logistics
Agency.
The Defense-Wide Review eliminated funding for the Defense
Logistics Agency's (DLA's) Blankets for Homeless Program. The
Stewart B. McKinley Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 (Public Law
100-77) enables the DLA to provide blankets to qualified U.S.
501(c)3 organizations working with the homeless, many of whom
are veterans. Homeless shelters request blankets, which are
issued on a first-come first-served basis up to the amount of
funding.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.6
million for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTB for the Defense Logistics Agency to continue this program.
Defense Institute of International Legal Studies
The budget request included $2.7 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), SAG 4GTD, Defense Security
Cooperation Agency for the Defense Institute of International
Legal Studies.
The committee notes that the reforms to the Department of
Defense's security cooperation enterprise contained in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public
Law 114-328) emphasized institutional capacity building as a
critical component of the Department's security cooperation
efforts. The committee notes that the Defense Institute of
International Legal Studies plays an important role in building
partner nation legal capacity, which strengthens accountability
within the security and justice sectors, civilian control of
the military, enhanced compliance with human rights standards
and international humanitarian law, democracy, and democratic
rule of law.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTD, Defense Security Cooperation Agency for the Defense
Institute of International Legal Studies to increase its
capacity to conduct its expanding mission of legal
institutional capacity building as a significant component of
the Department's security cooperation efforts. The committee
notes that, elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends
a correlated decrease in funding for the Institute for Security
Governance.
Institute for Security Governance
The budget request included $58.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), SAG 4GTD, Defense Security
Cooperation Agency, for the Institute for Security Governance.
The committee notes that the reforms to the Department of
Defense's security cooperation enterprise contained in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public
Law 114-328) emphasized institutional capacity building as a
critical component of the Department's security cooperation
efforts. The committee notes that the Department has made
progress in integrating institutional capacity building as a
core element of its security cooperation activities and expects
the Department to continue to expand these efforts. The
committee also notes the importance of legal institutional
capacity building, a key mission of the Defense Institute of
International Legal Studies, to the long-term sustainability of
these programs. The budget request of $58.8 million for the
Institute for Security Governance would represent a more than
57 percent increase over fiscal year 2020 funding levels.
In line with the committee's support for legal
institutional capacity building, the committee recommends a
decrease of $2.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
wide, SAG 4GTD, Defense Security Cooperation Agency, for the
Institute for Security Governance. The committee notes that,
elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a correlated
increase for the Defense Institute of International Legal
Studies.
PDI: Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative
The budget request included $410.7 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTD Defense Security
Cooperation Agency for the National Defense Strategy
Implementation account.
The committee notes that the budget request for the
National Defense Strategy Implementation account included
amounts intended for building partner capacity (BPC) activities
in the Indo-Pacific Command area of responsibility, utilizing
authorities provided in section 333 of title 10, United States
Code, and section 1263 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). The committee
continues to support the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security
Initiative (MSI) as a standalone and signature security
cooperation initiative for strengthening partnerships in the
Department of Defense's priority theater, the Indo-Pacific. The
initiative's flexibility with regard to multinational projects
offers unique opportunities for increasing regional cooperation
and deepening regional interoperability. Furthermore, the
initiative is a tangible and recognizable symbol of the
enduring American commitment to the Indo-Pacific region at a
time when our strategic competitors are seeking to sow doubt
about the value of our alliances and partnerships. For these
reasons, the committee believes that the funding requested in
the National Defense Strategy Implementation account for
maritime-focused BPC activities in the Indo-Pacific Command
area of responsibility is most appropriately executed pursuant
to the MSI authority.
Therefore, the committee directs that, of the amount
requested for BPC activities in the Indo-Pacific Command area
of responsibility in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide,
for SAG 4GTD for the National Defense Strategy Implementation
account, not less than $200.0 million be used pursuant to
section 1263 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). This amount shall only
come from those amounts requested by the Department of Defense
for security cooperation activities in the Indo-Pacific Command
area of responsibility.
PDI: Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative
The budget request included $627.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, Overseas Contingency Operations, for
SAG 4GTD Defense Security Cooperation Agency for the National
Defense Strategy Implementation account.
The committee notes that the budget request for the
National Defense Strategy Implementation account included
amounts intended for building partner capacity (BPC) activities
in the Indo-Pacific Command area of responsibility, utilizing
authorities provided in section 333 of title 10, United States
Code, and section 1263 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). The committee
continues to support the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security
Initiative (MSI) as a standalone and signature security
cooperation initiative for strengthening partnerships in the
Department of Defense's priority theater, the Indo-Pacific. The
initiative's flexibility with regard to multinational projects
offers unique opportunities for increasing regional cooperation
and deepening regional interoperability. Furthermore, the
initiative is a tangible and recognizable symbol of the
enduring American commitment to the Indo-Pacific region at a
time when our strategic competitors are seeking to sow doubt
about the value of our alliances and partnerships. For these
reasons, the committee believes that the funding requested in
the National Defense Strategy Implementation account for
maritime-focused BPC activities in the Indo-Pacific Command
area of responsibility is most appropriately executed pursuant
to the MSI authority.
Therefore, the committee directs that, of the amount
requested for BPC activities in the Indo-Pacific Command area
of responsibility in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide,
for SAG 4GTD for the National Defense Strategy Implementation
account, not less than $200.0 million be used pursuant to
section 1263 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). This amount shall only
come from those amounts requested by the Department of Defense
for security cooperation activities in the Indo-Pacific Command
area of responsibility.
Staffing of Department of Defense Education Activity schools
The budget request included $44.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $2.9 billion was for
SAG 4GTJ Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA). The
amount authorized to be appropriated for OMDW includes the
following change from the budget request. The provision
underlying this change in funding levels is discussed in
greater detail in title V of this committee report.
[Changes in millions of dollars]
Maintenance of student-teacher ratios in DODEA schools +1.5
-----------------
Total............................................. +1.5
Impact aid
The budget request included $44.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $2.9 billion was for
SAG 4GTJ Department of Defense Education Activity. The amount
authorized to be appropriated for OMDW includes the following
changes from the budget request. The provisions underlying
these changes in funding levels are discussed in greater detail
in title V of this committee report.
[Changes in millions of dollars]
Impact aid for schools with military dependent +50.0
students.............................................
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities...... +20.0
-----------------
Total............................................. +70.0
Defense Community Infrastructure Program
The budget request included $40.3 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $40.2 million was
for SAG 4GTM Office of Economic Adjustment.
The committee notes that section 2861 of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232) established a pilot for the Defense Community
Infrastructure Program. The committee continues to recognize
the importance of the military services' establishing and
strengthening their relationships with local communities and
looks forward to reviewing the results of the pilot program
upon its completion.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in OMDW to SAG 4GTM Office of Economic Adjustment.
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary
of Defense.
The committee recognizes the important work that the
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI)
has put forth in its interim reports and is aware of the first
quarter recommendations of the Commission. Additionally, the
committee is aware that additional funds are needed to cover
additional Freedom of Information Act request expenses. The
committee is supportive of the NSCAI and looks forward to its
final report and recommendations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTN for the NSCAI.
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were proposed for Bien
Hoa dioxin cleanup in Vietnam.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup.
Energy Resilience Readiness Exercises
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were for Energy
Resilience Readiness Exercises (ERREs).
The committee continues to support the significant success
of ``black start'' ERREs performed by the military services and
overseen by the Department of Defense (DOD). The committee
believes that low-cost ERREs, which each cost roughly $500,000,
provide a real-world opportunity to ``pull the plug'' on
military installations and truly test how each would respond in
the event of a cyberattack or natural disaster. The committee
believes that this is a small but warranted investment for
Department of Defense installation readiness. Unfortunately,
the Department elected not to program for any ERREs in fiscal
year 2021.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for ERREs.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nation-wide human health
assessment
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were proposed for the
ongoing Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Nation-wide human health assessment related to contaminated
sources of drinking water from per- and poly-fluoroalkyl
substances.
The committee continues to support the ongoing human health
assessment. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase
of $10.0 million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for the ongoing CDC
assessment.
Funding for commission relating to Confederate symbols
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 490 Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
OMDW for SAG 490 to provide adequate resources for the
commission on Confederate symbols established elsewhere in this
Act.
Cooperative program for Vietnam personnel MIA
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 490 Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
OMDW for SAG 490 to provide adequate resources to a cooperative
program with the Ministry of Defense of Vietnam to account for
Vietnamese missing in action, a program which is authorized
elsewhere in this Act.
DWR restore: Congressional background investigations
The budget request included $949.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 5GTE Defense
Counterintelligence and Security Agency.
The Defense-Wide Review proposed transferring the burden
for processing security clearance background investigations for
congressional staff from the Department of Defense to the
congressional defense committees.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTE for the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency to
continue processing congressional background investigations.
The committee notes a corresponding decrease elsewhere in this
report.
Energy performance contracts
The budget request included $1.5 billion in the Operation
and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of
the Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were for energy
performance contracts.
The committee supports efforts by the Department of Defense
and the military services to include energy resilience and
cybersecurity in all energy performance contract projects.
However, in too many instances, the upfront costs of resilience
do not pencil out despite providing a direct mission benefit
and capability. To facilitate inclusion of mission-critical
resilience and cybersecurity across the Department, the
committee recommends adding $10.0 million to leverage
performance contracting efforts. These funds should be used
only to leverage resilience and cybersecurity into a
performance contract when those measures cannot be effectively
paid for with a performance contract and leverage at least $10
of private capital for every dollar of Department funds.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for energy performance contract
funding.
Personnel in the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense Sustainment
and Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were for sufficient
numbers of personnel in the Office of the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment in Environment, Safety, and
Occupational Health (ESOH).
The committee recognizes the challenges facing the
Department of Defense in the Office's remit, ranging from per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances to the Military Housing
Privatization Initiative.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in OMDW for ESOH personnel in the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment.
Improvement of occupational license portability for military spouses
through interstate compacts
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
The committee remains concerned about the lack of
portability of employment licenses and credentials across State
lines, which hinders military spouse employment. Due to the
delays and expense involved in re-licensure and re-
credentialing, many military spouses decide not to practice
their professions. This becomes a financial and career choice
issue for military families, impacting servicemembers' desire
to stay in the military.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN, for the activities outlined in
section 575 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), which required the
Secretary of Defense to enter into a cooperative agreement with
the Council of State Governments to assist with the funding and
development of interstate compacts on licensed occupations.
National Cyber Director independent study funding
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a
independent study on the establishment of a National Cyber
Director.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for conducting an independent
study on the establishment of a National Cyber Director.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which $75.0 million was for the
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI).
The committee continues to support the mission of the REPI
and believes that the program has proven to be highly effective
in addressing encroachment. However, the committee is concerned
that the Department of Defense continues to underfund the REPI
despite its success to date and the cost-efficiency of
Department investments, born from substantial partner
contributions. The Department has expressed concerns about the
growing need to protect key installations, ranges, and airspace
but has failed to match those concerns with adequate resources.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for the REPI and strongly
encourages the Department to reflect in future REPI budget
requests the urgency of the problem of encroachment and the
success that the REPI has achieved in addressing this problem.
DWR restore: support to commissions
The budget request included $340.3 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTQ Washington Headquarters
Services.
The Defense-Wide Review 1.0 proposed ending support for
commissions and transferring the burden onto other components.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG
4GTQ for the Washington Headquarters Services to continue to
provide support for commissions.
Biological Threat Reduction Program
The budget request included $238.5 million in Miscellaneous
Appropriations for SAG 1PL3 Cooperative Threat Reduction.
The committee believes that the Biological Threat Reduction
Program (BTRP) has provided valuable assistance in the
prevention and detection of emergent biological threats.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in Miscellaneous Appropriations for SAG 1PL3 for the
BTRP.
Acquisition Workforce Development Account
The budget request included $58.2 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 012 Acquisition
Workforce Development Account (DAWDA).
The committee notes that the budget request included a
$199.0 million reduction for the DAWDA based on the Defense-
Wide Review. The committee notes that this account was
originally authorized due to the Department's inability to
adequately invest in the training and education of its
professional acquisition workforce. The committee is concerned
that, at a reduced funding level, the Department will face
challenges in building the acquisition workforce it needs to
support the National Defense Strategy. The acquisition
workforce is currently demonstrating its critical role as the
Department works to meet the national security and economic
challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The committee
believes that DAWDA is critical to meeting the Department's
need to streamline procurement, work with Silicon Valley
innovators, support research on and development of new
acquisition tools and innovative acquisition policies, and
develop a workforce to implement modern acquisition reforms and
practices.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $98.5
million in OMDW for SAG 012 to increase funding for the
Acquisition Workforce Development Account.
Operation and maintenance adjustments
The budget request included $253.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance funding.
The committee notes that the onset of COVID-19 has forced
the delay or cancellation of numerous training and exercise
events, as well as slowed operations. The committee expects
that COVID-19 will continue to affect such activities in an
unpredictable and non-linear fashion.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $550.0
million across the Operation and Maintenance accounts to
account for the impacts of COVID-19 on training and operations.
Bulk fuel adjustment
The budget request included $7.7 billion across the
Operation and Maintenance accounts, both base and Overseas
Contingency Operations, for the purchase of bulk fuel.
Analysis conducted by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) using the most recent data indicates that the Department
of Defense will underexecute its bulk fuel purchases by $1.5
billion in fiscal year 2021 owing to the rapid decrease in bulk
fuel prices. The committee commends GAO for its forward-leaning
work in analyzing bulk fuel prices to assist Congress in
decision-making given the unique uncertainty of the current
fuel markets.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease in the
Operation and Maintenance accounts of $1.5 billion to account
for likely underexecution in bulk fuel purchases.
Foreign currency adjustment
The budget request included $5.4 billion in the Operation
and Maintenance and Military Personnel accounts for activities
requiring conversion of U.S. dollars to foreign currencies.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office has repeatedly issued recommendations for the Department
of Defense to analyze its Foreign Currency Fluctuations,
Defense account balance given historical trends and managerial
usage of the account.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $450.0
million across the Operation and Maintenance and Military
Personnel accounts.
Items of Special Interest
Adversary air
The committee is aware of the ongoing and growing
requirements for near-peer representative air-to-air training
using aggressor aircraft with capability similar to that of the
advanced adversaries that these aircraft are designed to
replicate. Additionally, it is becoming clear that this
requirement will not be met in the near-term with solely
organic service assets.
Therefore the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force and the Secretary of the Navy, no later than February 1,
2021, to submit to the congressional defense committees a
report that sets forth a plan to develop and implement an Air
Aggressor Enterprise that incorporates advanced organic and
contract services to maintain full-spectrum readiness for Air
Force and Navy 4th and 5th generation aircraft.
The report shall include: (1) A description of the current
Air Aggressor Enterprise for the Air Force and Navy; (2) A
description of the needs, resources, and requirements that the
Air Force and Navy require to maintain full-spectrum readiness
for all required joint and single service exercises as well as
daily, home station, in-garrison training requirements; (3) A
description and identification of any tactical, operational, or
strategic risk that is incurred by maintaining, retiring, or
modernizing the current Air Aggressor Enterprise; (4) A
description of the basic requirements for an aircraft that can
replicate a modern ``2030'' adversary in the air domain; and
(5) An assessment of the costs and benefits of organic versus
contract-supplied adversary air.
Air Force aerospace ground equipment
As the Air Force implements its ``Base of the Future''
concept, the committee encourages the use of new technologies
and alternatives to the current method of powering aircraft on
the flight-line through diesel generators and aerospace ground
equipment (AGE). Existing AGE lack efficiency and can be costly
for operations and repairs. Electrical Ground Power Units
(eGPUs) can use automotive propulsion batteries to power an
electronics package and be integrated onto a self-propelled
cart, providing near silent operation while eliminating
emissions. The committee understands that eGPUs could also
increase overall system efficiency by nearly 75 percent and
provide the additional function of having a one-solution power
system to support a variety of loads. Furthermore, the
elimination of mechanical moving parts and diesel fuel could
decrease the ongoing need for periodic maintenance, which could
reduce the total ownership costs of the units to the Air Force.
By leveraging the economies of scale provided by using proven
commercial automotive batteries to power aircraft on the
flight-line, the Air Force could see a reduction in
development, procurement, and lifecycle costs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Air
Force to brief the committee not later than October 1, 2020, on
the following: (1) Readiness status of the current AGE fleet;
(2) Sustainment and operation and maintenance costs of the
current AGE fleet; (3) Identification of alternate types of AGE
that can provide flight-line power to aircraft; and (4) An
assessment of total life cycle cost savings of replacing
current diesel-powered flight-line AGE with eGPUs.
Air Force Reserve runway infrastructure
The committee believes that the Air Force's physical runway
infrastructure is an essential component of the readiness of
U.S. operational and strategic forces, including the crucial
reserve component forces that support the National Defense
Strategy. The committee believes that the maintenance and
extension of such assets is critical to launching aircraft
quickly and effectively across a variety of mission areas. The
committee is concerned by multiple examples where the Air Force
Reserve has yet to or is not addressing these requirements with
urgency.
In particular, the committee notes that the continued
operation at Gila Bend Air Force Auxiliary Field, home of the
56th Fighter Wing, is crucial to emergency operations for both
Luke Air Force Base and Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. The
committee understands that the current end-of-runway turnaround
does not meet current requirements, thus requiring the 56th
Fighter Wing to operate under a waiver. The committee further
understands that Gila Bend accounted for 18,000 sorties in 2018
alone and will continue to increase as the 56th Fighter Wing
fields additional F-35As. Additionally, the committee notes
that the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station's existing runway is
not long enough to allow KC-135 aircraft to take off or land at
high gross weights under all weather conditions. The committee
further understands that the current taxi pattern does not
allow for the use of the full runway without back taxi, which
is not an option during the free-flow launch of aircraft
required to support certain critical missions. The committee
notes that both examples, if not addressed, increase risk to
aircraft and crew safety during inclement weather or other
emergency situations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to conduct an assessment and provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, no later than November 1,
2020, detailing the operational requirements for Air Force
Reserve and Air Guard airfields in addition to the state of
airfields where runway degradation currently poses a threat to
operations. Additionally, the assessment shall include a list
of all runways currently utilizing a waiver authority of
current requirements and the cost associated for improving said
runways to meet current requirements. The briefing shall
include the operational requirement for airfields, an
assessment of the impact to operations, cost to repair, cost to
replace, remaining useful life, and narrative on the required
daily maintenance to ensure that the runway is acceptable for
full operations at the installation as well as any challenges
with infrastructure acquisition methods and processes.
If required, a classified annex may accompany the
unclassified briefing.
Air Force Special Operations Command total force utilization
The committee believes that the Air Force Special
Operations Command (AFSOC) should make every effort to fully
utilize the total force to meet aircrew training and
operational requirements in platforms like the AC-130J, CV-22,
MC-12W, and A-29 in order to meet the requirements of the
National Defense Strategy (NDS). The committee notes that
AFSOC's 2020 Strategic Guidance document indicated the need to
``appropriately structure and resource its training enterprise
to ensure full-spectrum readiness across the total force.''
Additionally, the committee believes that AFSOC should fully
utilize infrastructure and personnel across the total force, to
include those of the Air National Guard. Such assets include
hanger space, taxiway, and parking space at available
installations. Furthermore, the committee believes that AFSOC
should fully utilize Active/National Guard associated
installations with access to bombing ranges and large-scale
military operating areas, low-level training routes, and
advanced training environments.
Therefore, the committee encourages AFSOC to work with the
National Guard Bureau to fully utilize the total force in
support of AFSOC's strategic objectives and in furtherance of
the NDS.
Assessment of potential transfer of real property, equipment and
facilities in the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative
Program
The Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative Program carries
out the destruction of chemical weapons produced by the United
States as required under the Chemical Weapons Convention, which
entered into force on April 29, 1997. The Department of Defense
is responsible for the construction of facilities with
specialized equipment to perform such destruction where the
stockpile of chemical weapons is located. Given the highly
toxic nature of this process, much of the equipment and
facilities cannot be re-utilized, except for a small number of
limited cases where re-use by local communities would be
beneficial. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
report to the congressional defense committees, no later than
February 28, 2021, on the ability of the Assembled Chemical
Weapons Alternatives Program to transfer for follow on use by
the military or to local communities real property, equipment,
and facilities, safe to use for additional duties at minimal
cost to the U.S. Government and consistent with section
1521(d)(2) of title 50, United States Code, including necessary
legislative changes if so required. The committee directs the
Department of Defense to engage with relevant local
communities, as appropriate, in preparation of the required
report as well as planning related to any such transfers.
Backup power technology
The committee is concerned that the critical
telecommunications and cybersecurity networks on our military
installations throughout the United States and abroad are
increasingly susceptible to power outages caused by attacks
from our adversaries or by natural disasters. Loss of power to
communications equipment contradicts mission readiness and
assurance and must be mitigated.
The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense
to ensure that all military installations across the military
services have backup power technology that adheres to master
energy plans as well mission critical resilience and
cybersecurity measures, meets performance standards set by the
Environmental Protection Agency, and provides power for no less
than 48 hours without refueling. The committee also strongly
encourages the Department to pursue technologies with low noise
while ensuring cost-effectiveness.
Briefing on contested logistics in support of the National Defense
Strategy
The committee strongly supports the National Defense
Strategy (NDS) and the Department of Defense's focus in
preparing both the individual military services and the
combatant commands for great power competition. The committee
notes that, in the event of a large scale conflict, the
Department will be required to maneuver in a contested
environment, which will require logistics planning for
manpower, liquid energy, munitions, sustainment, and many other
facets of projecting a forward presence. The committee believes
that the individual military service components' working
together with the United States Transportation Command
(TRANSCOM) will be essential to ensuring that the Department is
ready and resourced to project and sustain U.S. forces.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with Commander, TRANSCOM, to brief the
committee no later than October 15, 2020, on how the Department
creates and sustains long-term logistics plans to inform the
NDS to meet the requirements of great power competition. The
briefing should address but not be limited to: (1) How
logistics-centric war games inform future warplans; (2) How the
Department shares best practices across the military services
to improve potential outcomes for issues like operational
energy; (3) The current logistics-focused documents used to
support the NDS; and (4) The Department's view on whether a
separate logistics-focused strategy document as an addendum to
the NDS would bolster current plans. This briefing should also
consider the unique geographic constraints, security risks, and
potential for operations under a contested environment and any
other issues the Department deems appropriate.
If required, the briefing may include a classified annex.
Briefing on microturbine technology for military applications
The committee notes the importance of installation and
operational energy in support of both basing and contested
logistics, which directly support the National Defense
Strategy. The committee is aware of advances in microturbine
and mobile substation technology that now enables rapid
deployments of resilient power units that could maximize
operational flexibility by using multiple fuel types, including
natural gas and diesel, as well as alternative fuels such as
propane, hydrogen, ethanol, biogas, and landfill gas, depending
on fuel availability in the theater of operations. The
committee understands that these units are compact, that they
can be transported via air, sea, rail, or road, and that they
can be operational in a matter of hours. The committee further
understands that microturbines not only produce potential fuel
savings but can also connect to existing power assets using a
micro-grid controller to ensure that all assets are used in the
most efficient manner. The committee notes that this power
generation should allow for lower overall fuel usage and fewer
fuel convoys on the road, which are vulnerable to potential
enemy action.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Army, who serves as the
executive agent for Joint Force Logistics, to review this
technology and study its military applications. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
committee on the potential applicability and effectiveness of
microturbines for both installation and operational energy
needs no later than November 1, 2020. If deemed viable, the
briefing should also include a cost estimate and schedule for
conducting a proof of concept demonstration.
Cold spray applications for Department of Defense sustainment and
medical activities
The committee recognizes the importance of further
advancement, procurement, and deployment of high pressure cold
spray systems that can be used to repair high performance
materials for the Department of Defense. The committee highly
encourages further integration of portable deployable high
pressure cold spray systems. Such systems will potentially
enable improved performance, readiness, and sustainability of
deployed joint forces. Examples may include ships underway,
deployed ground forces, and expeditionary aviation units.
The committee encourages the Department to explore
additional cold spray applications during original manufacture
of new weapon systems as well as for the application of
antimicrobial copper surfaces. The committee recognizes that
copper surfaces have proven effective at reducing or
eliminating bacteria and viruses on touch surfaces and that
cold spray technology is an efficient and cost-effective method
of coating touch surfaces with antimicrobial copper. These
applications may provide means of preventing the spread of
harmful pathogens and reducing hospital-acquired infections.
Consideration for local broadcasting and traditional media for
Department of Defense advertising
The committee encourages the service chiefs, in
coordination with their respective recruiting commands, to give
all due consideration toward the use of local broadcasting and
traditional media sources when advertising for the Department
of Defense.
Consideration of variable refrigerant flow systems
The committee acknowledges that variable refrigerant flow
systems already deployed at United States Army, Air Force, and
Navy installations, as well as on ships, play an important role
in assisting the Department of Defense in achieving energy
efficiency requirements. Further, the committee recognizes that
variable refrigerant flow systems provide the Department with a
number of benefits, including precise individual control and
inverter technology to minimize energy consumption and optimize
energy savings, adaptable designs suitable for both retrofits
and new builds, large allowances for piping length and level
difference to provide a flexible layout, and individualized
climate control settings to maximize comfort.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department, in
selecting equipment for heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning, to consider life-cycle costs, energy efficiency,
design flexibility, and individualized comfort. Additionally,
when considering modifications to the Unified Facilities
Criteria regarding the use of variable refrigerant flow systems
at Department facilities, the committee encourages the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment to work
collaboratively with industry to mitigate technical concerns,
optimize equipment performance, minimize energy consumption,
and maximize energy savings.
Defense Personal Property Program
The committee appreciates the work the United States
Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) has undertaken to address
shortfalls with the Defense Personal Property Program (DP3)
through a single contractor known as the Global Household Goods
Contract (GHC). The committee appreciates TRANSCOM's
responsiveness to congressional inquiries regarding this topic
and looks forward to continued transparency from TRANSCOM.
The committee remains concerned, however, of GHC's
implementation as it relates to remote and isolated
installations. The committee is aware that locations, such as
Alaska and Hawaii, generally have fewer shipping companies to
assist in boosting capacity and much higher transit costs due
to the time, space, and distance required for such moves. The
committee notes that these unique challenges are often not
considered in the planning and execution of Nation-wide
government programs, leading to poor customer experiences,
which could reflect poorly on the newly established GHC
program.
Accordingly, as TRANSCOM begins its transition from DP3 to
GHC, the committee encourages the use of small businesses to
ensure that capacity and quality of service are maintained
across all installation locations, especially in areas with
remote, isolated, and insular installations.
Defense Personal Property Program
The committee is aware of the continued frustrations of
servicemembers and their families with the quality and
efficiency of the Defense Personal Property Program (DP3),
provided by U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM). The
committee notes that DP3 arranges for the movement and storage
of about 400,000 personal property shipments of servicemembers
and their families annually--40 percent of them during peak
moving season. The committee understands that TRANSCOM has
identified problems meeting peak moving season demand and
addressing longstanding quality issues.
The committee notes that TRANSCOM announced that, no
earlier than April 30, 2020, it would award a Global Household
Goods Contract to a single commercial move manager to oversee
DP3 activities that relate to the movement and storage-in-
transit of household goods. While the committee is encouraged
by TRANSCOM's desire to improve the program's delivery of
services to servicemembers, the committee believes that the
Department of Defense should maintain certain services for
servicemembers. The committee expects that servicemembers and
their families will continue to have the option to utilize or
reject any vendor to assist in their Personally Procured Move
(PPM) relocation. Further, military exchanges should continue
to enter into contracts and arrange marketing programs with PPM
relocation vendors, as they deem appropriate, and market PPM
relocation vendors to servicemembers who select the PPM
relocation option.
Additionally, as the Department moves forward to implement
the Global Household Goods Contract, the committee remains
concerned about the recommendations described by the Government
Accountability Office in a report titled ``Movement of
Household Goods: DOD Should Take Additional Steps to Assess
Progress toward Achieving Program Goals'' (GAO-20-295). The
committee strongly encourages the Commander, TRANSCOM, to
develop a process for tracking data during the first 3 years of
the Global Household Goods Contract to inform the planned
manpower study during the third year of the contract. The
committee also encourages the development of performance
metrics for those DP3 activities that will still be performed
by the military services, such as servicemember counseling and
claims resolution. The committee believes that servicemembers
and their families deserve a process that relies on quality
data and include performance metrics to ensure accountability.
Defense Readiness Reporting Reform briefing
The committee recognizes that the Defense Readiness Report
System must evolve to meet the demands of irregular warfare
environments and capture whether force elements are able to
compete and win in a high-intensity near-peer scenario. The
committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's ongoing
efforts in readiness reporting reform, guided by the findings
and milestones established in the Department's recent
assessment of the current readiness reporting system, Defense
Readiness Reporting Systems Reform (D-C613F67), and applauds
the Department for its assessment of how readiness reporting
can be improved using new analytical technologies.
The committee believes that the Department can benefit
greatly from improving its readiness reporting, as implementing
the National Defense Strategy depends on a more lethal and
ready force. The committee notes that the report outlined
specific measures the Department could take to successfully
measure readiness of components and therefore enable a more
effective warfighting force. The committee further notes that
this report identifies threat-based reporting, improved
information technology systems, interoperability, and agility
as some of the elements required of the future data
architecture. For example, the Department found that effective
data modeling requires artificial intelligence-enabled
technologies and that commercial-off-the-shelf products would
benefit a future analytics workbench. The committee agrees that
leveraging artificial intelligence-enabled technologies would
allow the Department to better understand system data and make
actionable decisions in near-real time.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
consider inclusion of artificial intelligence as it develops
guidance for the Defense Readiness Reporting System and expects
the Department to implement the recommendations from its
report, D-C613F67.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing on Department of Defense
Instruction 7730.66, Guidance for the Defense Readiness
Reporting System, and Department of Defense Directive 7730.65,
Department of Defense Readiness Reporting System, as well as an
update on implementing the aforementioned recommendations no
later than February 1, 2021.
Diverse training for special operations forces
The committee notes that training of special operations
forces (SOF) requires access to diverse venues and locations to
enable realistic military training. In particular, training in
austere, remote, and rough terrain supports the development of
operational tactics, techniques, and procedures and testing of
special operations-peculiar equipment. The committee believes
that former surface mine sites may provide SOF with training
opportunities for accomplishing SOF-unique tasks and encourages
U.S. Special Operations Command to evaluate the use of such
locations for future training opportunities.
Eastern Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR)
The committee notes that the Air Force Development Test
Center's mission is to plan, conduct, and evaluate testing of
U.S. and allied non-nuclear munitions, electronic combat,
target acquisition, weapon delivery, base intrusion protection,
and supporting systems. That mission is executed at Eglin Air
Force Base in Florida, whose land test areas encompass 463,000
acres and water test areas, including the Eastern Gulf Test and
Training Range (EGTTR), which cover 86,500 square miles in the
Gulf of Mexico, making it the Department of Defense's (DOD)
largest test and training area in the world.
The committee notes that the DOD uses the EGGTR to develop
and maintain the readiness of our combat forces and that the
EGGTR is critical to achieving the objectives contained in the
National Defense Strategy. The EGTTR connects test and training
ranges and capabilities across the Eastern Gulf of Mexico
extending from Key West to NW Florida. The test and training
areas contain multiple live-fire bombing ranges, including
Pinecastle Range, Avon Park Air Force Range, and the Eglin
Bombing Range, supporting simultaneous maritime, air, and land
training exercises.
Due to its capabilities, the EGTTR complex is an integral
part of DOD's Major Range and Test Facilities Base and the
Training Resources Strategy. Additionally, the EGTTR supports
multiple users, which include all military services within the
DOD, other government agencies, foreign countries, and private
companies. The Air Force currently expends annually in the
EGTTR approximately 550 bombs, 580 missiles, 1,218,000 rounds
of ammunition, and 637,000 countermeasures.
All the military services, plus other government agencies,
allied nations, and commercial entities, use the EGTTR to test
the newest weapons and to ensure that legacy inventory weapons
still work as intended.
The committee understands that emerging technologies such
as hypersonics, autonomous systems, and advanced sub-surface
systems could require enlarged testing and training footprints.
Therefore, the committee recognizes the importance of the
EGTTR to the national security of the United States.
Electronic component failures
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
found that electronics maintenance is a leading driver of
weapon systems non-availability, accounting for over $10
billion in fiscal year 2018 sustainment costs. This has
exacerbated electronics availability issues and resulted in
over 278,000 days of end-item system nonavailability and
approximately $3 billion in non-value-added sustainment costs
annually.
To address these issues, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees, no later than December 31, 2020, that
analyzes this persistent maintenance issue. The report should:
recommend best practices to be used by the Department of
Defense to address electronics component failures due to
intermittent faults; identify responsible organizations in the
military services and the Defense Agencies and Department of
Defense Field Activities to address these issues; and include
strategic plans and a roadmap to field intermittent fault
detection and isolation capabilities.
Emerging viral threats
The committee believes that emerging viral threats such as
the 2019 novel coronavirus highlight the need for innovative
and real-time forecasting and modeling techniques to ensure
that the U.S. military and civilians are best positioned to
respond, as appropriate, to emerging public health and national
security threats. The committee encourages the Department of
Defense (DOD) to leverage emerging infectious disease
forecasting and modeling methods and data developed by
university and private partners to the extent practicable. The
committee also encourages the Defense Threat Reduction Agency,
in collaboration with other agencies such as the Department of
Health and Human Services, to examine the zoonotic features of
emerging viruses, such as COVID-19 and Ebola, with the goal of
understanding how such pathogens cause disease in humans and
the potential impact on U.S. national security interests.
Engine optimization initiatives at Tinker Air Force Base
The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy
(NDS) requires a lethal and ready force and, to support that
force, aviation platforms will have a key role in strategic
airlift. Jet engine ingestion of debris and contaminants during
operations erodes engine compressor blades, decreasing engine
efficiency and power, increasing fuel burn and exhaust gas
temperature, and causing higher maintenance costs and decreased
aircraft availability.
The committee understands that the Air Force Office of
Operational Energy, in conjunction with the Advanced Power
Technology Office, Air Force Research Laboratory, Naval Air
Systems, commercial airlines, industry, and the Air Force Life
Cycle Management Center Propulsion Directorate at Tinker Air
Force Base, is exploring blade coating certifications for the
F-117 engine, blade scanning testing for the F-108 engine
program, and an engine foam wash. The committee further
understands that the Air Force is currently validating return
on investment data and will have an implementation report of
any proven concepts later this year.
The committee notes that coating high pressure compressor
blades with erosion/corrosion-resistant finish preserves
structures and increases time between repairs. Laser and
infrared scanning of high pressure compressor blades can be
used to determine physical characteristics of the airfoils and
group them to ``tune'' the engine and improve efficiency.
Finally, washing engines on wing with atomized water to remove
debris from the compressor blade airfoil surfaces can be used
to maintain optimal efficiency and deliver a cooler running
engine.
The committee agrees with the Air Force's assessment that,
if the return on investment can be demonstrated through testing
and certification, these optimization initiatives can reduce
fuel consumption of the largest USAF consumers and lead to
second and third order benefits, including improved performance
and increased readiness. The committee understands that
industry is already realizing fuel savings of up to 3 percent
using this technology. A roughly 2 percent fuel savings for the
KC-135, for example, is $17.0 million (2018 fuel expenditures).
The committee is encouraged by these potential savings as
there are secondary and tertiary benefits in readiness and in
the performance of contested logistics missions and looks
forward to the final implementation report.
Improving depot best practice sharing
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) has issued several reports on the challenges
experienced at the organic maintenance depots, including
challenges pertaining to deteriorating equipment and facility
condition, filling critical personnel skill gaps, meeting
service repair needs, and excesses in carryover of workload.
These problems can lead to delays in the maintenance of weapon
systems that ultimately affect readiness by impeding the
military services' ability to conduct training and provide
forces to perform missions around the world. Despite these
challenges, it is not clear the extent to which the Department
of Defense (DOD) is assessing and mitigating the risk of
maintenance delays when identifying its depot workload
requirements.
The committee notes that the GAO's most recent report on
the subject, ``DOD Can Benefit from Further Sharing of Best
Practices and Lessons Learned'' (GAO-20-116), outlined specific
areas where the DOD can improve both its information sharing
practices as well as implementation of said practices between
the military services. For example, the GAO found that while
the DOD has more than 60 working groups, the Office of the
Secretary of Defense does not maintain a centralized list of
working groups nor points of contact. Additionally, the GAO
found that differing military service priorities and strategies
were also a barrier to successful best practice sharing. The
committee agrees with GAO's assessment that the inability to
locate these working groups combined with competing service
priorities can impede the sharing of best practices.
The committee notes the benefits of cross-service sharing
of best practices. The committee was encouraged, for example,
to learn that the Navy Fleet Readiness Center Southwest
implemented an intermittent fault detection system from Ogden
Air Logistics Complex, an Air Force organization, reducing
repair time from 90 days to 30 days while quadrupling the
generators' time between failures. The committee further notes,
however, that according to the GAO, the Army stated that, while
it established lessons learned for sharing maintenance best
practices and lessons learned, it did not maintain them due to
organizational restructuring and resource constraints.
The committee notes that the GAO provided two
recommendations, both of which the Department of Defense
concurred with: 1) The Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment should ensure that the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Materiel Readiness create,
share, and maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date list of all
DOD sharing venues, including points of contact, related to
depot maintenance; and 2) The Secretary of the Army should
ensure that Army Materiel Command reestablishes and maintains
organizations dedicated to sharing materiel best practices and
lessons learned, as required by Army regulations.
Accordingly, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense
to implement the recommendations of GAO-20-116.
Informing War Plans Through Accurate War Gaming
The committee notes the 2018 National Defense Strategy
calls for resilient and agile logistics in the era of great
power competition. The committee believes that the delivery of
liquid energy, including, but not limited to JP5, JP8, Jet A1,
and F76, is crucial to achieving that success.
The committee notes that the Air Force Office of
Operational Energy has developed modeling and simulation tools
to analyze fuel consumption and installation supply during
wargames. The committee believes that these tools can better
inform wargame outcomes and must be designed to reflect the new
reality of the contested logistics environment that
characterizes the operating environment to improve future
warplans.
The committee encourages the Joint Staff to work in
coordination with the Air Force Office of Operational Energy to
produce energy-informed warplans through wargaming, campaign
analysis, and modeling and simulation.
Infrared uniform management
The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy
cites growing threats from China and Russia, whose forces are
equipped with thermal detection sensors. The committee believes
that, to counter this threat, it is important that
servicemembers are equipped with uniforms that are effective in
concealing servicemembers from enemy infrared (IR) and thermal
sensors and durable enough to withstand wear and tear from
combat operations. The committee further believes that, as
advanced IR and thermal detection technology becomes
increasingly available to the Nation's military competitors,
effective and durable personal signature management becomes
critical to force protection and mission execution.
The committee notes that the military services have
previously established baseline standards for flame resistant
uniforms for servicemembers deployed in hostile areas, which
include a laundering durability requirement to ensure that
servicemembers have an enduring protective capability that
extends well into the predicted service life of the uniform.
However, the committee understands that the military services
do not currently maintain a similar durability requirement for
uniforms with IR signature management capability. The committee
understands that recent technical developments in flame
resistant garments have begun to reduce costs while offering
options that include a durable IR management capability. The
committee notes that these emerging technological developments
could provide the military services with ways to protect their
forces, regardless of the environment, without imposing undue
burden on already strained budgets.
As such, the committee encourages the military services to
explore these technologies further and to incorporate durable
IR signature management capabilities designed to fully protect
our men and women in uniform.
Installation energy
The committee recognizes that the energy consumption of
large, energy-intensive systems, such as heating, ventilation,
and air conditioning (HVAC) systems of the Department of
Defense (DOD), are monitored and managed by industrial control
systems (ICS) to maximize their efficiency and cost savings.
Unfortunately, computers, printers, and other smaller items
plugged into an electrical system are not. While the More
Situational Awareness for Industrial Control Systems (MOSAICS)
program is focused on the cybersecurity of ICS platforms, it is
not aimed at providing energy cost savings. Recent technologies
have emerged on the market to provide comprehensive plug-load
energy savings with cybersecurity protection.
Therefore, to further a DOD priority to leverage building
control systems to achieve substantial energy savings in a
highly secure architecture, the committee authorizes and
encourages the Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot
program that incorporates technologies relating to energy
management on an installation that is not reliant on a single
telecommunications provider or energy provider. This approach
will assure that, if successful, the technology suite and
architecture will be easily implemented across the DOD and will
be able to generate the maximum level of energy savings in a
secure environment.
The pilot should: (1) Include at least three installations;
(2) Incorporate energy efficiency technology for an entire
plug-load (large and small systems); (3) Incorporate
comprehensive cybersecurity technology; (4) Integrate with
current and future architectures; (5) Allow scalability and
flexibility; and (6) Avoid single points of failure. The pilot
program shall sunset on September 30, 2023. Within 90 days of
completion of the pilot, the DOD shall brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House Representatives on
the results of the pilot, whether or not it should be expanded
as appropriate, and explanation as to the outcome of that
decision.
Installation Utility and Energy Authority Integration
The committee supports the Department of Defense's (DOD's)
efforts to improve installation utility resilience. The
committee recognizes that the DOD has a variety of statutory
authorities that can be used to fulfill the Department's
installation utility needs, including third-party financing,
utilities privatization, and capital investment using
appropriated dollars.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the congressional defense committees, not later than
April 1, 2021, on initiatives that leverage and integrate
existing utility and energy authorities to support installation
resiliency projects that improve utilities efficiency, upgrade
infrastructure, and strengthen mission assurance.
Joint Military Information Support Operations WebOps Center
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) is designated as the coordinating authority for web-
based military information support operations. The committee
supports the establishment of the Joint Military Information
Support Operations WebOps Center (JMWC) at SOCOM to enable
global coordination of web-based MISO, counter transregional
misinformation challenges, share best practices, and leverage
efficiencies whenever possible.
However, the committee is concerned that the overall
resource requirements to support the JMWC, in both funding and
personnel, are not well understood and should be better refined
as the JMWC seeks to achieve initial operating capacity later
this year. Additionally, the committee believes that projected
personnel requirements for some combatant commands are
excessive and not aligned with the priorities outlined in the
National Defense Strategy. The committee also believes that
SOCOM should prioritize the development of rigorous standards
and assessments to appropriately characterize the success or
failure of web-based messaging efforts and make recommendations
for re-directing resources when appropriate.
Military Munitions Response Program
The committee recognizes and supports the ongoing and
costly efforts by the Department of Defense to address the
significant challenges of cleaning up military installations
contaminated by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Additionally, the Department must weigh the pressing priority
of executing the Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) in
a manner consistent with its budget request. The committee is
also concerned about public safety at the over 5,000 MMRP sites
across the country that potentially contain unexploded
ordnance. The committee understands that tough choices must be
made by the Department and the military services when balancing
the priorities of environmental contamination and unexploded
ordnance in executing the MMRP. The committee strongly
encourages the Department and the military services to execute
and obligate funds for the MMRP within the environmental
restoration accounts in accordance with their budget requests
as best as possible, given the competing priorities of MMRP and
the need to clean up installations contaminated by per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Military working dogs Comptroller General review
The committee recognizes the importance of working dogs,
who serve honorably alongside servicemembers and support
agencies across the Federal Government. However, the committee
is concerned by the September 2019 State Department Office of
the Inspector General report on the ``Evaluation of the Anti-
terrorism Assistance Explosive Detection Canine Program--Health
and Welfare,'' which documented serious animal welfare concerns
for working dogs.
Given that the committee recognizes the importance of
welfare protections for humane treatment, the committee directs
the Comptroller General of the United States to submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report no later than February 1, 2021, that
reviews the use of working dogs across the Federal Government
and evaluates whether welfare standards for working dogs are
upheld. This report should include the total number of working
dogs at each Federal entity and a summary of their support
roles.
Additionally, the Comptroller General should summarize any
Federal policies related to the protection or health and
welfare of working dogs and evaluate whether Federal entities
with working dogs implement and adhere to these policies.
Finally, the Comptroller General should provide recommendations
to strengthen oversight and protection of working dogs,
including suggestions to standardize contracts relating to the
use of working dogs by foreign countries or Federal
contractors. These written agreements should ensure a mutual
understanding regarding the health, welfare, and retirement of
working dogs, require that any foreign partner or contractor
provide welfare evaluations and healthcare for canines, and
stipulate that medical needs after deployment or service are
met.
National all-domain warfighting center
The committee recognizes the critical need for the National
Guard, as an essential component of the Joint Force, to conduct
all-domain training and exercises in support of the National
Defense Strategy (NDS).
The committee notes the Joint Staff's development of an
all-domain warfighting concept to support the NDS. It also
notes that the National Guard Bureau has successfully sponsored
exercise Northern Strike as a Joint National Training
Capability accredited exercise to provide readiness-building
opportunities for all the military services through joint
combined arms training. This exercise occurs at Camp Grayling
Joint Maneuver Training Center and the Alpena Combat Readiness
Training Center, installations which have already provided
opportunities for units from any service, allies, and partners
to achieve or sustain proficiency in conducting joint command
and control, air, maritime, and ground maneuver integration,
and the synchronization of lethal and non-lethal (cyber) fires
in a joint, multinational major combat operations environment
that is scalable across unit resources levels. It also has
multi-modal capabilities to train and exercise joint logistics
and sustainment at operationally relevant distances. This
training environment addresses training gaps and builds
readiness at multiple echelons with the scope and scale
required to address emerging challenges of near-peer
competitors.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army and the
Secretary of the Air Force to appropriately resource training
and exercise opportunities for the Army and Air National Guards
to maintain readiness in an all-domain training environment to
the maximum extent feasible.
Naval expeditionary sustainment and repair
The committee supports investments that align mature
technology-based solutions with expeditionary shipboard
sustainment and repair concepts of operations to improve
warship resiliency, lethality, and availability.
Navy Converged Enterprise Resource Planning
The committee supports Navy efforts to modernize financial
management and logistics systems using best-in-class commercial
enterprise resource planning solutions and notes strong initial
progress in this area. The committee urges the Navy to adopt a
flexible staffing model to scale progress across the Navy
enterprise, ensure cost-effective staffing, keep pace with
innovation, and leverage the value of cloud computing-enabled
platforms. To achieve this, the committee believes that the
Navy should avoid excessive on-site place of performance
requirements, restrictive experience level requirements
inconsistent with commercial practices, and other policies that
restrict available workforce, increase costs, and reduce the
scalability needed to achieve audit readiness and logistics
modernization goals. The committee notes that the recent
challenges in response to the COVID-19 crisis highlighted the
need for flexible policies with respect to place of performance
of appropriate Department of Defense missions.
Navy shipyard infrastructure optimization
The committee notes that the Department of the Navy
operates and maintains four public shipyards in the United
States: Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Virginia; Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard, Maine; Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Washington; and
Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, Hawaii. The committee recognizes
the vital role these shipyards play in generating readiness,
supporting the Navy's surface and submarine fleet by performing
depot- and intermediate-level maintenance, modernization work,
emergent repairs, and in-activations.
In recognizing the importance of maintaining these public
shipyards, in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), the committee directed the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees to address shortfalls in the public shipyard
enterprise. The committee notes that the Navy created the
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan (SIOP) within the
Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) to recapitalize and
modernize the infrastructure at all four public shipyards. The
committee understands that subsequently the Navy established a
program office, PMS-555, to help coordinate the various Navy
stakeholders as they optimized the SIOP and began
implementation of the plan.
The committee believes the infrastructure improvements
needed at the Navy's public shipyards must be consistent and
keep pace with the anticipated growth of Navy force structure,
consistent with the 30-year shipbuilding plan, required
annually pursuant to section 231 of title 10, United States
Code. The committee is concerned that necessary SIOP
infrastructure investments have seen little military
construction or facilities, sustainment, restoration and
modernization (FSRM) funding programmed to date. These
investments are critical to ensuring the readiness of the Navy
and for maintaining the fleet. The committee appreciates that
the Navy is trying to optimize the program but remains
concerned that further delays will add cost and complicate
fulfillment of fleet maintenance needs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees every 6 months, beginning on September 1, 2020, on
the status of the SIOP. Specifically, the briefing should
include updates on the following plans: (1) Personnel Roadmap;
(2) Infrastructure Development Plan; (3) Metrics Assessment
Plan; (4) Workload Management Plan; and (5) Funding and
Authorities Plan.
Additionally, the briefing shall include a listing of
equipment from Federal Supply Class 3411 (Boring Machines),
3416 (Lathes), and 3441 (Bending and Forming Machines) that has
been unserviceable for over 30 consecutive days. The listing
shall include, for each such piece of equipment: (1) The reason
for the delayed repair; (2) The availability of technical
representatives from the manufacturer to provide assistance in
diagnosing and repairing the discrepancy; and (3) The estimated
time to repair.
Lastly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide to the congressional defense committees a report with
the annual budget request for each of fiscal years 2022 through
2027. This report shall include details surrounding the
anticipated investment in the public shipyards contained in the
future years defense program, including military construction
and FSRM-funded projects. These investments shall be broken out
by project, public shipyard, and fiscal year.
Partnerships with industrial base for hypersonic and directed energy
programs
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of the
defense industrial base. The committee also recognizes that
hypersonic and directed energy programs are developing crucial
platforms in support of the National Defense Strategy. The
committee believes that, in order to efficiently utilize the
combined capabilities of the organic and non-organic industrial
bases, the Department of Defense should pursue partnerships and
joint ventures between non-organic and established Centers of
Excellence within the organic industrial base for any contract
actions pertaining to enduring research and development,
design, prototyping, testing, production, and sustainment,
including for hypersonic and directed energy programs.
Preservation of the Force and Families program
The committee recognizes the near- and long-term physical,
mental, and emotional effects of nearly two decades of
continuous operations in high-stress environments experienced
by our special operations forces (SOF). One of the top
priorities of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) is to
take care of its people, and, in responding to the demand
signal from SOF components, SOCOM created the Preservation of
the Force and Families (POTFF) program. The committee strongly
supports all aspects of the POTFF initiative, especially the
nesting of human, psychological, spiritual, and social
performance support programs within an integrated care model,
intended to maximize access and minimize stigma.
The committee also recognizes the stress caused by high
operational tempo and unexpected deployment and training
schedules on the families of SOF personnel and strongly
supports the POTFF programs that provide families with the
tools to deal with these unique challenges. The committee
encourages SOCOM across all echelons to continue to prioritize
the POTFF program and to utilize all tools at its disposal to
drive forward the POTFF's continuous innovation and evolution
to meet the needs of the SOF force and family.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration program
The committee recognizes the important role that the
Department of Defense plays as a Federal partner in multi-state
watershed restoration projects and the importance of the
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration (REPI)
program in advancing a critical military goal: limiting
encroachment and land use conflicts on and near military
installations.
The committee strongly encourages the Department to support
REPI projects that leverage other Federal and non-Federal
funding sources to deploy best management practices on lands
conserved through the REPI program to enhance resilience and
improve water quality in watersheds where the Department has
restoration partnership obligations and where land subsidence
compounds the threat of sea level fluctuation and associated
flooding.
Red Hill
The committee encourages the Navy and the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA) to prioritize engagement with local community
stakeholders as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and
the State of Hawaii as they continue efforts to carry out
requirements established in the Administrative Order of Consent
(AOC). The purpose of the AOC is to ensure that the drinking
water supply is protected while allowing the Red Hill Bulk Fuel
Storage Facility adjacent to Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam,
Hawaii, to remain in use as a vital resource for our national
defense. The committee also encourages the Navy to continue to
hold quarterly informational updates on the Red Hill Bulk Fuel
Storage Facility, as per the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), that are open to the
public.
Additionally, the committee supports the Navy's continuing
effort to improve the integrity of its bulk fuel storage
systems, including its plan to acquire and implement a
secondary containment solution for Red Hill where 27,000
gallons of fuel leaked in January 2014. The committee strongly
encourages the Secretary of the Navy to appoint a senior
executive solely responsible for overseeing and executing the
Navy's obligations related to Red Hill, including those
detailed in its October 2019 Tank Upgrade Alternative report.
This individual should be given decision authority related to
research and development, procurement, resourcing requirements,
and community engagement, while continuing to rely on expert
advice concerning engineering matters that affect the integrity
of the bulk fuel storage facility.
Report on Department of Defense small arms training system capabilities
The committee notes that the past four National Defense
Authorization Acts have called on the Department of Defense to
transition to advanced small arms synthetic training systems to
improve Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard lethality and
combat readiness training. The committee further notes that
this directive aligns with the Department of Defense's National
Defense Strategy objective to achieve a more lethal force and
to accelerate ongoing reforms to ensure that the military
services are making the most of the resources that the Congress
provides and to focus on processes that free up time, money,
and manpower to further readiness recovery. The committee is
concerned that the military services have not yet achieved a
consistent standard of verifying that all small arms synthetic
training systems are leveraging advanced technology to achieve
these objectives.
Despite years of program acquisition efforts by each of the
military services coupled with reports from the Department
confirming the importance of transitioning to next generation
small arms training systems, the committee remains concerned
that there is a lack of substantial financial investments in
the improvement of legacy small arms simulation systems and
programs of record, currently capable of only rudimentary
training and data collection capabilities and lacking the
requirement to integrate and validate key biometrics, human
performance, and cognitive data that enable tracking and
verification of trainee performance and skills enhancement.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to conduct an audit of each military
service's existing and planned small arms simulation training
systems. The report shall include, but not be limited to, a
detailed description and assessment of each system's
effectiveness in delivering: advanced human performance and
cognitive training techniques; integrated biometric systems;
advanced software-based data processing and collection
capabilities beyond basic fundamentals of marksmanship; the
ability to establish cognitive and physical baselines at the
individual level; and the ability to track and report detailed
trainee results without requiring man-in-the-loop logging and
aggregation. In addition, the audit shall report: the type of
data collected; how the data are retained and tracked to
validate system effectiveness, lethality requirements, and
measurable live fire qualification improvements at the
individual, small unit, and collective levels; and how the data
are being used to inform determinations for training and
readiness resourcing of small arms trainers.
The committee directs that the Comptroller General provide
a report on its findings no later than February 1, 2021.
Software to automate manufacturing
Noting that the National Defense Strategy cites the
importance of maintaining the Department of Defense's domestic
technological advantage, which requires changes across the
National Security Innovation Base, the committee understands
that automotive manufacturers, aerospace companies, medical
technology companies, industrial automation companies, and
consumer packaged goods manufacturers leverage software that
further automates manufacturing through the use of computer
aided design (CAD), computer aided manufacturing (CAM),
computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machining, and
similar manufacturing technologies. These can optimize
manufacturing, even at very low minimum order quantities.
The committee believes that, as the Department of Defense
aims to balance near term readiness recovery with investments
in long term combat capability and faces challenges with
mission-critical repair part obsolesce and shortages across the
organic industrial base, the use of such technologies could
help address these challenges.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, in consultation with each Service Acquisition
Executive, to: (1) Assess how using automated technologies
related to CAD, CAM, and CNC machining at arsenals, depots, and
fleet readiness centers could address spare part obsolescence
issues; (2) Evaluate which service components would implement
such digital manufacturing approaches and which current
domestic industrial base entities could support these
technologies; and (3) Submit a report to the congressional
defense committees on (1) and (2) no later than October 1,
2021.
Utilities privatization
The committee continues to support the successful utilities
privatization (UP) effort that has been underway for the past 2
decades. The UP program has succeeded for many years due to
robust oversight from the military departments. This committee
has repeatedly expressed its support for UP, both in
legislative text and in accompanying report language. In the
Senate report accompanying S. 1790 (S. Rept. 116-48) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, this
committee reiterated its support for UP and specifically
praised the Army for its successful privatization of the storm
water system at Fort Knox. Existing legal authority, including
the authority to privatize storm water systems under the
current text of section 2688 of title 10, United States Code,
allows the Department of Defense (DOD) to leverage private-
sector expertise to enhance installation resiliency and to
improve water, wastewater, storm water, and electrical services
for tenant commands and residents in a cost-effective manner.
The committee strongly encourages the DOD to take
additional action to use UP capabilities to the fullest extent
possible, consistent with the intent of the original
authorization. Thus, the committee encourages the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to issue
additional guidance to the military departments, building on
the February 7, 2019, memorandum issued by the Under Secretary,
authorizing the military departments to competitively seek
proposals for storm water system privatization, consistent with
section 2688 of title 10, United States Code. The committee
encourages the Assistant Secretaries of the military
departments with responsibility for energy, installations, and
environment, in turn, to engage with installation leaders to
consider options for using the UP model for storm water
infrastructure on the installations that they oversee under
those authorities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Assistant Secretaries of the military departments with
responsibility for energy, installations, and environment, to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives no later than March 1,
2021, on any updated guidance released by the DOD on UP and a
list of any cases where the military departments have declined
to privatize the storm water infrastructure of a base or
installation that has already privatized water and wastewater
systems, to include a detailed explanation for each such
decision.
Water and energy infrastructure
The committee notes that the definition of military
installation resilience, codified in section 101(e)(8) of title
10, United States Code, includes water and energy
infrastructure improvement projects, as well as the protection
of water sources, under ``necessary resources on or outside of
the military installation.'' For example, the committee
understands that El Paso Water provides approximately 30
percent of the water and 100 percent of the wastewater service
for Fort Bliss. The committee strongly encourages the Army to
maintain this relationship and these specific ratios as they
relate to water and wastewater, which are crucial to the
installation's mission.
The committee also notes that an April 2019 report by the
Department of Defense found that ``water shortages can
significantly impact military readiness through reduced
training opportunities and limited operational capacity.'' As
such, the Department and the military services should be doing
everything they can to ensure sustainable access to water for
each installation, especially at locations that ``may benefit
[from] using additional water conservation measures to avoid
potential water shortages or increased costs associated with
water scarcity'' like Fort Hunter Liggett, Fort Stewart,
Mountain Home Air Force Base, Naval Air Station Lemoore, and
Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake.
Given that water shortages pose a risk to the long-term
viability of military bases, the committee directs the Army to
brief the committee no later than October 1, 2020, on lessons
learned from its Net Zero Initiative Pilot Program. Lastly, the
committee encourages the Department and the military services
to increase its focus on and maximize efforts in leak detection
and repair, which the Department found is the ``most promising
water conservation strategy that DOD can apply.''
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Active-Duty end strengths for fiscal year 2021, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Change from
FY 2020 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2021 FY 2020
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army.......................................... 480,000 485,900 485,000 -900 +5,000
Navy.......................................... 340,500 347,800 346,730 -1,070 +6,230
Marine Corps.................................. 186,200 184,100 180,000 -4,100 -6,200
Air Force..................................... 332,800 333,700 333,475 -225 +675
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 1,339,500 1,351,500 1,345,205 -6,295 +5,705
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As COVID-19 continues to wreak havoc on the nation, the
committee has monitored closely the military's ability meet its
recruiting and retention mission. Due to social distancing,
school closures, and other virus mitigation measures, military
recruiting has shifted to an online activity. It is too early
to know whether this virtual approach will prove successful.
Meanwhile, the military departments were forced to reduce basic
training capacity to approximately 50 percent of normal
operations. While each service believes it will be able to
return to normal basic training throughput by early summer,
this is not guaranteed. Based on these factors, the military's
ability to achieve authorized end strength in fiscal year 2020
is uncertain.
Many of the assumptions utilized in determining the
military's fiscal year 2021 end strength request are no longer
accurate. Each military department may begin the fiscal year
with fewer personnel than anticipated due to COVID-19.
Recruiters may still be unable to access potential recruits in
schools and in their homes, which could exacerbate recruiting
challenges. Reduced basic training capacity could continue,
limiting the military's ability to process new recruits.
Therefore, the committee has taken a cautious approach to
the end strength authorization for active forces. This
provision would authorize end strength levels within existing
variance authority for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Based on
detailed modelling conducted by the Marine Corps, the committee
would further reduce Marine Corps end strength by 4,100
compared to the budget request.
The committee emphasizes that this provision does not
signal a lack of support for the military's end strength goals.
If conditions improve throughout the summer and fall of 2020,
the committee would support restoring end strength to the
requested level.
End strength level matters (sec. 402)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 691 of title 10, United States Code, which would
consolidate Active-Duty end strength management legal
requirements into one statute. The provision would also amend
section 115 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary concerned to vary Active-Duty end strength levels as
previously authorized by section 691.
The committee notes that the military departments are
required to adhere to statutory end strength levels as
specified in section 115 of title 10, United States Code. The
amendments made by this provision would remove a mostly
redundant requirement, which complicates the ability of the
Secretary of Defense to manage the military.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2021, as shown
below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Authorized Change from
-----------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2020
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 336,000 336,500 336,500 0 +500
Army Reserve................................... 189,500 189,800 189,800 0 +300
Navy Reserve................................... 59,000 58,800 58,800 0 -200
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 38,500 38,500 38,500 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 107,700 108,100 108,100 0 400
Air Force Reserve.............................. 70,100 70,300 70,300 0 200
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................. 800,800 802,000 802,000 0 +1,200
Coast Guard Reserve............................ 7,000 7,000 7,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the reserves
(sec. 412)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2021, as shown
below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Authorized Change from
-----------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2020
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 30,595 30,595 30,595 0 0
Army Reserve................................... 16,511 16,511 16,511 0 0
Navy Reserve................................... 10,155 10,215 10,215 0 60
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 2,386 2,386 2,386 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 22,637 25,333 25,333 0 2,696
Air Force Reserve.............................. 4,431 5,256 5,256 0 825
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................. 86,715 90,296 90,296 0 3,581
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military technicians (dual status) for the reserve components
of the Army and Air Force for fiscal year 2021, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Authorized Change from
-----------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2020
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 22,294 22,294 22,294 0 0
Army Reserve................................... 6,492 6,492 6,492 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 13,569 10,994 10,994 0 -2,575
Air Force Reserve.............................. 8,938 7,947 7,947 0 -991
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total...................................... 51,293 47,727 47,727 0 -3,566
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provision would also prohibit under any circumstances
the coercion of a military technician (dual status) by a State
into accepting an offer of realignment or conversion to any
other military status, including as a member of the Active,
Guard, and Reserve program of a reserve component. The
provision would further specify that if a technician declines
to participate in such a realignment or conversion, no further
action may be taken against the individual or the individual's
position.
Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for
operational support (sec. 414)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
limits on the number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
Active Duty for operational support under section 115(b) of
title 10, United States Code, as of September 30, 2021, as
shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Authorized Change from
-----------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2020
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 17,000 17,000 17,000 0 0
Army Reserve................................... 13,000 13,000 13,000 0 0
Navy Reserve................................... 6,200 6,200 6,200 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 16,000 16,000 16,000 0 0
Air Force Reserve.............................. 14,000 14,000 14,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................. 69,200 69,200 69,200 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate authorization by Congress of minimum end strengths for non-
temporary military technicians (dual status) and maximum end
strengths for temporary military technicians (dual status)
(sec. 415)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 115 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
separate authorization of minimum end strengths for non-
temporary dual status military technicians and maximum end
strengths for temporary dual status military technicians for
each fiscal year by the Congress. The provision would also
require the Department of Defense to include, as part of the
President's annual budget request, a request for end strength
authorizations for non-temporary and temporary dual status
military technicians.
The use of temporary dual status military technicians is
largely not subject to congressional oversight. While the
committee authorizes annually the minimum number of permanent
dual status technician positions, temporary technician
positions are not subject to any similar limitation. The
committee has learned that each reserve component likely
utilizes thousands of temporary technician positions every year
but that the actual number is difficult to determine and each
reserve component struggles to explain the purpose for the
temporary technician workforce. A new end strength
authorization for temporary military technicians would enable
the Department of Defense and the Congress to understand the
size and role of this population.
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Military personnel (sec. 421)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for military personnel activities at the
levels identified in section 4401 of division D of this Act.
Budget Items
Military personnel funding changes
The amount authorized to be appropriated for military
personnel programs includes the following changes from the
budget request:
[Changes in millions of dollars]
Military personnel underexecution..................... -1,611.69
End strength reduction................................ -755.0
Total............................................. -2,366.69
The committee recommends a total reduction in the Military
Personnel (MILPERS) appropriation of $2,366.69 million. This
amount includes: (1) A reduction of $1,611.69 million to
reflect the Government Accountability Office's most recent
assessment of annual MILPERS under-execution; and (2) A
decrease of $755.0 million to reflect active component end
strength reductions from the President's Budget request.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
Repeal of codified specification of authorized strengths of certain
commissioned officers on active duty (sec. 501)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 523 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
the number of officers serving on Active Duty in the grades of
major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel in the Army, Air Force,
and Marine Corps or lieutenant commander, commander, and
captain in the Navy in a given fiscal year be specifically
authorized by the Congress.
The committee notes that the officer strength table was
originally included as a fundamental feature of the Defense
Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) (Public Law 96-513).
The strength table was designed to serve as an effective
limitation on the number of mid-grade officers within each
military service. The House report accompanying the legislation
(H. Rept. 96-1462) explained that the table would be adjusted
over time to align with emerging officer manpower requirements.
However, in practice, the authorized strength table is rarely
updated, and it is no longer linked to strategy or actual
officer requirements.
The committee authorizes annual end strength levels for the
overall active and reserve components and numerous other
subsets of total force manpower. This allows end strength to
fluctuate to meet strategic and budgetary necessities.
Similarly, this provision would require each military service
to annually justify required mid-grade officer manpower needs
to support an annual authorization from the Congress. This
provision would provide greater flexibility to the military
while also ensuring that the Congress continues to perform its
vital oversight role in ensuring that the officer corps is
effectively managed.
Temporary expansion of availability of enhanced constructive service
credit in a particular career field upon original appointment
as a commissioned officer (sec. 502)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 533 and 12207 of title 10, United States Code, to
provide temporary authority for the Secretaries of the military
departments to award constructive service credit upon original
appointment in particular officer career fields for advanced
education.
Section 502 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232)
enacted authority to permit additional credit for ``special
training or experience in a particular officer career field as
designated by the Secretary concerned, if such training or
experience is directly related to the operational needs of the
armed force concerned.'' No authority was provided to award
additional credit for ``advanced education,'' however. This
provision would afford the Secretaries of the military
departments greater flexibility to award credit for not only
special training or experience but also advanced education in
designated career fields such as those related to cyberspace or
specialized skillsets.
The provision would also require each of the Secretaries of
the military departments to submit a report detailing the use
and benefits of enhanced constructive credit authority in
meeting the operational needs of the Armed Forces.
Requirement for promotion selection board recommendation of higher
placement on promotion list of officers of particular merit
(sec. 503)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 616 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
the secretary of the military department concerned shall
prescribe guidelines and procedures for placing officers higher
on a promotion selection list based on an officer's merit.
Special selection review boards for review of promotion of officers
subject to adverse information identified after recommendation
for promotion and related matters (sec. 504)
The committee recommends a provision that would delay until
January 1, 2021, the applicability of the amendments made by
section 502 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), germane to the manner in
which adverse information about a regular officer would be
furnished to a promotion selection board convened under section
611(a) of title 10, United States Code, to consider such an
officer for promotion to a grade below brigadier general in the
Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, rear admiral (lower half) in
the Navy, or the equivalent grade in the Space Force.
The provision would also modify section 14107 of title 10,
United States Code, to extend prescriptions for furnishing
adverse information to promotion selection boards convened
pursuant to section 14101(a) of title 10, United States Code,
to consider a reserve officer for promotion to a grade above
lieutenant colonel in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps,
commander in the Navy, or the equivalent grade in the Space
Force.
Finally, the provision would codify in two new sections of
law the authority of the Secretary of the military department
concerned to convene a special selection review board--pursuant
to section 628a of title 10, United States Code, for regular
officers and pursuant to section 14502a of title 10, United
States Code, for reserve officers--upon determining that an
officer recommended for promotion to a grade at or below major
general in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, rear admiral
in the Navy, or the equivalent grade in the Space Force is the
subject of adverse information that was not furnished to a
promotion selection board that recommended the officer for
promotion, as required by sections 615 or 14107 of title 10,
United States Code.
Any special selection review board convened--whether for a
regular or reserve officer--would, to the greatest extent
practicable, apply the same standards used by the promotion
selection board that originally recommended the officer for
promotion and would consider the record of the officer as
presented to the original promotion board, together with the
adverse information regarding the officer. The special
selection review board would be conducted so as not to indicate
or disclose the officer or officers for whom the board was
convened and the members of the board would apply a competitive
process to determine whether or not to sustain the
recommendation of the officer or officers at issue for
promotion. An officer whose promotion is recommended for
sustainment by a special selection review board and approved by
the President would be appointed to the next higher grade as
soon as practicable and, upon appointment, would have the same
date of rank as the officer would have had pursuant to the
recommendation of the original promotion board. If a special
selection review board did not sustain a recommendation for
promotion of an officer, that officer would be considered to
have failed selection for promotion.
The amendments to section 14107 and the codification of
sections 628a and 14502a of title 10, United States Code, would
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
Number of opportunities for consideration for promotion under
alternative promotion authority (sec. 505)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 649c of title 10, United States Code, to make a
technical correction related to the definition of the term
``promotion zone'' in the alternative promotion authority
provided by section 507 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232).
Section 645 of title 10, United States Code, defines the
term ``promotion zone'' in part as officers who have not
``failed of selection for promotion to the next higher grade.''
Though appropriate for traditional promotion policy, this
portion of the definition inhibits the full implementation of
the alternative promotion authority.
Mandatory retirement for age (sec. 506)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1251 of title 10, United States Code, to include the
Space Force and expand the authority of the Secretaries of the
military departments to permit an officer to defer retirement
until the officer reaches age 68. The provision would also
clarify benefit eligibility for officers who reach mandatory
retirement age.
Clarifying and improving restatement of rules on the retired grade of
commissioned officers (sec. 507)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
rules governing the retired grades of commissioned officers.
The codification of rules pertaining to regular officers would
be restated in section 1370 of title 10, United States Code,
and the rules applicable to non-regular officers--including
guidance to address certain unique circumstances particular to
a non-regular career path--set forth in new section 1370a of
title 10, United States Code.
Both sections 1370 and 1370a would address the principles
underpinning determinations of satisfactory service, the effect
of misconduct in a lower grade on such determinations, service-
in-grade requirements and waivers and reductions thereto, and
requirements for notice to the Congress.
As a general rule, the restatement would reserve to the
Secretary of the military department concerned the authority to
make grade determinations with regard to officers--regular and
non-regular--to be retired at or below major general, rear
admiral, or the equivalent grade, but without the power of
delegation. The restatement would reserve to the Secretary of
Defense most actions related to officers proposed for
retirement in a grade above major general, rear admiral, or the
equivalent.
The restatement would promulgate enhanced guidelines for
the assignment of a conditional retired grade to officers under
investigation for misconduct or pending adverse personnel
action and the determination of an officer's final retired
grade and adjustment of retired pay on the resolution of such
matters.
Finally, the restatement would clarify the conditions
pursuant to which an administratively final retirement grade
could be reopened, and the manner by which a proposed change to
a reopened grade would be effectuated and the officer's retired
pay recalculated. Although the committee has undertaken to
clarify section 509 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), it remains strongly
committed to the principle that a determination to increase an
officer's retired grade to O-9 or O-10 after reopening an
administratively final determination may be effectuated only by
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate. Although the committee ultimately declined to take this
step, it considered returning to the long-held practice--of
requiring that all O-9 and O-10 retirements, of both active and
reserve officers, be made by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate. The current practice, enacted
by section 502 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
1996 (Public Law 104-106)--pursuant to which the Secretary of
Defense certifies to Congress the highest grade in which such
officers have served satisfactorily and should be retired, is a
creature of statute, derived from Congress' authority under
Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution to raise,
support, and regulate the armed forces. Prior to 1996, an
officer could be retired in the grade of O-9 or O-10 only by
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate. The committee expects that any reopening of an
administratively final determination of retired grade that
results in the proposal to increase an officer's retired grade
to O-9 or O-10, be submitted by the President to the Senate
under provisions of section 509 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, as amended by the
instant provision.
Repeal of authority for original appointment of regular Navy officers
designated for engineering duty, aeronautical engineering duty,
and special duty (sec. 508)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 8137 of title 10, United States Code, which authorizes
the Secretary of the Navy to appoint regular officers who are
designated for engineering, aeronautical engineering, and
special duty.
Repealing this section of law will provide additional
flexibility to the Navy to assign commanders and manage
officers according to emerging needs. The committee notes that
under current law the Navy needs to request a legislative
change for every new category of unrestricted line officers,
which delays the Navy's ability to adjust its officer corps to
reflect current priorities. The other military departments
already possess the flexibility that would be provided by this
provision.
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management
Exclusion of certain reserve general and flag officers on active duty
from limitations on authorized strengths (sec. 511)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 526a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to allocate 15 general
and flag officer positions in the combatant commands and 3
general and flag officer positions on the Joint Staff to be
exclusively filled by reserve component officers. The provision
would also create an exclusion from general and flag officer
strength limitations for a Reserve general or flag officer who
is on Active Duty for training or who is on Active Duty under a
call or order specifying a period of less than 180 days.
Subtitle C--General Service Authorities
Increased access to potential recruits (sec. 516)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 503 and 983 of title 10, United States Code, to add e-
mail addresses and mobile telephone numbers to the list of
information required to be provided to recruiters by
institutions of higher education and secondary schools. The
provision would also require secondary schools to provide
student information within 60 days of a request from a military
recruiter. Additionally, this provision would require colleges
and universities to provide student directory information
within 60 days of the start of a school year or 60 days of the
date of a recruiter's request as well as to provide lists of
those students who do not return to the institution from the
previous semester.
Current law only allows for the collection of outdated
communication information, such as address and telephone
listings. Further, no response time is mandated, so many
schools do not provide this information until it is too late
for military recruiters to make the best use of it by providing
students with pertinent information enabling them to explore
their options.
The committee emphasizes that parents continue to have the
right to opt out of releasing their child's information under
the same terms and conditions as are available under current
law.
Studies show that half of today's youth admit that they
know little of the military. This provision would allow
recruiters to collect better information for contacting today's
students, improving the military's ability to inform students
and parents about the opportunities provided by military
service.
Temporary authority to order retired members to active duty in high-
demand, low-density assignments during war or national
emergency (sec. 517)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 688a of title 10, United States Code, to make certain
constraints on the Secretary of a military department's
authority to order to Active Duty a retired member who agrees
to serve on Active Duty inapplicable during a time of declared
war or national emergency.
Certificate of release or discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214)
matters (sec. 518)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense Form DD 214 to be redesignated as the
Certificate of Military Service. The provision would also amend
section 569 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to require the Certificate
of Military Service to be a standard total force record of
military service for all members of the Armed Forces that
summarizes the record of service for each member and to require
that the Certificate of Military Service be provided to members
of the reserve components of the Armed Forces at appropriate
times throughout a servicemember's career. Lastly, the
provision would repeal section 570 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020.
Evaluation of barriers to minority participation in certain units of
the Armed Forces (sec. 519)
The committee recommends a provision that would require not
later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act
the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to seek to enter into an
agreement with a federally funded research and development
center to conduct a study on reducing barriers to minority
participation in elite units in the Armed Services.
Subtitle D--Military Justice and Related Matters
Part I--Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault and
Related Matters
Modification of time required for expedited decisions in connection
with applications for change of station or unit transfer of
members who are victims of sexual assault or related offenses
(sec. 521)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 673 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
approval or disapproval time of an expedited transfer request
from 72 hours to 5 calendar days.
This proposed change would allow commanders to have access
to sexual assault victims' complete career information before
counseling victims on their options. By providing more time for
commanders to gather information, a victim of sexual assault
requesting an expedited transfer will be able to make a fully
informed decision.
Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct
(sec. 522)
The committee recommends a provision that would include the
United States Coast Guard (USCG) Academy in the Defense
Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Assault (DAC-PSA)
established by section 550B of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92).
Additionally, this provision would require the DAC-PSA to
advise the Secretary of the Department under which the USCG is
operating on policies, programs, and practices of the USCG
Academy.
Report on ability of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates to perform
duties (sec. 523)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a survey of sexual assault
response coordinators and sexual assault prevention and
response victim advocates on their experiences in assisting
victims of sexual assault by June 30, 2021.
The provision would require the Secretary to submit a
report on the results of the survey, including any actions to
be taken based on the results, to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Briefing on Special Victims' Counsel program (sec. 524)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Judge Advocates General of the Army, the Navy, the Air Force,
and the Coast Guard and the Staff Judge Advocate to the
Commandant of the Marine Corps to brief the congressional
defense committees on the status of the Special Victims'
Counsel program of the Armed Force concerned.
Accountability of leadership of the Department of Defense for
discharging the sexual harassment policies and programs of the
Department (sec. 525)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a strategy on
holding leadership accountable for discharging the sexual
harassment policies and programs of the Department of Defense.
Safe-to-report policy applicable across the Armed Forces (sec. 526)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to prescribe in regulations a safe-to-
report policy regarding the handling of minor collateral
misconduct involving a member of the Armed Forces who is the
alleged victim of sexual assault that applies to all members of
the Armed Forces and cadets and midshipmen at the military
service academies.
Additional bases for provision of advice by the Defense Advisory
Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct (sec. 527)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 550B of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to include additional
items for the Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of
Sexual Misconduct to review.
Additional matters for reports of the Defense Advisory Committee for
the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct (sec. 528)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 550B of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to include additional
matters for reports provided by the Defense Advisory Committee
for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct.
Policy on separation of victim and accused at military service
academies and degree-granting military educational institutions
(sec. 529)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to promulgate regulations for the military
academies and degree-granting military educational institutions
to minimize the association between an alleged victim of sexual
assault and the accused until both complete their courses of
study.
Briefing on placement of members of the Armed Forces in academic status
who are victims of sexual assault onto Non-Rated Periods (sec.
530)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to brief the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
feasibility and advisability of granting requests from members
of the Armed Forces who are in academic status and who are
victims of sexual assault to be placed on a non-rated period
for their performance report.
Part II--Other Military Justice Matters
Right to notice of victims of offenses under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice regarding certain post-trial motions, filings,
and hearings (sec. 531)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 6b(a)(2) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10
U.S.C. 802b(a)(2)), to provide that victims of offenses under
the Uniform Code of Military Justice have the right to
reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of a post-trial motion,
filing, or hearing that may address the finding or sentence of
a court-martial with respect to the accused, unseal privileged
or private information of the victim, or result in the release
of the accused.
Consideration of the evidence by Courts of Criminal Appeals (sec. 532)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 66 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
866) to authorize the Court of Criminal Appeals, when
considering appeals of court-martial convictions, to consider
the weight of the evidence only upon a specific showing by the
accused of deficiencies of proof. Under the provision, the
Court could set aside and dismiss a finding if clearly
convinced that the finding was against the weight of the
evidence.
Further, the provision would require a minimum of twelve
years of experience in military justice assignments to qualify
as a military judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals, with a
waiver. The provision would also require the entire Court of
Criminal Appeals review a determination by a panel of the Court
that a finding of guilty was clearly against the weight of the
evidence.
Preservation of records of the military justice system (sec. 533)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to retain records of the military justice
system for a minimum of 15 years.
Comptroller General of the United States report on implementation by
the Armed Forces of recent GAO recommendations and statutory
requirements on assessment of racial, ethnic, and gender
disparities in the military justice system (sec. 534)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to study and submit to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives a report on the implementation of the
recommendations in the May 2019 report of the Government
Accountability Office titled ``Military Justice: DOD and the
Coast Guard Need to Improve Their Capabilities to Assess Racial
and Gender Disparities''' (GAO-19-344) and the requirements in
section 540I(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92).
Briefing on mental health support for vicarious trauma for certain
personnel in the military justice system (sec. 535)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Judge Advocates General of the Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force and the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the
Marine Corps to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the mental health
support for vicarious trauma provided to certain personnel in
the military justice system no later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
Guardian ad litem program for minor dependents of members of the Armed
Forces (sec. 536)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 540L of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) by adding an element to
the report on the establishment of a guardian ad litem program
for certain military dependents who are victims or witnesses of
offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice involving
abuse or exploitation.
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, Transition, and Resilience
Training on religious accommodation for members of the Armed Forces
(sec. 541)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop and implement training
regarding religious liberty and accommodation for members of
the Armed Forces in consultation with the Chief of Chaplains of
each service. Recipients of this training shall include
commanders, chaplains, judge advocates, and others as
recognized by the Secretary.
Additional elements with 2021 certifications on the Ready, Relevant
Learning initiative of the Navy (sec. 542)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to submit a life cycle sustainment plan
and report on the use of readiness assessment teams with the
2021 Ready Relevant Learning certifications required by section
545 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2018 (Public Law 115-91).
Report on standardization and potential merger of law enforcement
training for military and civilian personnel across the
Department of Defense (sec. 543)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the standardization
and potential merger of law enforcement training for military
and civilian personnel across the Department of Defense to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than June 8, 2021.
Quarterly Report on Implementation of the Comprehensive Review of
Special Operations Forces Culture and Ethics (sec. 544)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
quarterly reports on the implementation of the Comprehensive
Review of Special Operations Forces Culture and Ethics.
The committee strongly supports efforts by the United
States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to address the root
causes of ethical lapses and misconduct by Special Operations
Forces (SOF) identified by the Comprehensive Review of Special
Operations Forces Culture and Ethics completed in January 2020.
The committee notes that the Comprehensive Review found that
``selective implementation'' of recommendations from four
previous reviews related to SOF culture and ethics since 2011,
including two mandated by the Congress, have resulted in
continued challenges related to the assessment and selection of
SOF, leader development, force structure, and employment.
The committee also notes that, while the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict (ASD SOLIC) is the ``service secretary-like'' civilian
responsible for oversight of and advocacy for SOF, the ASD
SOLIC played a relatively minor role in the comprehensive
review. The committee believes that the ASD SOLIC must play a
direct and active role in overseeing implementation of the
actions recommended by the comprehensive review if such reforms
are to be successful.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would
require the ASD SOLIC, in coordination with the Commander,
SOCOM, to provide the congressional defense committees with
quarterly updates on progress in implementing the 16 actions
recommended by the Comprehensive Review.
Information on nominations and applications for military service
academies (sec. 545)
The committee recommends a provision that would require, no
later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of the Defense, in consultation with the
Superintendents of the military service academies, to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the feasibility and
advisability of creating a uniform online portal for all
congressional nominations to the military service academies.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Superintendents of the military
service academies, to establish standard classifications that
cadets, midshipmen, and applicants to the academies may use to
self-identify gender, race, and ethnicity.
Pilot programs in connection with Senior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps units at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and
minority institutions (sec. 546)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out pilot programs to reduce
barriers to participation in the Senior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (SROTC) through partnerships with nearby
military installations and to assess the feasibility and
advisability of providing financial assistance to members of
SROTC who participate in flight training. Historically black
colleges and universities and minority institutions would be
given preference for participation in the pilot programs that
would be authorized by this provision.
Expansion of Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program (sec. 547)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2031(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to insert
language expanding the purpose of the Junior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (JROTC) to include an introduction to service
opportunities in military, national, and public service. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
develop and implement a plan to establish and support not fewer
than 6,000 JROTC units by September 30, 2031.
Department of Defense STARBASE program (sec. 548)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2193b(h) of title 10, United States Code, to include
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and American
Samoa in the Department of Defense STARBASE program.
Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards
Award or presentation of decorations favorably recommended following
determination on merits of proposals for decorations not
previously submitted in a timely fashion (sec. 551)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1130 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize a
Secretary of a military department to present an award or
decoration, following the favorable review of a request of a
Member of Congress, after a 60-day period for congressional
review. This provision would eliminate the requirement for
legislation to waive the statute of limitation for award of
that medal or decoration.
Honorary promotion matters (sec. 552)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 80 of title 10, United States Code, by authorizing the
Secretary of Defense to make honorary promotions, whether or
not posthumous, of a former member or retired member of the
Armed Forces to any grade not exceeding the grade of major
general, rear admiral (upper half), or an equivalent grade in
the Space Force. At least 60 days prior to making an honorary
promotion, the Secretary would provide notification to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives and the requesting Member of Congress, if
applicable, including a detailed discussion of the rationale
supporting the determination.
In addition, the provision would amend section 1563 of
title 10, United States Code, to require that all promotions
made using this authority would be honorary, whether or not
posthumous, with no effect on pay, retired pay, or other
benefits.
Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family Readiness
Matters
Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters
Continuation of authority to assist local educational agencies that
benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 561)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$50.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for
continuation of the Department of Defense (DOD) assistance
program to local educational agencies impacted by enrollment of
dependent children of military members and DOD civilian
employees. The committee increased the funding amount for
fiscal year 2021 to provide additional assistance to local
educational agencies that may experience unforeseen expenses
related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 562)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$10.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for
impact aid payments for children with disabilities (as enacted
by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-77; 20 U.S.C. 7703a),
using the formula set forth in section 363 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398), for continuation of Department of Defense
assistance to local educational agencies that benefit eligible
dependents with severe disabilities. Subsection (b) of the
provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense to use an
additional $10.0 million for payments to local educational
agencies determined by the Secretary to have higher
concentrations of military children with severe disabilities.
Subsection (c) of the provision would establish a one-time
requirement for the Secretary to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by
March 1, 2021, on the Department's evaluation of each local
educational agency with higher concentrations of military
children with severe disabilities and its subsequent
determination of the amounts of impact aid each such agency
should receive. The committee increased the funding amount for
fiscal year 2021 to provide additional assistance to local
educational agencies that may experience unforeseen expenses
related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Staffing of Department of Defense Education Activity schools to
maintain maximum student-to-teacher ratios (sec. 563)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
maximum student-to-teacher ratios for Department of Defense
Education Activity (DODEA) schools through the 2023-2024 school
year.
The committee remains concerned about the Department of
Defense's plans to reduce staffing in grades K-3 as part of the
Defense-Wide Review, which seeks to move funding from lower
priority to higher priority programs. The committee believes
that the education of children in the DODEA system should
remain among the Department's highest priorities. Nevertheless,
since the Department seeks to harvest savings from DODEA's
budget, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
review DODEA's above-school staffing and funding as of the date
of this committee report and to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by
December 1, 2020, on the results of this review. This review
shall include: (1) An analysis of the number of employees,
full-time and part-time, employed by the DODEA who are not
assigned to a school; (2) The number of contractors so employed
and the amount of contract payments made to such individuals;
and (3) The amount of headquarters funding associated with the
DODEA, along with a comparison to headquarters or overhead
spending in domestic school districts in the continental United
States.
Matters in connection with free appropriate public education for
dependents of members of the Armed Forces with special needs
(sec. 564)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each of the Secretaries of the military departments to collect
and maintain information on special education disputes filed by
servicemembers and the outcomes of such disputes, based on
information from Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP)
personnel, installation or other military leadership, and any
other sources that the Secretary concerned considers
appropriate.
Additionally, the provision would require the Comptroller
General of the United States to conduct a study and brief the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, no later than March 31, 2021, on: (1) The
consequences for a State or local educational agency of a
finding of failure to provide free, appropriate public
education to a military dependent; (2) The manner in which
local educational agencies with military families utilize
impact aid funds; (3) The efficacy of attorney and other legal
support for military families in special education disputes;
(4) The standardization of policies and guidance for school
liaison officers between the Office of Special Needs of the
Department of Defense (DOD) and the military departments and
the efficacy of such policies and guidance; and (5) The
improvements of family support programs of the Office of
Special Needs, and of each military department, in light of the
recommendations of the Comptroller General in the report titled
``DOD Should Improve Its Oversight of the Exceptional Family
Member Program'' (GAO-18-348).
Pilot program on expanded eligibility for Department of Defense
Education Activity Virtual High School program (sec. 565)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a 4-year pilot program that
would permit certain dependents of Active-Duty servicemembers
to enroll in the Department of Defense Education Activity
Virtual High School (DVHS) program. The provision would
prescribe the selection of DVHS participants and limitations on
the program. Additionally, the provision would require the
Secretary to submit an interim report on the pilot program no
more than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives and a final report to the same committees no
more than 180 days after completion of the program.
Pilot program on expansion of eligibility for enrollment at domestic
dependent elementary and secondary schools (sec. 566)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, beginning not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, to carry out a pilot
program to authorize a dependent of a full-time Active-Duty
servicemember, without regard to whether the member resides on
a military installation, to enroll in a domestic Department of
Defense Education Activity school on a space-available basis.
Comptroller General of the United States report on the structural
condition of Department of Defense Education Activity schools
(sec. 567)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees, within 1 year of the date
of the enactment of this Act, on the structural condition of
all Department of Defense Education Activity schools, including
the infrastructure or other means to support the virtual
education of students attending such schools with no physical
structure.
Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters
Responsibility for allocation of certain funds for military child
development programs (sec. 571)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1791 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense to be responsible for the allocation of
Office of the Secretary of Defense-level funds for military
child development programs for children from birth through 12
years of age. The provision would disallow delegation of the
Secretary's responsibility to the military departments.
The committee remains concerned about the Department of
Defense's plans to transfer funds to the military services to
provide childcare fee assistance as part of the Defense-Wide
Review. The committee believes that military family childcare
should remain among the Department's highest priorities and
transferring resources to the military services would degrade
standardization of the program and hinder oversight
capabilities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Currently, the military services administer two separate
contracts with different fee assistance benefits for military
families, one more generous to military families than the
other. The committee understands that there are ongoing
discussions within the Department about creating a single
contract for the childcare fee assistance program across the
Department. Since the Army's childcare fee assistance contract
provides the greatest benefit to military families, the
committee encourages the Department to model any Department-
wide contract after that currently used by the Army.
Improvements to Exceptional Family Member Program (sec. 572)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1781c of title 10, United States Code, to standardize
and improve the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). The
provision would: (1) Require the Secretary of Defense to
implement certain performance metrics; (2) Create additional
protections and options for servicemembers and their families
enrolled in EFMP; and (3) Require the Office of Special Needs
to create policies and procedures to confirm that each military
service has the right staffing to ensure effective and
efficient operation of the program so that military families
receive the required support.
Procedures of the Office of Special Needs for the development of
individualized services plans for military families with
special needs (sec. 573)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1781c(d)(4) of title 10, United States Code, to require
that the policy of the Department of Defense Office of Special
Needs must include requirements for the development and
continuous updating by an appropriate office of an
individualized services plan--whether medical, educational, or
both--for each military family with special needs and
procedures for the development of an individualized services
plan for military family members with special needs who have
requested family support services and have completed family
needs assessments.
Restatement and clarification of authority to reimburse members for
spouse relicensing costs pursuant to a permanent change of
station (sec. 574)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 453 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretaries of the military departments to reimburse a
servicemember of the Armed Forces for the qualified relicensing
or credentialing costs of his or her spouse. The provision
would repeal the expiring authority in section 476(p) of title
37, United States Code.
The committee notes that the provision would clarify the
existing statutory language to ensure that servicemembers and
their spouses can request reimbursement for qualified
relicensing or credentialing costs when undergoing a permanent
change of station from an overseas duty location to a duty
location in the continental United States. Additionally, the
provision would clarify the requirement for a military spouse
to have been previously credentialed or certified, regardless
of location or professional engagement.
Improvements to Department of Defense tracking of and response to
incidents of child abuse involving military dependents on
military installations (sec. 575)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, consistent with the recommendations of
the Comptroller General of the United States in the Government
Accountability Office report titled ``Child Welfare: Increased
Guidance and Collaboration Needed to Improve DOD's Tracking and
Response to Child Abuse'' (GAO-20-110), to improve the efforts
of the Department of Defense to track and respond to incidents
of child abuse involving dependents of members of the Armed
Forces that occur on military installations.
Military childcare and child development center matters (sec. 576)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1793 of title 10, United States Code, to require: (1)
The liberal issuance of hardship waivers for childcare fees;
(2) A family discount to be offered in child development
centers (CDCs), charging any child after the first child an
amount equal to 85 percent of the fee otherwise chargeable; (3)
Secretaries of the military departments to carry out a fee
assistance program modeled after the Army Fee Assistance
program; (4) Additional actions to allow for the hiring of
qualified employees for CDCs; and (5) Reports on installations
with imbalances between demand and availability for childcare.
Expansion of financial assistance under My Career Advancement Account
program (sec. 577)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 453 of title 37, United States Code, to allow the
reimbursement to a servicemember of the cost that his or her
spouse incurs for the maintenance of professional licenses and
credentials and continuing education courses associated with a
permanent change of station. Additionally, the provision would
expand the My Career Advancement Account Program to include
expenses relating to continuing education courses and national
testing.
Subtitle H--Other Matters
Removal of personally identifying and other information of certain
persons from investigative reports, the Department of Defense
Central Index of Investigations, and other records and
databases (sec. 586)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that, not later than October 1, 2021, the Secretary of Defense
establish and implement a policy and process through which a
person's name, personally identifying information, and other
pertinent information could be expunged or otherwise removed
from: (1) The subject or title block of a Department of Defense
(DOD) law enforcement or criminal investigative report; (2) The
Department of Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII);
and (3) Any other record maintained by the DOD in connection
with such a report or DCII entry, under circumstances in which
probable cause did not or does not exist to determine that the
offense for which the person was titled occurred or that the
titled person actually committed the offense.
Further, the provision would require the Department to
establish a mechanism to assist a person whose information is
expunged or removed from DOD records in correcting or expunging
the person's information from records and databases maintained
by organizations or entities external to the DOD, based on
information previously provided by the Department.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
October 1, 2021, detailing actions taken to implement these
requirements.
National emergency exception for timing requirements with respect to
certain surveys of members of the Armed Forces (sec. 587)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 481, 481a, 7461, 8480, and 9461 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to postpone
the conduct of the following surveys when conducting these
surveys is not practicable due to a war or national emergency
declared by the President or the Congress: (1) Armed Forces
Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys; (2) Armed Forces
Workplace and Equal Opportunity Surveys; (3) Assessments of
sexual harassment and sexual violence at the military service
academies; and (4) The workplace and gender relations survey of
Department of Defense civilian employees.
The committee expects that the Secretary would exercise
this authority to postpone these surveys and assessments only
when conditions are such that the survey cannot be conducted
or, if conducted, the results of the survey would not be
meaningful. The committee also expects that any survey
postponed under this authority would be conducted as soon as
practicable and appropriate.
Sunset and transfer of functions of the Physical Disability Board of
Review (sec. 588)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1554a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to sunset the Physical Disability Board of
Review (PDBR) on or after October 1, 2020. The provision would
require the Secretary to transfer any remaining requests
pending the Board's review at that time and to assign them to a
board for the correction of military records operated by the
Secretary of the military department concerned.
Extension of reporting deadline for the annual report on the assessment
of the effectiveness of activities of the federal voting
assistance program (sec. 589)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 105A(b) of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee
Voting Act (52 U.S.C. 20308(b)) to change the deadline to
submit the annual report on the effectiveness of activities of
the Federal Voting Assistance Program from March 31 of every
year to September 30 of odd-numbered years. The provision also
would clarify that the information submitted in the report
should cover the previous calendar year to align with regularly
scheduled elections for Federal office.
Pilot programs on remote provision by National Guard to State
governments and National Guards in other States of
cybersecurity technical assistance in training, preparation,
and response to cyber incidents (sec. 590)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air Force to
each conduct a pilot program to develop and use a capability
within the National Guard through which a National Guard of a
State would remotely provide State governments and National
Guard units of other States with cybersecurity technical
assistance. The provision would establish the development and
exercise activities to be assessed and executed as part of the
program, should it be carried out.
The committee is supportive of programs to facilitate
National Guard cyber assistance to State and local entities. In
future contingencies, such assistance will need to be provided
rapidly if it is to be efficacious, meaning that physical
transportation and access to compromised systems are likely
unaffordable luxuries for the National Guard and other cyber
forces. The committee sees merit in such a program in preparing
the National Guard for remote provision of cybersecurity
assistance, a likely demand of governors and Federal
authorities in the wake of cyberattacks of significant
consequence.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army and the
Secretary of the Air Force, if they opt to carry out such a
program, to coordinate with the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command.
The committee understands that Cyber Command has made concerted
efforts to reduce its physical deployment of cyber protection
teams and has developed capabilities and tactics, techniques,
and procedures (TTPs) to enable remote provision of
cybersecurity capability. The committee sees merit in the
development of common architectures, toolsuites, and TTPs
across the National Guard and Cyber Mission Forces for use in
missions such as hunt forward operations, securing the
Department of Defense Information Network, and the provision of
assistance to critical infrastructure companies.
Plan on performance of funeral honors details by members of other Armed
Forces when members of the Armed Force of the deceased are
unavailable (sec. 591)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, within 180 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on a plan for the performance of funeral honors
functions at the funeral of a deceased member of the Armed
Forces by one or more members of the Armed Force of the
deceased or by such other servicemembers or organizations as
described in the provision. The provision would amend section
1491(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the
requirement that one member of the Armed Force of the deceased
be a member of the funeral detail.
Limitation on implementation of Army Combat Fitness Test (sec. 592)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of the Army from implementing the Army Combat
Fitness Test until the Secretary receives the results of a
study from an independent entity on the extent that the test:
(1) Would adversely impact Army members stationed or deployed
to climates or areas with conditions that would prevent outdoor
physical training on a frequent or sustained basis; and (2)
Would affect recruitment and retention in critical support
military occupational specialties of the Army, such as medical
personnel.
Items of Special Interest
Air Force Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Flight Academy
As the United States confronts a shortage of pilots and
aviation professionals, both the military and the private
sector must look to increase awareness and enthusiasm for
aviation-related careers among today's youth. The committee
supports the Air Force's attempts to boost interest in aviation
professions through its Air Force Junior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (ROTC) Flight Academy program. The first 2
years' results of the program are promising. More than 40
percent of participants have come from historically
underrepresented groups in the aviation community, and at least
80 percent of all participants have earned their private pilot
certificates. 5 2018 participants earned U.S. Air Force Academy
appointments, and 20 2019 participants earned service academy
appointments. In addition, 62 2019 participants earned ROTC
scholarships. In 2020, the program received 2,594 applications
for 200 scholarships, compared with 621 applications for 120
scholarships in 2018, and the number of university partners has
grown from 6 to 17, demonstrating clear success in
accomplishing the program's goals of increasing awareness and
enthusiasm for opportunities in aviation. The committee
encourages the Air Force to continue and expand this important
program.
Air Ground Operations Wings
The committee supports the Air Force's continued focus on
ensuring that it has highly trained battlefield airmen who are
ready to deploy at a moment's notice to provide commanders with
combat-ready tactical air control party personnel, battlefield
weather, and force protection assets. However, due to these
units' high operational tempo, the committee is concerned about
sustaining their long-term combat readiness and effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives no later than
March 1, 2021, that assesses the long-term sustainment of Air
Force's Air Ground Operations Wings (AGOW). This briefing
should include the following components: (1) A description of
the organisational structure of the Air Force's Air Ground
Operations Wings; (2) An evaluation of AGOW equipment, manning,
and training; (3) The status of AGOW base infrastructure and
support; (4) An evaluation of AGOW training capability; and (5)
Recommendations on improving the overall readiness of AGOWs and
their associated personnel.
Ban on unsafe products at Department of Defense Child Development
Centers
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (Public
Law 110-314) prohibits the sale of recalled consumer products.
While this Act has helped clear store shelves of dangerous
products, it fails to ensure that they are removed from
childcare facilities, potentially leaving children across the
country at risk. While some states have banned the use of
recalled products at childcare facilities, there remains no
Federal requirement that childcare facilities, including on
military installations, prohibit the use of these dangerous
products. The committee is concerned about military children
encountering recalled consumer products in Department of
Defense (DOD) Child Development Centers (CDCs) and strongly
encourages the Department to develop policy identifying and
removing such products from DOD CDCs.
Briefing on current efforts to reduce non-essential training
The committee commends the Department of Defense and each
of the military departments on recent efforts to reduce
administrative, ancillary, and computer-based training
requirements in order to give warfighters additional time to
focus on combat lethality. These steps, when combined with a
focus on empowering local commanders to manage training
requirements, should significantly improve the quality of life
and quality of service for all servicemembers.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the effect of these non-essential training
reductions on the morale and readiness of military personnel by
November 1, 2020. The briefing shall include the Department's
definition of non-essential training, as well as an update on
any ongoing efforts to identify and reduce non-essential
training. Additionally, the briefing shall highlight any non-
essential training mandated by law that, in the Department's
view, should be curtailed or eliminated.
Comptroller General report on the dual status military technician
workforce
Over the last several years, the military technician
workforce has been subject to several major transformation and
realignment initiatives. For example, recent National Defense
Authorization Acts reduced and eventually eliminated entirely
non-dual status military technician position authorizations.
Additionally, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) required the Department of
Defense to convert a significant number of dual status military
technician positions into full-time Federal civilian positions.
Meanwhile, the committee is monitoring current efforts in the
Air National Guard to convert large numbers of dual status
military technicians into Active Guard Reserve positions.
An additional confusing aspect of the military technician
workforce is the use and prevalence of temporary military
technician positions, which are meant to fill in for vacancies
in permanent positions that occur when an employee deploys or
is on another long-term military duty. This ``temporary''
workforce is not subject to any congressional oversight, so its
size, structure, and purpose are largely unknown outside of the
Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than March 31, 2021, a report on the military technician
workforce, with an emphasis on determining how temporary
positions align with law, rules, and procedures governing the
permanent technician workforce. The report should include the
following components:
(1) The number of temporary technicians utilized by
each reserve component in recent fiscal years;
(2) The justification for utilizing temporary dual
status technicians;
(3) A thorough description of the type of work
performed by temporary dual status technicians;
(4) An explanation of the approval process and any
other management controls related to temporary dual
status technicians;
(5) A summary of benefits and employment protections
for temporary dual status technicians;
(6) An assessment of the degree to which the civilian
duties of these temporary technicians align with
military duties;
(7) An analysis of the average Federal civilian
experience of individuals employed as temporary
technicians;
(8) An analysis of the average Federal civilian
experience of individuals employed as dual-status
technicians who were converted to Active Guard Reserve
positions in the Air National Guard in fiscal year
2019; and
(9) An assessment of the effect on unit and personnel
readiness resulting from the use of temporary positions
compared to permanent dual status technicians.
Comptroller General review on Department of Defense's accreditation of
confinement and other detention facilities
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
contracted with the American Correctional Association for the
accreditation of confinement and other detention facilities in
the United States, South Korea, Germany, and Okinawa. The
committee recognizes the importance of maintaining military
facilities at home and abroad that meet basic health and safety
standards, including the risks posed to members of the military
services and the military's credibility by the maintenance of
facilities that do not meet these standards.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
briefing on preliminary observations by February 27, 2021,
followed by a report to be delivered on a mutually agreeable
date, on the Department of Defense's accreditation of
confinement and other detention facilities. This report shall
include: (1) Information, including cost information, related
to the contracts awarded by the Office of the Secretary of
Defense and the military services for accreditation of these
facilities over the past 3 years; (2) An assessment of DOD's
process for ensuring that its accredited facilities meet
established health and safety standards; and (3) An assessment
of possible alternatives to the current use of contractors,
such as creation of an independent unit, internal to the
Department of Defense, responsible for oversight, auditing, and
accreditation of these facilities.
Grade of Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center
The committee notes that the Joint Artificial Intelligence
Center (JAIC) has become the central organization for the
adoption and incorporation of artificial intelligence
capabilities throughout the Department of Defense. The
committee recognizes the recommendation made by the National
Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence with respect to
the benefits of having a senior military official direct the
JAIC. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to ensure that the Director of the JAIC has the grade
of lieutenant general in the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps,
or vice admiral in the Navy. The committee further encourages
the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the JAIC Director has
operational experience in artificial intelligence, machine
learning, or relevant career fields.
Interagency cooperation impacting recruiting
The committee remains concerned by studies that have found
that up to 71 percent of young people in the United States may
be ineligible for military service due to medical disqualifying
factors, a lack of educational attainment, or a record of crime
or substance abuse. The committee understands that these are
deeper issues, outside the purview of the Department of
Defense, but they have a direct impact on the military's
ability to recruit new servicemembers.
The committee notes that barriers to recruitment cause a
monetary cost to the Department of Defense by necessitating the
use of enhanced recruiting tactics to meet mission. There are
also risks associated with providing waivers to potential
recruits who are otherwise ineligible to serve.
The committee recommends that the Secretary of Defense
collaborate with the Secretaries and Administrators of relevant
Federal departments and agencies, including the Departments of
Agriculture, Education, Health and Human Services, and Justice,
with the purpose of taking a holistic approach to addressing
issues that ultimately impact the ability of the military
services to recruit new servicemembers.
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps computer science and
cybersecurity education
The committee recognizes that the United States in general,
and the military in particular, currently struggles to find and
produce a sufficient number of Americans trained to succeed in
computer science and cybersecurity careers. The Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) can serve as a catalyst to
overcoming these systemic shortages by providing an
extracurricular experience to this public service-oriented,
highly diverse population of young Americans who demonstrate a
penchant for computer science and related subjects. The
committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to partner
with Federal, State, and industry leaders to continue pilot
programs that provide evidence-based computer science and
cybersecurity education at schools serving JROTC youth.
Mental health discrimination during accession
During the military accession process, recruits with
potentially disqualifying medical conditions are reviewed on a
case-by-case basis to determine whether a given applicant is a
candidate to receive a medical waiver. Although the committee
recognizes that the physical, mental, and emotional strain
associated with military service necessitates rigorous medical
standards to protect servicemembers, the committee is concerned
that existing medical waiver policies related to mental health
conditions in pre-adolescent or early adolescent years could
deter aspiring recruits from seeking mental healthcare. Given
the propensity for military dependents to serve and the
stresses of military family life, these policies could
disproportionately impact military children. The committee
encourages the military services to review the medical waiver
request process as it pertains to mental health conditions,
particularly in instances of temporary or adolescent diagnoses
with demonstrable clinical improvement.
Military Family Readiness and Command Climate Surveys
The committee believes that commanders and other
individuals, both military and civilian, with military family
readiness responsibilities must be adequately trained so that
they are equipped to encourage, support, and increase military
family readiness among the personnel within the unit or
installation under such individual's command or purview,
including by providing servicemembers and their families with a
fuller understanding of the resources available locally within
such units or installations. Further, the committee believes
that leaders with these responsibilities must be evaluated on
how well they encourage, support, and increase military family
readiness, including through incorporation of these matters
into command assessments and other surveys as appropriate to
ensure that leaders at all levels pay the necessary attention
to these matters.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the committee by no later than December 1, 2020, on
the feasibility and advisability of incorporating military
family readiness matters into command climate surveys or other
appropriate mechanisms to assess the adequacy of command and
unit efforts: (1) To welcome new military families to the
installation concerned and to ensure that such families are
immediately connected with any resources necessary to
acclimatize to such installation; (2) To provide support for
military families experiencing challenges with military family
housing, including privatized military housing; (3) To inform
military spouses of employment opportunities; (4) To provide
support for military families seeking childcare opportunities,
including for children with special needs; (5) To provide
support for military families during deployment and training
exercises of the unit concerned; (6) To provide support for
military spouses during pregnancy and after childbirth; (7) To
provide support for military families preparing to transition
into civilian life; (8) To provide support for military
families seeking healthcare or mental health resources; and (9)
To provide support for military families experiencing food
insecurity or seeking nutrition assistance program support.
Plan for enhancement of recruitment for the Armed Forces among rural,
isolated, and native populations
The committee notes that recent Office of Personnel
Management data show that people who come from native or
isolated populations comprise less than 0.1 percent of the
military. As the Department of Defense seeks to improve
recruiting practices to improve performance among
underrepresented groups, the native and isolated populations of
the country can be a vital source of quality military
personnel.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives by December 1, 2020,
detailing current military recruiting efforts among populations
in rural areas, isolated areas, socially disadvantaged areas,
and among native populations.
The report should include the following elements:
(1) A summary of current and planned recruiting
efforts in rural, isolated, and socially disadvantaged
areas, as well as among native populations;
(2) A discussion of challenges germane to access to
rural and isolated populations;
(3) An analysis of cultural challenges involved with
recruiting rural, isolated, and native populations; and
(4) An assessment of any funding shortfalls related
to rural, isolated, and native population recruiting.
Senior officer accountability and use of ``proximate cause'' standard
The committee has recently become aware of a troubling
practice within the military services of finding that, because
the actions or inactions of senior military officials are not
the ``proximate cause'' of events on the battlefield, such
officials bear no responsibility for their leadership failures,
even in cases in which a properly conducted investigation found
that such officers should bear responsibility for their
conduct.
Black's Law Dictionary defines proximate cause as ``the
result of a direct action . . . that sets in motion a chain of
events that is unbroken and causes damage, injury, and
destruction with no other interference.'' Would-be proximate
cause is overcome by intervening causes. In the context of
military action on a battlefield, those closest to the action
and most in harm's way, enlisted service members and junior
officers, will almost always provide intervening cause that
under this standard could absolve senior commanders from ever
being responsible for anything that happens under their
command. In short, the committee believes that application of
the legal principle of proximate cause is inappropriate in
determining a military commander's responsibility for the
actions of subordinate units. A commander's responsibility for
the actions of subordinates goes hand-in-hand with the
commander's authority. The committee strongly urges the
military services to ensure that senior military officials are
held accountable, to the extent appropriate, under traditional
military norms of command responsibility that have served the
United States military well for over 200 years.
Status of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Culture and Process Improvement
Program
In 2016, the Air Force launched the Culture and Process
Improvement Program (CPIP) for the Remotely Piloted Aircraft
(RPA) community. At the time, the Air Force described the CPIP
as providing focus to build a sustainable RPA enterprise for
the long term. Based on numerous focus groups and other
feedback, the CPIP cataloged over 170 recommendations to
improve the health of the RPA workforce. Four years later,
however, the Air Force struggles to explain how many of the
CPIP recommendations have been, or are planned to be,
implemented.
The RPA workforce continues to face challenges not
experienced by any other community in the Air Force. RPA crews
are highly recruited to fly for government contractors who fly
the same RPAs as the Air Force on ``government owned-contractor
operated'' combat lines. Essentially, the government has
established a dynamic in which it pays contractors to poach Air
Force talent. Other well-known problems related to shift work,
dwell time, and austere base locations continue to dampen
morale among the RPA workforce. The CPIP identified these and
other problems years ago, yet the Air Force seems to have made
little progress in addressing them. From the perspective of the
workforce, the time and effort spent on the CPIP amounted to
little actual improvement.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by March 1,
2021, containing a detailed update on the status of each
recommendation made by the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Culture
and Process Improvement Program. The update shall include an
explanation of each recommendation and, for each
recommendation, a statement as to whether the Air Force has
already implemented or intends to implement it. If a
recommendation has already been, or is intended to be,
implemented, the report shall include an actual or planned
implementation date, designate a responsible official for the
recommendation, and note whether additional resources are
required for implementation. If the Air Force does not intend
to implement a recommendation, the report shall include an
explanation of the factors that led the Air Force to reach that
decision.
Supporting innovations for 21st century servicemember and family
readiness and resiliency
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
lacks a modern, software-driven approach to support
servicemember and military family population health, readiness,
and resiliency, and it believes that the Department must
implement transformative innovations that deliver 21st century
servicemember and family readiness and resiliency.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on the
Department's plan to develop partnership-driven innovation
efforts featuring multi-domain, software-driven solutions that
actively assist servicemembers and military families with
implementation of the eight categories of total force fitness
across their daily lives.
The report shall include the following elements: (1) A
proposal and timeline describing how the Department will change
its approach to total force fitness by better aligning its
efforts across all operational elements of the military
departments to support implementation of software-driven,
systemic approaches to address total force fitness; (2) An
overview of the Department's current activities to accelerate
partnerships for total force fitness innovation; and (3) A
description as to how the Department can use existing
authorities in combination with public-private partnerships to
support pilot/prototype projects for the development of
scalable, modern software-as-a-platform approaches that are
agile and comprehensive in breadth and capability.
The Veterans Metrics Initiative Study
Every year, over 200,000 servicemembers transition out of
the military to civilian life. The Departments of Defense and
Veterans Affairs, along with over 40,000 public and private
organizations, offer a vast array of services to assist
servicemembers during their military-to-civilian transitions:
helping them find fulfilling employment or educational
opportunities; meeting physical and mental healthcare needs;
retaining secure housing; and successfully re-integrating them
with civilian society. The committee is concerned, however, by
the lack of evidence-based methods to determine the value of
these many transition programs to veterans' long-term well-
being.
The committee applauds The Veterans Metrics Initiative
study, a public-private research partnership that evaluated
programs currently being used by transitioning veterans. The
study examined veteran well-being across four key areas--mental
and physical health; vocation; finances; and social
relationships--to identify factors associated with well-being
over a 3-year period following separation from military
service. The study also identified characteristics that can be
tracked to predict which veteran populations will have
increased difficulty in adjusting to civilian life, and which
types of programs may be of greatest use to them, by
identifying and characterizing program components that led to
positive well-being.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretaries of
Defense and Veterans Affairs to work with The Veterans Metrics
Initiative study coordinator to collaborate on the use of these
data to refine the Transition Assistance Program. Adjustments
to the program could address those areas of greatest risk to
the well-being of servicemembers as they transition to civilian
life and provide enhanced programs for the populations
predicted to have greater challenges in transition.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Reorganization of certain allowances other than travel and
transportation allowances (sec. 601)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize the
Department of Defense to continue making payments beyond fiscal
year 2022 for per diem while on duty outside the continental
United States and for funeral honors duties.
Hazardous duty pay for members of the Armed Forces performing duty in
response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (sec. 602)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the military department concerned to pay hazardous
duty pay in the amount of $150 per month to members of the
Armed Forces who perform duty in response to the coronavirus
disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hazardous duty pay for COVID-19 would
not be prorated.
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special pay
authorities (sec. 611)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend,
through December 31, 2021, various expiring bonus and special
pay authorities for military personnel. The provision would
extend special pay and bonus authority for reserve personnel,
military heathcare professionals, and nuclear officers and
consolidated pay authorities for officer and enlisted
personnel. The provision would also extend the authority to
provide a temporary increase in the rate of Basic Allowance for
Housing in certain circumstances.
Increase in special and incentive pays for officers in health
professions (sec. 612)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subparagraphs (A) through (E) of section 335(e)(1) of title 37,
United States Code, to increase the maximum amounts of special
and incentive pays for military health professions officers.
A recent report by the Comptroller General of the United
States (GAO-20-165) ``found that for 21 of the 27 physician and
dentist specialties, the maximum cash compensation was less
than the private sector civilian median within four officer pay
grades (O-3 to O-6).'' Additionally, the report stated that
``the maximum military cash compensation for 16 of 21 physician
and 5 of 6 dental specialties was less than the civilian median
for all pay grades.'' Furthermore, a previous Comptroller
General report (GAO-18-77) highlighted significant gaps in the
military departments for numerous Active-Duty physician
specialties, including those considered critical for combat
casualty care. As a result of the information provided in these
reports, the committee believes that it should enhance the cash
compensation of military health professions officers to ensure
that the Department of Defense can recruit and retain such
officers, especially those serving in critical wartime medical
and dental specialties.
Subtitle C--Disability Pay, Retired Pay, and Survivor Benefits
Inclusion of drill or training foregone due to emergency travel or duty
restrictions in computations of entitlement to and amounts of
retired pay for non-regular service (sec. 621)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 12732 and 12733 of title 10, United States Code, to
authorize the Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of
Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard, to provide
points for Reserve retirement purposes if a Reserve
servicemember is prevented from participating in required
drills or training during the emergency period beginning on
March 1, 2020, which coincides with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Modernization and clarification of payment of certain Reserves while on
duty (sec. 622)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12316 of title 10, United States Code, to modify the
existing priority of payments so that a Reservist, who is
entitled to retired or retainer pay and who performs paid
reserve duty, would receive compensation for the reserve duty
unless the Reservist elects to waive that compensation to
receive the retired or retainer pay.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Permanent authority for and enhancement of the Government lodging
program (sec. 631)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 914 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public
Law 113-291) to permanently authorize a government lodging
program for employees of the Department of Defense and members
of the uniformed services under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of Defense. The provision would also require the
Secretary concerned to exclude from the lodging program
Department of Defense civilian employees who are traveling for
the performance of mission functions of a public shipyard of
the Department of Defense, if the purpose or mission of such
travel would be adversely affected by the requirements of the
Government lodging program.
Approval of certain activities by retired and reserve members of the
uniformed services (sec. 632)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 908 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize
retired members of the uniformed services, members of a reserve
component of the Armed Forces not on Active Duty for more than
30 days, and members of the Commissioned Reserve Corps of the
Public Health Service to accept payment for speeches, travel,
meals, lodging, or registration fees, if approved by the
Secretary concerned. The provision would also require that
annual reports on approvals for employment or compensation of
retired general and flag officers include the following
elements: (1) The foreign government involved; (2) The duties
to be performed; and (3) The compensation or payment to be
provided.
Items of Special Interest
Commissary and Exchange loyalty programs
Military commissaries offer many benefits to their patrons
through the Commissary Rewards Program, such as digital coupon
offers, digital receipts, and at-cashier discounts. To improve
sales and revenues at commissaries and military exchanges, the
committee encourages the Military Exchange Service to adopt a
loyalty program using lessons learned from the Defense
Commissary Agency. The committee believes that both retail
venues would benefit from cross-linking loyalty programs, which
would further incentivize commissary customers to patronize
both commissaries and exchanges. Similar loyalty programs in
the private retail industry have proven to be highly successful
in expanding sales.
Comptroller General report on the impact of reforms in the defense
commissary system
The Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) operates about 240
commissaries worldwide that sell groceries and household goods
at reduced prices to eligible customers, including uniformed
servicemembers, their families, and retirees. To pay for
operating costs that exceed sales revenue, the Congress has
appropriated approximately $1.3 billion annually from amounts
appropriated to the Defense Working Capital Fund for commissary
use from fiscal years 2015 through 2019. Additionally, sales at
the commissaries have fallen from $5.5 billion in fiscal year
2015 to $4.5 billion in fiscal year 2019. To help the DeCA
improve its business operations without diminishing customer
savings, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) authorized certain
reforms for the commissary system. For example, the NDAA
authorized the DeCA to set commissary prices in response to
market conditions and customer demand (i.e., variable pricing),
and it authorized the Secretary of Defense to convert the
commissary system to a non-appropriated fund entity or
instrumentality, subject to certain conditions.
The committee seeks to understand the extent to which the
DeCA has used these authorities and/or implemented other
reforms (e.g., the sale of private label goods) to improve its
operations and to reduce its need for appropriated funds.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a review and to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than March 1, 2021, with a report to
follow, that includes the following: (1) What reforms the DeCA
has implemented within the past 5 years to improve its business
operations; (2) What effect those reforms have had on DeCA's
sales, expenses, need for appropriated funds, and/or customer
savings and satisfaction; (3) What challenges the DeCA faces in
providing reduced-price groceries and household goods, and what
steps the DeCA is taking to address those challenges; and (4)
Any other issues that the Comptroller General determines are
applicable to DeCA's operations and reform efforts.
Operation of commissaries during government shutdowns
Military commissaries provide a reliable source of high
quality food and subsistence for military servicemembers and
their families. During government shutdowns prompted by an
expiration of congressional appropriations, commissary closures
deprive families of this vital subsistence source. Due to the
critical importance of commissaries to military families, the
committee believes that the Department of Defense should
designate commissary operations as excepted programs during
government shutdowns.
Special operations special and incentive pay
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC),
in coordination with the Commander, United States Special
Operations Command (SOCOM), the Secretary of the Army, and the
Chief of Staff of the Army, to study the effect on steady-state
retention of offering a Critical Skills Retention Bonus to Army
Special Operations Forces (SOF) commissioned officers.
Specifically, the ASD SOLIC shall evaluate the Navy's Special
Warfare Officer Continuation Pay program and make a
recommendation on whether such a program should be emulated by
the other military departments. Not later than October 1, 2020,
the ASD SOLIC shall provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on its findings and recommendations for SOF special and
incentive pay. Lastly, the committee encourages the ASD SOLIC
and SOCOM to develop a dynamic modeling system to assess how
adjustments in other special and incentive pay policy could
increase retention within Army Special Operations Forces.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits
Authority for Secretary of Defense to manage provider type referral and
supervision requirements under TRICARE program (sec. 701)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1079(a)(12) of title 10, United States Code, to provide
the Department of Defense with greater flexibility in
determining which provider types under the TRICARE program may
diagnose or assess a mental or physical illness, injury, or
bodily malfunction and, by extension, the extent to which
referrals and supervision may be required for these provider
types.
Removal of Christian Science providers as authorized providers under
the TRICARE Program (sec. 702)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subsection (a) of section 1079 of title 10, United States Code,
by striking paragraph (4) to remove Christian Science providers
as authorized providers under the TRICARE program.
The Congress originally enacted the authorization of
Christian Science providers and the associated statutory
exemption of Christian Science services from TRICARE's medical
necessity requirement because the Church of Christ, Scientist
instructed its members to seek the care of Christian Science
practitioners in lieu of other clinicians, including
physicians. The Church has changed its position, however, and
it no longer prohibits members from seeking traditional medical
care, making this statutory exemption unnecessary.
Waiver of fees charged to certain civilians for emergency medical
treatment provided at military medical treatment facilities
(sec. 703)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1079b of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense to implement procedures that would
authorize military treatment facilities (MTFs) to waive fees
for medical care provided to civilians at MTFs if, after any
insurance payments, the civilian is unable to pay for the care
provided and that care enhanced the medical readiness of the
health care providers who furnished the care.
Mental health resources for members of the Armed Forces and their
dependents during the COVID-19 pandemic (sec. 704)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a plan, within 180 days of the
date of the enactment of this Act, to protect and promote the
mental health and well-being of servicemembers and their
dependents during the current pandemic. The provision would
require the Secretary to conduct outreach to the military
community to identify resources and healthcare services,
including mental healthcare services, available under the
TRICARE program to support servicemembers and their dependents.
Transitional health benefits for certain members of the National Guard
serving under orders in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19)
(sec. 705)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide to a National Guard (NG) member
separating from active service after serving on full-time duty
pursuant to section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, the
health benefits authorized under section 1145 of title 10,
United States Code, for a member of a reserve component
separating from Active Duty, if the active service from which
the NG member is separating was in support of the whole of
government response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Extramedical maternal health providers demonstration project (sec. 706)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, within 1 year of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to conduct a 5-year demonstration
project designed to evaluate the cost, quality of care, and
impact on maternal and fetal outcomes of using certain extra-
medical maternal health providers (doulas and lactation
consultants) under the TRICARE program to determine whether to
make coverage of the services of such providers permanent under
TRICARE.
Pilot program on receipt of non-generic prescription maintenance
medications under TRICARE pharmacy benefits program (sec. 707)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a 3-year pilot program whereby
covered TRICARE beneficiaries may elect to receive certain non-
generic prescription maintenance medications either through
military treatment facility pharmacies, the TRICARE mail order
pharmacy program, or retail network pharmacies. The provision
would prescribe certain conditions of the pilot program and
would require the Secretary to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, within 90 days of the date of
the enactment of this Act, on implementation of the pilot
program. Subsequently, the Secretary would provide an interim
report to the same committees within 18 months after the
commencement of the pilot program. Finally, the Comptroller
General of the United States would submit a report on the
program to the same committees by March 1, 2024.
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration
Modifications to transfer of Army Medical Research and Development
Command and public health commands to Defense Health Agency
(sec. 721)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1073c(e) of title 10, United States Code, and section
737 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116-92) to delay the transfer of the Army
Medical Research and Development Command (and such other
medical research organizations of the Armed Forces, as
appropriate) and the public health commands or programs of the
military services to the Defense Health Agency from September
30, 2022, to September 30, 2024, and correcting the name of the
Army Medical Research and Development Command.
Delay of applicability of administration of TRICARE dental plans
through Federal Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program
(sec. 722)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 713(c) of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) to
delay the transition of the administration of TRICARE dental
plans for Active-Duty family members, non-activated National
Guard/Reserve members, family members of National Guard/Reserve
members, and certain survivors to the Federal Employees Dental
and Vision Insurance Program until January 1, 2023.
Authority of Secretary of Defense to waive requirements during national
emergencies for purposes of provision of health care (sec. 723)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to waive or modify the requirements of
such chapter, or any regulation prescribed under such chapter,
for a period of 60 days for services furnished by a health care
provider (or class of providers) in an emergency area (or
portion of such area) during an emergency period (or portion of
such period). The provision would authorize the Secretary to
renew any such waiver or modification for subsequent 60-day
periods during an applicable emergency declaration.
Additionally, the provision would require the Secretary to
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, at least 2 days before exercising
a waiver or modification, a certification and advance written
notice that describes the impact and duration of the waiver or
modification. Finally, the provision would require the
Secretary to submit a report to the same committees on the use
of this authority within 1 year of the end of an emergency
period during which the Secretary exercised this authority.
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters
Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund (sec. 741)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1704(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) to extend the authority
for the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Demonstration Fund from September 30, 2021, to
September 30, 2022.
Membership of Board of Regents of Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences (sec. 742)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2113a(b) of title 10, United States Code, to designate
the Director of the Defense Health Agency as an ex officio
member of the Board of Regents of the Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences.
Military health system Clinical Quality Management Program (sec. 743)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to implement a comprehensive clinical
quality management program within the military health system.
The provision would prescribe the elements of the program and
include clinical quality management of healthcare delivery
outside military medical treatment facilities, on ships,
planes, in deployed settings, and in the purchased care
component of the military health system.
The committee is aware of several recent incidents in which
a military service waited years until a substantial claim was
paid under the Federal Tort Claims Act before initiating a
review to determine whether any involved healthcare provider
met National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) reporting criteria.
This delay in conducting a review of substandard medical care
allowed providers who failed to meet medical practice standards
to continue treating TRICARE beneficiaries. This provision
would require initiation of the review as soon as possible
after an event to expedite reports to the NPDB and other
accountability measures in appropriate cases.
Modifications to pilot program on civilian and military partnerships to
enhance interoperability and medical surge capability and
capacity of National Disaster Medical System (sec. 744)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 740 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to require the Secretary
of Defense to implement the pilot program on civilian and
military partnerships to enhance interoperability and medical
surge capability and capacity of the National Disaster Medical
System not later than September 30, 2021. The provision would:
(1) Designate the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs as the lead official for design and implementation of
the program; (2) Describe the requirements for a phased
selection of pilot program sites at not fewer than five sites;
and (3) Describe the conditions for consideration and
prioritization of such sites. The provision would authorize the
appropriation of $5.0 million to the Secretary to establish and
implement the pilot program.
The committee recognizes the importance of developing
strong military-civilian partnerships to enhance and expand the
capabilities and capacities of the National Disaster Medical
System. These partnerships would: (1) Provide additional
training platforms to improve the clinical readiness skills of
military medical providers; (2) Expand the Nation's capacity to
redistribute mass casualties of war to civilian medical
centers; and (3) Establish an enduring framework for a well-
coordinated Federal response to pandemics, such as COVID-19, or
to nuclear, radiological, biological, and chemical threats.
Study on force mix options and service models to enhance readiness of
medical force of the Armed Forces to provide combat casualty
care (sec. 745)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, within 30 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to seek to enter into an agreement with
a federally funded research and development center or other
independent entity to conduct a study on force mix options and
service models to optimize readiness of the medical force to
deliver combat casualty care. The Secretary would submit a
report on the findings of the study to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives within
15 months of the date of the enactment of this Act.
The committee remains concerned that existing force mix
options and service models do not meet the total combat
casualty care requirements of the combatant commanders in their
areas of responsibility. Therefore, the committee expects this
study to consider, examine, and explore: (1) A design for an
optimal scalable model for embedding critically skilled Active-
Duty medical providers in civilian trauma centers; (2) The
potential impact of expanding the current model of Reservists'
serving in civilian trauma centers; and (3) Any options for
alternative Reservists models, including various accession and
training models.
Comptroller General study on delivery of mental health services to
members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces (sec.
746)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on
the delivery of Federal, State, and private mental health
services to members of the reserve components. The provision
would require the Comptroller General to submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report on the study not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Review and report on prevention of suicide among members of the Armed
Forces stationed at remote installations outside the contiguous
United States (sec. 747)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review of
efforts by the Department of Defense to prevent suicide among
servicemembers stationed at remote installations outside the
contiguous United States. The provision would prescribe the
elements of such review and require the Comptroller General to
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than October 1, 2021, on
preliminary observations relating to the review. The
Comptroller General would then submit a report containing the
results of the review to the same committees not later than
March 1, 2022.
Audit of medical conditions of tenants in privatized military housing
(sec. 748)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DODIG) to
conduct an audit of the medical conditions of servicemembers
and their families who have resided in unsafe or unhealthy
privatized military housing. One of the objectives of the audit
is to determine the association between the exposure to
specified hazards and the occurrence of a medical condition.
Not later than 1 year after commencement of the audit, the
DODIG would be required to submit to the Secretary of Defense
and the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives a report on the results of the audit
and to publish the audit on a publicly available internet
website of the Department of Defense.
Comptroller General study on prenatal and postpartum mental health
conditions among members of the Armed Forces and their
dependents (sec. 749)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on
prenatal and postpartum mental health conditions among members
of the Armed Forces and their dependents. The Comptroller
General would submit a report on the study's findings to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives within 1 year of the date of the enactment of
this Act.
Plan for evaluation of flexible spending account options for members of
the uniformed services and their families (sec. 750)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit, by March 1, 2021, to the
congressional defense committees a plan to evaluate flexible
spending account options that allow pre-tax payment of health
and dental insurance premiums, out-of-pocket health care
expenses, and dependent care expenses for members of the
uniformed services.
Assessment of receipt by civilians of emergency medical treatment at
military medical treatment facilities (sec. 751)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States, within 1 year of the
date of the enactment of this Act, to complete an assessment of
the provision of emergency medical treatment by the Department
of Defense to non-covered civilian patients at military medical
treatment facilities during the period from October 1, 2015, to
September 30, 2020. The Comptroller General would provide a
report containing the results of the assessment to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives within 180 days after completion of such
assessment.
Items of Special Interest
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis research of the Department of Defense
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
expand funding for research related to amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis (ALS), an insidious, non-curable neurodegenerative
disease, in the annual core medical research budget of the
Department of Defense. Evidence from scientific research
suggests a mutually inclusive relationship between military
service and ALS with a higher incidence in the veteran
population without known reasons. The committee directs the
Department to brief, not later than September 30, 2020, the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the initiatives and funding for ALS research
of the Department during the 5-year period preceding the date
of the briefing. The briefing shall include a description of
any existing or promising breakthroughs in the diagnosis and
treatment of ALS resulting from such research.
Clinical performance management system
The committee is aware of web-enabled software that can
empower health system administrators and frontline clinicians
to transform healthcare delivery and reduce costs through a
unique clinical performance management system. The software
allows comparison of clinical effectiveness across key
variables, including patient demographics, individual
clinicians, procedures, medications, and facilities. With such
available software, the Defense Health Agency and military
treatment facility clinicians could perform rapid analyses of
clinical data using actionable, accurate statistical process
control charts to improve health outcomes, reduce variability,
and improve performance throughout the military health system.
The committee encourages the Defense Health Agency to explore
this opportunity to improve the quality of care delivered in
military treatment facilities.
Diagnostic medical devices for traumatic brain injury
The Department of Defense continues to seek ways to
evaluate troops rapidly for suspected traumatic brain injury.
Still, the committee remains concerned by the Department's
failure to field certain diagnostic tools already approved by
the Food and Drug Administration. The committee believes that
such tools could have more rapidly diagnosed servicemembers'
mild TBI (mTBI) following the January 8, 2020, missile attack
on Al Asad Air Base, Iraq. Although the Al Asad incident is a
troubling example, the committee understands that most mTBIs
occur in training, sports, and off-duty events at home station.
More than ever, the committee believes that FDA-approved mTBI
screening devices should be available for use in troop clinics
where service personnel with no apparent symptoms are too often
returned to duty without further medical evaluation. Therefore,
the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to deploy
mTBI/concussion multi-modal diagnostic devices to the lowest
possible echelon of medical care to help medical personnel and
commanders better understand when injured troops must receive
more specialized medical evaluation and treatment for mTBI.
Ensure eating disorder treatment for servicemembers and dependents
The committee is aware of studies indicating that there is
a higher prevalence of eating disorders among members of the
Armed Forces and veterans than among the general population and
that research has found a significant relationship between
eating disorders and these individuals with a history of post-
traumatic stress and trauma. The committee recognizes that
family members of the Armed Forces have a higher prevalence of
eating disorders than the general population, with 20 percent
of children of members of the Armed Forces found at risk of
developing an eating disorder. The committee also recognizes
that female members have a particularly high risk for an eating
disorder, as studies have found that 16 percent of such members
have an eating disorder and 34 percent of such members are at
risk of developing an eating disorder.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of
Defense and the Defense Health Agency to identify eating
disorders as a health condition to be treated and to: (1)
Ensure that facilities are available to treat these disorders
for all servicemembers; (2) Provide eating disorder treatment
under TRICARE to a dependent without regard to the age of the
dependent; and (3) Require commanders and supervisory personnel
to undertake mental health early identification training,
including on the warning signs and symptoms of eating
disorders.
Improve academic collaboration and streamline traumatic brain injury
funding streams
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
has identified traumatic brain injury (TBI) as a top medical
priority for combat casualties and commends the significant
investments in identifying and treating TBI and related pain.
Additionally, the committee acknowledges that there are
multiple federal funding streams available for research into
identifying and treating TBI and that the Department
collaborates with a wide variety of research institutions to
develop improved identification and treatment tools.
The committee is concerned, however, that a lack of
collaboration and information sharing between civilian
researchers in these areas has slowed progress in developing
diagnostic and treatment tools and that there appears to be
only limited progress in deploying a diagnostic tool for TBI.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and
the heads of other Federal agencies as deemed appropriate by
the Secretary of Defense, to coordinate available streams of
federal funding for research in these critical areas. The
Department should seek partnerships with civilian researchers
and encourage collaboration and information sharing between
such researchers receiving federal funds. Finally, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to streamline the
approval process for research funding, particularly those
studies relating to TBI, to the greatest extent possible to
accelerate the development of identification and treatment
tools.
Improvements to the TRICARE Extended Care Health Option program
The Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) provides
comprehensive, coordinated community support, housing,
educational, medical, and personnel services worldwide to U.S.
military families with children with special needs. The
committee is aware that many families participating in the EFMP
are not provided with consistent opportunities and services
throughout each Permanent Change of Station move. Such moves
disrupt family members as the unique services provided to
special needs children can differ between States. As a
component of EFMP, the TRICARE Extended Care Health Option
(ECHO) program serves as an alternative to States' Home and
Community-Based Services 1915(c) waiver programs for families
of Active-Duty servicemembers. State waiver programs often
operate under existing enrollment caps, which create lengthy
waiting lists for services, making them inaccessible to many
military family members. The committee is concerned that the
current ECHO program may not provide comparable services to
programs in States where military families reside, and, as
such, the Department of Defense should consider program changes
to provide more equitable access to services that States offer
more widely.
Military health clinical readiness
Ensuring a ready medical force can only be accomplished
when Active-Duty clinicians receive the necessary volume and
diversity of clinical cases or surgeries in a peacetime setting
sufficient to prepare them for the types of injuries they will
treat in the combat theater. The committee supports the Defense
Health Agency's (DHA) adoption of a knowledge, skills, and
abilities (KSA) clinician readiness framework. Furthermore, the
committee believes that a joint KSA center of excellence,
leveraging the input of the combatant commands (through the
Joint Staff Surgeon) and the military services' medical
departments, will help sustain, integrate, and standardize the
methodology across the military health system. Specifically, a
joint KSA center of excellence will incorporate industry best
practices, integrate clinical readiness metrics into DHA's
performance planning process, track National Guard and
Reservist clinician KSAs, and help inform future service and
joint medical training platforms. Accordingly, the committee
recommends that the Secretary of Defense establish a joint KSA
center of excellence.
Modification of Post Deployment Health Assessment (DD Form 2796) to
increase reporting of exposure to burn pit smoke
The committee is aware that many servicemembers returning
from deployment in support of a contingency operation do not
report that they have experienced exposure to airborne
contaminants from burn pits. As a result, they are not
evaluated for the effects of such exposure, and there is no
documentation in the member's health record. The DD Form 2796
contains a general question asking servicemembers if they are
worried about their health because they believe they were
exposed to something in the environment while deployed. Many
servicemembers respond ``no'' if they are not experiencing
health issues. To address underreporting of exposures, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to modify DD Form
2796 to ask explicitly whether a servicemember was exposed to
an open burn pit in an operational environment.
Musculoskeletal injury prevention
The committee is aware that musculoskeletal disorders
account for almost 25 percent of all military injuries.
Musculoskeletal injuries among Active-Duty servicemembers
result in over 10 million limited duty days each year and
account for over 70 percent of the medically non-deployable
population. Servicemembers experience anterior cruciate
ligament (ACL) injuries at 10 times the rate of the general
population. Investing in injury prevention education and human
performance programming can greatly reduce the number of
musculoskeletal injuries, resulting in both improved
servicemember health and improved combat force readiness.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Army Holistic Health and Fitness Program,
to carry out a program on musculoskeletal injury prevention
research to identify risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries
among members of the Armed Forces and to create a better
understanding for adaptive musculoskeletal and bone formation
during initial entry military training. Additionally, the
committee supports partnerships between the Department of
Defense and institutions of higher education to expand current
injury prevention and human performance education programs.
These partnerships could support on-site medical coverage,
musculoskeletal recovery, and physical performance improvement
capabilities to improve unit readiness.
Rare cancer research and treatment
The Department of Defense has begun to address
environmental exposure risks which may correlate with certain
cancers. The committee remains concerned, however, with
servicemembers' receipt of medical care following a rare cancer
diagnosis. Over 60 cancers may disproportionately impact
servicemembers, and many are rare cancers affecting fewer than
6 per 100,000 Americans annually. Some targeted therapies for
such cancers have been developed, but more work must be done.
Understanding specific molecular drivers for each patient's
cancer and then sharing those data are key to providing the
most effective therapies and to advancing research that will
lead to new treatments. Therefore, the committee directs the
Department to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than March 1, 2021, that: (1) Describes the specific
types of molecular diagnostic tests that are available to
cancer patients within the military health system; (2) Provides
recommendations on expansion of molecular diagnostic testing
for servicemembers with cancer; and (3) Outlines data-sharing
practices with the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National
Institutes of Health, and the external research community.
Remote health capabilities in the tactical environment
Rapidly evolving telehealth capabilities--hardware with
advanced remote vital signs monitoring, software facilitating
medical records documentation and reach-back consultation in
real time, and cloud storage of documentation--can
significantly improve warfighter survival on the battlefield.
In the critical moments after a combat injury, direct, two-way
physician/combat medic interaction in the tactical environment
at very low bandwidths can bridge communications gaps among
medics, forward surgical hospital teams, and echelon III
medical centers. The Army's Medical Communications for Combat
Casualty Care (MC4) initiative demonstrates how the development
of medical information management and information technology
infrastructure facilitates point-of-injury care for combat
casualties and ultimately saves lives. The committee encourages
the Department of Defense to consider implementation of MC4 as
a joint battlefield medical solution across the military
services.
Status of pilot program to treat post-traumatic stress disorder
resulting from sexual trauma
Section 702 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232)
authorized a 3-year pilot program to assess the feasibility and
advisability of using intensive outpatient programs to treat
servicemembers suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder
resulting from sexual trauma. The legislation required the
pilot program to be carried out through partnerships with
public, private, and non-profit health care organizations,
universities, and institutions.
The committee is concerned that, nearly 2 years after the
enactment of this provision, the Department of Defense has not
yet selected civilian partners to participate in this pilot
program. The committee urges the Department to expedite
required policy and TRICARE manual changes needed to reach
agreements with civilian partners to facilitate testing of new
models of care that will be evidence-based and measurable. The
committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to provide
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives with a briefing on the status of this pilot
program not later than July 31, 2020.
Substance abuse prevention
The committee recognizes the ongoing work of the Department
of Defense to reduce substance abuse among servicemembers.
Certain studies from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Administration conclude that a large percentage of suicide
victims suffer from depression, substance use disorders, or
both. The committee recognizes the importance of programs that
teach harm reduction techniques and offer confidential
educational information that can help reduce substance use and
potential relapse. Therefore, the committee recommends that the
Department initiate a pilot program to test an evidence-based,
confidential, internet-based substance abuse education, peer
coaching, and case management program.
TBI medical research
The Department of Defense continues to seek methods for
expeditiously evaluating servicemembers for acute traumatic
brain injury (TBI). The committee recognizes that over 320,000
servicemembers were diagnosed with a TBI within the last 15
years and that these injuries are associated with a variety of
long-term effects, including cognitive impairment, psychiatric
disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, and chronic traumatic
encephalopathy. The committee further recognizes that the early
diagnosis of a TBI, while it is still in its acute phase and
especially prior to the display of symptoms, significantly
improves military medical professionals' ability to treat this
injury and to prevent or mitigate those long-term effects. The
committee therefore encourages the Secretary of Defense to
support the basic research required to develop and field acute
TBI diagnostic capabilities as quickly as possible, to include
multi-modal research models focused on medical imaging,
molecular biomarkers, and biophysical sensors, among other
diagnostic capabilities.
Telehealth and virtual health technology implementation
Section 718 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) required the military
health system (MHS) to incorporate telehealth services
throughout its direct and purchased care components. The
Department of Defense's (DOD) slow implementation of telehealth
and virtual health technologies, however, has hindered
transformation of the MHS into a modern healthcare delivery
platform. A rapid expansion of DOD's virtual health
technologies over the last few years would have given
beneficiaries more options to access certain healthcare
services while practicing physical distancing at their homes
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The committee remains interested in the continued, expanded
use of both telehealth and virtual health technologies
throughout the MHS and recommends an approach that implements
those technologies using a flexible, evolutionary acquisition
process that encourages healthy competition, enables
incremental improvements to provider workflows, improves access
and care for beneficiaries, and potentially lowers overall
costs to the MHS.
Traumatic brain injury treatment
The committee is encouraged by the recent successful
clinical trial involving non-implanted neurostimulation devices
and physical therapy for preventing headaches and improving
balance for patients with mild-to-moderate traumatic brain
injury (mmTBI). The committee supports continuing research into
mmTBI treatments for the hundreds of thousands of
servicemembers diagnosed with this illness. Therefore, the
committee encourages the Department of Defense to pursue
additional clinical trials with non-implanted neurostimulation
devices to treat mmTBI.
TRICARE managed care support contract structure
The committee is aware that the Defense Health Agency (DHA)
has been working to draft requirements for the fifth generation
of TRICARE managed care support contracts, known as ``T-5.''
The DHA held two industry day events in 2019 to conduct market
research and to present T-5 concepts to potential offerors, but
the contracting plans presented by the DHA at each of these
meetings differed drastically. At one event, the DHA presented
the concept of potentially awarding multiple TRICARE contracts
via an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract
structure. At a subsequent meeting, the DHA announced that it
had shifted away from the IDIQ and/or multiple region concept
and pivoted back to considering a two-region structure for
TRICARE Prime contracts, similar to that of the existing
TRICARE managed care support contracts.
The current TRICARE contract structure does not support
innovation, beneficiary choice, increased competition, or
market-based management strategies. Continuing the current
contract structure limits the DHA and does not comport with the
reforms directed by this committee. Specifically, maintaining a
two-region structure will neither provide the DHA with options
to swiftly address contractor performance issues or shortfalls
nor will it incentivize contractors to comport with the most
high quality, innovative, and cost-effective industry best
practices to improve quality of care for TRICARE beneficiaries
and to maximize returns on DHA investment. Furthermore, a DHA
choice to continue to limit TRICARE managed care support
contracts to two large regions stifles competition because the
incumbents have a significant advantage. Additionally, very few
private sector health care delivery companies have both the
significant financial resources as well as the relevant past
performance required to compete for such large scale, widely-
scoped contracts.
In defense of maintaining the status quo, the DHA has
informed the committee that there exists a legal barrier to the
DHA's contracting for multiple TRICARE networks, either via an
increased number of smaller regions, by medical markets, or by
means of a multiple award IDIQ contract vehicle. The committee
notes, however, that to date the DHA has been unable to provide
a citation to any such legal barrier. Moreover, an examination
of relevant statutory (chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code) and regulatory (title 32, Code of Federal Regulations,
part 199) language confirms that no such legal barrier exists.
To the contrary, the statutory and regulatory language
contemplates multiple contracts as well as multiple provider
networks.
The committee believes that shifting the next iteration of
TRICARE managed care support contracts to a multiple region
construct will allow private sector support plans to better
serve beneficiaries by more closely matching local beneficiary
needs with innovative service and care capabilities, improve
integration with military treatment facility leadership, and
facilitate a more agile, cost-effective approach for the
Department. The committee therefore urges the Secretary to
ensure that the contract structure for T-5 departs from the
current two-region design.
The committee directs the Secretary to review the
legislative reforms enacted over the past several years and
report to the committee on how the acquisition strategy for the
next set of TRICARE managed care support contracts incorporates
those reforms in a manner that increases competition and
beneficiary choice. This report should be provided to the
committee prior to the release of any T-5 Request for Proposal.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Industrial Base Matters
Policy recommendations for implementation of Executive Order 13806
(Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense
Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency) (sec. 801)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
submit a series of recommendations surrounding United States
industrial policies to the Secretary of Defense, who would
subsequently be required to submit these recommendations to the
President, the Office of Management and Budget, the National
Security Council, the National Economic Council, and the
congressional defense committees.
The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
leadership in implementing the July 21, 2017, Presidential
Executive Order on Assessing and Strengthening the
Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain
Resiliency of the United States. The challenges and shortfalls
highlighted in the report authored in response to the executive
order are of such scale that the committee believes that only a
national approach can effectively address these deficits.
Therefore, the committee expects the Department to exercise its
leadership position, analytical capabilities, and policy
expertise in developing recommendations for the industrial
policies that the United States ought to pursue.
Assessment of national security innovation base (sec. 802)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Deputy Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of how
economic forces and structures are shaping the capacity of the
national security innovation base. The provision would require
the Deputy Secretary to submit an assessment along with any
policy recommendations proceeding from it to the Secretary of
Defense no later than 540 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act and the Secretary of Defense to submit such
assessment and recommendations, no later than 30 days after
receipt, to the President, the Office of Management and Budget,
the National Security Council, the National Economic Council,
and the congressional defense committees.
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
substantial efforts to ensure that the industrial base is
innovative, robust, and expansive and remains concerned that
the wider U.S. economy has a significant impact on the
industrial base. The committee believes that ensuring domestic
production and supply of critical national security
technologies and source materials may extend beyond the
activities, industrial policies, and scope of the Department of
Defense and require serious interagency and private sector
cooperation. Developing a strategy to address this issue should
be an inclusive, whole-of-government deliberative process that
involves the Department of Defense, other relevant government
agencies, and relevant stakeholders. The committee also
recognizes that Department of Defense appropriations are
downstream of economic health and Federal budgets. This
provision would therefore allow the Department to identify
critical economic features, propose policies to guarantee that
its development, industrial, and budgetary needs are
recognized, and ensure that broader economic policy decisions
are fully informed.
Improving implementation of policy pertaining to the national
technology and industrial base (sec. 803)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in executing the activities required
under sections 2501, 2502, and 2505 of title 10, United States
Code, to also identify critical National Technology and
Industrial Base (NTIB) member country development and
manufacturing activities and capabilities. The provision would
also: modify section 2502 of title 10, United States Code, to
require the establishment of a regulatory council comprised of
the member countries; modify section 2350a of title 10, United
States Code, to allow for the consummation of cooperative
research and development agreements among the NTIB member
countries; and require the Secretary of Defense to establish a
process for considering additional NTIB member countries,
conduct an assessment on certain countries, and report on that
assessment within 540 days of the date of the enactment of this
Act.
Modification of framework for modernizing acquisition processes to
ensure integrity of industrial base (sec. 804)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2509 of title 10, United States Code, to add references
to matters of existing law, regulation, policy, and associated
activities and that would make a technical change related to
optical transmission components. The committee appreciates the
Department of Defense's continued attention to challenges that
it faces in modernizing acquisition processes to ensure the
integrity of the defense industrial base.
In carrying out the assessment required by section 2509 of
title 10, United States Code, due March 15, 2022, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall incorporate the
following additional objectives: (1) The use by the Defense
Logistics Agency and the Defense Health Agency of contracts for
the purchase of drugs and medical devices; (2) The effect that
increasing domestic manufacturing may have on the price and
quality of drugs and medical devices used by the Department of
Defense; and (3) The opportunities for investment in domestic
advanced manufacturing capabilities for drugs and medical
devices to reduce supply chain dependence risks to members of
the Armed Forces and civilians.
Assessments of industrial base capabilities and capacity (sec. 805)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a process for assessing
foreign industrial bases, to integrate that process with other
industrial base analysis activities, and to report to the
congressional defense committees on that approach by March 15,
2021.
The Department of Defense's September 2018 report on
Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense
Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency identifies
industrial policies of competitor nations as one of the five
macro forces driving risk into the United States industrial
base, noting ``the erosion of parts of our industrial base[]
is, in part, attributable to the industrial policies of major
trading partners that have created an unfair and non-reciprocal
trade environment.'' The report goes on to cite China's
behavior in particular, to include Chinese economic aggression,
as a contributing factor. The committee remains concerned not
only about the United States' overreliance on China for key
components of national security capabilities but also about how
China's own industrial policy has facilitated this.
The committee notes the respective roles for the Director,
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA), and the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Policy
outlined in section 2509 of title 10, United States Code, as
part of a framework for modernizing acquisition processes to
ensure the integrity of the industrial base. The committee
acknowledges the increased demands levied on the DCSA, and the
committee believes that cooperation between these two
organizations on this activity will help to anchor a strategic
vision for expeditiously identifying and countering evolving
threats to the defense industrial base.
Analyses of certain materials and technology sectors for action to
address sourcing and industrial capacity (sec. 806)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a series of assessments of
certain materials and technology sectors, such as
microelectronics and pharmaceutical ingredients, to determine
what action to take with respect to sourcing or investment to
increase domestic industrial capacity and explore ways to
entice critical technology industries to move production to the
United States for the purposes of national security. The
committee notes that, in 2018, the Department of Defense
published a study titled ``Assessing and Strengthening the
Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain
Resiliency of the United States.'' The study identified several
risks to the industrial base, including foreign dependency.
China, Japan, and Germany were all identified as sole suppliers
for critical technologies used by the United States military.
Additionally, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review
Commission's 2019 annual report identified a ``growing
reliance'' on products critical to the manufacturing of active
pharmaceutical ingredients.
The committee notes that significant supply chain
vulnerability has been demonstrated by the recent coronavirus
pandemic. This represents a critical vulnerability, especially
when some supply chains are under the direct control or
influence of the Government of the People's Republic of China
or are potentially unreliable during an actual conflict. The
committee remains concerned about overreliance on non-domestic
sources of supply for certain technologies and products that
are critical to the national defense, including
microelectronics and pharmaceutical ingredients. The committee
believes that the Department must increase resiliency by
expanding our domestic industrial base as well as fostering
industrial cooperation with trusted allies and partners, who
may offer additional capability and capacity in certain areas.
The committee notes that a variety of mechanisms to balance
these objectives are available to the Department and enshrined
in title 10, United States Code, to include the Berry amendment
and the National Technology and Industrial Base, and elsewhere
in section 55 of title 50, United States Code, pertaining to
the Defense Production Act. The committee notes that, in some
cases, these authorities have been used to support and maintain
trusted and assured sources of critical goods from domestic or
friendly nation sources and may be used beneficially to address
other materials and goods. In establishing an assessment
process for considering all available mechanisms, the committee
intends to increase defense industrial base resiliency while
also reducing espionage vulnerabilities and limiting the
potential for foreign sabotage or disruption of U.S. access to
supply.
The committee notes that the assessments required by this
provision are intended neither to lead to the removal of
covered items as identified in section 2533a(b) of title 10,
United States Code, nor to remove the Department's ability to
make a determination of non-availability of domestic sources
under section 2533a(c) of title 10, United States Code, to meet
critical needs. The committee notes that the provision is
intended to initiate analyses of items where such a
determination has been made, to determine whether and what
actions to take to develop additional domestic capacity, and to
thereby increase supply chain security.
Microelectronics manufacturing strategy (sec. 807)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Deputy Secretary of Defense to develop a Department of Defense-
wide (DOD-wide) strategy by January 1, 2021, to manufacture
state-of-the-art integrated circuits in the United States
within a period of 3-5 years that includes a plan to explore
and evaluate options for re-establishing foundry services and
the industrial capabilities associated with such services. The
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to submit the
strategy, together with any views and recommendations that the
Secretary may have, to the President, the National Security
Council, and the National Economic Council by January 15, 2021,
followed by a briefing, not later than February 1, 2021, to the
congressional defense committees. The committee expects the
Deputy Secretary of Defense, in implementing this provision, to
consult with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering and to integrate the results of ongoing studies
sponsored by those officials.
Section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Department of
Defense to develop tiered standards for the security of supply
chains for microelectronics and to procure products that comply
with such standards. The committee intended this provision to
stimulate government and industry action to reduce the United
States' current near-total dependence on overseas foundries for
the manufacture and assembly of state-of-the-art
microelectronics.
Over the last few decades, Taiwan, South Korea, and the
People's Republic of China have implemented large-scale
national industrial policies to build microelectronics
manufacturing facilities. In contrast, there are no longer any
large-scale state-of-the-art microelectronics manufacturing
foundries in the United States. There are facilities in the
United States to manufacture advanced integrated circuits but
they either do not offer manufacturing services for other
companies' designs, they lack scale, or both.
The committee is aware that the DOD is developing
technology that potentially could secure otherwise untrusted
microelectronics components, but the committee is concerned
that these technologies cannot protect against supply chain
disruptions due to geopolitical shifts or military
confrontation in a volatile region overseas. The committee is
also aware that the Department is developing a strategy to
enable the domestic production of state-of-the-art integrated
circuits in low volumes to meet DOD needs. The committee is
concerned that this approach will not scale to satisfy larger
national security and economic requirements for an assured and
trusted supply of state-of-the-art microelectronics. The
committee believes that the U.S. Government needs to develop a
comprehensive microelectronics strategy to foster a sustainable
domestic electronics manufacturing capability that is globally
and commercially competitive in both cost and performance.
The committee notes with concern that microelectronics
supply chain problems are not limited to state-of-the-art
devices. The production of printed circuit boards, servers, and
other essential computing and networking equipment is also
dominated by foreign suppliers in at-risk locations.
Additional requirements pertaining to printed circuit boards (sec. 808)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to take steps to reduce and mitigate the
risks of reliance on certain sources of supply and
manufacturing for printed circuit boards.
Statement of policy with respect to supply of strategic minerals and
metals for Department of Defense purposes (sec. 809)
The committee recommends a provision that would state the
policy of the United States regarding the supply of strategic
minerals and metals for the purposes of the Department of
Defense.
Report on strategic and critical minerals and metals (sec. 810)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on strategic and
critical minerals and metals and vulnerabilities in the supply
chains of such minerals and metals to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives not
later than June 30, 2021.
Stabilization of shipbuilding industrial base workforce (sec. 811)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
shipbuilding industrial base working group.
Miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods other than United
States goods (sec. 812)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2534 of title 10, United States Code, related to
miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods.
Use of domestically sourced star trackers in national security
satellites (sec. 813)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
beginning October 1, 2021, any acquisition executive of the
Department of Defense who approves a contract to require any
star tracker system included in the design of such national
security satellite to be domestically sourced, unless: (1)
There was no available domestically sourced star tracker system
to meet the national security satellite system's needs; (2) The
cost of the available domestically sourced star tracker system
was unreasonably priced based on market conditions; or (3) An
urgent and compelling national security need exists.
According to a 2011 Department of Defense report, heavily
subsidized foreign suppliers have invested significantly in
developing state-of-the-art star tracking systems, effectively
cornering the international market, including the U.S.
government satellite market, for models with moderate accuracy.
Recognizing the critical nature of these star tracking systems
to the proper operation of U.S. Government satellites, the
Department of Defense leveraged Title III of the Defense
Production Act to invest over $22 million in producing a
competitively-bid, domestically sourced moderate accuracy star
tracking system, which will be commercially available in 2021.
Once in production, U.S.-made star trackers will be available
to meet the range of needs of U.S. national security
satellites.
The committee recognizes that star trackers have direct
access to satellite attitude control systems, making their data
integrity and processing capabilities integral to the
satellite's safe navigation while also enabling accurate
geolocation of terrestrial objects. The committee believes that
the availability of domestically-sourced star trackers is vital
to the safe and effective operation of U.S. national security
satellites.
Modification to small purchase threshold exception to sourcing
requirements for certain articles (sec. 814)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
small purchases exception included in section 2533a of title
10, United States Code, also known as the Berry Amendment. The
threshold for the small purchases exception in the Berry
Amendment is based on the simplified acquisition threshold. The
committee notes that section 805 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91)
modified the simplified acquisition threshold, increasing it
from $150,000 to $250,000. This provision would return the
threshold for the small purchases exception in the Berry
Amendment to $150,000.
Subtitle B--Acquisition Policy and Management
Report on acquisition risk assessment and mitigation as part of
Adaptive Acquisition Framework implementation (sec. 831)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Service Acquisition Executives to identify how they are
assessing certain risks in acquisition programs under the new
Adaptive Acquisition Framework.
The committee continues to appreciate the careful
consideration paid by the Department of Defense to its Adaptive
Acquisition Framework, which implements the acquisition reforms
legislated over the last 5 years. The committee believes that
the Service Acquisition Executives play important roles as
portfolio managers and in executing programs delegated by the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. The
committee believes that the Department of Defense can no longer
afford to use cost, schedule, and performance thresholds as
simple proxies for risk when determining the path that an
acquisition program travels through the Defense Acquisition
System and in organizing how programs are managed and overseen.
Exclusive attention to cost, schedule, and performance of major
defense acquisition programs and other development programs
obscures myriad other risks in programs, large and small, any
one of which could be single points of failure for successful
acquisitions. Given the role that the Service Acquisition
Executives play in portfolio and program management, the
committee believes their insights to be valuable in shaping
overall acquisition policy.
The committee believes that another area of opportunity is
the optimization of the Department's requirements generation
processes, as established under Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff Instruction 5123.01H, pertaining to the Joint
Capabilities Integration and Development System, and the
associated manual. The committee notes that the Department's
challenges are well-described in the MITRE Corporation's March
2020 report, titled ``Modernizing DOD Requirements Enabling
Speed, Agility, and Innovation,'' in particular the additional
time it takes to produce validated requirements for an
acquisition program. The committee notes the report's
recommendations accord with the idea underpinning the
Department's Adaptive Acquisition Framework. Notwithstanding
the committee's direction elsewhere in this Act regarding the
Department's incorporation of certain elements in finalizing
its interim Software Acquisition Pathway, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to consider the recommendations of the
MITRE Corporation's report and to provide views to the
congressional defense committees, along with rationales for why
such recommendations could not be implemented if they are
determined to be inapposite, not later than July 15, 2021.
Comptroller General report on implementation of software acquisition
reforms (sec. 832)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess the extent
to which the Department of Defense has implemented various
reforms related to the acquisition of software for weapon
systems, business systems, and other activities that are part
of the defense acquisition system. The committee notes that the
Defense Science Board and Defense Innovation Board have
produced substantial studies with significant recommendations
for reform and that the committee has itself produced numerous
provisions in prior National Defense Authorization Acts related
to the reform of software acquisition. The committee further
notes the Department's commitment to implementing these
reforms.
The Comptroller General would brief the committee by March
15, 2021, and scope follow-on work accordingly.
The provision would also make certain modifications to the
Comptroller General's annual assessment of selected acquisition
programs and initiatives.
Subtitle C--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Authority to acquire innovative commercial products and services using
general solicitation competitive procedures (sec. 841)
The committee recommends a provision that would permanently
authorize the Department of Defense to use what are commonly
known as Commercial Solutions Openings to solicit and acquire
innovative commercial items, technologies, or services.
The committee notes that this authority was originally
established in section 879 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and
that it has been successfully used by the Department to
establish agreements with small businesses in technology areas
relevant to supporting the National Defense Strategy.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to collect
and develop best practices for the use of this authority and to
share those practices with relevant acquisition organizations
as well as to include it with appropriate educational and
training activities of the Department's acquisition workforce.
Truth in Negotiations Act threshold for Department of Defense contracts
(sec. 842)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 2306a of title 10, United States Code, by establishing
a standard $2.0 million threshold for application of the
requirements of the Truth in Negotiations Act.
Revision of proof required when using an evaluation factor for defense
contractors employing or subcontracting with members of the
selected reserve of the reserve components of the Armed Forces
(sec. 843)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 819 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) to remove a documentation
requirement that is duplicative of solicitation requirements
established under subpart 15.203 of the Federal Acquisition
Regulation. The committee appreciates the Department of
Defense's continued attention to regulatory reform efforts and
notes that this change is based on a recommendation from the
Department's Regulatory Reform Task Force.
Contract authority for advanced development of initial or additional
prototype units (sec. 844)
The committee recommends a provision that would enhance an
authority previously provided to the Department of Defense to
streamline the process for moving technologies from science and
technology into production by permitting activities to be
performed under the same contract as the technology is matured.
The committee notes that this proposal would help to implement
the National Defense Strategy as a reform effort to enable
greater performance and affordability, capability delivery at
the speed of relevance, and rapid, iterative approaches from
development to fielding.
Definition of business system deficiencies for contractor business
systems (sec. 845)
The committee recommends a provision that would replace the
term ``significant deficiency'' and its definition in section
893 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) with the term ``material
weakness'' and its definition, as established by Generally
Accepted Auditing Standards. The committee notes that the
Section 809 Panel's ``Report of the Advisory Panel on
Streamlining and Codifying Acquisition Regulations''
recommended this terminology change to ensure consistency
between the National Defense Authorization Act, the Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, and Generally
Accepted Auditing Standards.
In implementing this change in the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement, the Department of Defense
should ensure that the definitions for associated terms are
also updated or incorporated as appropriate, including:
``significant deficiency,'' ``other deficiency,'' ``material
noncompliance,'' ``misstatement,'' and ``acceptable contractor
business system.''
Repeal of pilot program on payment of costs for denied Government
Accountability Office bid protests (sec. 846)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 827 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), which required the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to determine
the effectiveness of requiring contractors to reimburse the
Department of Defense (DOD) for costs incurred in processing
covered protests. The committee finds that the pilot program is
unlikely to result in improvements to the bid protest process
given the small number of bid protests captured by the pilot
criteria and lack of cost data.
The committee continues to support efforts to improve the
handling of bid protests. In support of such efforts, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to undertake a study
of the processes for agency-level bid protests. The study
should evaluate the following for agency-level bid protests:
prevalence, timeliness, outcomes, availability, and reliability
of data on protest activities; consistency of protest processes
among the military services; and any other challenges that
affect the expediency of such protest processes. In doing so,
the study should review existing law, the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, and agency policies and procedures and solicit
input from across the DOD and industry stakeholders. The study
should also include recommendations to improve the expediency,
timeliness, transparency, and consistency of agency-level bid
protests.
Not later than September 1, 2021, the Secretary of Defense
shall provide the congressional defense committees with a
report detailing the results and recommendations of the study,
together with such comments as the Secretary determines
appropriate.
Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition Programs
Implementation of Modular Open Systems Architecture requirements (sec.
861)
The committee recommends a provision that would facilitate
and establish requirements for the open systems architecture
for Joint All-Domain Command and Control to ensure
compatibility across new and legacy systems in the Department
of Defense.
Sustainment reviews (sec. 862)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
military services to submit certain information, already
required in section 2441 of title 10, United States Code, to
the Congress regarding operating and support costs of the
largest and most expensive acquisition programs. The
information would also be required to be available on a public
website maintained by the Director of the Cost Assessment and
Program Evaluation. Additionally, the section would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess the steps
the military departments are taking to quantify and address
operating and support cost growth.
Recommendations for future direct selections (sec. 863)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each military department to nominate to the congressional
defense committees at least one acquisition program for which
it would be appropriate and advantageous to use large numbers
of users to provide direct assessment of the outcome of a
competitive contract award.
Disclosures for certain shipbuilding major defense acquisition program
offers (sec. 864)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
disclosures for certain shipbuilding major defense acquisition
program offers.
The disclosures would require a description of the extent
to which the offeror's planned contract performance will
include foreign government subsidized performance, financing,
financial guarantees, or tax concessions.
The committee's intent is to increase transparency in
shipbuilding major defense acquisition programs.
Subtitle E--Small Business Matters
Prompt payment of contractors (sec. 871)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
contract financing law to strengthen the requirement that the
Department of Defense establish a goal to pay small business
contractors within 15 days of receipt of an invoice. The
committee notes that the Defense Logistics Agency decision in
November 2019 to move from 15-day payment terms to 30-day terms
may have a detrimental effect on small businesses' ability to
continue to do business for the U.S. Government, especially
during economic downturns. The committee further notes that
modern invoicing and payment systems should be able to support
expedited review and payment of invoices and support Department
efforts to continue to leverage existing commercial systems in
support of those processes.
Extension of pilot program for streamlined awards for innovative
technology programs (sec. 872)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 3
years the authorization of a pilot program to streamline
contracting and auditing processes for certain innovative
technology projects carried out by small businesses. Originally
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), this authority has the potential
to accelerate the awards of Small Business Innovation Research
contracts and other contracts to innovative non-traditional
defense contractors by alleviating requirements for small
businesses to submit certified cost and pricing data and
requirements for certain types of audit and records
examination.
Subtitle F--Provisions Related to Software-Driven Capabilities
Inclusion of software in government performance of acquisition
functions (sec. 881)
The committee recommends a provision that would add
software to the list of government performance of acquisition
functions to ensure that each acquisition program has a
software program lead position that is performed by a properly
qualified member of the Armed Forces or a full-time employee of
the Department of Defense. Additionally, the provision would
remove the statutory reference to the categories of Major
Automated Information System and Major Defense Acquisition
Program so that software expertise is required for all
acquisition programs, as needed.
As noted in the February 2018 Defense Science Board report
titled ``Design and Acquisition of Software for Defense
Systems,'' software is a crucial and growing part of weapon
systems and the Department needs to be able to sustain software
indefinitely. In the administration proposal on this provision,
the Department noted that it ``lacks modern software
development expertise in its program offices or the broader
functional acquisition workforce'' and that the Department
``needs to ensure software management and expertise is
developed and established as core to major programs.'' As part
of implementing the Department's high priority of improving
software acquisition, the Department must ensure that properly
qualified professionals occupy key leadership positions
responsible for software.
Balancing security and innovation in software development and
acquisition (sec. 882)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
incorporate certain considerations while finalizing the interim
software policy for a software acquisition pathway as part of
the Department of Defense's (DOD's) new Adaptive Acquisition
Framework.
The committee recognizes the growing importance of assuring
the security of software and determining the provenance of code
and the risks posed by reliance--whether known or inadvertent--
on code produced by or within adversary nations.
The committee is also concerned about DOD's non-compliance
with section 875 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), which required the
Department to implement an Office of Management and Budget
pilot relating to open source software due to significant
potential benefits to the Department, to include improved
performance. The committee notes that the Department has cited
security concerns in connection with openly publishing certain
code. The committee further notes that there is no
comprehensive Department-wide process for conducting security
reviews of code or parts of code and that the National Security
Agency, which should have similar security concerns to the
Department as a whole, has such a process for the purpose of
maximizing appropriate public release.
The committee encourages the Department to pursue the
appropriate balance of innovation and security in developing,
acquiring, and maintaining software.
The committee further directs the Under Secretary and the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer to develop a
roadmap with milestones that will enable the Department to
require and effectively manage the submission by contractors of
a software bill of materials.
Finally, the committee reminds the Department that section
800 of the National Defense Authorization for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) required that the Department's software
policy provide for delivery of capability to end-users no later
than 1 year after funds are obligated and that other
government-wide policy and best practices call for updates no
less frequently than once every 6 months.
Comptroller General report on intellectual property acquisition and
licensing (sec. 883)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Comptroller General of the United States to report on the
implementation of the Department of Defense's instruction for
intellectual property acquisition and licensing. The committee
notes that the Department established this instruction in
response to section 2322 of title 10, United States Code, which
required the Department to develop a policy for intellectual
property acquisition and licensing and to create a cadre of
intellectual property experts.
The report should assess the following: (1) Whether the
Department is achieving the instruction's core principles; (2)
The extent to which key offices are fulfilling their
responsibilities; (3) The Department's progress in creating a
cadre of intellectual property experts; (4) How the Department
is assessing and demonstrating implementation; and (5) Changes
to acquisition programs, among other things. The Comptroller
General should submit the report to the congressional defense
committees no later than October 1, 2021.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Safeguarding defense-sensitive United States intellectual property,
technology, and other data and information (sec. 891)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish, enforce, and track actions
being taken to protect defense-sensitive United States
intellectual property, technology, and other data and
information, including hardware and software, from acquisition
by China. Additionally, the provision would require the
Secretary to generate a list of critical national security
technology and provide for mechanisms to restrict employees or
former employees of the defense industrial base from working
directly for companies wholly owned by, or under the direction
of, the government of the People's Republic of China.
The National Defense Strategy establishes that long-term
strategic competition with near-peer adversaries is one of the
two ``principal priorities'' of the Department of Defense. The
committee recognizes that the protection of defense-sensitive
United States intellectual property, technology, and other data
and information from acquisition by China or other potential
adversaries is vital to the national security of the United
States. It also recognizes that the Government of the People's
Republic of China maintains, as a national priority, an
unequalled global program of theft and other misappropriation
of intellectual property and technology and unacceptable
requirements for transfer of intellectual property, technology,
and other data and information, with particular attention to
items and matters of national security and economic importance.
Domestic comparative testing activities (sec. 892)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 2350a of title 10, United States Code, to allow for
domestic comparative test. The committee believes that the
Department of Defense's new Adaptive Acquisition Framework is a
very important step toward ensuring additional avenues for new
entrants to the defense industrial base. The committee
emphasizes the Federal Acquisition Regulation preference for
commercial solutions and believes that this is especially
important in technical areas where commercial development
outpaces the Department. The ability of companies with
innovative commercial solutions to conduct comparative tests
with one or more programs of record against program
requirements is foundational to enabling the Department's
benefiting from commercial innovation.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering to jointly define the
points along each of the acquisition pathways where market
research should be refreshed and establish entry points for
such testing.
Repeal of apprenticeship program (sec. 893)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 2870 of title 10, United States Code, as added by
section 865 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), which requires the
Secretary of Defense to revise the Defense Supplement to the
Federal Acquisition Regulation to require that a system be used
to monitor or record contractor past performance related to
efforts to meet or exceed an apprenticeship employment goal of
20 percent.
Items of Special Interest
Army Combat Fitness Test equipment
The committee is aware that United States Army Forces
Command (FORSCOM) trains, mobilizes, deploys, sustains,
transforms, and reconstitutes assigned conventional forces and
that United States Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC)
recruits, trains, and educates soldiers for all initial entry
training. The Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) with its Holistic
Health Fitness (H2F) approach is scheduled to replace the Army
Physical Fitness Test in October 2020. The committee
understands that there are domestic companies interested in
supplying and sustaining this equipment. However, the committee
is concerned that FORSCOM has procured containerized gym
equipment sourced from China and other non-domestic sources
using a reverse auction contract vehicle without any technical
evaluation ahead of ACFT implementation. The committee is most
concerned that FORSCOM does not have a sustainment plan for
these container gyms and will face increased operation and
maintenance costs in maintaining lower quality equipment
sustained in the field over time.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by October 1,
2020, on: (1) The results of an assessment as to whether its
reverse auction acquisitions were appropriate for ACFT gym
equipment and whether it has the appropriate sustainment plan
in place for its gym equipment; and (2) A plan to transfer
procurement and sustainment of ACFT supporting gym equipment
from FORSCOM to TRADOC.
Comptroller General review on the impact of small business Federal
contracting programs
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a review of Department of Defense contracts
with certain small business concerns and assess the effect that
Federal contract set asides have had on small business concerns
in the defense industrial base. The committee notes that
Federal contracting programs have been established to assist
small business concerns with the intent of stimulating economic
development and creating a level playing field. This has
generally been accomplished by setting aside certain
percentages of Federal contracts for different categories of
small business concerns, including small business concerns
owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals, as defined in section 8(d)(3)(C) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(3)(C)), small business concerns
owned and controlled by women, as defined in section 3 of such
Act (15 U.S.C. 632), and qualified HUBZone small business
concerns, as defined in section 31(b) of such Act (15 U.S.C.
657a(b)). However, beyond these percentages, the committee
would like to understand how the Department measures the
success of its efforts under these small business programs and,
in turn, determines the health of this critical element of the
defense industrial base.
Therefore, the Comptroller General review shall assess: (1)
Whether the Department's efforts carried out under these
Federal contracting programs have achieved their intended
effect of stimulating economic development and creating a level
playing field for small business concerns in the defense
industrial base; (2) How the Department measures the short- and
long-term effects of these contracting programs on small
business concerns in the defense industrial base, (3) The
Department's progress in implementing the small business plan
required under section 851 of the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232); and (4) Other matters that the Comptroller General
determines appropriate. The Comptroller General shall submit a
report detailing the findings of the review to the
congressional defense committees and congressional small
business committees by August 31, 2021.
Contracting for non-traditional defense contractors
The committee recognizes that certain categories of non-
traditional businesses face barriers to working with the
Department of Defense. These businesses include, but are not
limited to, veteran-owned, disabled-veteran-owned, and
minority-owned businesses. The committee further recognizes
that other categories of non-traditional businesses face
obstacles to contracting with the Department, including
entities that are owned entirely by employee stock ownership
plans (ESOPs). The committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
by December 31, 2020, on the advantages of working with ESOPs
and the barriers ESOPs face in contracting with the Department.
For the purposes of this briefing, an ESOP shall mean an entity
that is owned entirely by an employee stock ownership plan (as
defined in section 4975(e)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (title 26 of United States Code)).
Development of domestic unmanned aircraft systems industry
The committee notes the prohibition on the operation and
procurement of foreign-made unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) in
section 848 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). As such, the committee
encourages the Department of Defense to take additional steps
to promote the further development of the domestic UAS
industry, including making it easier for small UAS providers to
work with the Department by reducing burdensome requirements
for participation in Department programs.
The committee also encourages the Department to use
available rapid acquisition authorities to contract for proven
commercial off-the-shelf technologies and recommends that the
Department expand the use of capabilities from small,
innovative, domestic UAS companies to provide the greatest
opportunity to successfully meet performance objectives,
program cost objectives, and schedules.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the
congressional defense committees no later than January 31,
2021, on the Department's plans to support domestic
manufacturing of small unmanned aircraft systems, perhaps
including use of the Defense Production Act or other
mechanisms, to enhance the domestic production capacity.
Domestic procurement of military working dogs
The committee notes the critical role played by military
working dogs in military operations around the world, and the
committee is concerned by increased competition in procuring
military working dogs. According to the Air Force, which serves
as the Executive Agent for the Military Working Dog Program in
Department of Defense Directive 5200.31E, nearly all military
working dogs procured by the Department are whelped in Europe
and trained domestically. Due to the finite number of breeders
overseas, as well as rising market demand, the cost for the Air
Force and other agencies to procure whelped military working
dogs from Europe is skyrocketing. The Air Force recognizes that
the United States does not have enough established breeders
with the expertise, genetic quality, and potential capacity to
meet increasing demands for military working dogs for the
Department of Defense and other executive agencies. The
committee supports initiatives of the Air Force to meet this
challenge, including the forthcoming proposed Capabilities
Based Assessment on the military working dog program that will
include a review of procurement. This year-long assessment
enables the Department to identify requirements necessary to
execute the aforementioned program successfully and to breed
military working dogs domestically in order to sustain a
stable, secure supply and to minimize costs.
Additionally, the committee recognizes that the
Department's Military Working Dog programs, carried out by the
Air Force as executive agent, are in need of a dedicated line
of accounting and therefore supports Department efforts to
establish one. A dedicated line of accounting will more
accurately capture the facility and resource requirements
necessary to successfully and efficiently provide military
working dogs to all the military services.
Domestic sources for corrosion control chemicals
The committee recognizes that the impact of corrosion on
the Department of Defense (DOD) is nearly $20.0 billion per
year as it accounts for as much as 20 percent of maintenance
costs and impacts military readiness. The committee notes that
many of the current chemicals used to treat, mitigate, and
control corrosion are produced in China and can be dangerous
for workers and harmful to the environment. The committee
believes that DOD should not be reliant on chemicals from China
to maintain vital weapon systems and other military equipment.
The committee understands that there are now bio-based
solutions that are produced domestically that are safer, better
performing, and more cost-effective than traditional solutions.
The committee believes that the DOD should review whether these
bio-based chemicals, which are already used in other domestic
sections such as the oil and gas industry, could offer a better
performing domestic corrosion control solution.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment to review commercially-available,
domestically-manufactured bio-based corrosion control and
mitigation solutions used in other commercial sectors and to
provide to the committee no later than November 1, 2020, a
briefing that should include the Department's findings and
potential military applications.
Improving information available to contracting officials regarding
contractor workplace safety violations
The committee is concerned that companies with serious
workplace safety violations continue to receive Department of
Defense (DOD) contracts. The committee notes recent legislation
directing attention to DOD contractor workplace safety,
including establishing section 2509 of title 10, United States
Code, to streamline and digitize processes for identifying and
mitigating risks to the defense industrial base across the
acquisition process. The committee notes that a February 2019
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, titled ``Defense
Contracting: Enhanced Information Needed on Contractor
Workplace Safety'' (GAO-19-235), mandated by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91) identified several challenges the DOD faces in addressing
violations. The report found that, among 192 companies
performing manufacturing or construction contracts for the DOD,
83 had previously been cited for health and safety violations
and 52 of those had at least one ``serious'' violation, meaning
that there was a ``substantial probability that death or
serious physical harm could result, and the company knew or
would have known with the exercise of reasonable diligence.''
The GAO noted the absence of information on Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) violations to inform
DOD decisions related to contract award and administration and
recommended that the Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA
address data limitations that prevent the DOD from reliably
identifying contractors with violations. The GAO also
recommended that the DOD make better use of the OSHA website
and consider establishing a safety performance rating for DOD
contracts in industries with high rates of occupational
injuries. The DOD agreed with the recommendations, but it is
unclear whether it has taken steps to implement them.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide to the Senate Armed Services Committee a briefing on
the steps taken to implement the GAO recommendations by March
1, 2021.
Procurement Technical Assistance Program and COVID-19
The committee recognizes that, in order to address the
economic damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Congress
passed legislation that provided economic support to certain
businesses.
The Procurement Technical Assistance Program supports the
work of Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTACs) to
provide support to businesses to pursue and perform contracts
with the Department of Defense, other Federal, State, and local
government entities, and with government prime contractors--
often at no cost to the supported business.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
identify opportunities for PTACs to provide their client
businesses with relevant information related to recently
created opportunities for economic support.
Report on battery supply chain security
The committee notes that the Department of Defense relies
on reliable, durable, and high performance batteries for nearly
all weapon systems and other military equipment such as backup,
energy storage, and uninterrupted power supply. The committee
notes that the United States is heavily reliant on China and
foreign sources for mining and refining of lithium to create
lithium ion batteries necessary for today's modern weapon
systems.
The committee also notes that the last primary lead smelter
in the United States closed in 2013 and that, in order to
produce new lead batteries needed for military and other
systems, spent lead acid batteries must be recycled. The
committee is concerned about the recent rise of unregulated,
unreported, or mislabeled exports of spent lead acid batteries,
as U.S.-based secondary lead recyclers are encountering a
shortage of batteries to recycle for use in military and
civilian supply chains.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial
Policy, to deliver a report to the congressional defense
committees no later than February 1, 2021, on the threats to
the supply chain and reliance on foreign sources for lithium
and the impact of unregulated, unreported, or mislabeled export
of spent lead acid batteries affecting the domestic lead supply
chain. In completing this report, the Department should consult
with any other Federal agencies it deems appropriate.
Report on satellite power sourcing
The committee is aware that high-efficiency solar cells and
panels are essential for powering civil and national security
satellites. U.S. technological leadership and secure and
reliable sources of solar cells and panels are critical aspects
of wartime and peacetime satellite operations. A 2019 report by
Air Force Research Laboratory and the Defense Innovation Unit
found that China has a national strategy to become a global
space power and aims to ``penetrate foreign space companies to
provide access to space-enabled global infrastructure . . . and
use[s] predatory pricing and unfair trade practices to dominate
key market segments.''
One of the recommendations in the report is for the United
States to ``include reforms in government contracting and
direct government investment as needed to compensate for U.S.
adversaries'' anti-competitive behavior, and establish the
long-term technological and logistical space infrastructure
needed to ensure long-term, U.S. dominance in space.''
The committee understands that the U.S. domestic supply of
satellite solar power products is limited and believes that a
whole-of-government approach is needed to enable a stable
domestic industrial base for solar cell and panel
manufacturing. The committee also believes that foreign
competition within the solar cell industry is often subsidized
in order to undercut U.S. domestic suppliers. The committee
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with other agencies as required, to submit a report to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees by December
31, 2020, outlining the vulnerabilities and risks associated
with foreign sources of satellite solar power technology and
provide a set of recommended investments, policy changes, or
other steps deemed appropriate to support this segment of the
national security space industrial base.
Risks associated with contractor ownership
The committee has a longstanding concern regarding the
risks arising from insufficient transparency of contractor
ownership structures, as reflected in section 845 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92) on modernization of acquisition processes to ensure
integrity of the defense industrial base and section 847 of the
same law on mitigating risks related to foreign ownership,
control, or influence of Department of Defense (DOD)
contractors or subcontractors.
The committee notes that a November 2019 report by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), titled ``Defense
Procurement: Ongoing DOD Fraud Risk Assessment Efforts Should
Include Contractor Ownership'' (GAO-20-106), found that the DOD
faces ``financial and nonfinancial fraud and national security
risks posed by contractors with opaque ownership.'' The report
noted that contractors can use opaque ownership structures for
illicit financial gain through a variety of methods, including
price inflation, fraudulent subcontracting, and subverting
competitive processes. The DOD concurred with GAO's
recommendation that the DOD Comptroller ``should include an
assessment of risks related to contractor ownership as part of
its ongoing efforts to plan and conduct a department-wide fraud
risk assessment.'' However, it is unclear what steps have been
taken to implement it.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the committee, not later than October 30, 2020, on the
status of implementing this recommendation. The briefing should
also identify resources that the DOD is dedicating to
mitigating the risks associated with contractor ownership,
identify the entity or entities within the Department dedicated
to addressing contractor ownership risks, evaluate whether
existing control activities are sufficient to respond to these
risks, and recommend any changes to law that would support
efforts to identify and mitigate these risks.
Secure sources of supply for rare earth elements
The committee is aware of and supports the Department's
focus on identifying and acquiring secure sources of supply for
rare earth elements (REE). The committee recognizes that the
extraction of REE is becoming more prevalent across the United
States and that there is further research being conducted to
determine innovative techniques to improve such extraction of
REE. For example, substantial progress has been made in the
extraction of REE from coal acid mine drainage waste. The
Department is encouraged to team with other agencies to take
this proven extraction method from the laboratory to a
practical, viable, steady-state process that produces REE for
the Department's warfighting needs. With the increase in
extraction, the committee understands the importance for the
Department of determining how to best store extracted REE and
to maintain secure sources of supply. The committee strongly
encourages the Department to continue to stockpile extracted
REE in their appropriate forms, as it is critical for the
Department to maintain adequate amounts of REE to source
warfighter equipment and munitions in support of the National
Defense Strategy.
The committee also strongly supports the five Presidential
Determinations authorizing the use of Defense Production Act
(DPA) Title III authorities to strengthen the domestic
industrial base and supply chain for REE. Two Funding
Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) focused on magnets and process
capabilities have been issued. The committee urges the
Department to also use DPA Title III authorities to invest in
the production of nontraditional sources of REE feedstock,
including the extraction of REE from coal ash. Coal ash
deposits containing economically significant fractions of REE
have been stockpiled in the U.S. for much of the last century
from coal-burning power plants. They represent a supplemental
resource to conventional ore-mining. Both industry and Federal
Government investments have matured processes to extract REE
from coal ash, and the committee encourages investment in a
production scale plant to help address the national defense
market for REE.
Accordingly, the Secretary of Defense shall brief the
committee no later than February 1, 2021, and assess the
viability and necessity of using or developing new technologies
to maintain secure sources of supply of REE. The briefing shall
cover or include the following elements: (1) Traditional
extraction of REE; (2) Nontraditional corrosive extraction and
refining of such elements from ore and coal; (3) Nontraditional
noncorrosive extraction and refining of such elements from ore
and coal; (4) An assessment of the economic importance of REE,
including Indium, Gallium, Germanium, and Tin; (5) An
assessment of the domestic supply chain and availability of
rare earth metals, including Indium, Gallium, Germanium, and
Tin; and (6) An evaluation of the need to stockpile REE,
including Indium, Gallium, Germanium, and Tin. The briefing
shall be provided at the appropriate level of classification.
Shipbuilding industrial base
The committee notes that the ``Report to Congress on the
Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels for
Fiscal Year 2019'' stated, ``An efficient and supported
industrial base is a fundamental requirement to achieving and
sustaining the Navy's baseline acquisition profiles. Our
shipbuilding industrial base and supporting vendor base
constitute a national security imperative that is unique and
that must be properly managed and protected. Over the previous
five decades 14 defense-related new construction shipyards have
closed, 3 have left the defense industry, and one new shipyard
has opened. Today, the Navy contracts primarily with 7 private
new-construction shipyards to build our future Battle Force,
representing significantly less capacity than our principal
competitors. If faced with the demands of a major conflict it
may be possible to engage other industries to assist, but the
cost of such assistance is currently unquantifiable.''
Consequently, the committee urges the Secretary of the Navy
to properly manage and protect the domestic Navy shipbuilding
industrial base and supporting vendor base.
Sustainment of munitions
Joint Munitions Command (JMC) provides the Army and the
Joint Force with ready, reliable, and lethal munitions to
sustain global operations. Since 2002, JMC and the Army have
taken significant steps to address critical readiness concerns
identified in the munitions readiness report; however,
additional steps should be taken to ensure that life cycle
needs for ammunition are met. In addition, the committee is
aware of the interagency report, ``Assessing and Strengthening
the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain
Resiliency of the United States,'' published in response to
Executive Order 13806. The report highlights myriad challenges,
especially for the organic industrial base, for securing the
supply chain for a wide range of systems, including munitions.
As such, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing, not later than December 31, 2020, to the
committee on the feasibility and suitability of establishing a
pilot program at JMC for the sustainment of munitions as part
of the overall life-cycle management of munitions programs. The
briefing should address the recommendations included in the
interagency report to help ``diversify away from complete
dependency on source of supply'' as well as ``modernize the
organic industrial base.'' The briefing should also include
cost savings and operational efficiencies that could be gained
by centralizing the sustainment of munitions. Finally, the
briefing should address whether an automated process would help
determine critical required levels and the required sources
needed to fulfill them.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related Matters
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict and related matters (sec. 901)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC) for
providing ``service secretary-like'' civilian oversight and
advocacy for special operations forces (SOF). Specifically, the
provision would modify section 138(b)(2) of title 10, United
States Code, to clarify the administrative chain of command for
the ASD SOLIC in exercising authority, direction, and control
with respect to the special operations-peculiar administration
and support of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM). The
provision would also codify the Secretariat for Special
Operations, which currently exists within the Office of the ASD
SOLIC, in section 139 of title 10, United States Code. Lastly,
the provision would require the Secretary of Defense, not later
than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to
publish a Department of Defense directive establishing policy
and procedures related to the exercise of authority, direction,
and control of all matters relating to the organization,
training, and equipping of SOF by the ASD SOLIC as specified by
section 138(b)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code.
The committee remains concerned with the lack of progress
on implementation of section 922 of the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328), which enhanced the role of ASD SOLIC as the ``service
secretary-like'' individual responsible for providing civilian
oversight and advocacy of SOF. The committee notes that a May
2019 report published by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) found that the majority of the remaining tasks identified
by the Department as necessary for implementing section 922 do
not have clear timeframes for completion. Furthermore, the GAO
found that ``outdated'' departmental guidance is hindering the
ASD SOLIC's ability to serve as the ``service secretary-like''
civilian responsible for the oversight and advocacy of SOF, as
required by section 138(b)(2)(A) of title 10, United States
Code. Further, the committee is concerned by the lack of
progress in staffing the Secretariat for Special Operations
that was created to facilitate the ASD SOLIC's ``service
secretary-like'' responsibilities despite efforts by the
committee in recent NDAAs to provide additional flexibility to
the Department to bring on additional personnel to support the
activities of the Secretariat.
The committee strongly believes that an empowered and
appropriately resourced ASD SOLIC is critical to the effective
civilian oversight and advocacy of SOF and to ensuring that
this force is appropriately aligned with the objectives of the
National Defense Strategy.
Redesignation and codification in law of Office of Economic Adjustment
(sec. 902)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify the
Office of Economic Adjustment and redesignate it as the
``Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation,'' falling
under the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment.
Modernization of process used by the Department of Defense to identify,
task, and manage Congressional reporting requirements (sec.
903)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs to
conduct business process reengineering analysis and assess
commercially available analytics tools, technologies, and
services in order to modernize the process by which the
Department of Defense identifies reporting requirements from
the text of the National Defense Authorization Act, tasks the
reports within the Department, and manages their completion and
delivery to Congress. The analysis shall be conducted with the
assistance of the Chief Data Officer of the Department of
Defense and the Director, Defense Digital Service. A briefing
to the congressional defense committees, due November 15, 2020,
shall include key takeaways of the business process analysis
and concrete steps taken to optimize the process, as well as
any necessary congressional support.
The committee believes that the current process for
tasking, assigning, generating, and distributing congressional
required reports does not serve anyone involved, as most of the
process involves manual data entry on both the departmental and
congressional sides. This generates unnecessary workload for
both sides and significantly impedes Congressional oversight.
Section 874 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232)
required the Department of Defense to diagnose the obstacles to
achieving a modernized process for tracking congressionally
required reports. The Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives have worked with the
Department to standardize all data elements involved for the
rapid transmission of data and define the necessary
functionality of a modernized process. The committee expects
the Department to aggressively pursue the next step of this
modernization effort, which is replacing its software systems
and collaborating with the committee to enable its access to
such systems in a timely fashion.
Inclusion of Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau as an advisor to
the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (sec. 904)
The committee recommends a provision that would include the
Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau as an advisor to the
Joint Requirements Oversight Council under certain
circumstances.
Assignment of Responsibility for the Arctic region within the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (sec. 905)
The committee recommends a provision that would assign
responsibility for the Arctic region to the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense for the Western Hemisphere or any other
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense the Secretary of Defense
considers appropriate. The committee recommends that the
Secretary of Defense consider adding `Arctic Region' to the
title of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense designated
to cover Arctic issues as a way of highlighting the importance
of the portfolio.
Subtitle B--Department of Defense Management Reform
Termination of position of Chief Management Officer of the Department
of Defense (sec. 911)
The committee recommends a provision that would
disestablish the position of the Chief Management Officer of
the Department of Defense on a date to be determined by the
Secretary of Defense but in no case later than September 30,
2022.
Report on assignment of responsibilities, duties, and authorities of
Chief Management Officer to other officers or employees of the
Department of Defense (sec. 912)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that, not later than 45 days before the date on which the
Secretary of Defense determines that the position of the Chief
Management Officer (CMO) of the Department of Defense (DOD)
should be disestablished, the Secretary submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report setting forth: (1) The position and
title of each officer or employee of the DOD in whom the
Secretary would vest responsibility for performing the various
duties of the CMO on the disestablishment of that position; (2)
Any duties of the CMO that the Secretary would recommend be
discontinued or modified; (3) A description of the process and
timeline for transferring the responsibilities and resources of
the CMO to the appropriate persons and organizations; (4) The
Secretary's recommendations for additional authorities and
resources that may be required to ensure effective exercise by
the appropriate officers or employees of the responsibilities
to be transferred to them from the CMO; and (5) Such other
matters as the Secretary deems appropriate.
The report would be required to reflect that the Secretary
of Defense: (1) Vested in the Deputy Secretary of Defense
responsibility to perform such duties of the CMO as are
properly assigned to the Deputy in the role of Chief Operating
Officer of the Department under provisions of section 1123 of
title 31, United States Code; and (2) Assigned to the
Performance Improvement Officer of the Department of Defense
the functions enumerated in section 1124 of title 31, United
States Code.
Performance Improvement Officer of the Department of Defense (sec. 913)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify in
section 142a of title 10, United States Code, the position of
Performance Improvement Officer (PIO) of the Department of
Defense (DOD), to be appointed consistent with and perform the
duties and functions enumerated in section 1124 of title 31,
United States Code, together with such other duties and
responsibilities prescribed by the Secretary or Deputy
Secretary of Defense.
The DOD PIO would report directly to the Deputy Secretary
of Defense in the Deputy's role as the Chief Operating Officer
of the Department of Defense, as set forth in section 1123 of
title 31. The PIO would be authorized to communicate views on
matters under the PIO's purview directly to the Deputy
Secretary, without obtaining the approval or concurrence of any
other officer or employee of the Department.
Assignment of certain responsibilities and duties to particular
officers of the Department of Defense (sec. 914)
The committee recommends a provision that would affirm the
designation of the Deputy Secretary of Defense as the Chief
Operating Officer of the Department of Defense in accordance
with section 1123 of title 31, United States Code, and the
Deputy's responsibility for supervision of the Performance
Improvement Officer of the Department. Further, consistent with
the disestablishment of the position of the Chief Management
Officer of the Department of Defense, the provision would
reassign certain responsibilities and duties to particular
officers of the Department, including: (1) To the Deputy
Secretary of Defense or such other officer or official of the
Department as the Secretary of Defense or Deputy may designate,
the authority to designate a priority defense business system,
consistent with section 2222 of title 10, United States Code;
(2) To the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, or an officer or official designated by either, the
responsibility to conduct periodic reviews of the efficiency
and effectiveness of each Defense Agency and Department of
Defense Field Activity, as set forth in section 192 of title
10, United States Code; (3) To the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller), together with any such officers and employees of
the Department of Defense as the Secretary or Deputy Secretary
of Defense may designate, the maintenance of the ``Financial
Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan'' in accordance with
section 240b of title 10, United States Code; and (4) To the
Performance Improvement Officer of the Department of Defense,
designation as a member of the Defense Business Council and
access authorization to all common enterprise data of the
Department of Defense as set forth in section 2222 of title 10,
United States Code.
Assignment of responsibilities and duties of Chief Management Officer
to officers or employees of the Department of Defense to be
designated (sec. 915)
The committee recommends a provision that, consistent with
the disestablishment of the position of the Chief Management
Officer of the Department of Defense, would reassign certain
duties and responsibilities established in law to those
officers or employees of the Department so designated by the
Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Defense.
Definition of enterprise business operations for title 10, United
States Code (sec. 916)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify in
section 101 of title 10, United States Code, the definition of
the term ``enterprise business operations.''
Annual report on enterprise business operations of the Department of
Defense (sec. 917)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Congress an annual report
on the enterprise business operations of the Department of
Defense. The report would include: a review of the proposed
budget for the enterprise business operations of each of the
Defense Agencies and Department of Defense Field Activities for
the fiscal year beginning in the year in which the report is
submitted; the identification of each such proposed budget that
does not achieve required levels of efficiency and
effectiveness for enterprise business operations; and a
discussion of the actions proposed to address any such
deficiency.
Conforming amendments (sec. 918)
The committee recommends a provision that would would
provide conforming amendments to title 10, United States Code,
to reflect the disestablishment of the position of Chief
Management Officer of the Department of Defense and the
establishment of the position of Performance Improvement
Officer of the Department of Defense.
Subtitle C--Space Force Matters
Part I--Amendments to Integrate the Space Force Into Law
Clarification of Space Force and Chief of Space Operations authorities
(sec. 931)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to clarify in existing law
the authorities of the United States Space Force and the Chief
of Space Operations.
Amendments to Department of the Air Force provisions in title 10,
United States Code (sec. 932)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the United
States Space Force in Department of the Air Force provisions in
title 10, United States Code.
Amendments to other provisions of title 10, United States Code (sec.
933)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the United
States Space Force in certain provisions of title 10, United
States Code.
Amendments to provisions of law relating to pay and allowances (sec.
934)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the United
States Space Force in certain provisions of law pertaining to
military pay and allowances.
Amendments relating to provisions of law on veterans' benefits (sec.
935)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the United
States Space Force in certain provisions of law relating to
veterans' benefits.
Amendments to other provisions of the United States Code (sec. 936)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the United
States Space Force in certain other provisions of the United
States Code.
Applicability to other provisions of law (sec. 937)
The committee recommends a provision that would define the
authority of the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the
Air Force with regard to members of the United States Space
Force and the benefits for which members of the United States
Space Force would be eligible with regard to any provision of
law not addressed by the technical and conforming amendments
enacted in this Act.
Part II--Other Matters
Matters relating to reserve components for the Space Force (sec. 941)
The committee recommends a provision that would explicitly
authorize a reserve component of the United States Space Force
(USSF) but delay the establishment of a Space National Guard
until the completion of the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force for Manpower and Reserve Affairs-led reserve component
study and until the Secretary of Defense certifies that a Space
National Guard organization would effectively execute its
assigned missions, which would also be described in that
certification.
Additionally, the committee is aware that there are current
Air National Guard units with space missions. These units play
important roles in space operations. The committee directs the
Air National Guard to assign these units as USSF-gained units
upon mobilization until such time as there is a Space National
Guard.
Transfers of military and civilian personnel to the Space Force (sec.
942)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the involuntary transfer of military or civilian personnel into
the United States Space Force (USSF). The committee is fully
supportive of the force structure and mission requirements of
the United States Space Force but remains concerned that the
involuntary transfer of military or civilian personnel into the
USSF is counterproductive to its successful deployment.
Limitation on transfer of military installations to the jurisdiction of
the Space Force (sec. 943)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the transfer of a military installation to the responsibility
or command of the U.S. Space Force until the Secretary of the
Air Force conducts a business case analysis of the cost and
efficacy of such transfer and briefs the congressional defense
committees on the outcome of such analysis. Under the
provision, the Secretary would be required to brief the
congressional defense committees on the outcome of any such
analysis within 15 days of its conclusion.
Subtitle D--Organization and Management of Other Department of Defense
Offices and Elements
Annual report on establishment of field operating agencies (sec. 951)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 31 of each year,
identifying any field operating agency established by the
Department of Defense or a component thereof during the
preceding calendar year. The report would list: (1) The name of
such field operating agency; (2) The agency's location; (3) The
title and grade of the head of the agency; (4) The chain of
command, supervision, or authority by which the agency head
reports to the Office of the Secretary of Defense or the
military department concerned; (5) The agency's mission; (6)
The number of personnel authorized and assigned to the agency;
(7) The purpose underlying the agency's establishment; and (8)
Any cost savings or other efficiencies expected to accrue to
the Department in connection with the establishment and
operation of the agency.
The committee intends this provision to substitute for a
long-recurring provision of defense appropriations acts, last
enacted in section 8041 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-93).
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $4.0 billion of fiscal
year 2021 funds authorized in division A of this Act to
unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal
reprogramming procedures. Transfers of funds between military
personnel authorizations would not be counted toward the dollar
limitation in this provision.
Application of Financial Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan to
fiscal years following fiscal year 2020 (sec. 1002)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the Department of Defense Financial Improvement and Audit
Remediation Plan ensure that an annual audit of the
Department's financial statements for each fiscal year after
fiscal year 2020 occurs by not later than March 31 following
that fiscal year.
Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities
Codification of authority for joint task forces of the Department of
Defense to support law enforcement agencies conducting
counterterrorism or counter-transnational organized crime
activities (sec. 1011)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
new section 285 in title 10, United States Code, to codify
section 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), as most recently amended
by section 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), which authorizes the
expenditure of funds from the drug interdiction and counter-
drug activities account to enable joint task forces that
support law enforcement agencies conducting counter-drug
activities to also provide support to law enforcement agencies
conducting counterterrorism or counter-transnational organized
crime activities. The provision would also eliminate the
geographic limitations on the use of the authority to better
reflect the global nature of the threat.
Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards
Modification of authority to purchase used vessels with funds in the
National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1021)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, to permit the
Secretary of Defense to purchase 7 used, foreign-built sealift
ships without the accompanying requirement to procure 10 new
sealift vessels from U.S. shipyards.
Waiver during war or threat to national security of restrictions on
overhaul, repair, or maintenance of vessels in foreign
shipyards (sec. 1022)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 8680 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the
Secretary of the Navy to waive restrictions on the overhaul,
repair, or maintenance of vessels in foreign shipyards during a
time of war or for the duration of a period of a threat to
national security (as determined by the Secretary of Defense).
Modification of waiver authority on prohibition on use of funds for
retirement of certain legacy maritime mine countermeasure
platforms (sec. 1023)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
waiver authority germane to the prohibition on the use of funds
for retirement of certain legacy maritime mine countermeasure
platforms contained in section 1046 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to
include concurrence by the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation.
Extension of authority for reimbursement of expenses for certain Navy
mess operations afloat (sec. 1024)
The committee recommends a provision that would further
amend section 1014(b) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as
most recently amended by section 1023(a) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-
92), by striking September 30, 2020, and inserting September
30, 2025, thereby extending the Secretary of Defense's
authority to fund the cost of meals on United States naval and
naval auxiliary vessels for non-military personnel.
Sense of Congress on actions necessary to achieve a 355-ship Navy (sec.
1025)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress on actions necessary to implement the
national policy of the United States to have available, as soon
as practicable, not fewer than 355 battle force ships.
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to the United States (sec. 1031)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2021, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to the United States.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or relinquish control
of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec.
1032)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through the end of fiscal year 2021, the prohibition on the use
of funds provided to the Department of Defense: (1) To close or
abandon United States Naval Station, Guantanamo; (2) To
relinquish control of Guantanamo Bay to the Republic of Cuba;
or (3) To implement a material modification to the Treaty
between the United States of America and Cuba signed at
Washington, D.C., on May 29, 1934, which modification would
constructively close United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to certain countries (sec. 1033)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2021, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to construct or modify
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec.
1034)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2021, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to construct or modify
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Inclusion of disaster-related emergency preparedness activities among
law enforcement activities authorities for sale or donation of
excess personal property of the Department of Defense (sec.
1041)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2576a of title 10, United States Code, to permit the
transfer of excess property, to include high-water vehicles,
for use in disaster-related emergency preparedness activities.
High-water vehicles include the Family of Medium Tactical
Vehicles, Light Medium Tactical Vehicles, Low Signature Armored
Cab vehicles, Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected tactical
vehicles, M939 series trucks, M809 series trucks, M35 series
trucks, Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement vehicles, the Heavy
Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck, Palletized Load System
trucks, Logistics Vehicle Systems, and any vehicle requested
for high water response for disaster-related emergency
preparedness.
Expenditure of funds for Department of Defense clandestine activities
that support operational preparation of the environment (sec.
1042)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to expend up to $15.0 million in any
fiscal year for clandestine activities for any purpose the
Secretary determines to be proper for preparation of the
environment for operations of a confidential nature. The
committee notes that the Department of Defense previously
utilized section 127 of title 10, United States Code, otherwise
known as ``emergency and extraordinary expenses'' (EEE) for
clandestine operational preparation of the environment
activities. However, the committee has previously expressed
concerns with the Department's use of the EEE authority for
non-emergent and recurring expenses. Therefore, the committee
believes that this authority will allow for the continuation of
clandestine operational preparation of the environment
activities while enhancing congressional oversight.
Clarification of authority of military commissions under chapter 47A of
title 10, United States Code, to punish contempt (sec. 1043)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subchapter IV of chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code,
to permit a judge of the United States Court of Military
Commission Review or a military judge detailed to a military
commission to punish contempt. The provision would also provide
that the punishment for contempt may not exceed confinement for
30 days, a fine of $1,000, or both and would establish the
conditions under which punishment for contempt is reviewable.
The committee perceives the availability of the contempt
power as essential to the orderly progression of military
commission proceedings and notes that vesting contempt power in
a military judge detailed to a military commission would align
with the authority vested in both a military judge presiding
over a court-martial and in a civilian judge presiding in a
court established pursuant to Article III of the U.S.
Constitution. The committee expects that a military judge
detailed to a military commission would exercise contempt power
in accord with the judicial tenets of fairness and
impartiality.
Prohibition on actions to infringe upon First Amendment rights of
peaceable assembly and petition for redress of grievances (sec.
1044)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act
for a program, project, or activity, or for the use of
personnel, to conduct actions against United States citizens
that infringe on their rights under the First Amendment to the
Constitution peaceably to assemble or to petition the
government for a redress of grievances.
Arctic planning, research, and development (sec. 1045)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff to begin planning and implementing changes that may be
necessary for requirements, training, equipment, doctrine, and
capability development of the Armed Forces should an expanded
role of the Armed Forces in the Arctic be determined to be in
the national security interests of the United States.
Consideration of security risks in certain telecommunications
architecture for future overseas basing decisions of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1046)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to take security risks posed by at-risk
vendors such as Huawei and ZTE into account when making
overseas stationing decisions.
Foreign military training programs (sec. 1047)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish specified vetting procedures
and monitoring requirements for certain military training on
Department of Defense installations and facilities within the
United States.
Reporting of adverse events relating to consumer products on military
installations (sec. 1048)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that any adverse event that
occurs on a military installation relating to consumer products
is reported on saferproducts.gov.
Inclusion of United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps among youth and
charitable organizations authorized to receive assistance from
the National Guard (sec. 1049)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 508 of title 32, United States Code, to add the United
States Navy Sea Cadet Corps to the list of organizations
authorized to receive assistance from the National Guard.
Department of Defense policy for the regulation of dangerous dogs (sec.
1050)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Veterinary Service Activity of the Department of Defense to
establish a standardized policy applicable across all military
communities for the regulation of dangerous dogs within 90 days
of the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sense of Congress on basing of KC-46A aircraft outside the contiguous
United States (sec. 1051)
The committee recommends a provision that would articulate
the sense of Congress on what the Secretary of the Air Force
should consider during the strategic basing process for the KC-
46A aircraft outside the continental United States.
Subtitle F--Studies and Reports
Report on potential improvements to certain military educational
institutions of the Department of Defense (sec. 1061)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
no later than December 1, 2021, setting forth the results of a
review and assessment of potential improvements to certain
educational institutions of the Department of Defense. The
review would be conducted by an outside organization with
expertise in analyzing matters in connection with higher
education.
Reports on status and modernization of the North Warning System (sec.
1062)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees two reports: one on the current status of the North
Warning System and another containing a plan for modernizing
the capabilities provided by that system, including cost,
schedule, and technological advancements required.
Studies on the force structure for Marine Corps aviation (sec. 1063)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to commission three studies on the future
of the U.S. Marine Corps aviation enterprise.
The committee commends the Marine Corps on its efforts to
organize, train, and equip the force to better meet the needs
outlined in the National Defense Strategy, in particular, the
need for forward-postured, combat-credible forces to serve as
the ``contact'' and ``blunt'' layers in both competition and
conflict, particularly in the Indo-Pacific theater. While the
committee supports the goals of the Marine Corps in a time of
sustained world-wide deployments, it remains concerned about
the planned aviation divestment. The committee requires more
analysis to determine if reducing the number of F-35B squadrons
contradicts the significant fifth-generation fighter capability
requirements of the future force. Furthermore, the committee is
concerned that reducing medium and heavy lift helicopter
squadrons may not meet operational capacity requirements given
the focus of Force Design 2030 on the Indo-Pacific and the
logistics demands created by Expeditionary Advanced Base
Operations, particularly in a contested environment.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Department of Defense strategic Arctic ports (sec. 1081)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees on the updated assessment of the estimated
cost of constructing, maintaining, and operating a strategic
port in the Arctic at each potential site evaluated pursuant to
section 1752(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). The report should also
include, for each potential site at which construction of such
a port could be completed by 2030, an estimate of the number of
days per year that such port would be usable by vessels of the
Navy and the Coast Guard. The provision would further permit
the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with others, to
designate one or more ports identified in the report as
Department of Defense Strategic Arctic Ports.
Personal protective equipment matters (sec. 1082)
The committee recommends a provision that would require:
(1) Briefings from the Secretaries of the military departments,
no later than January 31, 2021, on the fielding of the newest
generations of personal protective equipment (PPE) by the
military services in the jurisdiction of each Secretary; (2)
The Director of the Defense Health Agency to develop and
maintain a system for tracking data on injuries among members
of the Armed Forces when servicemembers are utilizing the
newest generation of PPE and to brief Congress no later than
January 21, 2025, on the prevalence of preventable injuries
attributable to ill-fitting or malfunctioning PPE; and (3) The
annual Periodic Health Assessment of servicemembers and post-
deployment health assessments of servicemembers to include
questions on whether a servicemember incurred an injury in
connection with ill-fitting or malfunctioning PPE and, in the
case of a servicemember's having incurred such an injury,
questions on one or more elements of self-evaluation of the
injury.
Estimate of damages from Federal Communications Commission Order 20-48
(sec. 1083)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
any funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for fiscal
year 2021 from being used by the Secretary of Defense to comply
with the Order and Authorization adopted by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC 20-48) until the Secretary
submits to the Congress an estimate of the covered costs and
eligible reimbursable costs associated with interference with
the Global Positioning System (GPS) resulting from the Order.
The provision would require that the Secretary certify that the
estimate is accurate with a high degree of certainty.
The committee is concerned that the Federal Communications
Commission approved Ligado's proposal despite extensive testing
performed by 9 Federal agencies that concluded that the Ligado
proposal will cause interference for both civilian and military
GPS users. The committee is concerned that the conditions
imposed on Ligado in FCC 20-48 are not practical and do not
adequately protect GPS. Specifically, the committee is
concerned that the requirement for Ligado to repair or replace
any potentially affected Federal GPS receiver would only cover
the cost of the GPS receiver and not any of the associated
development and fielding costs to repair or replace the device,
placing a large cost burden on the Department of Defense.
Modernization effort (sec. 1084)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and
Information, in consultation with the Policy and Plans Steering
Group, to establish goals and a plan for modernization of
spectrum management infrastructure. The provision also includes
assorted reporting requirements and requires Government
Accountability Office oversight of those reports and
activities.
Items of Special Interest
21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act implementation
The committee supports the goals of the 21st Century
Integrated Digital Experience Act (IDEA) (Public Law 115-336)
and believes that embracing the requirements of the 21st
Century IDEA would have a significant positive impact on the
Department of Defense's mission delivery and improving customer
service to employees, Active-Duty personnel, family members,
and others who interact with the Department and the military
services through intranets, websites, and forms.
Therefore, to assess the progress of the implementation of
the 21st Century IDEA across the Department, the committee
directs the Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department
of Defense to prepare and issue a report on its implementation.
This assessment should include the status of any Department-
wide guidance and initiatives and consultation with the CIOs of
the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, as well as the
Washington Headquarters Service and any other relevant
departments. The Department shall provide the report to the
congressional defense committees within 90 days of the
enactment of this Act.
American Red Cross
The American Red Cross is a congressionally chartered
Federal instrumentality that provides independently verified
emergency communication messages for military members seeking
emergency leave due to medical emergencies of loved ones,
supports deployed locations in conflict zones, and mobilizes
clinical and non-clinical volunteers for service in military
medical treatment facilities. Since 9/11, the Red Cross has
served more than 1 million military families by providing
critical services on military installations and in military
hospitals around the world, supporting military families during
deployments and emergencies, and continuing to serve veterans
after completion of their military service. To provide these
services, Red Cross staff and volunteers require support from
the Department of Defense, including access to facilities and
information technology. The committee encourages the Secretary
of Defense to review and update agreements with the American
Red Cross and the Department's directives to ensure appropriate
support to the Red Cross as a Federal instrumentality.
Comptroller General assessment of Defense Logistics Agency disposal of
surplus equipment
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
may not be disposing of surplus equipment in accordance with
Departmental guidance, particularly with respect to military
vehicles. The committee therefore directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to conduct a review of: (1) The
Department's process for assigning demilitarization codes; (2)
How the demilitarization codes inform the disposal process,
including, in the case of property with controlled components,
the degree to which the Department is authorized to make
reasonable, cost-effective modifications in order to make them
available for public use; (3) The extent to which the Defense
Logistics Agency and the military services adhere to
demilitarization coding and disposal policies, consistent with
Department of Defense requirements; and (4) In the case of
property with controlled components, the process used to
determine whether or not to modify such property in order to
make it available for public use. The Comptroller General shall
submit a report detailing the findings of the review to the
congressional defense committees by June 30, 2021.
COVID-19 and security forces relationships
The committee acknowledges that the COVID-19 pandemic will
pose a unique challenge to security forces relationships by
complicating planned exercises, reducing the possibility of in-
person meetings and exchanges, and creating myriad scheduling
and logistical challenges. However, the committee believes that
building and maintaining security forces relationships has
become even more important in the wake of the pandemic and
feels that it is incumbent upon the regional combatant commands
to adapt to changing circumstances.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide, not later than September 30, 2020, the
congressional defense committees with a briefing on the
following subjects: (1) How the combatant commands, military
services, and Defense Agencies and Department of Defense Field
Activities have altered their plans to continue to build
security forces relationships in light of COVID-19; (2) The
types of exercises, key leader engagements, trainings,
education, workshops, and other activities complicated by
COVID-19; (3) The policies and procedures used to overcome
these issues; (4) New policies, procedures, and activities--
especially virtual alternatives--being employed to build
relationships in light of COVID-19; and (5) The ways in which
the pandemic has altered the goals and focus of various
security forces relationships, especially related to how the
pandemic has changed the perspective, plans, and needs of our
key allies and partners.
Demonstration of current Department of Defense budget and program data
visualization (sec.)
The committee is concerned that Department of Defense (DOD)
senior leadership is not availing itself of modern data
visualization tools to provide adequate visibility of choices
and facilitate decision-making in the Planning, Programming,
Budgeting, and Execution process. The scope and complexity of
the data associated with the defense enterprise are vast and
can act as a significant tax on the efficiency of all levels of
the national security enterprise.
The committee commends the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) for developing an internal data
visualization solution for the DOD-wide audit to help senior
leaders understand data quickly, diagnose problems, and focus
decision-making and resources.
The committee believes that both DOD leadership as well as
the congressional defense committees would benefit from the use
of modern data visualization tools, which could enable
decision-makers to rapidly and more easily understand budgetary
and programmatic data and trends.
Enabling congressional oversight of defense-wide agency spending (sec.
)
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to deliver a
report with the submission of the budget request for fiscal
year 2022 detailing the changes to the budgets of agencies not
under the control of a military department, including programs
affected by a Defense-Wide Review 2.0. The report shall
identify the action taken under such review as either an
expansion or acceleration, a cancellation, reduction in scope,
deferral or delay, or a transfer to another component or
agency. The report should include basic relevant budget data,
including identifying information such as program element, sub-
activity group, or line number, and the projected 5-year budget
plan for each program.
The committee commends the Department of Defense for
undertaking the Defense-Wide Review for the first time in the
fiscal year 2021 budget process. The Defense-wide budget
contains myriad and largely unconnected activities, from the
Defense Health Program to the Missile Defense Agency, and
comprises about 15 percent of the Department of Defense's
overall budget. Establishment of a rigorous process for annual
review by the Secretary of Defense of the Defense-wide budget
is valuable. As the Defense-Wide Review 1.0 demonstrated, the
relevant agencies conducted risk-based prioritization of their
programs and activities, resulting in delays or reduction of
programs for justified reasons. Unfortunately, in other cases,
the Review simply acted as a catalyst to cut or eliminate
programs based on little to no justification to meet savings
targets.
The committee notes that the information provided by the
Department to enable the committee to carry out its
constitutional duty of oversight fell woefully short of
expectations. Despite months of congressional requests for
information, the Department hosted only one engagement on the
Defense-Wide Review, and it failed to update its supplemental
justification documents. While the Defense-Wide Review was
conducted on a short timeline, the committee believes that the
Congress must receive far more robust explanatory materials not
only to fulfill its duties but also to ensure that the overall
Defense-Wide Review process aligns the Department with the
National Defense Strategy. The committee further notes that the
data and justification material necessary to enable
congressional oversight of the Defense-Wide Review already
exist. Therefore, the committee encourages the Department to
work with the congressional defense committees to establish
expectations for Defense-Wide Review 2.0 justification
materials well in advance of the submission of the budget
request for fiscal year 2022.
Enhancing security cooperation
The committee notes that security cooperation is a
fundamental element of the National Defense Strategy and that
engagement, development, training, and education with partner
military forces is crucial to successfully strengthening
alliances and attracting new partners. The committee further
notes that reforms made in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and subsequent
Department of Defense Instruction 5132.14, ``Assessment,
Monitoring, and Evaluation Policy for the Security Cooperation
Enterprise,'' dated January 12, 2017, have resulted in
important improvements to security cooperation and that the
framework for the assessment, monitoring, and evaluation (AM&E)
has enhanced the Department's transparency, effectiveness, and
performance management of these partner engagements.
The committee expresses its support for the ongoing
implementation of the AM&E framework and highlights its added
importance in light of increasing global power competition. The
committee also encourages further investment in security
cooperation and engagement and continued support within the
Department for these efforts.
Incentives to promote Department of Defense audit activities
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
has begun to undertake focused and coordinated activities to
try to meet the mandate of the Chief Financial Officers Act of
1990 (Public Law 101-576), which requires annual audits of
financial statements for Federal agencies. The committee also
notes that, although the DOD has significantly more resources
and access to expertise than most Federal agencies, after 30
years of effort, the DOD remains the only agency yet to obtain
a ``clean'' audit opinion on its financial statements.
The committee believes that DOD's progress toward achieving
this clean audit opinion will continue to be hampered by a lack
of internal organizational incentives to invest the resources
and leadership attention required to change the systems,
processes, and culture that define the currently unauditable
DOD enterprise.
The committee notes that the establishment of internal
organizational budgetary incentives, such as the ability for
the military services and agencies to recoup and reapply the
savings derived from correcting issues uncovered by audit
activities to agency priorities or to activities that could
help achieve and maintain clean audit status, would be
beneficial to the overall audit effort.
The committee therefore directs the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to consider and develop incentives, including budgetary
incentives, that would encourage the military services and
agencies to increase efforts to achieve a clean financial audit
status and to develop the capabilities, expertise, and
practices to maintain that clean status over time.
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support
The committee understands that resource limitations may
impact the ability of the Department of Defense to conduct
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) activities
in support of global counternarcotics and counter-illicit
trafficking operations. The committee further understands that
there may be opportunities to enhance ISR capabilities in
support of these missions through modifications to and
increased maintenance of currently fielded systems, including
land-based radar and communications intercept technology, or
through the leasing of such systems. The committee encourages
the Department to explore opportunities in this area in order
to provide increased area coverage and capabilities for
counternarcotics, counter-illicit trafficking, and other
missions, as appropriate.
Inventory of systems integral to the Planning, Programming, Budgeting,
and Execution process (sec. )
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller), in consultation with the Chief Information
Officer, the Chief Data Officer, and such other officers and
employees of the Department of Defense as the Secretary of
Defense may designate, to deliver a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than October 1, 2020, on the
information systems integral to managing and sharing data
related to the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution
(PPBE) process.
The report should include a compilation of discrete
information technology systems used to manage and share
programming and budgetary data throughout the Department of
Defense, with information identifying each system's deployment
by component and the phases of the PPBE process to which each
system contributes. Accompanying information may include the
initial operational capability dates, modernization efforts to
date, and future modernization plans for such systems.
The committee is concerned that the systems undergirding
the Department of Defense PPBE process do not enable the
standardization of relevant budgetary and programmatic data
across the Department. While the internal sharing of such
information has improved in recent years, the custom data
elements created by various components act as a significant
barrier to further collaboration and efficiency. Improved data
standardization across the Department will decrease repetitive
work, enable new types of data visualization, and improve the
ability of senior leadership to access information in a timely
fashion.
Mission-based budgeting (sec. )
The committee notes that identifying or categorizing
program elements by specific mission or combatant command could
provide immense value to both the Department of Defense and the
Congress in considering changes to the defense budget. The
Major Force Programs provide little analytical value as
currently constructed. Program elements, the building blocks of
the budget, are dispersed among several accounts and sub-
activity groups, making the aggregation of relevant
activities--from hypersonic strike weapons to artificial
intelligence programs, for example--to understand mission
capabilities and gaps extremely time-consuming and difficult.
The committee understands that certain components have
expanded their use of mission-based budgeting, such as the
Chief Information Officer's work in identifying cyber-related
program elements. However, the potential for expanding this
practice remains great, particularly for joint capability
portfolios such as integrated air and missile defense, counter-
unmanned aerial systems, long-range precision strike, and
emerging technologies.
The committee believes that the expanded use of mission-
based budgeting could substantially improve the visibility of
certain areas of the Department's budget without any change to
the underlying structure of the budget itself.
Presentation of defense budget materials by military services
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
may be making decisions regarding the budget requests of each
military service without adequate consideration of mission-
specific funding requirements. The committee notes that the
division of the defense budget between the military services
should be primarily based on strategic considerations. The
committee believes that more accurate presentation of service
budgets would help the Secretary of Defense analyze the budget
proposals prepared by each of the military departments and
adjudicate the amounts of funding recommended for each of the
services based on factors such as relevance to implementation
of the National Defense Strategy, opportunities for
technological breakthroughs, efficiency and accountability for
previous years' funding, and similar objective criteria.
To facilitate the extent to which the Office of the
Secretary of Defense follows this direction, the committee
directs that the Secretary of Defense shall include in any
budget overview documents provided to Congress with the fiscal
year 2022 budget, and all subsequent budgets, a description of
the amounts and shares of the defense budget recommended to
each of the military services or departments, the defense-wide
accounts, and any other or miscellaneous recipients of
Department of Defense budget requests.
The committee additionally directs that the amounts and
shares for each military service or department reported
pursuant to this direction shall not include amounts that are
not directly related to the budgets of each service or
department, such as funding that is subsequently redirected to
general defense-wide needs or for other national security
purposes.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing on the implementation of revised budget
overview documents to the congressional defense and
intelligence committees. This briefing should be delivered no
later than November 1, 2020.
Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
consult with the appropriate counterintelligence officials in
preparation of these exhibits.
Reciprocity of security clearances
The committee is concerned that issues remain concerning
extended delays or impediments in the transfer of security
clearances between agencies and departments of the U.S.
Government.
The committee understands that organizations ``receiving''
a request to accept clearances and provide access have the
authority to reject automatic approval and to conduct their own
adjudication if the individual in question has what is called a
``condition'' or ``exception'' code in his or her security file
or if ``new information'' relating to one or more of the
standard adjudicative guidelines has emerged since the
individual was last approved for access. A condition or
exception code indicates that the individual is not in
compliance with one or more adjudicative standards but has
received a waiver. The receiving or ``gaining'' organization,
in such cases, has the right to review the specific issue and
how it was handled and resolved by the agency or department
currently holding the clearance and providing access to
classified information.
The committee understands that these conditions or
exception codes are not standardized and vary across government
organizations and, in some circumstances, individuals may not
be aware that they have such codes in their files.
Therefore, the committee directs that the Security
Executive Agent and the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security shall conduct a review that includes
the following actions: (1) Compile statistics based on a
representative sample on the prevalence of condition codes that
result in above average durations for approval of clearance and
access transfer requests and in outright rejections of
requested transfers; (2) Assess the degree of consistency and
rigor across agencies and departments in the use of these
condition codes; (3) Develop and evaluate the merits of options
to mitigate or even eliminate this limitation on reciprocity,
including improved documentation of and the sharing of
information about the circumstances or context for activating a
condition code; and (4) Produce recommendations for reforms.
The results of this review shall be provided to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees no later than
February 1, 2021.
Civilian casualties
The committee notes that civilian casualties are a tragic
and unavoidable part of war and recognizes that the Department
of Defense endeavors to conduct all military operations in
compliance with the international law of armed conflict and the
laws of the United States, including the principles of
distinction, proportionality, and the requirement to take
feasible precautions in planning and conducting operations to
reduce the risk of harm to civilians and civilian objects.
The committee believes that protection of civilians and
civilian objects during military operations is a moral and
ethical imperative and commends the Department of Defense for
the measures it has implemented and is currently implementing
to prevent, mitigate, track, investigate, learn from, respond
to, and report civilian casualties resulting from United States
military operations. The committee notes that the Department
has submitted to the Congress three successive annual reports
on civilian casualties resulting from United States military
operations for calendar years 2017, 2018, and 2019 and has
updated reports as appropriate. Additionally, the committee
commends the United States Africa Command for announcing on
March 31, 2020, that the command would be issuing a new
quarterly report on the status of ongoing civilian casualty
allegations and assessments. Collectively, these efforts
increase public transparency regarding civilian casualty
allegations that are reported to the command and demonstrate
the constant commitment of the United States Armed Forces to
minimizing civilian harm in the conduct of military operations.
In support of its broader efforts to prevent and respond to
allegations of civilian casualties, the committee encourages
the Department to redouble efforts to:
(1) Establish and implement the policy of the
Department relating to civilian casualties resulting
from United States military operations, as required by
section 936 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232);
(2) Issue regulations for the implementation of
section 1213 of the National Defense Authorization for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) for ex gratia
payments for damage, personal injury, or death that is
incident to the use of force by the United States Armed
Forces, a coalition that includes the United States, a
military organization supporting the United States, or
a military organization supporting the United States or
such coalition;
(3) Ensure that the geographic combatant commands
have the requisite personnel and resources to
appropriately integrate the observance of human rights
and the protection of civilians and civilian objects in
all activities be the commands;
(4) Promote the observance of human rights and the
protection of civilians and civilian objects through
engagements with foreign partner forces, including in
connection with train and equip programs; advise,
assist, accompany, and enable missions; and executing
fully combined and coalition operations; and
(5) Increase coordination with the Department of
State in any country in which the United States Armed
Forces are conducting military operations in order to
assist in the response to reports of civilian
casualties resulting from such military operations.
United States Army High Containment Facility at Fort Detrick
The committee notes that Fort Detrick currently houses the
military's primary High Containment Bio Safety Level Four (BSL
4) Facility, which is nearing its end-of-life. These unique
facilities serve to conduct research on pathogenic agents that
pose extreme health risks to the military and homeland, such as
COVID-19. Recently, the facility has been shut down by the
Centers for Disease Control over concern about its ability to
safely handle waste streams from the aging facility. The waste
handling facility is separate from the main facility, and it
too is aging and has broken down several times.
Over the past 10 years, the Army has been constructing a
modern 30,000 square foot High Containment Facility next to the
existing one in order to replace it. This new facility, which
has several unique handling features and wings, is being built
at a cost of over $1 billion. However, the construction and
final operations have been delayed several times, first by a
fire from welding during construction and more recently because
of dependence on the aging waste handling facility that the
current High Containment Facility relies upon and which has
been unreliable. The U.S. Army's Future Command is now
responsible for operating the High Containment Facilities, both
the current one and that under construction.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to report to the congressional defense committees, no later
than February 28, 2021, on: (1) The expected lifetime and
annual cost of operating the current High Containment Facility;
(2) Actions, cost, and timelines to remedy the aging waste
handling facility next to it; (3) The amount expended to date
on the High Containment Facility under construction; (4) A plan
of action for waste handling at the High Containment Facility
under construction, including cost, timelines, and impacts if
additional delays are incurred; and (5) The expected date to
certify full operations of the High Containment Facility under
construction, taking into account the current inability to
handle waste generated from operations.
The committee notes the unique role that the U.S. Army has
had in research of and handling these extremely dangerous
pathogens and the importance of this unique responsibility to
the Department of Defense and our Nation and encourages swift
action to resolve any outstanding issues that have delayed
transitioning operations to the High Containment Facility under
construction.
Update to Digital Modernization Strategy and investments to improve
resiliency in sustaining mission-essential functions
The committee believes that the Department of Defense's
need to work remotely as part of the response to the COVID-19
pandemic exposed a decade or more of underinvestment in
critical enterprise-wide information technology infrastructure,
to include end user devices, network capacity and stability,
cloud services, and classified capabilities. The committee
acknowledges that the Department of Defense Chief Information
Officer formed a task force and acted quickly to mobilize
contracting instruments to mitigate near-term gaps, requested
appropriate funding from the Congress, and at present seems to
have been able to minimize the degradation of continuity of the
Department's mission-essential functions. However, the
committee is concerned about significant degradation of certain
functions--especially those requiring access to classified
information--that have not been fully mitigated. Furthermore,
the committee believes that, in order to sustain improvements
in capacity and resiliency, the Department needs to reexamine
its requirements. The committee directs the Chief Information
Officer to update the Department's Digital Modernization
Strategy and supporting policies and procedures and to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees on these actions
and specific investments needed to achieve this resiliency with
the budget request for fiscal year 2022.
State Partnership Program foreign travel expenses
The committee is aware that a January 14, 2020, report
published by the United States Property and Fiscal Office for
Hawaii (report no. 19-002) found that, when the Financial
Management Regulation Chapter 18 of Volume 12 was repealed by
the Department of Defense, it may have resulted in the removal
of a positive legal authority for the National Guard State
Partnership Program to fund travel and allowances for members
of foreign countries under the State Partnership Program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department to coordinate
with the National Guard Bureau to review the issue and provide
a report to the committee no later than December 30, 2020,
identifying any potential discrepancies discovered and
specifying the resolution.
Strategic evaluation of the State Partnership Program
The committee notes that security cooperation is a
fundamental element of the National Defense Strategy and that
engagement, development, training, and education with partner
military forces is crucial to successfully strengthening
alliances and attracting new partners. In particular, the
committee highlights the effectiveness of the State Partnership
Program in cultivating positive relationships with partner
forces and enhancing long-term interoperability and notes the
efforts made by the Department to improve security cooperation.
The committee believes that global power competition
necessitates an effort to expand the competitive space and
encourages the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the
National Guard Bureau, in consultation with the Department of
State, combatant commanders, and adjutants general, to
prioritize expansion of partnerships in regions that offer new
opportunities for U.S. engagement where it may traditionally
have been less present, in alignment with the goals of the
National Defense Strategy. The committee is also aware that a
strategic evaluation of the State Partnership Program is being
conducted by the Department of Defense and expresses its
support for an objective analysis with the aim of improving,
expanding, and enhancing the program. The committee expresses
its support for the effort and encourages the Department to
fully share the results with the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives and to
collaborate with these committees to implement applicable
policy recommendations that result from the study.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters
Enhanced pay authority for certain acquisition and technology positions
in the Department of Defense (sec. 1101)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subchapter I of chapter 87 of title 10, United States Code, to
permanently authorize an enhanced pay authority for acquisition
and technology positions in the Department of Defense. The
provision would authorize up to 20 total positions within the
Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments
that may have a maximum pay rate set at 150 percent of level 1
of the Executive Schedule.
Enhanced pay authority for certain research and technology positions in
the science and technology reinvention laboratories of the
Department of Defense (sec. 1102)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 139 of title 10, United States Code, to permanently
authorize an enhanced pay authority for research and technology
positions in the Department of Defense. The provision would
authorize up to 15 total positions within the military
departments that may have a maximum pay rate set at 150 percent
of level 1 of the Executive Schedule.
Extension of enhanced appointment and compensation authority for
civilian personnel for care and treatment of wounded and
injured members of the Armed Forces (sec. 1103)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1599c(b) of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
enhanced appointment and compensation authority for civilian
personnel for the care and treatment of wounded and injured
members of the Armed Forces through December 31, 2025.
Extension of overtime rate authority for Department of the Navy
employees performing work aboard or dockside in support of the
nuclear-powered aircraft carrier forward deployed in Japan
(sec. 1104)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 5542 of title 5, United States Code, to extend until
September 30, 2023, the authority of the Secretary of the Navy
to pay overtime rates to civilian employees performing
temporary duty in Japan in support of the forward deployed
nuclear aircraft carrier.
Expansion of direct hire authority for certain Department of Defense
personnel to include installation military housing office
positions supervising privatized military housing (sec. 1105)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9905 of title 5, United States Code, to authorize
direct hire authority for installation military housing office
positions responsible for supervising privatized military
housing projects.
Extension of sunset of inapplicability of certification of executive
qualifications by qualification certification review board of
Office of Personnel Management for initial appointments to
Senior Executive Service positions in Department of Defense
(sec. 1106)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1109 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), to
extend by 3 years the sunset date of the Department of
Defense's temporary exemption from Office of Personnel
Management qualification certification review boards for
individuals appointed to senior executive service positions
within the Department.
During the first year of this temporary authority, 15
qualified individuals were appointed to Department of Defense
senior executive service positions in financial management,
human resources, mathematics, and acquisition organizations.
Average time-to-hire was reduced by nearly 140 days. This
authority allowed the Department to utilize a high quality
selection process, coupled with a streamlined application
process, to reduce hiring timelines, all while continuing to
ensure that candidates demonstrate a mastery of the
competencies most valued and attributed to successful
executives.
Pilot program on enhanced pay authority for certain high-level
management positions in the Department of Defense (sec. 1107)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Department of Defense to establish a pilot program to offer
higher compensation than normally allowed by the executive
schedule for limited numbers of positions requiring extremely
high levels of experience managing complex organizations.
Pilot program on expanded authority for appointment of recently-retired
members of the Armed Forces to positions in the Department of
Defense (sec. 1108)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to initiate a 3-year pilot program to
hire retired servicemembers within 180 days of retirement into
positions at a pay grade no higher than GS-13 of the general
schedule. The provision would also require positions utilizing
the pilot authority to have direct hire authority and a
certification of a potential lack of qualified applicants for
the vacant position before a recently retired servicemember can
be hired. The provision would require the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on
the use of the pilot authority 2 years after the commencement
of a pilot program.
The committee envisions that this provision would be used
broadly by the military departments to alleviate hiring
challenges due to a variety of circumstances. The Secretary
concerned may certify that a position, or set of positions,
lacks sufficient numbers of potential applicants based on
geography, unique job requirements, security clearance
restrictions, or any other factor. In addition, the committee
emphasizes that the authority to make the required
certification may be delegated to a local military or civilian
official with a pay grade equal to or above O-6.
Direct hire authority and relocation incentives for positions at remote
locations (sec. 1109)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 81 of title 10, United States Code, to provide a
temporary direct hire authority to positions in the competitive
service in geographically remote locations and locations with
extreme climate conditions. The provision would also provide a
relocation incentive to positions covered by the direct hire
authority.
Modification of direct hire authority for certain personnel involved
with Department of Defense maintenance activities (sec. 1110)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9905 of title 5, United States Code, to provide direct
hire authority for positions that perform support functions for
depot-level maintenance and repair.
Fire Fighters Alternative Work Schedule demonstration project for the
Navy Region Mid-Atlantic Fire and Emergency Services (sec.
1110A)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Commander of Navy Region Mid-Atlantic to establish and carry
out a 5-year fire fighter alternative work schedule
demonstration project. The demonstration project would require
tours of duty to be scheduled at least 2 weeks in advance and
that tours of duty use a regularly recurring pattern of 48-hour
shifts followed by 48 or 72 consecutive non-work hours. The
provision would also require the Commander of Navy Region Mid-
Atlantic to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on effects of
the demonstration project no later than 180 days after the
demonstration project is terminated.
Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant allowances,
benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on official duty
in a combat zone (sec. 1111)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 1
year the discretionary authority of the head of a Federal
agency to provide allowances, benefits, and gratuities
comparable to those provided to members of the Foreign Service
to the agency's civilian employees on official duty in a combat
zone.
One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation on premium
pay and aggregate limitation on pay for Federal civilian
employees working overseas (sec. 1112)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1101 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as
most recently amended by section 1105 of National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), to
extend through 2021 the authority of heads of executive
agencies to waive the limitation on the aggregate of basic and
premium pay of employees who perform work in an overseas
location that is in the area of responsibility of the
Commander, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), or in a location
that was formerly in CENTCOM but has been moved to the area of
responsibility of the Commander, U.S. Africa Command, in
support of a military operation or an operation in response to
a declared emergency.
Technical amendments to authority for reimbursement of Federal, State,
and local income taxes incurred during travel, transportation,
and relocation (sec. 1113)
The Committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 5724b of title 5, United States Code, to make a
technical correction to authority provided by section 1114 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) relative to the reimbursement of Federal,
State, and local income tax expenses incurred by Federal
civilian employees incident to government-directed travel,
transportation, and relocations.
Items of Special Interest
Classified ready workforce
The committee is aware of the challenges the Department of
Defense (DOD) faces when recruiting and retaining a diverse,
high-skilled science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM)
workforce. The committee further recognizes that the Department
can increase efforts to recruit its STEM workforce from
universities with minority-majority and historically under-
served student populations. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing, by December 31,
2020, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives on how the Department of Defense can
partner with Hispanic-serving land-grant institutions to create
a talent development program that provides experiential
learning through internship and co-op programs within the
military departments and other DOD components. The briefing
shall include information on how such programs can include
pathways for security clearances that would serve both the DOD
and students upon entry into the workforce.
Report prior to transfer of Defense Finance and Accounting Service
functions
The committee believes the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) performs a critical function in service to
military members, their families, and survivors. Continuity in
the delivery of these services is important as military
families, retirees, and survivors depend on timely delivery of
pay and benefits.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, prior to a
decision under any applicable provision of law, to transfer any
function currently performed by DFAS to a commercial provider
of finance, accounting, or similar services, to submit a report
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives setting forth the quantitative and business
case for the transfer, including the extent such transfer would
yield cost savings or improved service to the DFAS customer
base.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Authority to build capacity for additional operations (sec. 1201)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 333 of title 10, United States Code, relating to the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to conduct or support
programs to provide training and equipment to the national
security forces of one or more foreign countries by adding
cyberspace operations to the list of authorized functional
areas in which such support may be provided.
The committee notes that the Secretary has previously used
the authority under section 333 to conduct cyber-related
activities to build partner capacity (BPC) but notes that these
activities were couched within the span of other enumerated
operations under section 333. The committee believes that,
while this support was appropriate, the lack of an explicit
authority for cyber-related BPC complicated congressional
oversight as well as inhibits the ability of the Department of
Defense to conduct the deliberate planning necessary for the
long-term effectiveness of these activities.
Authority to build capacity for air sovereignty operations (sec. 1202)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 333 of title 10, United States Code, relating to the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to conduct or support
programs to provide training and equipment to the national
security forces of one or more foreign countries by adding air
sovereignty operations to the list of authorized functional
areas in which such support may be provided.
The committee notes that, in Department of Defense Joint
Publication 1-02, as of April 12, 2001, air sovereignty is
defined as ``a nation's inherent right to exercise absolute
control and authority over the airspace above its territory.''
The committee believes that the addition of air sovereignty
operations to the list of support authorized under section 333
is appropriate and consistent with the objectives outlined in
the National Defense Strategy. The committee notes, however,
that the amounts available for activities under section 333 are
limited and therefore expects the Department to exercise
discretion when considering proposals under the expanded
authority, particularly any proposals that may involve high-
cost, complex weapons systems.
Modification to the Inter-European Air Forces Academy (sec. 1203)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 350(b) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to expand military education and
training at the Inter-European Air Forces Academy to military
personnel of countries that are both within the United States
Africa Command area of responsibility and eligible for
assistance under chapter 5 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2347 et seq.). The provision would
expand eligibility beyond countries that are members of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization or signatories to the
Partnership for Peace Framework Documents.
Modification to support of special operations for irregular warfare
(sec. 1204)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91; 131 Stat. 1639), as most
recently amended by section 1207 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), by
raising the annual funding limitation to $15.0 million.
Extension and modification of authority to support border security
operations of certain foreign countries (sec. 1205)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1226 of the National Defense Authorization for Fiscal
Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), as most recently amended by
section 1213 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), to
extend the authority to support border security operations of
certain foreign countries through December 31, 2023. The
provision would also clarify the source of funds available for
support pursuant to this authority in order to improve
oversight of such expenditures.
Modification of authority for participation in multinational centers of
excellence (sec. 1206)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 344 of title 10, United States Code, by modifying the
authority for participation in multinational centers of
excellence.
Implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 (sec.
1207)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to undertake specified activities
consistent with the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017
(Public Law 115-68) and to provide an annual report to Congress
on the progress made in implementation.
Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies (sec. 1208)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, to submit a plan, not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, to establish a Department of
Defense Regional Center for Security Studies for the Arctic.
Further, not earlier than 30 days after the submission of the
required plan and subject to the availability of
appropriations, the provision would provide discretionary
authority to the Secretary to establish and administer such a
center.
Functional Center for Security Studies in Irregular Warfare (sec. 1209)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, to submit a report not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act that assesses the merits and
feasibility of establishing and administering a Department of
Defense Functional Center for Security Studies in Irregular
Warfare. Further, not earlier than 30 days after the submission
of the required plan and subject to the availability of
appropriations, the provision would provide discretionary
authority to the Secretary to establish and administer such a
center.
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan
Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement of certain
coalition nations for support provided to United States
military operations (sec. 1211)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority for reimbursement of certain coalition nations for
support provided to United States military operations through
December 31, 2021.
Extension and modification of Commanders' Emergency Response Program
(sec. 1212)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for the Commanders' Emergency Response Program in
Afghanistan through December 31, 2021, and would authorize $2.0
million for that program for use during calendar year 2021.
Extension and modification of support for reconciliation activities led
by the Government of Afghanistan (sec. 1213)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for the Department of Defense to provide support
for bottom-up, Government of Afghanistan-led reconciliation
activities. The provision would modify the existing authority
to ensure that covered support can only be provided for
reconciliation activities that include the participation of the
Government of Afghanistan and do not restrict the participation
of women. The provision would also prohibit Taliban members'
receipt of reimbursement for travel or lodging expenses and
stipends or per diem payments. Finally, the provision would
prohibit the Department from providing covered support until it
provides the implementation framework required by section 1218
of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92), due to the Congress on March 19, 2020.
Sense of Senate on special immigrant visa program for Afghan allies
(sec. 1214)
The committee recommends a provision that would express
support for the special immigrant visa program for Afghan
allies. The committee views this program as vital to the United
States mission in Afghanistan. Afghans routinely risk their
lives to assist United States military and diplomatic personnel
and further U.S. interests. The committee urges the United
States Government to clear the backlog in processing special
immigrant visa applications and notes that, under the Afghan
Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note),
applications for special immigrant status should be processed
within 270 days.
Sense of Senate and report on United States presence in Afghanistan
(sec. 1215)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate on the United States' presence in
Afghanistan and would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report on the external threat posed by extremist
groups in Afghanistan to the homeland, and other matters, by
September 1, 2020.
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran
Extension of authority and limitation on use of funds to provide
assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (sec.
1221)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority to provide assistance to Iraq to counter the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria through December 31, 2021. The
provision would authorize the use of not more than $322.5
million in Operation & Maintenance, Defense-wide, Overseas
Contingency Operations funds for such purposes. The provision
would also limit the obligation or expenditure of 75 percent of
the authorized funding until the Secretary of Defense provides
a plan to the congressional defense committees for fully
transitioning security assistance for the Iraqi Security Forces
from the Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and Syria Train and
Equip Fund to standing security assistance authorities managed
by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency and State Department
by the end of fiscal year 2022.
The committee supports continued assistance to the Iraqi
Security Forces, including the Counter Terrorism Service (CTS)
and the Ministry of Peshmerga. However, the committee believes
that traditional capacity-building activities are more
appropriately funded through standing security assistance
authorities found in titles 10 and 22 of United States Code.
The committee notes that, elsewhere in this report, the
committee recommends a transfer of $322.5 million to the
Defense Security Cooperation Agency for such purposes.
Extension and modification of authority to provide assistance to vetted
Syrian groups and individuals (sec. 1222)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority to provide assistance to vetted Syrian groups through
2021 under section 1209 of the Carl Levin and Howard P.
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), as amended. The provision would
also consolidate reporting elements into the standing
requirement for quarterly reports on the use of the authority.
The committee supports continued cooperation with the
Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to maintain the gains made
against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in
northeastern Syria and appreciates the sacrifices that the SDF
has made in defeating the so-called territorial caliphate. The
committee believes that the safe, humane detention of ISIS
foreign terrorist fighters and repatriation of such fighters to
their countries of origin should remain a top priority for the
United States and international community, and the committee
continues to support the use of authorized funding for such
purposes.
Extension and modification of authority to support operations and
activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (sec.
1223)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq
through fiscal year 2021. The provision would reduce the funds
available for this authority from $30.0 million to $15.0
million. The committee expects the Office of Security
Cooperation in Iraq to continue its transition to a normalized
security cooperation office and directs the Department of
Defense to report on its progress in implementing this
transition.
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian Federation
Extension of limitation on military cooperation between the United
States and the Russian Federation (sec. 1231)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1232(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to extend through fiscal
year 2021 the limitation on military cooperation between the
United States and the Russian Federation.
Prohibition on availability of funds relating to sovereignty of the
Russian Federation over Crimea (sec. 1232)
The committee recommends a provision that would state that
none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for
fiscal year 2021 for the Department of Defense may be obligated
or expended to, and that the Department may not, implement any
activity that recognizes the sovereignty of the Russian
Federation over Crimea.
Modification and extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative
(sec. 1233)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2024, the authority under section 1250 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016
(Public Law 114-92), as amended by section 1244 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92), for the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to provide security assistance, including
defensive lethal assistance, and intelligence support to
military and other security forces of the Government of
Ukraine. The provision would authorize up to $250.0 million in
fiscal year 2021 to provide security assistance to Ukraine, of
which $125.0 million would be available only for lethal
assistance.
The committee continues to believe that defense
institutional reforms are critical to sustaining capabilities
developed using security assistance provided under this and
other authorities. Moreover, defense institutional reforms will
ultimately enable a more effective defense of Ukraine's
sovereignty and territorial integrity and allow Ukraine to
achieve its full potential as a strategic partner of the United
States. Therefore, the provision would prohibit the obligation
or expenditure of 50 percent of the funds authorized to be
appropriated in fiscal year 2021 under this authority until the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, certifies that Ukraine has taken substantial action to
make defense institutional reforms. The provision would also
include additional areas of reform to be considered with
respect to such a certification, including: transformation of
command and control structures and roles in line with North
Atlantic Treaty Organization principles and improvement of
human resources management, including to support career
management reforms, enhanced social support to military
personnel and their families, and professional military
education systems.
Report on capability and capacity requirements of military forces of
Ukraine and resource plan for security assistance (sec. 1234)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to
jointly submit to certain committees of Congress a report on
the capability and capacity requirements of the military forces
of Ukraine. The provision would specify a number of elements to
be addressed in the report.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of State, not later than February 15, 2022,
to jointly submit to certain committees of Congress a resource
plan for United States security assistance with respect to
Ukraine in fiscal year 2023 and the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
Sense of Senate on North Atlantic Treaty Organization enhanced
opportunities partner status for Ukraine (sec. 1235)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the United States should support the
designation of Ukraine as an enhanced opportunities partner as
part of the Partnership Interoperability Initiative of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Extension of authority for training for Eastern European national
security forces in the course of multilateral exercises (sec.
1236)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2023, the authority provided in section
1251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended by section 1247 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92), for the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence
of the Secretary of State, to provide multilateral or regional
training, and pay the incremental expenses of participating in
such training, for countries in Eastern Europe that are
signatories to the Partnership for Peace Framework Documents
but not members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) or that became NATO members after January 1, 1999.
Sense of Senate on Kosovo and the role of the Kosovo Force of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (sec. 1237)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate on matters relating to Kosovo and the role
of the Kosovo Force (KFOR) of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO).
The committee believes that the United States should
continue to support the diplomatic efforts of Kosovo and Serbia
to reach a historic agreement to normalize relations with
mutual recognition as a central element. Such an agreement is
in the interest of both countries and would enhance security
and stability in the western Balkans.
The committee recognizes that the KFOR continues to play an
indispensable role in maintaining the security and stability
that are the essential predicates for the success of Kosovo's
and Serbia's diplomatic efforts to achieve normalization of
relations. While the participation of the United States Armed
Forces in the KFOR is foundational to the credibility and
success of KFOR's mission, the KFOR also represents a positive
example of burden-sharing. NATO allies and other European
partners contribute over 80 percent of the troops for the
mission. Therefore, together with our allies and partners, the
United States should maintain its commitment to the KFOR and
take all appropriate steps to ensure that the KFOR has the
necessary personnel, capabilities, and resources to perform its
critical mission.
Additionally, the committee believes that the United States
should continue to support the Kosovo Security Force's gradual
transition to a multi-ethnic army for the Republic of Kosovo
that is interoperable with NATO members through an inclusive
and transparent process that respects the rights and concerns
of all of Kosovo's citizens, promotes regional security and
stability, and supports Kosovo's aspirations for eventual full
membership in the NATO.
Sense of the Senate on strategic competition with the Russian
Federation and related activities of the Department of Defense
(sec. 1238)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that long-term strategic competition with
the Russian Federation is a principal priority for the
Department of Defense that requires sustained investment due to
the magnitude of the threat posed to United States security,
prosperity, and alliances and partnerships. The provision would
further express the sense of the Senate concerning steps that
the Department of Defense should take to enhance deterrence
against Russian aggression and counter Russian activities short
of armed conflict.
Report on Russian Federation support of racially and ethnically
motivated violent extremists (sec. 1239)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the head of any
other relevant Federal department or agency, to submit a report
to the appropriate congressional committees on Russian support
to racially- and ethnically-motivated violent extremist groups
and networks in Europe and the United States. The groups or
networks to be covered in the report include groups or
networks: (1) Targeted or recruited by the Russian intelligence
services; (2) That have received support, including training,
messaging support on social media platforms, and financial or
other support from Russia, its agents, or other Russian
entities acting at the direction of or for the benefit of the
Russian Government; and (3) That have leadership or bases of
operations located within Russia and that operate or maintain
chapters or a network of groups in Europe or the United States.
The report would also require the Secretary to provide any
recommendations for mitigating the security threat posed by
these groups or networks and countering Russian support for
such groups or networks.
The committee is concerned about the growing national
security threat arising from Russia's support, both directly
and indirectly, for racially- and ethnically-motivated violent
extremist groups in Europe and the United States. Russia's
continued support of such groups or networks, whether through
direct support, information warfare operations to amplify and
inflame ethnic and religious tensions, and tolerating their
operations on Russian soil, poses a significant risk to
societal stability and democratic institutions in Europe and
the United States.
Participation in European program on multilateral exchange of surface
transportation services (sec. 1240)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to participate in a Surface Exchange
of Services program of the Movement Coordination Center Europe.
Participation in programs relating to coordination or exchange of air
refueling and air transportation services (sec. 1241)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify
permanently the authority of the Secretary of Defense to
participate in programs relating to coordination or exchange of
air refueling and air transportation services.
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region
Pacific Deterrence Initiative (sec. 1251)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out the Pacific Deterrence
Initiative (PDI) to ensure the effective implementation of the
National Defense Strategy with respect to the Indo-Pacific
region. The provision would describe the activities to be
carried out under the PDI: (1) Activities to increase the
lethality of the Joint Force in the Indo-Pacific region; (2)
Activities to enhance the design and posture of the Joint Force
in the Indo-Pacific region; (3) Activities to strengthen
alliances and partnerships; and (4) Activities to carry out a
program of exercises, experimentation, and innovation for the
Joint Force in the Indo-Pacific region. The provision would
authorize $1.4 billion to be appropriated for the Secretary to
carry out PDI in fiscal year 2021, as specified in the funding
table in section 4502.
The provision would also authorize $5.5 billion to be
appropriated for the Secretary to carry out the PDI in fiscal
year 2022. Not later than February 15, 2021, the provision
would require the Secretary, in consultation with the
Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, to submit to the
congressional defense committees a plan to expend not less than
the amounts authorized to be appropriated for the Secretary to
carry out the PDI in fiscal year 2022.
The provision would repeal section 1251 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91), as most recently amended by section 1253 of the John S.
McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019
(Public Law 115-232), which established an authority for an
``Indo-Pacific Stability Initiative.''
The committee notes that the provision would emphasize that
specific activities to be carried out under the PDI,
particularly those related to the lethality of the Joint Force
and the design and posture of the Joint Force, should be
focused in and with respect to locations west of the
International Date Line. In this way, the committee believes
that the PDI will bolster the ``contact'' and ``blunt'' layers
described by the Global Operating Model of the National Defense
Strategy to maintain the credibility of American deterrence
against adversarial aggression in the Indo-Pacific region.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
consider whether a named operation in the Indo-Pacific would
improve the execution of the PDI, including through more
predictable and sustainable funding, improved joint planning
and coordination of training and exercise activities, and
increased support for deployments of rotational forces.
The committee notes that the PDI is designed to further the
strategic and policy objectives articulated by Congress in the
Asia Reassurance Initiative Act (Public Law 115-409) and by the
executive branch in the National Security Strategy, the ``Free
and Open Indo-Pacific'' strategy of the Department of State,
the National Defense Strategy, and the Indo-Pacific strategy
report of the Department of Defense.
The committee notes that the provision would require the
Department of Defense to submit detailed budgetary display
information associated with the PDI in future budget requests.
The committee believes that the availability of budgetary data
organized according to regional missions and the priorities of
the combatant commands is critical for the ability of the
Department and the Congress to assess the implementation of the
National Defense Strategy. Furthermore, a budgetary display is
included elsewhere in this Act that captures spending related
to the PDI. The committee encourages the Department of Defense
to continue working with the Congress to improve budgetary
transparency in support of its oversight responsibilities.
Sense of Senate on the United States-Vietnam defense relationship (sec.
1252)
The committee recommends a provision that would commemorate
the 25th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic
relations between the United States and Vietnam and express
support for deepening defense cooperation between the United
States and Vietnam, including with respect to maritime
security, cybersecurity, counterterrorism, information sharing,
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, military medicine,
peacekeeping operations, defense trade, and other areas.
Authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup (sec. 1253)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to transfer not more than $15.0 million in
fiscal year 2021 to the Secretary of State, to be used by the
United States Agency for International Development for the Bien
Hoa dioxin cleanup in Vietnam.
Cooperative program with Vietnam to account for Vietnamese personnel
missing in action (sec. 1254)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out a cooperative program
with the Ministry of Defense of Vietnam to assist in accounting
for Vietnamese personnel missing in action.
Provision of goods and services at Kwajalein Atoll, Republic of the
Marshall Islands (sec. 1255)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Army to provide goods and services,
including inter-atoll transportation, at Kwajalein Atoll,
Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), to the RMI government
and other eligible patrons. The provision would also require
the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing on the use of
the authority under section 7596(a) of title 10, United States
Code, as would be added by the provision, in fiscal year 2021,
including a written summary describing the goods and services
provided on a reimbursable basis and the goods and services
provided on a non-reimbursable basis.
Authority to establish a Movement Coordination Center Pacific in the
Indo-Pacific region and participate in an Air Transport and
Air-to-Air Refueling and other Exchanges of Services program
(sec. 1256)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of State, to establish a Movement Coordination Center Pacific
and enable the participation of the Department of Defense in an
Air Transport and Air-to-Air Refueling and other Exchanges of
Services (ATARES) program of the Center.
Training of ally and partner air forces in Guam (sec. 1257)
The committee recommends a provision that would commend the
memorandum of understanding agreed to by the United States and
the Republic of Singapore on December 6, 2019, to establish a
fighter jet training detachment in Guam. The provision would
require that, not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense submit to the
congressional defense committees a report assessing the merit
and feasibility of entering into agreements similar to the
aforementioned memorandum of understanding with other United
States allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, to
include Japan, Australia, and India.
Statement of policy and sense of Senate on the Taiwan Relations Act
(sec. 1258)
The committee recommends a provision that would state the
policy of the United States with respect to upholding its
obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96-8).
Among other things, the provision would emphasize that the
Taiwan Relations Act and the ``Six Assurances'' continue to
provide the foundation of United States-Taiwan relations.
The provision would reiterate the commitment of the United
States under the Taiwan Relations Act to maintain the capacity
``to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that
would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic
system, of the people on Taiwan,'' including the capacity of
the United States Armed Forces to deny an operation by the
People's Republic of China to rapidly seize control of Taiwan
and present the United States with a ``fait accompli.''
The provision would state that it is the policy of the
United States to deepen, to the fullest extent short of
establishing diplomatic relations the extensive, close, and
friendly relations of the United States with Taiwan, including
defense relations.
Finally, the provision would express the sense of the
Senate that the Secretary of Defense should ensure that policy
guidance to the Department of Defense related to United States-
Taiwan defense relations is fully consistent with the statement
of policy contained in the provision and issue new policy
guidance required to carry out such policy.
Sense of Congress on port calls in Taiwan with the USNS Comfort and
USNS Mercy (sec. 1259)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should conduct
port calls in Taiwan with the USNS Comfort and USNS Mercy.
Limitation on use of funds to reduce total number of members of the
Armed Forces serving on active duty who are deployed to the
Republic of Korea (sec. 1260)
The committee recommends a provision that would, among
other things, prohibit funds authorized to be appropriated by
this Act to be obligated or expended to reduce the total number
of members of the Armed Forces serving on Active Duty and
deployed to the Republic of Korea to fewer than 28,500.
Sense of Congress on co-development with Japan of a long-range ground-
based anti-ship cruise missile system (sec. 1261)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should
prioritize consultations with the Ministry of Defense of Japan
to determine whether a ground-based, long-range anti-ship
cruise missile system would meet shared defense requirements of
the United States and Japan and, if so, that the United States
and Japan should consider co-development of such a system.
Subtitle F--Reports
Review of and report on overdue acquisition and cross-servicing
agreement transactions (sec. 1271)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to produce a report on all unreimbursed
and overdue Acquisition and Cross-Servicing (ACSA) transactions
valued at $1.0 million or more. The provision would also
require a plan for securing reimbursement from the relevant
foreign partner and a summary of actions taken by the
Department to improve record-keeping related to ACSA
transactions.
Report on burden sharing contributions by designated countries (sec.
1272)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 2350j of title 10, United States Code, by requiring an
annual report on burden sharing contributions received from
designated countries under this authority and the purposes for
which such contributions were used.
The committee notes that section 2350j of title 10, United
States Code, authorizes the Secretary of Defense, after
consultation with the Secretary of State, to accept cash
contributions from any country or regional organization
designated for specified purposes. The committee lacks
sufficient visibility into reimbursements made pursuant to this
authority and believes that the report required by this
provision will better enable the committee to conduct
appropriate oversight.
Report on risk to personnel, equipment, and operations due to Huawei 5G
architecture in host countries (sec. 1273)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, to submit to the congressional
defense committees a report that contains an assessment of: (1)
The risk to personnel, equipment, and operations of the
Department of Defense in host countries posed by the current or
intended use by such countries of a 5G telecommunications
architecture provided by Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.; and (2)
Measures required to mitigate this risk, including the merit
and feasibility of the relocation of certain personnel or
equipment of the Department of Defense to another location
without the presence of a 5G telecommunications architecture
provided by Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Reciprocal patient movement agreements (sec. 1281)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of State, to enter into a bilateral or multilateral memorandum
of understanding or other formal agreement with one or more
governments of certain partner countries concerning reciprocity
with respect to patient movement personnel, services, and
equipment. The provision would require the Secretary of
Defense, before entering into a memorandum of understanding or
other formal agreement, to certify in writing that the
professional credentials, certifications, licenses, and
approvals for patient movement personnel and patient movement
equipment of the partner country meet or exceed the equivalent
standards of the United States for similar personnel and
equipment and will provide for a level of care comparable to,
or better than, the level of care provided by the Department of
Defense. The provision would require that such a certification
be submitted to the appropriate congressional committees not
later than 15 days after the date on which the Secretary of
Defense makes the certification and be reviewed and recertified
by the Secretary of Defense not less frequently than annually.
Extension of authorization of non-conventional assisted recovery
capabilities (sec. 1282)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 943(g) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as most recently amended
by section 1282(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), by extending for 3
years the authority of the Department of Defense to engage in
Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery activities.
Extension of Department of Defense support for stabilization activities
in national security interest of the United States (sec. 1283)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1210A(h) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) by extending the authority
for the Department of Defense to provide specified support for
stabilization activities in the national security interest of
the United States through December 31, 2021.
Notification with respect to withdrawal of members of the Armed Forces
participating in the Multinational Force and Observers in Egypt
(sec. 1284)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report 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 30 days prior to a reduction in the total
number of members of the Armed Forces deployed to the
Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) in Egypt to fewer than
430 members. The report would include: a detailed accounting of
the number of members of the Armed Forces to be withdrawn from
the MFO in Egypt and the capabilities that such members of the
Armed Forces provide in support of the mission; an explanation
of national security interests of the United States served by
such a reduction and an assessment of the effect, if any, such
a reduction is expected to have on the security of United
States partners in the region; a description of consultations
performed by the Secretary with the other countries that
contribute military forces to the MFO; an assessment of whether
other countries, including the countries that contribute
military forces to the MFO, will increase their contributions
of military forces to compensate for the capabilities withdrawn
by the United States; and an explanation of any anticipated
negative impact of such a reduction on the ability of the MFO
in Egypt to fulfill its mission of supervising the
implementation of the security provisions of the 1979 Treaty of
Peace between Egypt and Israel and employing best efforts to
prevent any violation of the terms of such treaty and the
manner in which any such negative impact will be mitigated.
The committee strongly supports maintaining U.S. military
support to the MFO. The 1979 Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty
represents an anchor of stability in an unpredictable region.
The MFO has been essential to supervising the implementation of
the treaty's security provisions and employing best efforts to
prevent violations of its terms. The committee believes that
American leadership of the MFO, including adequate U.S. force
contributions, is essential to the MFO's credibility with Egypt
and Israel and is also vital to encouraging 12 other partners
to contribute troops to the force. The committee is concerned
that a significant drawdown from the MFO would create new
challenges in the implementation of the peace treaty, resulting
in a less stable Middle East and making it more difficult to
implement the National Defense Strategy.
Modification to initiative to support protection of national security
academic researchers from undue influence and other security
threats (sec. 1285)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1286 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) to
include requirements for briefings to appropriate senior
officials of institutes of higher education on the espionage
risks posed by near-peer strategic competitors.
Establishment of United States-Israel Operations-Technology Working
Group (sec. 1286)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Minister of
Defense of Israel, to establish, not later than 1 year after
the date of the enactment of this Act, a United States-Israel
Operations-Technology Working Group.
Items of Special Interest
Barriers to security cooperation
The committee acknowledges that, while the Department of
Defense (DOD) maintains strong bi- and multilateral security
cooperation programs with key partners and allies involved in
the Indo-Pacific region, these capacity building efforts could
be enhanced through more proactive planning and cooperation
with allies and partners that capitalize on each country's
comparative strengths. Improved coordination among the security
cooperation activities of allies and partners in the Indo-
Pacific region would allow each partner to maximize its
contributions to regional security and interoperability with
U.S. forces while more efficiently distributing limited
resources. Medium- and long-range planning to meet shared
operational requirements and security cooperation planning
stand out as areas in which early coordination with partners,
such as Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom,
could pay significant dividends.
Therefore, not later than October 1, 2020, the committee
directs the DOD to commission a study conducted by a Federally
Funded Research and Development Corporation to examine: (1) Key
allies' and partners' comparative strengths in meeting shared
operational requirements and security cooperation objectives
with other partner nations; (2) The ways the DOD can draw on
partner nations' comparative strengths to meet shared security
objectives; (3) An assessment of the U.S. operational and
policy barriers that inhibit more expansive cooperation; and
(4) Recommendations for how to alter U.S. policies, guidance,
and procedures, including security cooperation planning
processes, to better capitalize on partners' comparative
strengths.
Defense cooperation with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
The committee commends Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania for
meeting their commitments as North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) allies to spend at least 2 percent of gross domestic
product on defense, focusing their investments on the
capabilities necessary to deter and resist Russian aggression,
and improving coordination on defense requirements and
procurement. However, despite these efforts, the committee
recognizes that each nation has unmet defense requirements that
are unlikely to be met solely through their individual national
defense budgets. That is why, among other steps, the Congress,
in section 1246 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-120), required the Secretary
of Defense and the Secretary of State to jointly conduct a
comprehensive, multilateral assessment of the military
requirements of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia to deter and
resist aggression by the Russian Federation and to report to
the Congress on the results of that assessment. The committee
underscores the importance of this assessment, which is
intended to provide a substantive foundation for expanded
defense cooperation between the United States and Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania, including in such areas as maritime
situational awareness, ammunition, Command, Control,
Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance, and special forces. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide, not later than
August 15, 2020, a briefing on the status of the assessment and
report required by section 1246 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-120),
including any interim recommendations of the Secretary.
Destabilizing activities of the Russian Federation
The committee remains concerned about activities of the
Russian Federation that could have a destabilizing impact on
the political and security environment in the U.S. European
Command area of responsibility.
The committee notes that the Russian Federation has played
a destabilizing role in the relationship between Kosovo and
Serbia, undermined the sovereignty of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
provided support to transnational extremist groups, and
consistently worked to undermine the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization alliance and European Union. In the western
Balkans, in particular, this has included the Russian
Federation's supporting a coup attempt in Montenegro and
promoting discord in North Macedonia as each country was
preparing to join the NATO alliance.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the committee, no later than October
30, 2020, on efforts by U.S. European Command to promote U.S.
security cooperation with countries in the western Balkans and
to reduce their dependence on Russian weapon systems.
Forward deployed naval forces in Europe
The committee continues to support additional forward-
basing of United States Navy destroyers in Rota, Spain. The
ships currently stationed in Spain are among the most
dynamically-employed assets of U.S. global maritime presence--
performing ballistic missile defense missions, carrying out
strikes in Syria, boosting U.S. presence across the European
theater in support of allies and partners, and monitoring
increasing Russian naval activities. At the same time, these
ships have maintained some of the highest readiness rates of
ships in the Navy, in part due to rigorous maintenance
practices.
The committee is concerned that increasing Russian naval
activity in the European theater, which is at its highest level
since the Cold War, presents a significant challenge to the
implementation of the National Defense Strategy in the European
theater. The committee is also aware of the significant
advances in Russian naval capability, especially undersea.
Due in part to these developments, the Commander, U.S.
European Command, testified to the committee in February 2020
that he supports increasing from four to six the number of
destroyers based in Rota, Spain. The Commander said that, based
on the European Deterrence Initiative investments, Rota, Spain,
facilities could support two more destroyers immediately. He
also said that the two ships would ``improve our ability to get
indications and warnings in the potential battle space and also
dramatically improve our ability to better command and
control.'' In March 2020, the Chief of Naval Operations also
endorsed the additional naval presence before the committee.
The committee finds the arguments of senior defense leadership
to increase naval presence in Europe, and the mission
flexibility it would provide, compelling.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commander, U.S. European Command, not later
than 15 days after the fiscal year 2022 budget request is
submitted to the Congress, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives on the plan to base two additional destroyers
at Rota, Spain. This brief shall include a detailed
explanation, by fiscal year, of actions and the associated
funding that will lead to the forward stationing of six
destroyers based in Rota as soon as practicable.
GAO briefing of the USMC distributed laydown
Section 1260K of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) directed the Department of
Defense to submit a report on the implementation of the planned
distributed lay-down of members of the United States Marine
Corps in Okinawa, Guam, Hawaii, Australia, and other locations.
The committee is aware that the estimated cost of the
distributed lay-down continues to increase and that the
projected completion date continues to be delayed. The
committee seeks to ensure the proper alignment of the
Department's plans concerning Marine Corps resources,
capabilities, and posture to adequately prepare these forces
for possible contingencies in the Indo-Pacific region. The
committee also recognizes the significant implications of the
Commandant's Planning Guidance issued in July 2019 and the
subsequent Force Design 2030 report issued in March 2020 with
respect to force design, operational concepts, and posture.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to review the report required above and
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives an assessment of the matters
contained in the report, including an assessment of: (1) The
extent to which DOD's report addressed the mandated reporting
elements; (2) The status of DOD's implementation for the
planned distributed laydown; and (3) Any other matters the
Comptroller General determines are relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide an interim briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
90 days after the date on which the DOD submits its report, on
preliminary findings of the Comptroller General's review and to
present final results to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives in a format and
timeframe agreed to subsequent to the briefing.
Global Engagement Center
The committee notes that the Global Engagement Center (GEC)
is responsible for directing, leading, synchronizing,
integrating, and coordinating efforts of the U.S. Government to
recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and
foreign non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed
at undermining or influencing the policies, security, or
stability of the United States and United States allies and
partner nations. The growing use of propaganda and
disinformation by adversaries, particularly Russia and China,
to undermine U.S. interests make the activities of the GEC all
the more important to support the National Security Strategy
and complement the objectives of the National Defense Strategy.
The committee notes that, since the establishment of the GEC in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017
(Public Law 114-328), the Department of Defense has provided
limited financial support to the GEC in order to facilitate
activities that directly support the objectives of both the
Department of Defense and the Department of State. The
committee believes that this cooperation is a critical
component of an effective whole-of-government approach to
identify and counter increasingly aggressive operations by our
adversaries in the information domain and encourages the
Department of Defense and the GEC to continue their cooperative
relationship.
The committee believes that, as the GEC continues to mature
organizationally and receives greater and more predictable
funding from the Department of State, the Department of Defense
should focus its efforts on institutionalizing its cooperative
relationship with the GEC. The committee believes that the
activities of the GEC are complementary to Department of
Defense objectives outlined in the National Defense Strategy.
Increasing exchange student slots at military institutions
The committee notes that there are opportunities to
increase student exchange programs to Southeast Asian nations
at the U.S. Military Academy, the Naval Academy, the Air Force
Academy, Merchant Marine Academies, Reserve Officers' Training
Corps programs, and other educational institutions affiliated
with the military. Military exchange programs foster and
develop robust alliances and partnerships, and the committee
encourages the Department to seek opportunities with the
Department of State to increase training opportunities with our
military partners in the Indo-Pacific region. The committee
urges the Department to give this issue a thorough review and
to continue to work collaboratively with the Congress to
further identify where exchange programs can be useful toward
cultivating long-lasting alliances as required by the National
Defense Strategy.
Interagency Cooperation for Addressing Great Power Competition in the
Arctic
The committee notes that the strategic importance of the
Arctic continues to increase as the United States and other
countries recognize the military and geopolitical significance
of the Arctic's sea lanes and choke points and the potential
for power projection into multiple regions. The committee notes
that Russia has focused on the development of its Arctic
capabilities and has made significant investments in its
military infrastructure in the Arctic. The committee also notes
that China--a non-Arctic state--has expanded its interest and
reach into the Arctic, recently releasing its own Arctic
Strategy, declaring itself a ``near-Arctic nation,'' investing
in nuclear-powered icebreakers, and pursuing military
cooperation with Russia in the region. The committee notes the
importance of an interagency cooperative approach to address
the great power competition issues germane to the Arctic,
including the State Department's role on the Arctic Council and
coordination with the United States' Arctic North Atlantic
Treaty Organization allies, the U.S. intelligence community's
role in maintaining intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance operations in the region to inform decision-
making, and the Department of Defense's role in maintaining the
readiness of U.S. forces capable of working with the U.S. Coast
Guard in maintaining freedom of movement, to the maximum extent
possible, in the Arctic and the defense of the U.S. homeland.
The committee is aware that other Federal agencies, including
the Departments of Commerce, Interior, and Homeland Security
and the National Science Foundation, have significant roles in
policy issues and activities related to the Arctic.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of
Defense to maintain and strengthen communication and cohesion
of efforts related to the Arctic region across all U.S.
Government agencies. Furthermore, the committee encourages the
Department of Defense to stand up a joint interagency task
force to help better coordinate efforts in the Arctic region.
PDI: State Partnership Program
The committee recognizes the benefit of relationships
established through the National Guard State Partnership
Program (SPP) and its foreign partners, especially in the Indo-
Pacific. These partnerships serve as a basis for enhancing
interoperability with U.S. forces, to include, but not limited
to, military, medical, humanitarian relief, and disaster
assistance activities in support of the National Defense
Strategy pillar of Strengthening Alliances and Attracting New
Partners. Given the Department's focus on the Indo-Pacific
region, the committee believes that the Department should fully
fund all SPP partnerships in the Indo-Pacific area of
responsibility in coordination with the Commander, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command.
Support for Peshmerga
The committee notes that the United States-led coalition
known as the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent
Resolve (CJTF-OIR), in partnership with the Iraqi Security
Forces (ISF), including the Kurdish Peshmerga, successfully
liberated all Iraqi territory from the control of the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). While the committee applauds
this notable achievement, it also expresses concern that ISIS
continues to pose a significant threat to Iraq, the region, and
potentially the U.S. homeland.
According to the most recent Lead Inspector General
quarterly report for OIR, CJTF-OIR has expressed concern that
ISIS continues to wage ``low-level insurgency'' in both Iraq
and Syria, including exploiting disputed territory that remains
ungoverned. In its report, the Lead Inspector General
highlighted that ``the ISF and Peshmerga share security
responsibilities in disputed territories, but lack strong
cooperation.'' According to CJTF-OIR, ISIS ``continues
leveraging this area to its advantage.'' Additionally, the
report notes that COVID-19 negatively impacted CJTF-OIR support
to the ISF, including disrupting training with partner units.
The committee believes a lasting defeat of ISIS is critical
to maintaining a stable and tolerant Iraq in which all faiths,
sects, and ethnicities are afforded equal protection and fully
integrated into the Government and society of Iraq and supports
the provision of U.S. security and other assistance for such
purposes. As part of those efforts, the committee supports
continued assistance to Kurdish Peshmerga forces with the
objective of enabling them to more effectively partner with the
ISF, the United States, and other international partners. The
committee strongly supports continuation of the partnership
between the U.S. military and the Kurdish Peshmerga in
furtherance of our shared interests, including through the
signing of a new memorandum of understanding between the
Department of Defense and the Ministry of Peshmerga. In the
coming years, the committee encourages the Department to
normalize its support to the Peshmerga by focusing assistance
on the reform and professionalization at the ministerial and
unit level.
Taiwan National Defense University feasibility report
Not later than November 30, 2020, the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with appropriate counterparts in Taiwan, shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the
feasibility and advisability of senior officers of the Armed
Forces providing educational training at the National Defense
University of Taiwan.
U.S. Army force posture in Europe
Improving U.S. Army force posture in Europe is critical for
implementing the National Defense Strategy. By adjusting
posture, capabilities, and capacity in Europe to the realities
of strategic competition with Russia, the United States can
bolster deterrence and reduce the risk of executing contingency
plans.
The committee commends recent steps to augment Army force
posture in Europe, including: the addition of 1,500
permanently-stationed soldiers announced in September 2018; the
``Joint Declaration on Defense Cooperation Regarding U.S. Force
Posture in the Republic of Poland,'' signed in September 2019,
including the decision to establish a Division Headquarters
(Forward); and the planned activation of Fifth Corps
headquarters announced in February 2020, including
approximately 200 soldiers to support an operational command
post (OCP) in Europe on a rotational basis. The committee
underscores the importance of the OCP and its persistent
presence in Europe for refining and integrating operational
design and planning of joint land operations, especially in
concert with regional allies and partners. The OCP is also
critical for coordinating and executing efforts to prevail in
competition and facilitating rapid transition to combat
operations in the event of conflict. Therefore, the committee
urges the Army and U.S. European Command to prioritize the
deployment of the OCP to Europe at the earliest opportunity.
The committee also commends the Army's efforts to develop,
mature, and field a Multi-Domain Task Force optimized for
operations in Europe.
Despite these efforts, as well as the important progress
made to improve the posture and readiness of U.S. forces in
Europe through the European Deterrence Initiative, the
committee continues to believe that there is an urgent
requirement for additional Army capability and capacity in
several areas, including long-range fires, air and missile
defense, logistics and sustainment, warfighting headquarters
elements, and electronic warfare. Furthermore, the recent
decision by the Secretary of Defense to repurpose funding from
critical EDI military construction projects, and thereby
deferring these projects for the foreseeable future, sends the
wrong message to our allies and could undermine our efforts to
deter Russia.
While recognizing the need to balance requirements in the
Indo-Pacific region, the committee urges the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of the Army to prioritize additional
permanently-stationed forces in Europe as soon as possible to
address these capability gaps and capacity shortfalls. The
committee notes that previous defense authorization bills have
authorized the additional end strength requested by the Army
for this purpose. In the long term, a number of locations may
be appropriate for these forces. However, in the short term,
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army should
prioritize locations that can receive new permanently-stationed
forces quickly with minimal new infrastructure investment.
United States Africa Command
The committee strongly supports the National Defense
Strategy (NDS) and its emphasis on prioritizing competition
with the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation
while sustaining efforts to counter the threat posed by violent
extremist organizations. The committee notes that the People's
Republic of China and the Russian Federation are actively
pursuing greater security and economic influence in the U.S.
Africa Command (AFRICOM) area of responsibility through the
establishment of overseas military infrastructure and bases,
arms sales, information and influence operations, and predatory
economic practices. At the same time, violent extremist
organizations with ties to al-Qaida and the Islamic State of
Iraq and Syria remain a potent threat across the African
continent and, particularly in West Africa, are significantly
expanding their areas of operation. Due to these factors, the
committee believes that AFRICOM is a critical component of the
Department of Defense's efforts to implement the NDS. In order
for these efforts to be effective, the Department must maintain
a meaningful military presence on the continent in support of
an integrated whole of government approach. As such, the
committee urges the Department to appropriately resource
AFRICOM, particularly in the areas of personnel, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities and security
cooperation programs.
United States Central Command forces briefing
The committee acknowledges the unique security challenges
present in the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) area of
responsibility, including Iran's malign and destabilizing
behavior, violent extremist organizations, and the need to
reassure U.S. allies and partners. However, the committee is
concerned that the number of troops and high-demand, low-
density capabilities deployed to the region detract from the
U.S. military's ability to meet requirements in other regions
and are in conflict with the goals articulated in the National
Defense Strategy.
Therefore, not later than September 30, 2020, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide to the
congressional defense committees a briefing on the following:
(1) A prioritized list of missions for which forces are
deployed to the CENTCOM area of responsibility; (2) The risks
and scenarios considered when deploying capabilities to the
region; (3) How the Department of Defense defines deterrence of
Iran, including deterrence of ballistic missile attacks and
asymmetric threats from terrorist and proxy groups supported by
the Government of Iran; (4) How the Department assesses whether
Iran is deterred, from what, and to what degree; (5) How the
Department assesses the contributions of individual Department
assets to the deterrence of Iran; and (6) Which, if any, assets
could be removed from the CENTCOM area of responsibility
without substantially reducing the military's ability to
advance its priority missions.
United States Indo-Pacific Command Fusion Centers
The committee recognizes the critical strategic role that
multilateral facilities and organizational structures play in
strengthening alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific
region. The second line of effort outlined in the National
Defense Strategy (NDS) states, ``By working together with
allies and partners we amass the greatest possible strength for
the long-term advancement of our interests, maintaining
favorable balances of power that deter aggression and support
the stability that generates economic growth.'' The independent
assessment submitted to the Congress by the Commander, U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command, in response to section 1253 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92), details the resources and capabilities required to
fully implement the NDS in the Indo-Pacific region, to include
investments in the Counter Terrorism Information Facility in
Singapore, the Oceania Fusion Center, and the Indo-Pacific
Maritime Coordination Center as well as supporting investments
in Mission Partner Environment that provide multinational
command and control. The committee recognizes that these fusion
centers serve the critical function of enhancing intelligence
support, promoting practical information sharing, and
facilitating logistics cooperation to enable allied and partner
nations confronting maritime and other operational challenges.
The committee strongly believes that fortifying the
institutional linkages with allies and partners such as these
is an important contribution to NDS implementation. Therefore,
the committee expects the Department of Defense to devote
appropriate focus and resources to multinational fusion centers
and other organizational structures, including in future budget
requests.
Use of the Secretarial Designee Program for rehabilitation of Ukrainian
wounded warriors
Section 1234 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) expanded the use of the
Secretarial Designee Program to provide for Ukrainian soldiers'
receipt of treatment at Department of Defense military
treatment facilities when the necessary care cannot be provided
in Ukraine. The committee notes that implementation issues have
arisen with regards to covering non-medical expenses in
connection with such treatment that have been approved in
previous instances under the Emergency and Extraordinary
Expense authority. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense
to coordinate with senior Ukrainian defense officials to
resolve these issues, including, but not limited to, examining
alternative sources of funding for these non-medical expenses.
Further, the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of State, to provide assistance
to Ukraine in developing its capacity to care for wounded
members of the Ukrainian Armed Forces within Ukraine, including
by providing education and training for Ukrainian military
medical personnel and healthcare specialists. The Department of
Defense should continue to consider Secretarial Designee
Program requests to provide specialized care in U.S. military
medical treatment facilities in the areas of polytrauma,
amputations, burn treatment, prosthetics, and rehabilitation on
a case-by-case basis.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
Funding allocations for Department of Defense Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program (sec. 1301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$288.5 million for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
program, define the funds as authorized to be appropriated in
section 301 of this Act, and authorize CTR funds to be
available for obligation for fiscal years 2021, 2022, and 2023.
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for the defense working capital funds at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec. 1402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction, Defense, at the levels identified in section 4501
of division D of this Act.
Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities, Defense-wide (sec. 1403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug
Activities, Defense-wide, at the levels identified in section
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for the Office of the Inspector General of
the Department of Defense at the levels identified in section
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1405)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the Defense Health Program activities at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec.
1411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an appropriation of $64.3 million from the Armed Forces
Retirement Home Trust Fund for fiscal year 2021 for the
operation of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Periodic inspections of Armed Forces Retirement Home facilities by
nationally recognized accrediting organization (sec. 1412)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1518 of the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 1991
(24 U.S.C. 418) to require the Chief Operating Officer (COO) to
request the inspection of each facility by a nationally
recognized civilian accrediting organization, in accordance
with section 1511(g) of such Act, on a frequency consistent
with the standards of the organization. The provision would
require the COO and the administrator of a facility under
inspection to make, in a timely manner, all staff, other
personnel, and facility records available to the civilian
accrediting organization for purposes of the inspection. Not
later than 60 days after an inspection, the COO would submit a
report to the Secretary of Defense, the Senior Medical Advisor,
and the Advisory Council containing the results of the
inspection and a plan to address recommendations or other
matters specified in the report. The provision would remove the
requirement for a periodic inspection of the retirement home's
facilities by the Department of Defense Inspector General.
Expansion of eligibility for residence at the Armed Forces Retirement
Home (sec. 1413)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1512(a) of the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 1991
(24 U.S.C. 412 (a)) to expand eligibility for residence at the
Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Authority for transfer of funds to Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration
Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois
(sec. 1421)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to transfer $130.4 million from the
Defense Health Program to the Joint Department of Defense--
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration
Fund, established by section 1704 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), for
the operation of the Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health
Care Center.
Budget Items
Working Capital Fund reductions
The budget request included various amounts for the
individual military services' Working Capital Fund budgets.
The committee believes that the organic industrial base
directly supports the National Defense Strategy by restoring
and maintaining the equipment and weapon systems of the
Department of Defense (DOD) and directly supporting warfighter
readiness. The committee notes that depot maintenance carryover
consists of funded orders that are not completed by the end of
the fiscal year. In an era of budget uncertainty and frequently
late appropriations, having an appropriate amount of carryover
on-hand can provide a continuous and effective means of
continuing production across fiscal years in the event of a
continuing resolution. The committee notes, however, that
excessive carryover, as determined by specific service range
limits, should not be construed as appropriate carryover.
Rather, appropriate carryover is the amount that falls between
the high and low thresholds.
Traditionally, the committee has been reluctant to reduce
any military service carryover accounts, as indiscriminate cuts
to carryover directly correlates to the loss of work at DOD
depots, shipyards, and air logistics centers, which in turn
negatively impacts units and the warfighter. This year,
however, in light of the COVID-19 global pandemic, organic
industrial base facilities were forced to stop work, leading to
a significant carryover buildup. The committee notes that, in
some cases, carryover estimates ranged from $500.0 million to
$750.0 million over the allowed threshold.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
decreases to the specified military service Working Capital
Fund accounts: $50.0 million to Army Working Capital Fund and
$100.0 million to Air Force Working Capital Fund.
Despite these recommended reductions for this fiscal year,
the committee remains steadfast in its belief that healthy
carryover within the specified thresholds is crucial to success
of the Nation's organic industrial base.
Air Force cash corpus for energy optimization
The budget request included $95.7 million in Working
Capital Fund, Air Force.
The committee continues to note the urgent requirement to
constantly innovate and improve combat capability and
operational effectiveness for the warfighter via targeted and
competitive operational energy. As such, the committee
continues to support section 337 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92),
which authorized the Secretary of Defense and the military
departments to use working capital funds for expenses directly
related to conducting a pilot program for energy optimization
initiatives for weapon system platforms or major end items in
order to improve efficiency and maintainability, extend useful
service life, lower maintenance costs, or provide performance
enhancement.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in Air Force Working Capital Fund account 493003F, line
110, to create a cash corpus for the purposes of energy
optimization initiatives.
PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West
The budget request included $546.2 million in Drug
Interdiction and Counterdrug activities for SAG 1FU1 Counter-
Narcotics Support.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
is planning to disestablish Joint Interagency Task Force--West
(JIATF-W) by fiscal year 2023 and, consistent with those plans,
reduced the amounts requested in the budget submission for
support to JIATF-W in fiscal year 2021. The committee is
concerned that a clear plan for the transition of the roles and
responsibilities of JIATF-W for counternarcotics and counter-
illicit trafficking activities in the Indo-Pacific Command area
of responsibility, should JIATF-W be disestablished, does not
exist. Furthermore, the committee notes that pre-cursor
chemicals used in the production of deadly drugs like synthetic
heroin and methamphetamine that threaten the health and safety
of American citizens and others around the world originate in
and are trafficked from the Indo-Pacific Command area of
responsibility. Absent greater clarity from the Department of
Defense as to how it intends to ensure that there is not a
degradation in its ability to support this important mission,
the committee believes that it is imprudent to disestablish
JIATF-W.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.8
million in Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug activities for SAG
1FU1 for JIATF-W. Of the increase of $15.8 million in Drug
Interdiction and Counterdrug activities, $13.0 million shall be
for project number 3309, Joint Interagency Task Force--West,
and $2.8 million shall be for project number 9202, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command Counternarcotics Operational Support.
The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit, not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives a report on the JIATF-W. The
report shall include the following:
(1) A description of the current roles and
responsibilities of JIATF-W;
(2) A description of the manner in which the roles
and responsibilities of the JIATF-W meet the
counternarcotics requirements of the Department of
Defense in the area of responsibility of U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command; and
(3) A comprehensive plan for either of the following
eventualities (whichever the Secretary determines most
effective in meeting the counternarcotics and counter-
illicit trafficking requirements of the Department of
Defense in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of
responsibility):
(A) The continuing operation of the JIATF-W
in fiscal year 2021 and thereafter; or
(B) A mechanism to meet the counternarcotics
requirements of the Department in the area of
responsibility of the United States Indo-
Pacific Command if the JIATF-W ceases
operations as a component within the
Department, including specific and detailed
information on the resources that the
Department anticipates providing to the
Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, to meet
the counternarcotics mission of that Command in
a manner that does not divert resources from
other mission requirements of that Command.
Pilot program on civilian and military partnerships to enhance
interoperability and medical surge capability and capacity of
National Disaster Medical System
The budget request included $32.7 billion for Defense
Health Program, of which $1.9 billion was for SAG 7 Base
Operations/Communications.
The committee recognizes the importance of developing
strong military-civilian partnerships to enhance and expand the
capabilities and capacities of the National Disaster Medical
System. These partnerships would: (1) Provide additional
training platforms to improve the clinical readiness skills of
military medical providers; (2) Expand the Nation's capacity to
redistribute mass casualties of war to civilian medical
centers; and (3) Establish an enduring framework for a well-
coordinated Federal response to pandemics, such as COVID-19, or
to nuclear, radiological, biological, and chemical threats.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in Defense Health Program for SAG 7 for a pilot program
on civilian and military partnerships to enhance
interoperability and medical surge capability and capacity of
National Disaster Medical System.
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations
Purpose (sec. 1501)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
this title and make available authorized appropriations upon
enactment of this Act for the Department of Defense, in
addition to amounts otherwise authorized in this Act.
Overseas contingency operations (sec. 1502)
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
authorization of appropriations in this title as overseas
contingency operations.
Procurement (sec. 1503)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for procurement activities at the
levels identified in section 4102 of division D of this Act.
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1504)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for research, development, test,
and evaluation activities at the levels identified in section
4202 of division D of this Act.
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1505)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for operation and maintenance
activities at the levels identified in section 4302 of division
D of this Act.
Military personnel (sec. 1506)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for military personnel activities
at the levels identified in section 4402 of division D of this
Act.
Working capital funds (sec. 1507)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for the Defense Working Capital
Funds at the levels identified in section 4502 of division D of
this Act.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide (sec. 1508)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for the Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide, at the levels identified
in section 4502 of division D of this Act.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1509)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for the Office of the Inspector
General of the Department of Defense identified in section 4502
of division D of this Act.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1510)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the additional appropriation for the Defense Health Program
activities identified in section 4502 of division D of this
Act.
Subtitle B--Financial Matters
Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1521)
The committee recommends a provision that would state that
the amounts authorized to be appropriated in this title are in
addition to amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated by
this Act.
Special transfer authority (sec. 1522)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $2.0 billion of overseas
contingency operations funding authorized for fiscal year 2021
in this title to unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance
with normal reprogramming procedures. This transfer authority
would be in addition to the authority provided to the Secretary
elsewhere in this Act.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1531)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Afghanistan Security Forces
Fund for fiscal year 2021. The provision would also require an
assessment of the Afghan government's progress on shared
security goals and fulfillment of the commitments under the
Joint Declaration between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
and the United States of America for Bringing Peace to
Afghanistan, which was issued on February 29, 2020. The
committee believes that an intra-Afghan dialogue is the best
path for peace in Afghanistan and urges all parties to work
through their disputes so that the intra-Afghan dialogue can
proceed. The committee also believes that continued support for
the Afghan security forces is important for achieving stability
and security in Afghanistan, including the conduct of shared
U.S.-Afghan counterterrorism activities.
Transition and enhancement of inspector general authorities for
Afghanistan reconstruction (sec. 1532)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1229 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to provide for the
transition to the lead Inspector General for Operation
Freedom's Sentinel of duties, responsibilities, and authorities
for serving as the independent and objective means of keeping
the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense fully and
currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to
programs and operations for the reconstruction of Afghanistan.
Budget Items
Procurement of PAC-3 MSE missiles
The budget request included $779.8 million in line number 3
of Missile Procurement, Army (MPA), for MSE Missiles, of which
$176.6 million was included in the Overseas Contingency
Operations account for the European Deterrence Initiative
(EDI).
While the committee strongly supports procurement of
additional MSE missiles to meet the global requirement,
activities funded through EDI should directly support
requirements in the U.S. European Command (EUCOM) area of
responsibility. The committee understands that the 46 MSE
missiles requested in EDI would be subject to global allocation
to the combatant commands at the discretion of the Secretary of
Defense, just as the 122 missiles requested under the Army's
base budget would be so distributed. The committee does not
believe that procurement of globally interchangeable assets,
like munitions, without a commitment that they will be
prepositioned at locations in Europe or otherwise allocated to
EUCOM upon delivery, is an appropriate use of EDI funding.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $176.6
million in line number 3 of MPA for MSE Missiles in the
Overseas Contingency Operations account for EDI.
EDI: NATO Response Force (NRF) networks
The budget request included $70.0 million in line number 62
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO), for Installation Info Infrastructure Mod
Program, of which no funds were for intermediate basing and
life support for Multi-Domain Task Forces.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Response Force Network efforts in
support of the Multi-Domain Task Force.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in line number 62 of OPA OCO for NATO Response Force
Network efforts in support of the Multi-Domain Task Force.
EDI: Improvements to living quarters for rotational forces in Europe
The budget request included $56.4 million in line number
145 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO), for Force Provider.
The unfunded priority lists submitted by the Chief of Staff
of the Army and the Commander, U.S. European Command, included
additional funding for improvements to living quarters for
rotational forces in Europe.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $73.4
million in line number 145 of OPA OCO for improvements to
living quarters for rotational forces in Europe.
EDI: Mission Partner Environment (MPE)
The budget request included no funds in line number 65 of
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force,
Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), for Mission Partner
Environments.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for Mission
Partner Environment connectivity work in support of the Multi-
Domain Task Force.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5
million in line number 65 of RDT&E, Air Force, OCO, for Mission
Partner Environment connectivity work in support of the Multi-
Domain Task Force.
EDI: Support to deterrent activities
The budget request included $2.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO),
for SAG 114 Theater Level Assets.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for support
to deterrent activities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.7
million in OMA OCO for SAG 114 for support to deterrent
activities.
EDI: Support to deterrent activities
The budget request included $5.7 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO),
for SAG 121 Force Operations Readiness Support.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for support
to deterrent activities.
Therefore, the committee recommends two separate increases
of $3.0 million and $1.5 million in OMA OCO for SAG 121,
specifically for support to deterrent activities.
Commander's Emergency Response Program
The budget request included $2.5 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO),
for SAG 136 Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP).
The committee notes that CERP is no longer being used to
make ``hero payments''' and that such payments, when needed,
should be funded via the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund or
from the Government of Afghanistan.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $500,000
in OMA OCO for SAG 136 for CERP.
EDI: Continuity of operations
The budget request included $120.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO),
for SAG 142 U.S. European Command.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for
continuity of operations work in support of the Multi-Domain
Task Force.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.1
million in OMA OCO for SAG 142 for continuity of operations
work in support of the Multi-Domain Task Force.
EDI: Modernizing Mission Partner Environment (MPE)
The budget request included $120.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO),
for SAG 142 U.S. European Command.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for Mission
Partner Environment efforts in support of the Multi-Domain Task
Force.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $22.0
million in OMA OCO for SAG 142 for BICES work and CENTRIX and
Seagull migration in support of the Multi-Domain Task Force.
EDI: Globally Integrated Exercise 20-4/Austere Challenge 21.3
The budget request included $728.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps, Overseas Contingency Operations
(OCO), for SAG 1A1A Operational Forces.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for the
Globally Integrated Exercise 20-4/Austere Challenge 21.3.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, OCO, for
SAG 1A1A for the Globally Integrated Exercise 20-4/Austere
Challenge 21.3.
EDI: Marine European training program
The budget request included $728.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps, Overseas Contingency Operations
(OCO), for SAG 1A1A Operational Forces.
The unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. European Command, included additional funding for the
Marine European training program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5
million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, OCO, for
SAG 1A1A for the Marine European training program.
Transfer from base
The budget request included $7.2 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force, Overseas Contingency Operations, SAG
011W for Contractor Logistics Support and System Support.
The committee recommends an increase of $30.5 million to to
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, Overseas Contingency
Operations, SAG 011W for Contractor Logistics Support and
System Support as a transfer. The committee notes a
corresponding decrease elsewhere in this report.
Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq
The budget request included $100.8 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force, for SAG 42G Other Servicewide
Activities, Overseas Contingency Operations, of which $30.0
million was for the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-
I).
The committee expects the OSC-I to continue its transition
to a normal security cooperation office, including by
transitioning funding for its operations to the Foreign
Military Financing Administrative Fund and the Foreign Military
Sales Trust Fund Administrative Surcharge Account.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $15.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, for SAG 42G,
Overseas Contingency Operations, for the OSC-I. The committee
notes that there is a corresponding legislative provision
elsewhere in this Act.
Contractor logistics support
The budget request included $355.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, Overseas Contingency Operations
(OCO), for SAG 1PL7 Special Operations Command Maintenance.
The committees notes that the availability of intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities remains a
perennial shortfall across the geographic combatant commands.
The committee notes that, despite this, the budget request for
fiscal year 2021 cuts the contractor logistics support
necessary for the deployment of manned ISR aircraft operated by
U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) without identifying a
follow-on ISR solution to mitigate the loss in capability in
fiscal year 2021.
Additionally, the committee notes that the budget request
for fiscal year 2021 and the future years defense program
includes proposals to modify the composition of SOCOM's
airborne ISR fleet through the acquisition of new platforms and
the divestment of platforms currently in its inventory. The
committee is concerned that there does not exist an overarching
strategy to guide SOCOM's airborne ISR acquisition efforts,
particularly one that clearly identifies current or anticipated
special operations-peculiar capability gaps and describes
future manned and unmanned ISR requirements. The committee
believes that it is not prudent to divest of important ISR
capabilities without a clearly articulated strategy for how
critical ISR requirements will be satisfied in the near-, mid-,
and long-term. The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act,
there is a provision that would require the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
and the Commander, SOCOM, to jointly submit to the
congressional defense committees an acquisition roadmap to meet
the manned and unmanned airborne ISR requirements of United
States Special Operations Forces.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $27.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, OCO, for
SAG 1PL7 for contractor logistics support for manned ISR
aircraft.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency for Iraq Train and Equip
Requirements
The budget request included $1.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO), for SAG 4GTD Defense Security Cooperation
Agency, of which no funds were for Iraq Train and Equip
Requirements.
The committee believes that, as the United States seeks to
normalize its security assistance relationship with the
Government of Iraq, traditional capacity building activities
should be funded via standing authorities for such purposes,
such as section 333 of title 10, United States Code, rather
than through authorities such as the Counter-Islamic State of
Iraq and Syria Train and Equip Fund.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $322.5
million in OMDW, OCO, for SAG 4GTD for Iraq Train and Equip
Requirements. The committee notes that, elsewhere in this
report, the committee recommends a commensurate decrease in
OMDW, OCO, for SAG 110 Counter ISIS Train and Equip Fund.
Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and Syria Train and Equip Fund
The budget request included $845.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO), for the Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria Train and Equip Fund, of which $645.0 million was for SAG
110 Iraq Train and Equip Requirements.
The committee understands that a substantial portion of the
funds requested for Iraq Train and Equip Requirements is for
capacity building of the Iraqi Security Forces as opposed to
operational support and immediate reconstitution of units
degraded in the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria. The committee believes that, as the United States seeks
to normalize its security assistance relationship with the
Government of Iraq, traditional capacity building activities
should be funded via standing authorities for such purposes,
such as section 333 of title 10, United States Code.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $322.5
million in OMDW, OCO, for SAG 110 Iraq Train and Equip
Requirements. The committee notes that, elsewhere in this
report, the committee recommends a commensurate increase for
the Defense Security Cooperation Agency for Iraq Train and
Equip Requirements.
TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS
Subtitle A--Space Activities
Resilient and survivable positioning, navigation, and timing
capabilities (sec. 1601)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to: (1) Prioritize mission elements,
platforms, and weapon systems that require position,
navigation, and timing (PNT) and are critical to operations;
(2) Mature, test, and produce sufficient quantities of
equipment that can generate or process available resilient
alternative PNT signals to equip the prioritized force
elements; and (3) Integrate and deploy such equipment into the
prioritized operational systems, platforms, and weapons.
In addition, the provision would require the Secretary, not
later than January 1, 2021, to submit a plan to the
congressional defense committees for achieving these goals,
including budget requirements, and to begin implementation in
fiscal year 2021.
The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to
coordinate with the National Security Council, the Department
of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, and
other appropriate departments and agencies to encourage
civilian and commercial adoption of Department of Defense-
developed technologies and capabilities for resilient
alternative PNT to back up the Global Positioning System.
Distribution of launches for phase two of acquisition strategy for
National Security Space Launch program (sec. 1602)
The committee recommends a provision that would encourage
National Security Space Launch program (NSSL) phase 2
procurement. The committee supports the U.S. Government's
approach for launch service agreements as well as its phase 2
launch service procurement. The procurement must be conducted
in a manner that awards national security space launches that
are sufficient to ensure healthy competitors and strong
contributors to the space industrial base.
Development efforts for National Security Space Launch providers (sec.
1603)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to establish a program to develop
technologies and systems to enhance phase three National
Security Space Launch requirements and enable further advances
in launch capability associated with the insertion of national
security payloads into relevant classes of orbits.
Timeline for nonrecurring design validation for responsive space launch
(sec. 1604)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to complete non-recurring design
validation of previously flown space hardware for use pursuant
to the phase 2 acquisition strategy and other national security
space missions within 540 days of the date that the Secretary
of the Air Force selects two providers for National Security
Space Launch. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report, no later than February 28, 2021, to
the congressional defense committees on the progress that the
Department is making with all non-recurring design validation
efforts as proposed in this provision, including justification
for any deviation from the New Entrant Certification Guide. The
report shall also include information on non-recurring design
validation work for providers not selected for phase 2.
The committee further directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a separate report to the congressional defense
committees, no later than 540 days after the selection of phase
2 launch providers, on efforts to ensure that cooperative
research and development agreements are maintained in force for
launch providers that are not selected for the phase 2 launch
acquisition to ensure that, if and when a phase 3 acquisition
is begun, collaborative efforts will not have to be re-started.
Tactically responsive space launch operations (sec. 1605)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to develop a program for tactically
responsive space. In fiscal year 2020, the Congress
appropriated approximately $19 million for this effort;
however, the long-term trajectory of the program remains
uncertain. The proposed language would provide guidance and
authority to that end.
The committee continues to believe that demonstrating
tactically responsive launch operations that leverage new and
innovative commercial capabilities will enable Department of
Defense space domain mission assurance and strategic deterrence
objectives. The committee recognizes the strategic value of
mobile launch capability to mitigate risks from adversary
threats and natural disasters to traditional fixed range launch
infrastructure and therefore encourages the Department of
Defense to support operationally relevant demonstrations.
The committee believes enhancing the resilience of national
security space systems is a critical priority due to the
increasing reliance on space in U.S. military operations and
growing threats to U.S. space superiority. Tactically
responsive launch provides great value, enabling flexible
military space operations and the strategic ability to
reconstitute space systems. The committee expects the
Department of Defense and the Space Force to continue
prioritizing adequate funding to test, train, and
operationalize these capabilities.
Conforming amendments relating to reestablishment of Space Command
(sec. 1606)
The committee recommends a provision that would align
space-relevant congressional reporting requirements under
United States Space Command.
Space Development Agency development requirements and transfer to Space
Force (sec. 1607)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Space Development Agency to lead: (1) The
development and demonstration of a proliferated low-earth orbit
sensing, tracking, and data transport architecture; and (2) The
integration of next generation space capabilities, such as a
hypersonic and ballistic missile-tracking space sensor payload.
The provision would also require the Space Development Agency
to be transferred from the Office of the Secretary of Defense
to the United States Space Force no later than October 1, 2022.
Space launch rate assessment (sec. 1608)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force, for the next 5 years, to submit to
the Congress every 2 years a report detailing certain
information germane to the number and subcategories of space
launches across the Federal Government. The Secretary should
use the results of the assessment to inform the acquisition
strategy for the National Security Space Launch program.
Report on impact of acquisition strategy for National Security Space
Launch program on emerging foreign space launch providers (sec.
1609)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit to the Congress a report,
no later than January 1, 2021, on the impact of the acquisition
strategy for the National Security Space Launch program on the
potential for foreign countries, including the People's
Republic of China, to enter the global commercial space launch
market.
Subtitle B--Cyberspace-Related Matters
Modification of position of Principal Cyber Advisor (sec. 1611)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 932 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) by updating the
responsibilities of the Principal Cyber Advisor.
The Principal Cyber Advisor has been a key driver of the
Department's development and implementation of its 2018 cyber
strategy. As a coordinator and advocate of cyber equities in
the science and technology, acquisition, intelligence, policy,
and operational worlds, the Principal Cyber Advisor has
successfully ensured that the Department's cyber policies and
programs are coherent, that cybersecurity concerns are
respected, that the Department's senior leadership is informed
and engaged on critical cyber issues, and that the Department
makes meaningful contributions to the Nation's cybersecurity.
The committee is aware of the model that the Principal Cyber
Advisor has employed to govern its cyber programs and policy--
the establishment of a permanent team in the office of the
Principal Cyber Advisor to support the rotating cyber cross-
functional team--and encourages the Secretary of Defense to
continue resourcing this implementation.
Framework for cyber hunt forward operations (sec. 1612)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive framework to
enhance the consistency and execution of cyber hunt forward
operations.
The committee is supportive of the Department of Defense's
novel hunt forward operations and is encouraged by its
innovative approaches to finding new ways to impose costs on
cyber adversaries. However, in the course of performing its
oversight, the committee has learned of a number of issues that
Cyber Command has encountered: insufficient coordination across
the Federal Government, inadequate manning and time spent
abroad, and the inability to access relevant networks. The
committee sees value in the prescription of such a framework in
institutionalizing these missions within the Department and
forcing commanders to assess the costs, potential gains, and
requirements of hunt forward missions. The committee does not
seek to delay or else discourage the performance of these
missions; to the contrary, the committee hopes that the
framework will enable Cyber Command's execution of more
successful missions at an increased operational tempo.
The committee is especially interested in the development
of relevant metrics for evaluating the success of hunt forward
missions. In particular, the committee recognizes the fleeting
value of intelligence in the cyber domain--malware can be
reengineered, infrastructure can be reestablished, and tactics,
techniques, and procedures can be recycled, rendering
signatures, firewall configurations, and other defensive
countermeasures calibrated to particular threats less than
effective. The committee therefore encourages to the Department
to pay particular attention to: metrics to define the utility
of the intelligence gained from hunt forward missions; threat
sharing programs to best utilize this intelligence; malware
analysis programs to render adversary countermeasures
ineffective; and potential synergies with building partner
capacity programs.
Modification of scope of notification requirements for sensitive
military cyber operations (sec. 1613)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 395 of title 10, United States Code, by changing the
requirements for notification of sensitive military cyber
operations. Specifically, the provision would require the
Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense
committees of operations that are intended to achieve a cyber
effect against a foreign terrorist organization or a country,
including its armed forces and the proxy forces of that country
located elsewhere, with which the Armed Forces of the United
States are not involved in hostilities or with respect to which
the involvement of the Armed Forces of the United States in
hostilities has not been acknowledged publicly by the United
States.
Modification of requirements for quarterly Department of Defense cyber
operations briefings for Congress (sec. 1614)
The committee recommends a provision that would update the
requirements of the Department of Defense's quarterly cyber
operations briefings to Congress, codified in section 484 of
title 10, United States Code. The provision would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Commander of United
States Cyber Command, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, or designees from each of their offices, to provide the
quarterly briefings. The provision would also require the
briefings to specifically cover recent presidential directives,
delegations of authority, and operational challenges and would
require the briefers to present certain documentation at the
briefings.
Current statute dictates that the quarterly cyber
operations briefings ``cover all offensive and significant
defensive military operations in cyberspace carried out by the
Department of Defense during the immediately preceding
quarter.'' This provision would make no changes to this
requirement. However, the committee has been consistently
frustrated by the Department's unwillingness to keep the
committee apprised of cyber operations conducted to gain access
to adversary systems, including those conducted pursuant to
standing military plans against military targets. The committee
believes that it is critical that the committee is informed as
to what targets are being developed, at what stage these
operations stand, and what cyber effects are available to
combatant commanders.
Therefore, the committee expects the Department to fully
follow the letter of the law in providing these briefings to
the Congress by supplying the congressional defense committees
details as to the operational activities of the Department's
offensive forces even short of effects, including, as
appropriate, the specific intent of and progress made in
operations targeting adversary cyber and military actors.
Rationalization and integration of parallel cybersecurity architectures
and operations (sec. 1615)
The committee recommends a provision that would require an
assessment led by the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, with the
concurrence of the Chief Data Officer (CDO), Department of
Defense Chief Information Officer (CIO), and the Principal
Cyber Adviser (PCA), of the gaps between the architectures,
concepts of operation, situational awareness, command and
control, tools, systems, and network instrumentation of the
Cyber Mission Forces and the Cybersecurity Service Providers
(CSSPs). The provision would specifically require
identification of opportunities for the integration and
rationalization of commercial security information and event
management (SIEM) systems and the government-developed Big Data
Platform (BDP) capability. The provision would also require the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, CIO, CDO, and PCA to jointly
recommend corrective actions to the Secretary of Defense in
preparation of the budget request for fiscal year 2023.
The committee understands that, under the current concept
of operations, Cyber Protection Teams (CPTs) are called in to
respond to intrusions on DOD networks, while CSSPs are
responsible for day-to-day protection of DoD networks. However,
over the last decade, CSSPs' responsibilities and capabilities
have evolved from the performance of relatively primitive
check-list compliance management to the execution of far more
sophisticated cybersecurity operations. CSSPs are increasingly
capable of active asset discovery, vulnerability scanning,
active and automated patch management, behavior-based intrusion
detection, agent-based remediation and compliance enforcement
for endpoints and hosts, network mapping, and deploying sensors
to generate metadata records on endpoint and network activity.
In addition, the CSSPs have widely deployed leading commercial
SIEM systems, which store network activity metadata and allow
operators to query and analyze those data to detect signs of
compromise and spreading infections. The committee is aware
that the operations of the CPTs are mostly independent of the
CSSPs, resulting in overlap, gaps, and unrealized opportunities
for synergies and mutual support. The committee believes that
the capabilities and operations of CPTs and CSSPs ought to be
complementary, so that CPTs can utilize and build on the
foundational capabilities and tools of the CSSPs. For example,
integration of CSSP and CPT architectures and concepts of
operations may enable CPTs to operate remotely and to commence
operations immediately without prior knowledge of the network
to be defended.
The committee understands that, in support of the CPTs, the
Department of Defense Information Network (DODIN) has been
instrumented to collect metadata (such as Domain Name System
records, netflow records, and log records) for storage in and
analysis by algorithms resident on BDP instances, as part of
the Unified Platform program. The committee also understands
that, in support of the CSSPs, the DODIN has been instrumented
independently to collect the same types of metadata for storage
and analysis by proliferated SIEM systems. However, in general,
BDP and SIEM instances and their analytic tools are not
interoperable, and metadata collection is both redundant and
incomplete across the two architectures. Additionally, the
committee notes that additional metadata collection operations
occurring at the middle tier of the DODIN, where Joint Regional
Security Stacks are deployed, presents yet another example of
duplication and gaps in the collection, storage, and analysis
performed with SIEM systems and BDPs.
Therefore, the committee believes that all of these efforts
should be combined into an integrated architecture that will
make the DOD cybersecurity enterprise more effective and
efficient and will provide substance to the new overarching
concept of the Cyber Operations Forces.
Modification of acquisition authority of Commander of United States
Cyber Command (sec. 1616)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal
Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note) by: (1)
Removing the cap on the Commander of Cyber Command's obligation
and expenditure; (2) Striking the sunset on the authority; and
(3) Striking the inapplicability of the authority to major
defense acquisition programs.
The committee believes that Cyber Command's expanded
mission and responsible use of this acquisition authority
justify the removal of these constraints. However, the
committee expects the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, not to
undertake expansive acquisition efforts, including major
defense acquisition programs, without compelling basis. Cyber
Command possesses neither the capacity nor the expertise nor
the mission to manage large acquisition programs; the military
services, in contrast, have substantial acquisition programs,
experience, and capacity. The committee recognizes that the
realization of the Joint Cyber Warfighting Architecture (JCWA)
has exposed certain coordination gaps in the distribution of
acquisition responsibilities across Cyber Command and the
military services. Elsewhere in this report, the committee
directs the Department to develop a governance plan for the
coordination and oversight of the JCWA. The committee does not
believe that such issues justify Cyber Command's taking on
substantial acquisition activities of its own and expects the
military services to remain the executive agents for major
cyber acquisition programs. The committee therefore expects
Cyber Command to judiciously exercise this expanded authority.
Assessment of cyber operational planning and deconfliction policies and
processes (sec. 1617)
The committee recommends a provision that would require, no
later than November 1, 2021, the Principal Cyber Advisor and
the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to jointly conduct and
complete an assessment on the operational planning and
deconfliction policies and processes that govern Department of
Defense cyber operations.
The committee is aware of a number of issues afflicting the
Department's planning and deconfliction of cyber operations,
which involve a great deal of coordination across the combatant
commands and intelligence community. The committee seeks to
ensure that these processes and policies enable the rapid
execution of cyber operations, facilitate decision-making that
appropriately balances relevant equities, and ensure that Cyber
Command possesses the necessary data and capabilities to
execute Department of Defense missions.
Pilot program on cybersecurity capability metrics (sec. 1618)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, through the DOD Chief Information Officer
and Commander of United States Cyber Command, to conduct a
pilot program to develop and apply speed-based metrics to
measure the performance and effectiveness of Department of
Defense (DOD) security operations centers and cyber security
service providers. The provision also requires the Secretary of
Defense to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, no later than December 1,
2021, on the findings of the pilot program.
The committee is aware of a growing practice in commercial
industry of implementing speed-based cybersecurity metrics. The
goal of these metrics is to assess an organization's ability to
respond to a cyber intrusion as quickly as possible, thereby
minimizing the impact that a malicious cyber actor can have.
The committee is aware that these speed-based cybersecurity
metrics often measure the time to detect an intrusion, the time
to investigate an incident, and the time to respond to the
intrusion, which are benchmarked against the average times
required by malicious cyber actors to penetrate and compromise
defended networks. The committee believes that understanding
and applying speed-based cybersecurity metrics are a necessary
component of assessing and improving the cybersecurity
performance of the DOD. Implementing speed-based cybersecurity
metrics will allow the Department to understand where
improvements need to made and will be increasingly important as
malicious cyber actors begin to incorporate automation, machine
learning, and artificial intelligence into their attack
operations, thus requiring a response at the speed of a
machine, not a person.
The committee understands that the metrics used to assess
the Cyber Mission Forces broadly reflect the importance of
rapidly detecting and mitigating adversary activity and timely
mission execution. While the provision applies only to DOD
security operations centers and cybersecurity service
providers, the committee encourages the Commander, U.S. Cyber
Command, to explicitly evaluate the Cyber Mission Forces on
their ability to expeditiously execute offensive and defensive
missions with little or no warning and to incorporate lessons
learned from this pilot program, as appropriate.
Assessment of effect of inconsistent timing and use of Network Address
Translation in Department of Defense networks (sec. 1619)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief Information Officer (CIO) to assess, by March 1, 2021,
potential challenges to cybersecurity analysis and remediation.
The provision would also require the CIO and the Principal
Cyber Adviser to submit a recommendation to the Secretary of
Defense to address the results of the assessment and to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees by April 1,
2021.
The committee is concerned that the variability in timing
across Department of Defense (DOD) networks may seriously
impair the ability of network defenders to detect intrusions
and malicious network activity using correlation techniques
that depend upon the accuracy of event sequences captured in
immense sets of metadata from distributed sensors.
The committee is also concerned about the adverse effects
on cybersecurity caused by the use of Network Address
Translation (NAT). NAT is a technique to service multiple hosts
or endpoint devices with a single Internet Protocol (IP)
address for communications external to the organization. The
committee understands that some DOD components organize their
networks with multiple layers of NAT so as to conserve IP
addresses--an advantageous efficiency as IP version 4 address
space dwindles. However, if network defenders do not have real-
time access to the underlying translation of unique IP
addresses at the NAT site, it is extremely difficult to
correlate an indication of compromise with a specific endpoint
or host for investigation and remediation. For example,
defenders may not be able to correlate a detection of malicious
software that ``detonated'' in a sandbox at an Internet access
point with a specific host if that host's identity is hidden
behind a NAT site.
Matters concerning the College of Information and Cyberspace at
National Defense University (sec. 1620)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to conduct an assessment
of the educational requirements for military and civilian
leaders in the cyber and information domains and the role that
National Defense University's (NDU's) College of Information
and Cyberspace (CIC) plays in meeting those needs and
requirements. The provision would prohibit the Secretary of
Defense from taking any action on the CIC until the findings of
this assessment are presented to the congressional defense
committees in a report with appropriate recommendations no
later than February 1, 2021.
The committee is aware of discussions underway to eliminate
the CIC as an independent college at the NDU and offer
cyberspace and information warfare-relevant curricula as
electives available at NDU's other colleges. The committee
notes that section 2165 of title 10, United States Code,
establishes the CIC in law as a constituent institution of the
NDU and that any action to eliminate, subsume into another
college, or institutionally diminish the CIC requires a change
in law. The institutionalization of the CIC in the United
States Code was a deliberate choice of the Congress and a
recognition of the importance of graduate education in the
complex disciplines involved in cyber and information warfare.
Given the certain importance of cyber warfare in future
conflicts, as emphasized in the National Defense Strategy, the
committee sees moves to eliminate the CIC as myopic and lacking
justification. The committee, therefore, expects the Department
to fully resource the CIC and correct any staffing shortfalls
currently in effect, until the Congress receives the findings
and recommendations of the assessment.
Modification of mission of cyber command and assignment of cyber
operations forces (sec. 1621)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 167b of title 10, United States Code, by further
specifying the principal mission of the United States Cyber
Command and by modifying the assignment of cyber forces to
address forces that are assigned to Cyber Command and forces
that are assigned to other combatant commands or service-
retained. This provision would update these items in United
States Code to be consistent with the definition of the
Department of Defense (DOD) Cyber Operations Forces (COF)
outlined in the December 2019 memorandum from the Secretary of
Defense.
The committee is aware of the December 12, 2019, memorandum
from the Secretary of Defense regarding the definition of the
DOD COF. The committee is pleased with the clarity provided by
the memorandum on the different operational groups within the
DOD and supports a consistent, methodical approach to
organizing, training, and equipping each of these cyber forces.
Integration of Department of Defense user activity monitoring and
cybersecurity (sec. 1622)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to integrate: the plans, capabilities, and
systems for user activity monitoring (UAM) and for endpoint
cybersecurity and the collection of metadata on network
activity for cybersecurity to enable mutual support and
information sharing. The provision would require the Secretary
of Defense to brief the congressional defense committees, no
later than October 1, 2021, on the plans and actions taken to
carry out this provision.
The committee is aware that the principal tools for UAM for
insider threat missions are keystroke loggers, which record all
user actions on keyboards. This tool has been primarily
deployed on classified Department of Defense (DOD) networks.
However, the committee is aware of assessments indicating that
monitoring user activity on unclassified networks connected to
the global Internet could be as important as, if not more
important than, monitoring activity on closed classified
networks. The committee understands that keystroke logging and
analysis is data-intensive and relatively expensive, inhibiting
deployment on unclassified networks.
The committee is also aware that cybersecurity metadata
currently collected on unclassified DOD networks may be an
inherently rich source of information about user activity that
could be beneficial to the performance of insider threat
missions. Likewise, the comprehensive UAM data collected for
the insider threat mission may be useful data for the
performance of cybersecurity missions. Currently, these two
missions--and the data that are collected and analyzed to
support them--are managed separately and are not integrated.
Defense industrial base cybersecurity sensor architecture plan (sec.
1623)
The committee recommends a provision that would task the
Department of Defense Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA), in
consultation with the Department of Defense Chief Information
Officer, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
and Security, and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to develop
a comprehensive plan, by February 1, 2021, for the deployment
of commercial-off-the-shelf solutions on supplier networks to
monitor the public-facing Internet attack surface of members of
the defense industrial base (DIB). The provision would also
require the PCA to provide a briefing on the plan to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by March 1, 2021.
The committee is aware of the challenges that the
Department faces in trying to improve the cybersecurity of the
more than 300,000 Department of Defense (DOD) suppliers and a
growing number of smaller sub-tier suppliers that make up the
U.S. DIB. Elsewhere in this report, the committee applauds the
Department's efforts to implement the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification to provide a standard basis for
cybersecurity assessments but emphasizes that section 1648 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) requires the Department to take a multi-
faceted approach to ensuring superior cybersecurity while
taking care to ensure that the solutions imposed on industry do
not represent an overly difficult burden to small and medium-
sized businesses.
The committee understands that one of the elements of a
comprehensive framework for improving the cybersecurity of the
DIB could be the utilization of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
solutions for independently monitoring the public-facing
Internet attack surface of DIB suppliers. Commercially-
available solutions can identify and catalog DIB assets and
continuously monitor networks for risks and potential
vulnerabilities while also striking the appropriate balance
between the need for visibility and accountability for supplier
cybersecurity and the prohibitive cost and invasiveness of more
intrusive approaches.
The committee is aware of current efforts undertaken by the
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency to adopt COTS
solutions for monitoring the public-facing Internet attack
surfaces of National Industrial Security Program participants
and encourages the Department to look for opportunities to
increase the deployment of COTS solutions to collect
cybersecurity data from DIB contractor participants.
However, the committee is concerned that these efforts are
not being adequately coordinated across the Department and that
there is a lack of a defined architecture, concept of
operations, and governance structure that would allow the
Department to take advantage of existing cybersecurity
capabilities in the analysis of cybersecurity data produced by
these sensors. The committee also seeks to ensure that the
selection and implementation of these sensors are informed by
the Department's leading cybersecurity organizations' policies
and programs for enhancing the cybersecurity of the DIB. The
committee encourages the Department, in defining the governance
structure, to define a single official that would be
responsible for this effort.
Extension of Cyberspace Solarium Commission to track and assess
implementation (sec. 1624)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission (CSC) for an additional 16
months to allow the CSC to monitor, assess, and report on the
implementation of the CSC's recommendations. The provision
would also require the CSC to submit an annual report on its
activities to Congress.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the CSC's
final report. The final report includes over 75 recommendations
to improve the United States Government's cyber policies,
governance, and capabilities. The committee also notes the
recommendation from the CSC that the Congress should consider
ways to monitor and assess the implementation of the CSC
report's recommendations.
Review of regulations and promulgation of guidance relating to National
Guard responses to cyber attacks (sec. 1625)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, to review, and if necessary update,
regulations and guidance relevant to the National Guard's
responsibilities and available capabilities in cyber incident
response.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
recommends that the Department of Defense clarify the National
Guard's responsibilities and available capabilities in cyber
incident response.
Improvements relating to the quadrennial cyber posture review (sec.
1626)
The committee recommends a provision that would implement
the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's recommendation to amend
section 1644 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to add a force structure
assessment of the Department of Defense's Cyber Operations
Forces to future cyber posture reviews.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
recommends that the Department of Defense conduct a force
structure assessment of the Cyber Mission Forces and review the
delegation of authorities for cyber operations. The committee
believes that it is an appropriate time to make such
assessments.
Report on enabling United States Cyber Command resource allocation
(sec. 1627)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than January 15, 2021, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees,
detailing the actions that the Secretary will undertake to
ensure that the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, has enhanced
authority, direction, and control of the Cyber Operations
Forces and of the equipment budget that enables Cyber
Operations Forces' operations and readiness, beginning with
fiscal year 2024 budget request.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
expresses concern about providing United States Cyber Command
with acquisition authorities over goods and services unique to
the Command's needs through a Major Force Program funding
category. The committee agrees with the importance of ensuring
that United States Cyber Command has the flexibility and
agility to control acquisitions for both the forces assigned to
it and the Cyber Operations Forces.
Evaluation of options for establishing a cyber reserve force (sec.
1628)
The committee recommends a provision that would implement
the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's recommendation to require
the Secretary of Defense, not later than December 31, 2021, to
assess options for establishing a cyber reserve force. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
provide to the congressional defense committees a report on the
assessment, not later than February 1, 2022.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
recommends assessing the need for, and requirements of, a
military cyber reserve, its possible composition, and its
structure, including how different types of reserve models,
e.g., traditional uniformed reserve models as well as non-
traditional civilian and uniformed reserve models, could
address broader talent management issues. The committee
believes that a cyber reserve force could provide a capable
surge capacity and enable the Department of Defense to draw on
cyber talent that currently resides in the private sector. The
committee encourages the Department to consider a uniformed
military reserve that does not contain the same kinds of
drilling, grooming, or physical expertise requirements as a
traditional uniformed reserve.
Ensuring cyber resiliency of nuclear command and control system (sec.
1629)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than October 1, 2021, to submit
a comprehensive plan, including a schedule and resourcing plan,
for the implementation of the findings and recommendations
included in the first report submitted under section 499(c)(3)
of title 10, United States Code.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
expresses concern about the cyber survivability and resiliency
of U.S. weapon systems, including nuclear forces, and the
committee especially agrees with the report's emphasis on
ensuring cyber resiliency of the nuclear command and control
system.
Modification of requirements relating to the Strategic Cybersecurity
Program and the evaluation of cyber vulnerabilities of major
weapon systems of the Department of Defense (sec. 1630)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish policies and requirements for
each major weapon system, and the priority critical
infrastructure essential to the proper functioning of major
weapon systems in broader mission areas, to be re-assessed for
cyber vulnerabilities. The provision would also make a number
of amendments to section 1640 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91; 10
U.S.C. 2224 note), which required the development of a plan for
the establishment of the Strategic Cybersecurity Program (SCP).
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The report
recommended the amendment of section 1647 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-
92) to require the development of an after-action report and
plan in order to ensure that weapon systems are serially
assessed for cybersecurity vulnerabilities.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
has been slow to implement the SCP but believes that, if
realized consistent with congressional intent, it would provide
great value in improving cybersecurity across entire mission
sets through mission thread analysis and design review. The
committee is disappointed by the lack of leadership on the SCP
exhibited by the National Security Agency in the past but is
aware of the establishment of the Cyber Security Directorate
(CSD) in the last year, whose mission mirrors that of the SCP,
and looks forward to understanding how the SCP will be
positioned within and resourced by the CSD. The committee
therefore urges the Department to amend and fortify this
program, as prescribed in this provision.
Defense industrial base participation in a cybersecurity threat
intelligence sharing program (sec. 1631)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a threat intelligence sharing
program to share threat intelligence with and obtain threat
intelligence from the defense industrial base. Such a program:
(1) Could be mandatory or encouraged, at the discretion of the
Secretary; (2) Would feature tiered requirements for companies
based on their position within the defense industrial base; and
(3) Could be a new program or an augmentation of an existing
program.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
expresses concern about the Department of Defense's visibility
into the cyber threats facing defense industrial base companies
and these companies' ability to defend themselves.
Assessment on defense industrial base cybersecurity threat hunting
(sec. 1632)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of the adequacy
of threat hunting elements of the Cyber Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) program and the need for continuous threat
monitoring operations. The provision would also require the
Secretary to brief the Committees of Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the assessment's
findings no later than February 1, 2022.
The committee is aware of the recommendations in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report. The final report
recommends that the Department of Defense establish a program
to identify cybersecurity threats on the networks of defense
industrial base (DIB) companies. While the committee commends
the Department's efforts to address cybersecurity risks to the
DIB, the committee is concerned that the CMMC program does not
require DIB companies, levels one through three, to have a
threat hunting capability. The committee encourages the
Department to also consider whether this program would be
appropriate for Federally funded research and development
centers.
Assessing risk to national security of quantum computing (sec. 1633)
The committee recommends a provision that would implement
the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's recommendation to address
the risks to National Security Systems (NSSs) posed by quantum
computing by requiring the Secretary of Defense to: (1)
Complete an assessment of current and potential threats to
critical NSSs and the standards used for quantum-resistant
cryptography; and (2) Provide recommendations for research and
development activities to secure NSSs. The provision would also
require the Secretary to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on the assessment and
recommendations no later than February 1, 2023.
Additionally, the committee is aware that commercial
industry is also developing quantum-resistant encryption
technology that may provide a capability that can enhance the
security of both new and legacy systems without sacrificing
overall system performance. Therefore, the committee directs
the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency to
separately assess available commercial off-the-shelf quantum-
resistant encryption technology solutions and provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees not later than
February 1, 2021, on the applicability of such solutions to the
Department of Defense's needs. The committee has consistently
encouraged the Department, where appropriate and feasible, to
take advantage of commercial-off-the-shelf capabilities for
securing its networks and believes that the rapid leveraging of
innovative commercial technology could play a vital part in the
Department's approach to addressing the risks posed by quantum
computing.
Applicability of reorientation of Big Data Platform program to
Department of Navy (sec. 1634)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1651 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-91), which established a
number of requirements for the Department of Defense's use of
the Big Data Platform, by specifying that the requirements
enumerated in that section also apply in full to the Department
of the Navy's Sharkcage and associated programs, which function
as the Navy's analogue to the Big Data Platform capability.
Expansion of authority for access and information relating to cyber
attacks on operationally critical contractors of the Armed
Forces (sec. 1635)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 391 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
ability of the Department of Defense (DOD) to react immediately
to reports of intrusions that may affect critical DOD data. The
committee understands the importance of commercial service
providers to the DOD and believes that the security and
integrity of these providers are absolutely critical to the
effective management of the worldwide logistics enterprise,
especially during a contingency or wartime. Therefore, the
committee believes that the same level of proactive DOD support
in responding to cyber incidents should be authorized with
respect to these providers as that authorized for cleared
defense contractors. The committee notes that the Department of
Defense has requested the inclusion of this authority in two
consecutive National Defense Authorization Acts.
Requirements for review of and limitations on the Joint Regional
Security Stacks activity (sec. 1636)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a baseline review of the Joint
Regional Security Stacks (JRSS) activity to determine whether
the initiative should continue, but as a program of record, or
should be replaced by an improved design and modern technology.
If the Secretary determines that JRSS should continue, the
Secretary would be required to develop a plan to transition
JRSS to a program of record, to which all standard acquisition
requirements and processes would be applicable. The provision
would also prohibit any operational deployment of JRSS to the
Secret Internet Protocol Network in fiscal year 2021. Finally,
the provision would require the Secretary of Defense to provide
the results of the JRSS review to the congressional defense
committees by December 1, 2021, which would include a plan to
either transition JRSS to a program of record or to seek a JRSS
replacement.
The committee further directs that the Secretary of
Defense, in conducting the assessment required by the
provision, investigate and answer the following questions: (1)
Is the Department of Defense Information Network properly
architected to achieve JRSS' intended network middle tier
security and network functions; (2) Is the JRSS hardware and
software stack technologically obsolete?; (3) If JRSS were to
be properly manned with proficiently trained personnel, can it
perform the security functions it was intended to provide
within affordable manning and training resources?; (4) What are
the required security functions that can be measured and
subjected to operational testing?; (5) Is the collection of
cybersecurity-related data and metadata enabled at JRSS nodes
being consumed by other cybersecurity systems--for example, the
Big Data Platform and Security Information and Event Management
capabilities?; (6) Is JRSS performing its network management
functions well, and should the security functions of JRSS be
terminated in favor of other solutions and investments?
The committee notes that multiple reports of the Director,
Operational Test and Evaluation, and the Department of Defense
Inspector General have highlighted problems with the ability of
JRSS to accomplish its intended purpose of traffic management
and security functions for the network middle tier. Operational
testing and audits have concluded that JRSS is not
operationally suitable and not capable of helping network
defenders to detect and respond to operationally realistic
cyber attacks.
Independent assessment of establishment of a National Cyber Director
(sec. 1637)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, not later than December 1, 2020, to seek to
enter into an agreement with an independent organization to
conduct an assessment on the feasibility and advisability of
establishing a National Cyber Director. The provision would
also require the Secretary of Defense to provide to the
appropriate congressional committees a report on the assessment
not later than March 1, 2021.
The committee is aware of the recommendation in the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission's final report for the
establishment of a National Cyber Director. The committee
agrees with the need for improved coordination of cybersecurity
policy and operations across the Federal Government but
believes that there are additional questions that need to be
answered prior to the establishment of a National Cyber
Director.
Modification of authority to use operation and maintenance funds for
cyber operations-peculiar capability development projects (sec.
1638)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authority to use Operation and Maintenance (O&M) funds for
cyber operations-peculiar capability development projects to
allow the Secretaries of the military departments to each
obligate and expend funds under this authority up to a total of
$20.0 million per year. The provision would also allow the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to use O&M funds for cyber
operations-peculiar capability development projects under this
authority up to a total of $6.0 million per year.
Section 1640 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) allowed the Secretaries of
the military departments to use up to $3.0 million annually of
money authorized for appropriation for O&M to develop cyber
operations-peculiar capabilities. This allowed the Department
of Defense to use its O&M funds for the rapid creation,
testing, fielding, and operation of cyber capabilities that
would be developed and used within the 1-year appropriation
period.
The committee is aware that the development of cyber
capabilities must be dynamic to allow the Department to rapidly
respond to the evolving cyber threat. The committee encourages
the military services to use this authority to its full extent
and to ensure that future year budget requests appropriately
account for these funds in their O&M requests.
Personnel management authority for Commander of United States Cyber
Command and development program for offensive cyber operations
(sec. 1639)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide to
the Commander, United States Cyber Command, the same personnel
management authority provided to the Director of the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Director of the
Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO), and the Director of the
Joint Artificial Intelligence Center to facilitate the hiring
of technical talent. The provision would allow the Commander to
pay up to 10 computer scientists, data scientists, engineers,
mathematicians, and computer network exploitation specialists
at rates of basic pay authorized for senior-level positions
under section 5376 of title 5, United States Code--pay that
would allow Cyber Command to be significantly more competitive
with commercial industry and on par with the intelligence
community for top-level talent. The provision would also
require the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to establish a or
augment an existing program, using such talent, to: (1) Develop
accesses, tools, vulnerabilities, and tactics, techniques, and
procedures (TTPs) fit for military operations; (2) Decrease the
reliance of the Command on accesses, tools, and expertise
provided by the intelligence community; and (3) Coordinate
development activities with and facilitate transition of
capabilities from the DARPA, SCO, and intelligence community.
The committee strongly believes that, in order to develop
capabilities and execute the missions envisioned in the
National Defense Strategy and 2018 Department of Defense Cyber
Strategy, Cyber Command must bolster the expertise resident in
the Command. Today, Cyber Command is largely reliant on the
technical expertise of the National Security Agency (NSA), the
Defense Information Systems Agency, and, to a lesser extent,
the Department of Defense's research and engineering community.
Cyber Command's operations, for example, are modeled after
the intelligence operations of the NSA, often relying on
tailored or signals intelligence-derived access. This means
that Cyber Command is frequently reliant on intelligence
community-provided access, which makes Cyber Command a
dependent of intelligence community partners that prize these
accesses for their own missions. These Cyber Command operations
also typically use NSA-developed tools and TTPs, which
prioritize stealth and are often more precise and exacting than
is strictly necessary for Cyber Command effects operations.
The committee believes that the inability to attract and
retain technical experts based on the available pay scale is
one substantial barrier to reducing this reliance and thus
intends for this provision to bolster the technical expertise
available in-house to the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, and
for these experts to facilitate the development of access and
capabilities for which Cyber Command is reliant on others
today.
Implementation of information operations matters (sec. 1640)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
availability of specified funds until the Secretary of Defense
submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives the report required by subsection
(h)(1) of section 1631 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and the strategy
and posture review required by subsection (g) of such section.
Report on Cyber Institutes Program (sec. 1641)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1640 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) by
requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit a report, by
September 30, 2021, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the effectiveness of
Cyber Institutes and on opportunities to expand Cyber
Institutes to additional institutions of higher learning that
have a Reserve Officers' Training Corps program.
Assistance for small manufacturers in the defense industrial supply
chain on matters relating to cybersecurity (sec. 1642)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, to award
financial assistance to Manufacturing Extension Program centers
for the purpose of providing cybersecurity services to small
manufacturers.
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces
Modification to responsibilities of Nuclear Weapons Council (sec. 1651)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide to
the Nuclear Weapons Council the authority to review proposed
capabilities and validate requirements for nuclear warhead
programs.
Responsibility of Nuclear Weapons Council in preparation of National
Nuclear Security Administration budget (sec. 1652)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
role of the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) in the planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution process of the National
Nuclear Security Administration, including by specifying NWC
participation at each stage of preparing the budget.
Modification of Government Accountability Office review of annual
reports on nuclear weapons enterprise (sec. 1653)
The committee recommends a provision that would better
align the Government Accountability Office review of the annual
report on the nuclear weapons enterprise required by section
492a of title 10, United States Code, commonly known as the
``1043 Report,'' with the schedule for submission of that
report.
Prohibition on reduction of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of
the United States (sec. 1654)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2021 funds to
reduce deployed U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles'
responsiveness, alert level, or quantity to fewer than 400. The
provision would provide an exception to this prohibition for
activities related to maintenance and sustainment and
activities to ensure safety, security, or reliability.
Sense of the Senate on nuclear cooperation between the United States
and the United Kingdom (sec. 1655)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate on nuclear cooperation between the United
States and the United Kingdom.
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli cooperative
missile defense program co-development and co-production (sec.
1661)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
not more than $73.0 million for the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) to provide to the Government of Israel to procure
components for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system
through co-production of such components in the United States.
The provision would also authorize $50.0 million for the MDA to
provide to the Government of Israel for the procurement of the
David's Sling Weapon System and $77.0 million for the Arrow 3
Upper Tier Interceptor Program, including for co-production of
parts and components in the United States by U.S. industry. The
provision would also provide a series of certification
requirements relating to implementation of the below relevant
bilateral agreements before disbursal of these funds. These
funds are a subset of the $500.0 million total authorized to be
appropriated for cooperative missile defense programs with
Israel within this Act.
The committee acknowledges that the September 14, 2016,
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the United States and
Israel commits $500.0 million in U.S. funding for cooperative
missile defense programs annually, beginning in fiscal year
2019 and ending in fiscal year 2028. According to the MOU, the
United States and Israel jointly understand that any U.S. funds
provided for such programs should be made available according
to separate bilateral agreements for the Iron Dome, David's
Sling, and Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program and should
maximize co-production of parts and components in the United
States at a level equal to or greater than 50 percent of U.S.-
appropriated funds for production. Additionally, Israel commits
not to seek additional missile defense funding from the United
States for the duration of the MOU, except in exceptional
circumstances as may be jointly agreed by the United States and
Israel. The committee expects to continue to receive annual
updates on all cooperative defense programs, as delineated in
the MOU, to include progress reports and spending plans as well
as the top-line figures of the Israel Missile Defense
Organization budget for these programs.
Acceleration of the deployment of hypersonic and ballistic tracking
space sensor payload (sec. 1662)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to assign primary responsibility for the
development and deployment of a hypersonic and ballistic
tracking space sensor (HBTSS) payload to the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) through the end of fiscal year
2022. It would also require the Secretary to determine whether
responsibility for the development and deployment of an HBTSS
payload should transition to the U.S. Space Force after fiscal
year 2022 and, if such a determination is made, submit a
transition plan along with the determination.
The provision would also require the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) and the Director, Cost Assessment and
Program Evaluation, to submit a certification with the fiscal
year 2022 budget request as to whether the HBTSS program is
sufficiently funded in the future years defense program and
would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of more than 50
percent of funds authorized to be appropriated for travel of
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering until that certification is submitted.
The provision would also require the Director of the MDA to
begin on-orbit testing of an HBTSS payload no later than
December 31, 2022. Finally, the provision would require the
Chair of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) to
submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment of
whether the various Department of Defense efforts for space-
based sensing and tracking are aligned with JROC-validated
requirements.
Extension of prohibition relating to missile defense information and
systems (sec. 1663)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through 2026 the limitations on providing certain sensitive
missile defense information to the Russian Federation and on
integrating missile defense systems of the Russian Federation
and the People's Republic of China into those of the United
States.
Report on and limitation on expenditure of funds for layered homeland
missile defense system (sec. 1664)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees no later than March 1,
2021, on the layered homeland missile defense system proposed
in the President's fiscal year 2021 budget request. The report
would include cost estimates, schedule options, requirements,
and an analysis of possible architecture solutions, in addition
to relevant policy considerations. The provision would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of more than 50 percent of fiscal
year 2021 funds authorized for this purpose until the required
report is submitted.
The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts
to seek additional homeland missile defense coverage in the
mid-2020s; however, the committee notes that the Department has
provided very little information or analysis to support this
proposal, despite including substantial funding within the MDA
budget for this purpose. The $260.0 million as requested is
authorized elsewhere in this Act.
Extension of requirement for Comptroller General review and assessment
of missile defense acquisition programs (sec. 1665)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through 2026 the requirement originally contained in section
232(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81), as amended, for the Comptroller
General of the United States to review the Missile Defense
Agency's acquisition programs. The provision would also allow
the Comptroller General to identify related emerging issues in
this area and provide briefings or reports to the congressional
defense committees as necessary.
Repeal of requirement for reporting structure of Missile Defense Agency
(sec. 1666)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
requirement in section 205 of title 10, United States Code, for
the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to report to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. The
provision would not mandate an alternative organizational
location for the MDA.
Ground-based midcourse defense interim capability (sec. 1667)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a program to develop an
interim ground-based interceptor (GBI) capability with delivery
of 20 new interceptors by 2026. The Secretary would be able to
waive this requirement under certain circumstances, in which
case the provision would require a report to the congressional
defense committees explaining the rationale for the decision,
an estimate of projected rogue nation threats to the U.S.
homeland, and an updated schedule for the development and
deployment of the Next Generation Interceptor. The Secretary
would only be permitted to delegate this waiver authority to
the Deputy Secretary of Defense if the Secretary is recused.
Finally, the provision would require the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency to submit the funding profile required
for an interim GBI program along with the budget request for
fiscal year 2022.
Items of Special Interest
Bi-static radar
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
focus on bi-static radars. These radars can perform important
functions for the Joint Force, including early warning, queuing
for sensors, and potentially detection of hypersonic weapons.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, in consultation with the Director of
the Defense Intelligence Agency, to submit a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, no later than March 3, 2021, on: (1) The use
and development of these radars globally; and (2) How these
systems are currently used in the Department of Defense and
their potential to be used across the future years defense
program.
Clearance process for National Nuclear Security Administration
employees and contractors working on the Long Range Stand Off
Weapon
The acquisition of the Long Range Stand Off Weapon (LRSO)
is a joint effort between the Department of the Air Force for
the airframe and the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) for the W80-4 warhead. Synchronization between the Air
Force and the NNSA is critical for the success of this program.
In order to maintain this synchronization, NNSA employees and
contractors must be able to obtain timely clearances to work
with the Air Force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Administrator of the NNSA, to
brief the congressional defense committees no later than
February 28, 2021, on the process underway for clearing NNSA
employees and contractors into the LRSO program in a timely
fashion to avoid programmatic delays. The briefing shall
include details on the backlog at the time of the briefing, the
estimated time to clearance, and the future number and types of
clearances required beyond the backlog that already exists.
Comptroller General review of Department of Defense Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification implementation
The committee recognizes the risk that malicious cyber
actors pose to the Department of Defense defense industrial
base (DIB) and the broader commercial sector. The National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) included a provision directing the Secretary of Defense to
develop a framework to enhance the cybersecurity of the DIB.
The committee is aware of the steps the Department has taken to
strengthen the cybersecurity of its contractors over the last
year. However, the committee has concerns about aspects of the
Department's plans to incorporate the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification (CMMC) as a procurement requirement in
certain contracts beginning in 2020 and in all contracts by
2026. Specifically, the committee is concerned about how the
Department will provide oversight of the certification process
to control contract and acquisition costs and ensure that,
while enhancing cybersecurity, the requirement does not create
unnecessary barriers to competitiveness, particularly for small
businesses.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the Department's implementation of
the CMMC program and assess the extent to which the CMMC
framework is positioned to meet its stated goals and the
appropriate requirements for the DIB framework specified in
section 1648 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). This evaluation should
incorporate perspectives of companies across the defense
industrial base and include analysis of the Department's
oversight responsibilities, the role of nongovernmental
entities in managing and executing the program, and assessment
of the Department's incorporation of lessons learned from the
pilot programs. The Comptroller General should also assess the
Department's plans to expand the requirement to all contracts
and associated costs and the steps the Department has taken to
ensure a consistent acquisition approach across all military
services and components. The committee directs the Comptroller
General to brief preliminary observations to the congressional
defense committees no later than May 31, 2021, with a final
report to follow on a mutually agreed date.
Comptroller General review of the Air Force's nuclear certification
program
Under Air Force Instruction 63-125 (dated January 16,
2020), Air Force nuclear certification occurs ``when a
determination is made by the Air Force that procedures,
equipment, software, and facilities are sufficient to perform
nuclear weapon functions and personnel and organizations are
capable of performing assigned nuclear missions.''
Implementation of this direction is particularly important in
order to ensure that nuclear certification and its requirements
are synchronized during the engineering and manufacturing
development phase of nuclear-capable weapons system
acquisitions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the implementation of Air Force
Instruction 63-125, in order to determine the extent to which
the Air Force has: (1) Allocated sufficient personnel to
implement the Instruction within current and future nuclear
acquisition programs; (2) Synchronized requirements generated
by the certification process with requirements within the
acquisition programs themselves; and (3) Applied lessons
learned on staffing from ongoing acquisition programs to ensure
that future nuclear modernization programs are not encumbered
by the certification process.
The Comptroller General shall provide an initial briefing
to the congressional defense committees no later than February
26, 2021, with a final report to be provided on a date mutually
agreeable to both parties.
Continued Comptroller General review of Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent program
Over the next decade, the Department of the Air Force will
continue to design, develop, and field the Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) to replace the fielded Minuteman III
intercontinental ballistic missile. Regular and sustained
reviews by the Government Accountability Office, as established
by the Senate report accompanying S. 2943 (S. Rept. 114-255) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017,
have been essential to congressional oversight of this program.
Accordingly, to ensure that this review process continues,
the committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to continue these reviews until the program reaches
Milestone C, and to brief the congressional defense committees
on a periodic basis mutually agreeable to both parties.
Continued Comptroller General review of nuclear command, control, and
communications systems
The modernization of nuclear command, control, and
communications systems includes three major activities:
maintaining the current equipment and architecture, acquiring
replacements for elements of the existing architecture in the
next decade, and developing a new architecture to be fielded
over the next several decades. Over the past several years, the
Government Accountability Office has conducted a regular review
of these efforts to inform the congressional defense committees
on the progress that the Department of Defense has made in
achieving these three goals.
To ensure that the committee continues to benefit from this
information, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to continue these reviews through fiscal year
2023, and to brief the congressional defense committees on a
periodic basis mutually agreeable to both parties.
Coordination and oversight of the Joint Cyber Warfighting Architecture
components
The committee is aware that the major components of the
Joint Cyber Warfighting Architecture (JCWA) are being designed
and developed by service executive agents. The committee also
understands that the JCWA is a unique ``system of systems''--a
collection of programs not under the control of a single
acquisition executive--and that each of these programs serves
the Joint Force. The customer for the capabilities of the JCWA
components is not a single service but rather the Cyber
Operations Forces as a whole, and the Commander, U.S. Cyber
Command, is responsible for the requirements of capabilities to
be used by the Cyber Operations Forces.
The committee is concerned that there is not adequate
oversight and coordination of the JCWA component program
offices and believes that deliberate oversight must be
exercised to ensure that acquisition priorities and objectives
are aligned to Cyber Command mission needs. Furthermore, the
lack of overall systems engineering and systems integration
authorities and competencies for the JCWA as a whole are
inconsistent with sound systems acquisition practice.
Therefore, the committee directs the Principal Cyber
Advisor (PCA), no later than December 1, 2020, in consultation
with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, the Chief Information Officer, the Commander, U.S.
Cyber Command, and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, to develop a governance plan for coordination and
oversight of the JCWA. The governance plan shall include: (1) A
structure and process to enable the proper integration of the
JCWA components as a functional system of systems that can
readily adapt to cyber mission needs; and (2) A mechanism to
ensure that the JCWA component program offices are responsive
to the needs of the Joint Force as represented by Cyber
Command. The committee directs the PCA and the Commander, U.S.
Cyber Command, to brief the congressional defense committees no
later than December 1, 2020, on the governance plan and its
planned implementation.
Cyber training capabilities for the Department of Defense
The committee is aware of the growing need for different
types of cybersecurity training in the Department of Defense
for personnel outside of the Cyber Mission Forces (CMF).
Examples of cybersecurity training includes that for: civilians
in the Cyber Excepted Service (CES) personnel system engaged in
cybersecurity roles and missions, personnel in the
Cybersecurity Service Provider (CSSP) organizations, and cloud
security personnel. The committee is aware of the Persistent
Cyber Training Environment (PCTE), a training environment that
has been developed primarily to meet the needs of the CMF. The
committee is concerned that the Department requires additional
cybersecurity training and assessment capabilities to meet the
diverse training needs of the Department. The committee
believes that the Department requires modern, scalable, and
affordable automated means to evaluate the expertise of
prospective employees, establish individualized training for
existing employees, test the proficiency of employees post-
training, and assess readiness to address this growing need.
Therefore, the committee directs the Principal Cyber
Advisor, in coordination with the Director of Cost Assessment
and Program Evaluation and the Chief Information Officer, not
later than February 1, 2021, to provide to the congressional
defense committees a briefing on the enhanced cybersecurity
training needs of the Department of Defense and viable
solutions to meet those needs. The briefing shall include: an
overview of the training requirements of CES personnel, CSSP
organizations, and cloud security personnel; an assessment of
the applicability of PCTE capabilities to these requirements;
and an assessment of alternative methods to meet these
requirements, including commercial cloud-based solutions.
Cyber vulnerability of the Air Force Satellite Control Network
The Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) commands
and controls a large array of national security satellites.
Like many other systems in the Department of Defense, the
network was first deployed well before there was a full
understanding of the current cyber threats and necessary
cybersecurity protections. Given the importance of the AFSCN,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 31, 2021, on the cyber vulnerability of the AFSCN
for both ground and space elements and how continuous
assessment and mitigation of these vulnerabilities are being
included in broader Air Force efforts to address cyber
vulnerabilities. Additionally, the briefing should address what
resources would be required over the next 5 years to adequately
protect the AFSCN.
Demonstration of interoperability and automated orchestration of
cybersecurity systems
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to sponsor a
demonstration of commercial technologies and techniques for
enabling interoperability among cybersecurity systems and tools
and for machine-to-machine communications and automated
workflow orchestration. This demonstration should include
comply-to-connect products, the Assured Compliance Assessment
Solution, the Automated Continuous Endpoint Monitoring program,
the Sharkseer perimeter defense system, and other Department of
Defense cybersecurity systems. The committee urges the
Secretary to coordinate this demonstration with the speed
metrics pilot and the demonstration of the Systems of Systems
Technology Integration Tool Chain for Heterogeneous Electronic
Systems interoperability technology recommended elsewhere in
this report.
In executing this demonstration, the committee urges the
Secretary to make effective use of the expertise and resources
of the National Security Agency Integrated Adaptive Cyber
Defense program and the University Affiliated Research Center
(the Applied Research Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins
University) that supports this program. The committee also
encourages the Department to consider the common messaging
fabrics and orchestration technologies enabled by them when
acquiring additional tools and establishing new cybersecurity
capabilities at all tiers of the Department of Defense
Information Network (DODIN); these orchestration technologies
are only as useful as their input technologies, and the
Department must evaluate products for ease-of-integration
during the source selection process.
The committee understands that the critical cybersecurity
development programs and tools that will constitute the
Department's future Joint Cybersecurity Warfighting
Architecture, such as the Joint Cyber Command and Control
system and the Unified Platform, are not currently engineered
to automatically connect to the plethora of other Department of
Defense cybersecurity systems, which are themselves not
connected, via any of the messaging fabrics that are now
commonplace in industry. The committee believes that
orchestration technologies will be a critical component of the
future DODIN architecture and encourages the Department to
exercise foresight by undertaking the engineering work,
acquisitions, and standardization required to integrate these
programs and technologies.
The committee directs the Secretary to brief the
congressional defense committees on the plans for the
demonstration by March 15, 2021, and the results of the
demonstration by December 15, 2021.
Department of Defense cyber hygiene
The committee is aware that the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has recently assessed the
Department of Defense's (DOD's) progress in implementing cyber
hygiene practices and found that the DOD had not fully
implemented three of its key initiatives and practices aimed at
improving cyber hygiene. The DOD had also developed lists of
its adversaries' most frequently used techniques and practices
to combat them. Nevertheless, the DOD does not know the extent
to which DOD components are using these practices.
The committee is concerned that, while DOD leadership
recognizes that certain cyber hygiene and other basic
cybersecurity practices could effectively protect the
Department from a significant number of cybersecurity risks,
the Department has not fully implemented its own cybersecurity
practices. The committee is aware that the DOD plans to require
private sector companies to meet certain cybersecurity
requirements through the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) framework, but the committee is aware that
the DOD components' cybersecurity practices and capabilities
frequently lag behind those of commercial companies. The
committee is not aware of any DOD Chief Information Officer
(CIO) intention to assess its own cybersecurity practices
against the CMMC framework, meaning that the DOD CIO is
potentially holding contractors to a higher standard than DOD
components.
Given the importance of implementing cybersecurity
practices that could effectively protect DOD missions,
information, systems, and networks, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, through the DOD CIO and the Commander,
Joint Forces Headquarters-Department of Defense Information
Network, to assess each DOD component against the CMMC
framework and submit a report, no later than March 1, 2021, to
the congressional defense committees that identifies each
component's CMMC level and implementation of the cybersecurity
practices and capabilities required in each of the levels of
the CMMC framework. The report shall include, for each DOD
component that does not achieve at least level 3 status
(referred to as ``good cyber hygiene'' in CMMC Model ver.
1.02), a determination as to whether and details as to how: (1)
The component will implement relevant security measures to
achieve a desired CMMC or other appropriate capability and
performance threshold prior to March 1, 2022; and (2) The
component will mitigate potential risks until those practices
and capabilities are implemented.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
review this report of the Secretary of Defense and provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees no later than
180 days after its submission to the Congress.
Department of Defense network external visibility
The committee applauds Fleet Cyber Command and Army Cyber
Command for using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions for
improved management of Internet connections and activity, which
include capabilities for continuous discovery, monitoring, and
management of Navy and Army Internet-facing and Internet-
connected systems and assets and their activities on the
Internet. These COTS services observe networks from the outside
as assets communicate on the Internet, which enables network
managers to understand what their external attacks surfaces
look like and how elements of their networks behave externally.
From this vantage point, it is possible to detect previously
unknown compromises, unsanctioned connections and
configurations, vulnerabilities, and threat activity.
The Department of Defense (DOD) lacks a similar
comprehensive understanding of the Internet-connected assets
and attack surface across the DOD enterprise; the committee
notes in this regard that the DOD only recently discovered that
it has twice as many managed connections to the Internet as it
thought it did--connections established and maintained by
components that were not protected like the other sanctioned
Internet Access Points managed by the Defense Information
Systems Agency. Despite strides made by Joint Force
Headquarters-Departments of Defense Information Network (JFHQ-
DODIN) in improving its enterprise-wide visibility of DOD
networks, DOD networks are controlled by individual components,
with JFHQ-DODIN deriving most of its situational awareness from
component reporting. The committee believes that it is critical
that JFHQ-DODIN achieve real-time visibility over all DOD
networks; adoption of COTS solutions at the enterprise-level
offers one solution for providing this enterprise capability.
The committee therefore directs the Commander, JFHQ-DODIN,
to provide a briefing, no later than March 1, 2021, on the
Department's plans for Internet operations management,
including: (1) The role that existing DOD systems and
capabilities can play in discovering, monitoring, and managing
DOD Internet behavior; (2) The potential further acquisition
and use of COTS solutions for Internet operations management;
and (3) JFHQ-DODIN's current and planned capabilities and
concept of operations for Internet operations management,
including the specific responsibilities of DOD components and
the headquarters in performing Internet operations management.
Ground vehicle cybersecurity
As the Department of Defense (DOD) undertakes ground
vehicle modernization efforts, the committee believes that it
is important that the Department implement robust cybersecurity
standards and practices during the design process. The
committee believes that cybersecurity considerations are of
particular importance, given modernization efforts in
autonomous driving technology and artificial intelligence:
cybersecurity must be a foundational consideration as the
Department introduces optionally-manned and autonomous
platforms into its fleet of ground vehicles. The committee also
believes that the Department should work with industry to apply
the best practices and lessons learned from the U.S. commercial
automotive industry to develop DOD-specific cyber requirements,
including those germane to sourcing of suppliers, vehicle
fielding, and sustainment activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing on ground vehicle cybersecurity to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than March 31, 2021. The briefing
shall include the following: (1) An overall assessment of
ground vehicle cybersecurity, to include current capabilities
and related vulnerabilities, cybersecurity design and
manufacturing concerns, and associated supply chain issues; (2)
Identification of available DOD and commercial automotive
cybersecurity technologies that could improve the cybersecurity
of DOD's existing fleet of ground vehicles as well as inform
the cybersecurity design and production requirements for new
ground vehicle programs; (3) Identification of internal and
external ground vehicle communication capabilities to enable
predictive maintenance, vehicle sustainment planning, remote
updating, and cybersecurity protections; and (4) Identification
of ground vehicle cybersecurity best practices from both the
DOD and commercial automotive industry and processes to
incorporate these best practices into existing DOD ground
vehicles and the production of new ones. Where appropriate,
this briefing should consider ground vehicles as integrated
systems-of-systems that include automotive components from
vendors, platform integration components from integrators, and
mission equipment from government sources.
Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii
The committee notes that section 1680 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
92) required the Department of Defense to improve missile
defense coverage against ballistic missile threats to Hawaii
and to protect the operations of the Pacific Missile Range
Facility. As a result, the Director of the Missile Defense
Agency (MDA) initiated development of the Homeland Defense
Radar-Hawaii (HDR-H) to fulfill this requirement. The HDR-H was
designed to significantly increase the ability of the Ground
Based Interceptors and other missile defense elements to defend
Hawaii against rapidly evolving threats of increased size and
complexity and to contribute to the overall sensor architecture
supporting the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System. This
program was supported by several combatant commanders in
testimony to the committee.
Therefore, the committee is deeply concerned by the
Department's decision to not request funding for the HDR-H in
fiscal year 2021 and notes that this program was included on
the unfunded priorities list submitted by the Commander, U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command. Elsewhere in this report, the committee
recommends a restoration of funding to support continuation of
this crucial program. Additionally, the committee urges the
Department to continue to execute all fiscal year 2020
requirements in support of the HDR-H, consistent with the
fiscal year 2020 defense authorization and appropriations acts.
The committee acknowledges that siting issues have caused
delays and that the September 30, 2023, completion date, as
outlined in section 1687 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232),
may no longer be achievable. Therefore, the committee directs
the Director of the MDA to provide a revised plan to the
committee no later than December 1, 2020, that describes an
updated timeline for completion, to include site selection,
radar procurement, and construction, and to brief the committee
on a semi-annual basis thereafter on the program's progress
until deployment of the radar. Finally, the committee expects
the Department to submit an adequate funding profile for this
program in subsequent budget requests.
Hybrid space infrastructure
The committee is aware of the growing advances and
proliferation of commercial capability in space-based
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance collection.
Therefore, in order to take advantage of the emerging U.S.
commercial space-based radio frequency (RF) geospatial
intelligence and RF data collection capabilities and address
existing combatant command requirements, the committee
encourages the Space Force to take full advantage of these
capabilities to augment organic assets.
Integrated Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent test plan
The Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) weapon system
is scheduled to reach a Milestone B decision in the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2020, with an estimated first flight of
the missile in the mid-2020s and fielding around 2030. Between
first flight and fielding, extensive testing must occur, which
is an inherently governmental activity. The Air Force, the
vendor awarded the GSBD contract, and the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA), which will produce the warhead
and Joint Test Assemblies, must all be synchronized across the
test campaign, which will likely utilize Vandenberg Air Force
Base and the Ronald Reagan Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll in the
Marshall Islands. While both locations have been involved in
steady state testing of the Minuteman III, the United States
has not conducted a concerted test campaign of a new
intercontinental ballistic missile weapons system since the
Peacekeeper was tested in the 1980s--more than 40 years prior
to initial testing of GBSD.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Director of Operational Test
and Evaluation, to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than February 26, 2021, on the
planned test campaign for the GBSD weapons system, including
the Test and Evaluation Master Plan.
The report shall also include: (1) Critical test milestones
integrated between the Air Force, the NNSA, and the contractor;
(2) Cybersecurity milestones; (3) Estimated costs; (4) Specific
facilities, included those requiring military construction; and
(5) Any actions that will be required under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq) and
the timing for completing those actions.
Long range launch and range complexes
The committee continues to recognize and encourage the use
of launch and range complexes for long-range hypersonic flight
tests as well as supporting national security space launch
priorities. The committee recognizes the importance of rapid
development and testing of hypersonic capabilities and the
efforts of the Test Resource Management Center (TRMC) to
accelerate the development of launch and downrange tracking
facilities, new range complexes such as the Aleutian Test
Range, and other U.S.-based long range corridors to support
robust testing of both offensive and defensive hypersonic
weapons. Additionally, the committee recognizes that certain
launch facilities, including the Pacific Spaceport Complex--
Alaska, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, and Oklahoma Air
and Space Port, are available to meet the requirements of the
national security space programs of the United States Space
Force, Operationally Responsive Space Office, Missile Defense
Agency, and other Department of Defense components. The
committee notes that these facilities and complexes could
improve the resiliency of U.S. launch infrastructure and help
ensure consistent access to space to support national security
space priorities and the testing of hypersonic weapons.
Maintain independence of Space Rapid Capabilities Office
The committee recognizes the rapidly evolving nature of
space technology and the need for the United States to remain
at the cutting edge of research and development in the space
domain. To meet this need, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) specifically
mandated that the Space Rapid Capabilities Office (Space RCO)
maintain a separate organizational form, distinct from
mainstream space acquisition organizations and with unique
authorities and a direct reporting chain to the Chief of Space
Operations. These characteristics have allowed and will
continue to allow the Space RCO to push the bounds of
performance and rapidly develop and field space capabilities at
the best cost to the taxpayer. Space RCO's statutorily required
mission is codified in section 2273(a) of title 10, United
States Code. Therefore, the committee encourages the Space
Force to ensure that Congress' statutorily mandated requirement
that the Space RCO remain a separate entity is adhered to as
the Space Force continues to lay out its structure and
organization in the near and medium terms.
Matters on Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification in annual
briefings on status of framework on cybersecurity for the
United States defense industrial base
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives no later than December 1, 2020, on
the status of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
(CMMC) implementation. The briefing shall be provided annually
until December 1, 2026. The briefings shall contain the
following information: (1) The current status of mechanisms
within the Department of Defense's CMMC framework for fraud
prevention, bid protest, and dispute resolution; (2) The
current status of processes within the framework for supporting
small businesses in achieving and maintaining certification
under the CMMC; (3) The current status of measures within the
framework to ensure that businesses have fair and timely access
to assessments in connection with the CMMC; (4) The overall
status of CMMC implementation, including disaggregated data on
the number of military service and component contracts modified
to include the CMMC requirements; and (5) The number of
contractors, per industry code and level of CMMC, that have
received certification.
Microelectronics for national security space
The committee has serious concerns about the availability
of radiation-hardened, space qualified microelectronics for
critical national security space programs. A number of critical
space systems currently in development incorporate 45 nm
components in their designs, and a loss of supply for these
components could result in increased costs, schedule delays,
and an erosion of space-based operational capabilities.
However, the committee understands that the sole remaining
source of these wafers intends to cease production of wafers
for new designs at the end of 2020 and to cease production for
legacy designs by the end of 2022. While the committee is aware
of evolving plans to meet the Nation's long-term need for
radiation-hardened microelectronics, the committee remains
concerned that alternative strategies may not be in place in
time to avoid the potential harmful effects of a disruption in
supply.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics, to submit to the congressional
defense committees a report, not later than December 1, 2020,
assessing the anticipated customer demand for 45 nm wafers and
options, including an end-of-life buy, to ensure that
sufficient supply is available.
Missile field ground support vehicles
The Air Force's Northern Tier intercontinental ballistic
missile fields cover large land areas, requiring many all-
weather capable ground vehicles. Operations, maintenance, and
especially security forces airmen travel long distances to
launch facilities in Bearcats and Humvees, some of which have
already been heavily used in Afghanistan and which can
accumulate tens of thousands of miles annually on unimproved
roads. The Air Force has committed to procuring the Joint Light
Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) to replace both the Humvee and the
Bearcat, but questions remain about the suitability of this
vehicle to the mission.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report, not later than February 26, 2021, to
the congressional defense committees on: (1) The planned
acquisition schedule of the JLTV by missile wing; (2)
Additional outfitting of the JLTV required for the missile
field mission, including whether these additions would be
before or after delivery; (3) Planned operational testing of
the JLTV for this mission; (4) Per unit cost of the JLTV in its
final operational state; (5) Lifetime per unit cost comparison
with a generic armed sport utility vehicle (SUV), taking into
account the commercial market for spares; and (6) Which
requirements, if any, the JLTV would be able to meet for this
mission that an armored SUV would not.
Missile warning and sensor integration for the Integrated Tactical
Warning and Attack Assessment system
Section 1669 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) required the Secretary of
the Air Force to submit to the congressional defense committees
a plan specifying a single lead major command to manage the
Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment System as a
weapons system consistent with Air Force Policy Directive 10-9,
titled ``Lead Command Designation and Responsibilities for
Weapon Systems,'' dated March 8, 2007. That plan, ``Air Force
Plan to Manage Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack
Assessment (ITW/AA) System and Multi-Domain Sensors,'' was
delivered to the congressional defense committees in February
2019.
The committee further expressed support for, and concern
about, this effort in the Senate report accompanying S. 1790
(S. Rept. 116-48) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020, requiring status briefings on the
implementation of this plan on March 1, 2020, and September 31,
2020.
Given the importance of this mission, as well as the
creation of U.S. Space Command as the combatant command
responsible for this mission and related sensor integration,
the committee directs the Commander, U.S. Space Command, in
consultation with the Commander, U.S. Northern Command, to
brief the congressional defense committees by February 28,
2021, on the Commander's assessment of the progress being made
to implement this plan and additional measures needed to ensure
that the ITW/AA system is modernized and can utilize non-ITW/AA
certified sensors to make an assessment of an attack on the
homeland.
In particular, the committee is concerned about the
modernization of the Combatant Commanders Integrated Command
and Control System (CICCS), which resides in Cheyenne Mountain
and is the principal ITW/AA correlation system for validating
ITW/AA outputs. This system, which is relying on outdated
software from the 1990s, must be modernized consistent with
other battle management and control systems found within the
Space Force.
As part of the briefing to the congressional defense
committees, the committee directs the Commander, U.S. Space
Command, to provide information on the status of incorporating
modern intelligence assessments into the correlation process
through the installation of Joint Worldwide Intelligence
Communications Systems terminals in the Cheyenne Mountain
facility.
National Cyber Security University
The committee recognizes that an increase in national
cybersecurity education, training, and workforce development
efforts is necessary for the protection and advancement of U.S.
national and economic security in the face of multiple advanced
persistent cyber threats. The committee supports the further
development of a university consortium with well-established
education and research programs in cybersecurity and critical
infrastructure protection, designated by the Department of
Homeland Security and National Security Agency as Centers of
Academic Excellence for cyber operations and cyber defense, and
ongoing cybersecurity and critical infrastructure
collaborations with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency as effective means to accomplish these
workforce development objectives. The committee notes that a
consortium that is reflective of and responsive to the Nation's
diversity (rural, minority, and veteran populations) will build
and amplify a non-traditional workforce, including through
technical training and apprenticeships.
Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared system
The committee supports the Air Force's plan to transition
from the legacy Space-Based Infrared System program by
developing a Block 0 constellation consisting of three
geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) satellites and two polar earth
orbit satellites. The committee supports the development of all
aspects of the Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared
system. The committee expects that the acquisition approach
meets all operational requirements and is responsive to rapidly
evolving adversary threat capabilities and operational plans.
The committee encourages the Air Force to ensure that funding
for the distinct projects are executed in accordance with the
budget request.
Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Enterprise Center
The committee continues to support U.S. Strategic Command's
Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Enterprise Center
(STRATCOM NEC) and believes that the sustainment and
modernization of the Nation's nuclear command, control, and
communications (NC3) architecture is a critical element of the
Department of Defense's most important mission: nuclear
deterrence. Given the diversity of systems and technology
within the NC3 enterprise, success in this effort will involve
input and cooperation from a variety of outside stakeholders,
including commercial industry. Additionally, innovative
modeling tools and concepts utilized by industry have the
potential to accelerate efforts through enhanced simulation and
testing.
Therefore, the committee directs STRATCOM to include in its
next briefing to the congressional defense committees on the
plan for future systems-level architecture of the NC3 systems,
as required by section 1679 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), a
description of the participation of federally funded research
and development centers, university associated research
centers, and commercial industry in the development of this
architecture so far, as well as an assessment of the potential
application of commercial industry modeling and simulation
practices, such as the creation of a ``digital twin,'' to the
NC3 enterprise.
Options for the future of the B83-1 gravity bomb
The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review required the National
Nuclear Security Administration to sustain the B83-1 gravity
bomb past its planned retirement date until a suitable
replacement is identified. The committee understands that the
Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) is currently reviewing options to
further sustain, life extend, or retire the B83 and will make
this decision in time to inform the fiscal year 2022 budget
submission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the NWC,
in consultation with the other members of the Council, to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than October 1, 2020, on options for the future of the
B83, including notional cost and schedule for a life extension
program as well as which targets would no longer be held at
risk if no suitable replacement can be fielded before its
retirement.
Organic space capability
The committee is aware of continued discussions within the
Department of Defense regarding the transfer of personnel and
missions from the various military services to the United
States Space Force. The committee understands that each
military service will require expertise in space, whether
organic to the service or as a liaison element from the Space
Force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, in consultation with the service chiefs, to
report no later than October 31, 2020, to the congressional
defense committees what missions and expertise should remain
resident and resourced within each service and whether those
missions require organic or liaised Space Force personnel.
Pilot program for improving the cybersecurity of disadvantaged small
businesses in the defense industrial base
The committee is aware that small and medium-sized
businesses in the defense industrial base (DIB) are justifiably
concerned about their ability to meet increasing cybersecurity
requirements for the protection of Department of Defense (DOD)
information and operations. One approach that is much discussed
for facilitating companies' meeting the new standards is to
enable them to store and work with DOD data in a protected
cloud that meets stringent security accreditation requirements.
While this concept could help many companies, for others it
would still be difficult to meet the remaining requirements for
on-premise security, as they lack the expertise, resources, and
access to services that could assist them. The committee notes
that extending the cloud-based architecture for providing
secure storage, processing, and transmission of controlled
unclassified information through thin-client, virtual desktop
technology would make compliance substantially easier and more
efficient.
A complicating factor in some areas, particularly outside
the contiguous United States (OCONUS), is the lack of locally-
based accredited commercial cloud facilities, which results in
latencies that make thin-client connections impractical.
The committee is aware that Department of Commerce
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) offices are working
with small and medium-sized DIB companies to develop options
for local high-bandwidth hosting and computing environments
that meet DOD security requirements and are capable of
supporting thin-client operations. The committee, therefore,
directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, in coordination with the MEP offices, to conduct a
pilot program to establish a secure hosting environment that
supports thin-client services to enable DIB companies to meet
most DOD cybersecurity requirements. The pilot program should
assess this approach as a model for OCONUS states and
territories without local accredited cloud regions as well as
to offer thin-client solutions to CONUS-based companies with
access to local enterprise cloud services that meet DOD
security standards. The committee directs the Under Secretary
to provide a briefing on the conduct of this pilot, together
with conclusions and recommendations, to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by December 1, 2022.
Progress regarding cybersecurity framework for the defense industrial
base
The committee included a provision in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) that
required the Secretary of Defense to develop a consistent,
comprehensive framework to enhance the cybersecurity of the
U.S. defense industrial base. The committee recognizes the
release of version 1.0 of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) in January 2020 and is pleased with the
progress that has been made in quickly developing and
establishing a program to assess the cybersecurity of the
defense industrial base (DIB).
The committee believes that the development of an
accreditation standard like CMMC is the foundation for the
framework that is required to enhance DIB cybersecurity and
commends the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment for its diligent outreach to
Department of Defense (DOD) stakeholders, University Affiliated
Research Centers, Federally Funded Research and Development
Centers, and industry during the development of the CMMC. The
committee encourages the Department to continue to work with
these stakeholders, including small businesses and
manufacturers, as it begins to include CMMC requirements in
upcoming requests for proposals so as to ensure the robust
communication of requirements and expectations.
However, the committee is concerned that many of the other
components of the required framework for improving the
cybersecurity of the DIB have not materialized as quickly as
the CMMC element. The committee believes that addressing the
cybersecurity of the DIB will require a multi-faceted strategy
to ensure an effective approach that does not represent an
overly difficult burden to small and medium-sized businesses.
The committee is also concerned that aspects of the framework
are being developed independently in different organizations
across the Department without centralized leadership or
coordination.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department, led by
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment
and coordinated by the Principal Cyber Advisor, to accelerate
progress on some of the other complementary and equally
important aspects of cybersecurity of the DIB, including: the
unnecessary flowdown of DOD controlled unclassified information
throughout the supply chain; the timely provision of useful
cyber threat intelligence to DIB partners; the direct provision
of cybersecurity capability or secure development environments
to contractors through the DOD or prime contractors; improved
program manager security plans; penalties for delinquent
contractors; and offensive cyber operations concepts to exploit
adversary penetration of DIB contractors.
Qualification of the television as part of the intercontinental
ballistic missile weapons system
The Minuteman III Launch Control Center (LCC), which
resides in an underground capsule, is defined by the Air Force
as part of the Minuteman III weapon system. All components of
the weapon system require periodic maintenance and rigorous
change specification by the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
System Program Office (SPO). Adding additional equipment to the
weapon system definition often requires lengthy analysis by the
SPO as well as requirements certification by Air Force Global
Strike Command.
One key piece of equipment to the combat crew within the
LCC is a flat panel television that provides the ability to
email and perform continuing education during the crew's 24-
hour alerts. As currently defined, the television is not part
of the weapon system, and, when it breaks, the SPO must go to
great lengths to find a commercial vendor that can qualify a
television to the electromagnetic interference requirements
required for the LCC. As a result, a simple flat panel
television that can be commercially purchased for several
hundred dollars costs several thousand dollars, simply because
it is not part of the weapon system. Due to the cost and
paperwork, televisions remain broken for lengthy periods of
time in LCCs.
Accordingly, and because this item is important to the
morale of the combat crews, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees no later than February 26, 2021, on what
efforts are being made to make the television part of the
weapon system to reduce cost and time to replacement and ensure
that the combat crews can perform personal duties to enhance
their morale during their free time in a 24-hour shift.
RAND study on space launch
As part of its assessment of future launch capability
needs, the Air Force directed the RAND Corporation to assess
the long-term market for space launch. The RAND Corporation
completed this study in June 2019. The study confirms that
maintaining three launch providers in the National Security
Space Launch (NSSL) program provides for the least amount of
risk, but the current market only provides for the viability of
two launch providers. Therefore, the committee believes that
the Air Force should make efforts to encourage the continued
developmental efforts of at least three providers for phase 3
of the NSSL program.
Recapitalization of the National Airborne Operations Center
The Air Force's fleet of E-4B aircraft serve as the
National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) for the President,
the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, and other senior leaders. The fleet constitutes a
foundational element of the National Military Command System
(NMCS) and provides a highly survivable command, control, and
communications center from which to direct U.S. forces, execute
emergency war orders, and coordinate actions by civil
authorities.
The E-4B fleet first entered service in 1974, and, as the
aircraft continues to age, sustainment efforts grow
increasingly difficult and costly. Sustaining the fleet as it
approaches end of life is becoming particularly challenging as
a result of diminishing manufacturing sources and parts
obsolescence. These factors contribute to increasing
maintenance costs and declining availability rates. The
committee is concerned that the path forward for recapitalizing
this vital strategic capability remains unclear and notes that
the Air Force conducted an analysis of alternatives (AOA) to
replace the E-4B in 2008. The committee expects the Department
of Defense to expeditiously complete its latest AOA, select a
preferred alternative, and make a sustained commitment to
recapitalize the capability.
Satellite ground terminal network
The Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) is a
satellite ground terminal network comprised of ground stations
and antenna systems distributed around the world, primarily to
ensure global command and control of 170 satellites critical
for conducting military, intelligence, and civilian government
operations. Over the past decade, the Air Force has invested
hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade the network.
However, the AFSCN is reaching its capacity to command and
control additional satellites planned for fielding in the near
term, and, as a result, some existing and new satellite system
programs may have to identify and use alternate means for
controlling their satellites.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to: (1) Assess the status of the AFSCN,
including its capacity for conducting satellite operations for
current and future satellites; (2) Determine and analyze any
plans to address AFSCN's capacity limitations, including
upgrading the existing system or acquiring new satellite
control capabilities; and (3) Assess the extent to which
acquiring satellite control services from commercial providers
can meet DOD's needs. The committee directs the Comptroller
General to brief its preliminary observations to the
congressional defense committees no later than March 31, 2021.
Small business cybersecurity compliance
The committee acknowledges that the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment is currently releasing
compliance achievement costing guidance and assessment guidance
for implementing Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
(CMMC) requirements. However, due to the extended Department of
Defense (DOD) rollout time, there is concern among small
businesses (with less than $5.0 million in annual revenue) that
they will not be able to achieve CMMC compliance in a timely
manner without prime contractor assistance.
Therefore, the committee requests that: (1) DOD release
assessment guidance for all CMMC levels in order that companies
can fully track compliance requirements for CMMC Level 3 and
higher; (2) DOD provide cost data and estimates for businesses
to be in compliance with the corresponding CMMC level; and (3)
DOD publish the training guide and standards for the
Accreditation Body and third-party certifiers within 180 days
of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021.
Space Force Training and Readiness Command
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of
ensuring that the next generation of space professionals is
trained and ready to operate in the space domain. The first
Comprehensive Plan for the Organizational Structure of the U.S.
Space Force, published in February 2020, called for the
establishment of a Space Training and Readiness Command to
focus on ``doctrine, space training and education, space
warfighting concepts, and overall readiness.'' The committee
encourages the establishment of such an organization to advance
space warfighting development. The committee also expects that,
consistent with the overall objective in standing up the Space
Force and as stated in the February 2020 report, it shall
integrate with and utilize as much as possible existing Air
Force functions and infrastructure to minimize cost and
bureaucracy.
The committee commends the Space Force on the combined
organizational model planned for the Air Force Research Lab. By
combining efforts and managing priorities of both the Air Force
and Space Force, the Department of Defense achieves
synchronized effects with a very limited bureaucracy. The
committee recommends the use of this combined model to the
maximum extent possible in places like the Air Warfare Center
and the National Air and Space Intelligence Center.
Space technology
The Space Force has been charged with protecting and
defending military space assets to build more resilient and
defensible architectures and to develop offensive capabilities
to challenge adversaries in space. The committee supports the
Space Force's efforts thus far to develop partnerships with
academic research institutions in different geographic regions
and with different military and intellectual assets in order to
establish critical research infrastructure and to develop the
necessary workforce of the future.
The committee directs the Space Force to continue working
with research institutions in areas such as autonomous
platforms and policy, supply chains, and cybersecurity.
Space testing ranges
The committee is concerned with the infrastructure
available to operate, test, and train in the space warfighting
domain. As the Department of Defense begins to field systems to
protect and defend our space assets, it is unclear to the
committee what the long-term requirement for ranges capable of
operationally assessing these systems is. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
consultation with the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation and the Commander, U.S. Space Command, to develop a
5-year plan for the institution of the necessary ranges,
equipment, and personnel to operationally test, train, and
operate weapon systems to protect our space assets. This plan
shall be briefed to the congressional defense committees no
later than January 1, 2021.
Space weather
In recognition of the profound impact that weather
forecasting has on daily worldwide military operations and the
availability of commercial satellite technology to provide more
accurate and timely weather data for joint and combined
missions and extreme weather prognosis, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Air Force to provide to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 1, 2021, a briefing
regarding the utility, benefits, and cost of the application of
commercial satellite weather data, including Radio Occultation
data, to national security missions.
Training and retention of cyber mission force personnel
The committee is aware that the Cyber Mission Forces (CMF)
lack sufficient highly trained personnel due to multiple
factors, including insufficient training capacity, the
exceptional aptitudes and time required to complete the highest
levels of training, and a lack of special policies to retain
personnel who have completed the rigorous training and served
in the CMF for multiple assignments. The committee is aware
that United States Cyber Command, the military services, and
the National Security Agency are in the midst of reorganizing
the CMF, reforming training regimens and courses, amending
retention policies, increasing training capacity, and
calibrating mission requirements.
The committee is encouraged by these developments but wants
to ensure that they are fully implemented and prove effective.
The committee therefore directs the Principal Cyber Adviser
(PCA) to oversee and track the progress of these reforms. The
committee also directs the PCA and Cyber Command to brief the
congressional defense committees not later than October 1,
2020, on the progress made to implement these reforms,
including the establishment of key progress milestones.
Transition from Minuteman III to the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent
The Minuteman weapon system began operational alert in 1962
and has been operating on a continuous alert status since. Many
Minuteman III components, such as life support equipment, blast
protection, and inertial guidance units, are beyond end of life
and cannot be life extended. The replacement for this weapon
system, the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD), is planned
to achieve Milestone B in the fourth quarter of fiscal year
2020, with initial operations beginning around 2030. Over the
next decade, the Air Force must maintain continuous alert
status of the Minuteman III while simultaneously replacing it
with the GBSD across 450 launch facilities and launch control
centers, at three missile fields, in order to provide the
Commander, U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), with forces to
meet deterrence requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Commander, STRATCOM, to provide
a report to the congressional defense committees, not later
than February 26, 2021, on: (1) The drawdown schedule of the
Minuteman III weapon system at each missile field, including
the removal of the missile from the launch facility as well as
the replacement of the launch control centers; (2) The launch
facility insertion rate of the GBSD missile at each missile
field; (3) The expected date of GBSD full operational
capability for each missile wing and squadron; (4) The
estimated annual costs of maintaining Minuteman III until its
full retirement; and (5) Proposed actions during this
transition period to account for any reduction or gaps in
operational availability of the land-based leg of the triad in
order for STRATCOM to meet its deterrence requirements.
United States Space Command Headquarters
The committee recognizes the bipartisan congressional
support for the National Defense Strategy and, with it, the
renewed emphasis on space as a contested domain that requires
unique operational command and control capabilities. The
committee's support for the establishment of the United States
Space Force and United States Space Command as a unified
combatant command reflect the need for elevated prioritization
of the critical threats to our national security in the space
domain. In the spirit of these efforts, and given the critical
mission of military space operations, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with joint military
partners and the intelligence community, to provide a report to
the committee no later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, detailing the criteria and process by
which the Department intends to determine the permanent site
for the United States Space Command Headquarters.
Value of inland spaceports
The committee recognizes the benefits of inland commercial
spaceports when coupled with airspace capable of meeting
testing requirements of hypersonic and directed energy weapons.
Inland commercial spaceports generally operate in remote
locations that are less susceptible to airspace confliction and
have significantly reduced electromagnetic interference.
Moreover, inland spaceports are less vulnerable to offshore
surveillance efforts conducted by adversarial nations and
provide increased operational security for sensitive national
security missions. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Department of Defense to leverage existing inland spaceports
with accompanying range and airspace for land-based testing of
hypersonic and directed energy weapons. The committee further
encourages the military services, in coordination with the
Department's Test Resources Management Center, to invest in the
testing infrastructure that will be necessary to ensure that
these inland spaceports have the capability and capacity to
test the military services' next-generation technologies.
Wide Area Surveillance Program Scorpion Sensor System
The committee recognizes the importance of the Wide Area
Surveillance (WAS) program and the threat it addresses. As the
air picture becomes increasingly complex and threats more
diverse, particularly in the U.S. Northern Command and North
American Aerospace Defense Command area of responsibility, air
battle managers' need for comprehensive situational awareness
is also growing. The committee notes that options exist to
enhance the WAS Scorpion sensor capability to address new
threats and environments while reducing system complexity and
cost. The committee further notes that the budget request
contained no research and development funding intended for
these WAS enhancements. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Air Force to consider funding system enhancements that will
improve the Battle Control Systems-Fixed air picture for
homeland defense, reduce schedule, and lower the cost of
manufacturing, fielding, operations, and maintenance.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary and explanation of funding tables
Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military
construction projects of the Department of Defense (DOD). It
includes funding authorizations for the construction and
operation of military family housing as well as military
construction for the reserve components, the Defense Agencies
and Field Activities, and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program. It also provides
authorization for the base closure accounts that fund military
construction, environmental cleanup, and other activities
required to implement the decisions made in prior base closure
rounds. It prohibits any future base realignment closure
rounds.
The tables contained in this Act provide the project-level
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized
in Division B of this Act and summarize that funding by
account.
The fiscal year 2021 budget requested $7.8 billion for
military construction and housing programs. Of this amount,
$6.0 billion was requested for military construction, $1.4
billion for the construction and operation of family housing,
$300.4 million for base closure activities, and $173.0 million
for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program.
The committee recommends the authorization of
appropriations for military construction, housing programs, and
base closure activities totaling $7.8 billion. The total amount
authorized for appropriations reflects the committee's
continued commitment to investing in the recapitalization of
DOD facilities and infrastructure.
Short title (sec. 2001)
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
division B of this Act as the ``Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.''
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2002)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
the expiration date for authorizations in this Act for military
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing
projects, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program as October 1, 2025, or
the date of the enactment of an act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2026, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2003)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide an
effective date for titles XXI through XXVII and title XXIX of
October 1, 2020, or the date of the enactment of this Act,
whichever is later.
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $650.3 million for military construction and $486.5 million
for family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2021.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$869.5 million for military construction for the Army and
$486.5 million for family housing for the Army for fiscal year
2021.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2101 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the active component of the
Army for fiscal year 2021. The committee recognizes the
Department of Defense's significant unfunded military
construction requirements and has included an additional $286.5
million for many of these projects here. The authorized amount
is listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Army for fiscal year 2021. This provision would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and
storage facilities.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Army authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2021. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Army. The state list contained in this report
is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2017 project at Camp
Walker, Korea (sec. 2104)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2102(a) of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B
of Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1146) for the construction of
an elevated walkway to connect two existing parking garages to
connect children's playgrounds at Camp Walker, South Korea.
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $2.0 billion for military construction and $389.4 million
for family housing for the Department of the Navy for fiscal
year 2021.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$1.9 billion for military construction for the Navy and $414.4
million for family housing for the Navy for fiscal year 2021.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2201 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Navy and Marine Corps military construction projects for fiscal
year 2021. The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $279.4 million for many of these
projects here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Navy for fiscal year 2021. This provision would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and
storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Navy to improve existing family housing
units of the Department of the Navy in an amount not to exceed
$37.0 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Department of the Navy
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2021. This
provision would also provide an overall limit on the amount
authorized for military construction and family housing
projects for the active components of the Navy and the Marine
Corps. The state list contained in this report is the binding
list of the specific projects authorized at each location.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $767.1 million for military construction and $414.2 million
for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2021.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$716.1 million for military construction for the Air Force and
$439.2 million for family housing for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2020.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2301 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2021.
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $228.0 million for many of these
projects here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Air Force for fiscal year 2021. This provision would
also authorize funds for facilities that support family
housing, including housing management offices, housing
maintenance, and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to improve existing family
housing units of the Department of the Air Force in an amount
not to exceed $94.2 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Air Force authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2021. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Air Force. The state list contained in this
report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized
at each location.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2018 project at
Royal Air Force Lakenheath (sec. 2305)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2301(b) of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (division B
of Public Law 115-91; 131 Stat. 1825) for the construction of a
2,700 square-meter Consolidated Corrosion Control and Wash Rack
Facility at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, United Kingdom, by
striking ``20,000,000'' as specified in the funding table of
section 4601 of such Act (131 Stat. 1999) and inserting
``55,300,000''.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2019
projects (sec. 2306)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2301(a) of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (division B
of Public Law 115-232; 132 Stat. 2246) for the construction of:
(1) An F-35 Combat Arms Training and Maintenance Range at
Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, to include a 426 square meter
non-contained (outdoor) range with a covered and heated firing
line; (2) An entrance road and gate complex at Barksdale Air
Force Base, Louisiana, consistent with the Unified Facilities
Criteria relating to entry control facilities and the
construction guidelines for the Air Force, in the amount of
$48,000,000; and (3) An F-35A Addition and Alteration
Conventional Munitions MX at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, United
Kingdom, to include a 1,206 square meter maintenance facility.
The provision would also amend the table in section 4601 of
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2019 by striking ``$35,000'' and inserting ``$50,000'' for
Force Protection and Safety, Air Force.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2020 family
housing projects (sec. 2307)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2302 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (division B
of Public Law 116-92) for the construction or acquisition of 76
family housing units at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany.
This provision would also amend section 2303 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 by
striking ``$53,584,000'' and inserting ``$46,638,000''.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2020
projects (sec. 2308)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2912(a) of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (division B
of Public Law 116-92) for specific disaster-related recovery
projects at: Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida; Offutt Air Force
Base, Nebraska; and Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $2.0 billion for military construction for the Defense
Agencies for fiscal year 2021.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$1.8 billion for military construction for the Defense Agencies
for fiscal year 2021.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Defense Agencies for
fiscal year 2021. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program
projects (sec. 2402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out energy conservation
projects. Beyond the requested amount of $142.5 million,
additional authorized amounts totaling $155.4 million are
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the military construction and family housing
projects of the Defense Agencies authorized for construction
for fiscal year 2021. This provision would also provide an
overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the Defense
Agencies. The state list contained in this report is the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $1.4 billion for military construction in
fiscal year 2021 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) Security Investment Program and in-kind contributions
from the Republic of Korea and the State of Qatar. The
committee recommends authorization of appropriations for the
requested amount.
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program in an
amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically authorized
in section 2502 of this title and the amount of recoupment due
to the United States for construction previously financed by
the United States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations of $173.0 million for the U.S. contribution to
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security
Investment Program (NSIP) for fiscal year 2021.
This provision would also allow the Department of Defense
construction agent to recognize the NATO project authorization
amounts as budgetary resources to incur obligations when the
United States is designated as the host nation for the purposes
of executing a project under the NSIP.
Execution of projects under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program (Sec. 2503)
The committee recommends a provision would authorize the
Secretary of Defense to accept and spend contributions from the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or NATO members for
various purposes relating to the NATO Security Improvement
Program (NSIP). The committee notes that project funding would
be limited to appropriations for the NSIP, contributions from
the NATO, contributions from NATO members, or a combination of
these funds.
The committee understands that, according to the Department
of Defense, this provision would decrease both cost and
schedule of construction projects exercised under this
authority.
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions
Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec. 2511)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept 10 military construction
projects totaling $416.0 million from the Republic of Korea as
in-kind contributions.
Qatar funded construction projects (sec. 2512)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept 15 military construction
projects totaling $791.2 million from the State of Qatar as in-
kind contributions.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $568.1 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2021 for facilities for the National Guard and
reserve components.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$687.7 million for military construction in fiscal year 2021
for facilities for the National Guard and reserve components.
The detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state
list table included in this report.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in the
tables in this title and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2601)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army National Guard for
fiscal year 2021. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $49.8 million for
many of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed
on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2602)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army Reserve for fiscal
year 2021. The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $2.5 million for 1 project here. The
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2603)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine
Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2021. The committee recognizes
the Department of Defense's significant unfunded military
construction requirements and has included an additional $12.8
million for 1 of these projects here. The authorized amounts
are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2604)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air National Guard for
fiscal year 2021. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $29.5 million for
many of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed
on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2605)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air Force Reserve for
fiscal year 2021. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $25.0 million for 1
of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and Reserve (sec. 2606)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the reserve component military construction
projects authorized for construction for fiscal year 2021 in
this Act. This provision would also provide an overall limit on
the amount authorized for military construction projects for
each of the reserve components of the military departments. The
state list contained in this report is the binding list of the
specific projects authorized at each location.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2020 project in
Alabama (sec. 2607)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2601 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (division B
of Public Law 116-92) for the construction of an Enlisted
Transient Barracks at Anniston Army Depot, Alabama, for the
construction of a training barracks at Fort McClellan, Alabama.
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES
Summary and explanation of tables
The budget request included $300.4 million for the ongoing
cost of environmental remediation and other activities
necessary to continue implementation of the 1988, 1991, 1993,
1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds. The
committee recommends $300.4 million for these efforts. The
detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state
list table included in this report.
Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and closure
activities funded through Department of Defense Base Closure
Account (sec. 2701)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for ongoing activities that
are required to implement the decisions of the 1988, 1991,
1993, 1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds.
Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and closure
(BRAC) round (sec. 2702)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense from conducting another base
realignment and closure (BRAC) round.
The committee notes that, although the Department of
Defense did not request authorization to conduct a BRAC round
in the request for fiscal year 2021, the Department continues
to focus its efforts on studying facility optimization. The
committee is encouraged by these efforts and looks forward to
reviewing these results prior to the request for any future
BRAC round.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program
Responsibility of Navy for military construction requirements for
certain Fleet Readiness Centers (sec. 2801)
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
the Navy as the responsible military service for programming,
requesting, and executing any military construction (MILCON)
requirements for a Fleet Readiness Center (FRC) that is a
tenant command aboard a Marine Corps installation.
The committee notes that there is currently apparent
ambiguity over this responsibility, which has delayed much
needed military construction investment in these facilities and
has created readiness concerns related to Marine Corps aviation
and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter variants used by the Air
Force, Marine Corps, and Navy. For example, because the Fleet
Readiness Center East (FRC East) is a Navy Command located on
Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, neither the Navy nor the
Marine Corps accept ownership of FRC East MILCON project
approval and funding. The committee notes that this provision
would provide the much needed guidance the Department of the
Navy has failed to mandate itself.
Construction of ground-based strategic deterrent launch facilities and
launch centers for Air Force (sec. 2802)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to carry out military
construction projects to convert Minuteman III launch
facilities and launch centers to ground-based strategic
deterrent configurations under certain conditions.
Subtitle B--Military Family Housing
Prohibition on substandard family housing units (sec. 2821)
The committee recommends a provision that would strike the
existing language contained in section 2830 of title 10, United
States Code, which allows the Secretaries of the military
departments to maintain substandard military family housing,
and replace it with a prohibition of the Secretaries' leasing
any substandard family housing unit.
The committee notes that the effective date of October 1,
2021, would allow the military services ample time to make
repairs after their inspection report to the Congress as
required under section 3051 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). The
committee further notes that, according to the military
services, no service currently has any ``substandard'' housing
and is not reliant on the authority that would be eliminated
via this provision.
Technical corrections to privatized military housing program (sec.
2822)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
technical corrections to specific sections of title 30 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92).
Requirement that Secretary of Defense implement recommendations
relating to military family housing contained in report by
Inspector General of Department of Defense (sec. 2823)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to implement, not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
recommendations of the Inspector General of the Department of
Defense contained in the report of the Inspector General, dated
April 30, 2020, and titled ``Evaluation of the DOD's Management
of Health and Safety Hazards in Government-Owned and
Government-Controlled Military Family Housing.''
Subtitle C--Project Management and Oversight Reforms
Promotion of energy resilience and energy security in privatized
utility systems (sec. 2841)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow
Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP)
projects to be executed on installations with utilities
privatization (UP).
Many military installations have already leveraged or plan
to leverage UP to achieve cost savings and benefit from
commercial best practices. However, because ERCIP is military
construction, currently it can only occur in conjunction with
utility systems owned solely by the Department of Defense. In
order to remove this obstacle and ensure that the Department
can improve energy security on all of its installations, this
provision would authorize the Department to pair ERCIP and UP.
Consideration of energy security and energy resilience in life-cycle
cost for military construction (sec. 2842)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
during the consideration and evaluation of the life-cycle
designed cost of a military construction project,
consideration, as a facility requirement, of energy security
and energy resilience to ensure that the resulting facility is
capable of performing its missions in the event of a human-
caused disaster or other unplanned event. The committee notes
that this consideration would apply to designs for operations
centers, hospitals, armories and readiness centers of the
National Guard, and facilities for nuclear command and control,
integrated strategic and tactical warning and attack
assessment, continuity of government, missile defense, air
defense, communications, and satellite and missile launch and
control.
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
Renewal of Fallon Range Training Complex land withdrawal and
reservation (sec. 2861)
The committee recommends a provision that would renew the
land withdrawal for the lands known as Fallon Range Training
Complex as described in section 3015 of the Military Lands
Withdrawal Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 892) and
the withdrawal and reservation of lands made by section 3011(a)
of such Act (113 Stat. 885) until November 6, 2041.
The committee recognizes the need for the Navy to
effectively train sailors and marines in the most realistic
environments. However, the committee believes that there is
more work to be done with all relevant stakeholders, including
other committees of jurisdiction, the Nevada delegation,
tribes, hunters, environmentalists, and others. As such, the
committee directs the Navy to reengage and develop a new
compromise approach that balances training needs with those of
all relevant parties.
Renewal of Nevada Test and Training Range land withdrawal and
reservation (sec. 2862)
The committee recommends a provision that would renew the
land withdrawal for the lands known as the Nevada Test and
Training Range as described in section 3015 of the Military
Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 892)
and the withdrawal and reservation of lands made by section
3011(b) of such Act (113 Stat. 886) until November 6, 2041.
The committee recognizes the need for the Air Force to
effectively train in the most realistic environments. However,
the committee is disappointed by the lack of engagement
conducted to date by the Air Force and the failure to
coordinate with all relevant stakeholders, including other
committees of jurisdiction, the Nevada delegation, tribes,
hunters, and conservationists. As such, the committee directs
the Air Force to reengage and develop a new compromise approach
that balances military training needs with that of all relevant
parties.
Transfer of land under the administrative jurisdiction of the
Department of the Interior within Naval Support Activity Panama
City, Florida (sec. 2863)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Interior to transfer to the Secretary of the
Navy 1.23 acres of land within Naval Support Activity, Panama
City, Florida, that would convert from public land to land
under the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the
Navy.
Land conveyance, Camp Navajo, Arizona (sec. 2864)
The committee recommends a provision that would grant the
Secretary of the Army permissive authority to transfer not more
than 3,000 acres at Camp Navajo, Arizona, to the State of
Arizona for the use of training the Army and Air National Guard
and defense industrial base economic development purposes.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Military family readiness considerations in basing decisions (sec.
2881)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to factor military
family readiness considerations, among other relevant factors,
in future basing decisions. At minimum, the Secretaries would
take the following family readiness factors into account in
each future basing decision: (1) Interstate portability of
professional licensure and certification credentials; (2)
Public education; (3) Housing; (4) Healthcare; (5)
Intergovernmental support agreements; and (6) Any other
considerations in connection with military family readiness
specified by the Secretary of Defense.
Additionally, the provision would require each of the
Secretaries of the military departments to establish, for each
of the military installations under his or her jurisdiction, a
basing decision scorecard that incorporates the military family
readiness considerations listed in this provision, among other
factors the Secretary deemed relevant. The scorecard would be
updated annually and available to the public.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing assessing the effect of the
military family readiness considerations on basing decisions to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than April 1 of each year, terminating
in 2023.
Prohibition on use of funds to reduce air base resiliency or demolish
protected aircraft shelters in the European theater without
creating a similar protection from attack (sec. 2882)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds for any activity that
reduces air base resiliency or demolishes protected aircraft
shelters in the European theater without creating similar
protection from attack until such time as the Secretary of
Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees that
protected aircraft shelters are not required in the European
theater.
Prohibitions relating to closure or returning to host nation of
existing bases under the European Consolidation Initiative
(sec. 2883)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of Department of Defense funds to
implement any activity that closes or returns to host nations
any existing bases until such time as the Secretary of Defense
certifies that there is no longer a need for a rotational
military presence in the European theater.
Enhancement of authority to accept conditional gifts of real property
on behalf of military museums (sec. 2884)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2601(e)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by
inserting ``a military museum,'' after ``offered to.''
The committee understands that, currently, a military
museum must request permission to accept a gift that has a
donor's name attached to it, which slows down the intake
process, putting them at a competitive disadvantage with
respect to other nonprofits. The committee is aware of two such
examples where the Air Force Museum is struggling to accept
specific donations. The committee applauds the work of the
military museums that support and preserve the history of the
United States military.
Equal treatment of insured depository institutions and credit unions
operating on military installations (sec. 2885)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2667 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to ensure that policies governing
depository institutions and credit unions operating on military
installations are equally applied to all relevant institutions.
Additionally, the provision would prohibit any requirement for
the Secretaries of the military departments to provide no-cost
office space or no-cost land lease to any insured depository
institution or insured credit union.
As servicemember financial practices evolve to reflect the
growing prevalence of online banking, it makes little sense for
the DOD to mandate that the military services provide a subsidy
in the form of free rent, utilities, or other logistical
support to any particular financial institution. Rather, the
Department should ensure that any decision to provide rent
concessions to on-base private businesses is justified on the
basis of a coherent cost-benefit analysis.
The committee also believes that no particular group of
financial institutions should be advantaged or disadvantaged by
DOD policy on the basis of its business structure and tax
status. Therefore, this provision would require the DOD to
develop policy treating all financial institutions equally when
determining whether to provide a subsidy in exchange for an on-
base location.
Report on operational aviation units impacted by noise restrictions or
noise mitigation measures (sec. 2886)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force or Secretary of the Navy to report
to Congress if: (1) Noise restrictions placed on the relevant
operational aviation unit affect readiness and combat
capability by prohibiting the unit from achieving combat ready
status or maintaining aircrew currency; or (2) If required
noise mitigation measures become cost prohibitive to the
Department of Defense, namely, by exceeding 10 percent of an
installation's annual budget.
Items of Special Interest
Army demolition prioritization
The committee notes the importance of balancing the
Department of Defense's (DOD's) existing infrastructure with
those of the individual military services and remains concerned
by the Department's inability to prioritize Facility
Sustainment and Restoration Modernization (FSRM) funding for
demolition. The committee believes that consistent lack of
prioritization of FSRM funding for demolition over a period of
years will have both short- and long-term impacts to successful
implementation of the National Defense Strategy.
The committee further notes that the DOD maintains over
550,000 facilities on about 28.0 million acres with an
estimated plant replacement value of about $830.0 billion,
which the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has
characterized as high-risk since 1997 in part due to
sustainment carrying costs of outdated and aging
infrastructure.
For instance, the committee is aware that the Martin Army
Community Hospital (MACH) at Fort Benning, Georgia was replaced
with a new hospital in 2014, yet the old facility stands vacant
for the last six years. The committee understands that the Army
has both the authority and clearance needed to demolish the old
MACH facility but has yet to prioritize its demolition.
Furthermore, the committee understands that the old MACH site,
assuming demolition does get prioritized, has been identified
in the area development plan as the site of a key
transportation node. Additionally, the committee is aware of
another example of a persistent lack of available demolition
funding at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC), especially
as it relates to the aging infrastructure on Gould Island in
Rhode Island. The committee strongly urges the Army and Navy to
prioritize and execute their respective appropriate demolition
resources for MACH, NUWC, and Gould Island.
The committee believes that it is critical that the DOD
make cost-effective decisions to manage its large facilities
portfolio, including excess facilities, by appropriately
targeting sustainment funds and disposing of or effectively
reusing excess facilities where practicable using extant
authorities. Even in the absence of a Base Realignment and
Closure round, the DOD should effectively use all available and
existing authorities to appropriately manage its facilities
portfolio.
Army training range coordination in Hawaii
The committee notes that the Army uses leased land to
satisfy a portion of its training requirements in Hawaii. The
use of such land for training in Hawaii is not only critical to
maintaining the readiness of Army forces stationed in Hawaii
but also for the Joint Force as the Department of Defense
increasingly looks toward the Indo-Pacific region.
The committee understands that the Army is engaged in
discussions about the retention of land parcels on both Oahu
and Hawaii Island. High level and continued engagement is
imperative throughout this process. The committee is concerned
about the level of continuity and specialized expertise
required to successfully execute the long term effort
associated with land retention projects in Hawaii. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to brief the
Senate Armed Services Committee by October 1, 2020, on a plan
to establish a stable program office under United States Army
Pacific that provides the necessary continuity and expertise to
ensure successful training land management efforts. Given the
regular rotation of military personnel, the committee
encourages the Army to consider the appropriate use of career
civil servants within the land management program office
construct.
Clarification of the use of section 2353 of title 10, United States
Code, authority by defense contractors
The committee notes that section 2353 of title 10, United
States Code, specifically authorizes defense contractors to
construct facilities necessary for the completion of a contract
for research and development and to charge the cost to the
underlying contract in accordance with the contract cost
principles. Specifically, section 2353 states that ``[a]
contract of a military department for research or development,
or both, may provide for the acquisition or construction by, or
furnishing to, the contractor, of research, developmental, or
test facilities and equipment that the Secretary of the
military department concerned determines to be necessary for
the performance of the contract.''
The committee believes that the authority clearly envisions
two paths toward the construction of research and development
facilities. First, a military department may procure new
facilities on Federal property using military construction
authority. Second, a contractor may construct research and
development facilities on contractor property using contractor
funds. Section 2353 further provides that, when the military
and its contractor agree to pursue the second path and the
contractor undertakes construction of new facilities, the
contractor shall charge the cost of construction to the
underlying contract. This cost, according to section 2353,
``shall be subject to the cost principles applicable to
allowable contract expenses.'' In instances where the
contractor is an educational institution, the construction
undertaken pursuant to section 2353 authority may be funded via
a Special Use Allowance as provided for in Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement section 235.015-70.
Additionally, the contractor construction would be performed on
either contractor-owned or contractor-leased (including
military installations) land. The committee believes that these
funding and construction approaches are fully consistent with
section 2353.
Accordingly, the committee believes that it is essential
for the military departments to read and apply section 2353 as
an explicit statutory authorization for the construction of
necessary government-owned or contractor-owned facilities.
Enhancing MQ-9 and MH-139 training capabilities
The committee notes that, in the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232), the Congress authorized $85 million for an MQ-9 Formal
Training Unit Facility at Holloman Air Force Base. The project
was designed to train 100 percent of the Air Force's MQ-9
pilots and to play a critical role in reversing the service's
overall pilot shortage. The United States Central Command has
identified the MQ-9 as its top unfunded acquisition priority
and has requested more MQ-9 assets for theater intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance and strike capabilities. The
committee notes that the current training facility faces
structural damage and poses health and safety risks. The
committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of the Air Force to continue the project's planning
and design to ensure that it is sufficiently advanced for
future construction.
The committee also understands that the Air Force is in the
process of upgrading its UH-1N Huey fleet to the MH-139 Grey
Wolf and that the service plans to train initial MH-139
operators using contract support from the prime contractor. The
committee believes that the Air Force should move expeditiously
to develop an organic MH-139 training capability to educate the
next generation of MH-139 pilots at a base currently operating
the UH-1N. In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), the Congress authorized $22.4
million for a UH-1N Replacement Facility at Kirtland Air Force
Base in preparation for the transition to the MH-139. The
committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of the Air Force to ensure that the planning and
design for a new 512th Rescue Squadron Operations Facility are
sufficiently advanced to ensure the project's inclusion in the
fiscal year 2022 budget submission.
F-35 military construction at Dannelly Field
The committee recognizes the critical importance of fully
completing the construction of bed-down facilities prior to the
delivery of F-35 aircraft to and the adverse impact on
readiness of failing to do so for the 187th Fighter Wing. The
committee notes that the fiscal year 2021 budget request for
the F-35 bed-down facilities at Dannelly Field does not provide
sufficient funding for the required bed-down facility
construction. The aircraft are scheduled to be delivered in
December 2023, although it is possible that the aircraft could
begin arriving as much as 6 months earlier. Failure to fund
related military construction projects could have significant
adverse impacts on the readiness of the 187th Fighter Wing. For
example, the committee understands that, according to the Air
National Guard, without the required aircraft maintenance unit
building, F-35 maintenance will occur in sufficient, but sub-
optimal conditions.
Therefore, the committee strongly urges the Department of
Defense to request sufficient funds for the aircraft
maintenance unit building to ensure this beddown occurs on
schedule.
Importance of small arms ranges
The committee notes the importance of small arms ranges in
ensuring the readiness of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and
marines. The committee notes the Air Force and Air National
Guard requirement to maintain small arms proficiency and
recognizes that, in the Reserves and National Guard,
servicemembers must often travel great distances to conduct
this vitally important training.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Air National
Guard to prioritize small arms ranges, particularly those that
have previously been authorized, in their military construction
requests to ensure that airmen have the resources they need to
effectively train and maintain readiness.
Improvements to the management of historic homes
Maintaining and repairing homes that are historic, defined
as more than 50-years-old, is costly and time-consuming for the
military services and military families living on
installations. Historic homes often require the continued use
of their original materials in repairs to maintain their
historic appearance. The committee understands that using
imitative building materials is an industry standard that can
simulate the appearance of and substitute for more expensive
historical building materials. Imitative building materials are
modern, natural, composite, and synthetic materials. The use of
imitative building materials is a priority for replacement of
historic building materials with friction and impact surfaces
that pose a potential lead-based paint hazard. Imitative
building materials could be used with proper planning to ensure
that the historic and architectural appearance of historic
housing is maintained. The committee encourages the use of
imitative building materials for use in the repair,
rehabilitation, and renovation of historic housing.
Increasing capacity at Arlington National Cemetery
The committee notes that the projected life of Arlington
National Cemetery, with no change to the current planned
capacity, is to 2055, even with the execution of the Southern
Expansion Project. The committee understands that the Advisory
Committee on Arlington National Cemetery's recommended changes
to eligibility restrictions, combined with the ongoing
expansion project, would provide sufficient capacity until
2151. Finally, the committee understands that both the 2055,
under current eligibility requirements, and 2151, under
proposed eligibility requirements, capacity dates assume that
current force levels are sustained but that no other major
conflict would take place.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs of the House of Representatives a report no later than
November 1, 2020, on increasing interment or inurnment capacity
at Arlington National Cemetery. The report should include the
following: (1) An assessment of how space at Arlington National
Cemetery can be optimized within the cemetery beyond actions
currently in effect or undertaken before the date of the
enactment of this Act; (2) An estimate of the costs associated
with converting all of specific parcels of Henderson Hall of
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall into usable cemetery space; (3)
An estimate of the costs associated with converting the
military resale lot of Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall into
usable cemetery space; and (4) An assessment of the feasibility
and advisability of changing the eligibility requirements for
above ground interment at Arlington National Cemetery to be
consistent with the eligibility requirements for burial in a
national cemetery under the jurisdiction of the National
Cemetery Administration.
Kwajalein military construction plan and hospital
In the Senate report accompanying S. 1376 (S. Rept. 114-49)
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016,
the committee directed the Secretary of the Army to ``provide
the congressional defense committees an updated report on the
Installation Management Command's infrastructure goals and an
updated 5-year profile of planned facilities recapitalization
for the Kwajalein Atoll with the fiscal year 2017 budget
request and subsequent budget requests through fiscal year
2021.'' These reports have been important for the committee's
tracking investments in this unique asset.
The committee is aware that a hospital for civilians and
military personnel was originally included in the budget
request for fiscal year 2021 but was later removed. The
existing hospital sits 300 feet from the ocean and is exposed
to the wind, tide, and elements, including typhoons. The
location for its replacement is on the interior of the Atoll
and less exposed. In addition, the hospital was built over 40
years ago and is aging. If a worker were to become critically
ill, it could take 48-72 hours to transport him or her off the
atoll. Replacing this hospital should be a high priority for
the Army as it takes care of its families, especially on a
remote atoll such as Kwajalein.
Given the importance of Kwajalein for future testing needs
of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, Hypersonic Strike
Systems, and Space Situational Awareness, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Army to continue providing these reports
through fiscal year 2026. The committee further directs the
Secretary of the Army to brief the congressional defense
committees on efforts to replace this important facility no
later than February 15, 2021.
Maneuver Area Training Equipment Site (MATES)
The committee recognizes the critical role of the Maneuver
Area Training Equipment Site (MATES) at Camp Shelby,
Mississippi, in providing needed wheel vehicle maintenance for
1,200 M1 Abrams Tanks and M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting
Vehicles. The committee notes that the current MATES facility
was constructed in 1983 and currently supports vehicles beyond
its intended purpose.
The committee is aware that the current design of the MATES
facility limits work area and work throughput and poses
potential safety issues. Due to its support for three of the
five Armored Brigade Combat Teams within the Army National
Guard, the committee recommends continued support to modernize
the MATES at Camp Shelby to ensure wheeled-vehicle readiness.
Naval Air Station Barbers Point
The committee notes that Naval Air Station (NAS) Barbers
Point was closed in 1999 by Base Realignment and Closure
action. Pursuant to section 2843 of the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (P.L. 109-364),
approximately 499 acres located at the former NAS Barbers Point
were conveyed by authorities for facilitating the development
of Ford Island, Hawaii, per section 2814(a)(2) of title 10,
United States Code, and the accompanying master plan. While
development has progressed over the last 20 years,
unfortunately, it has been hampered by an aged electrical
system that the Navy still holds. The committee strongly
encourages the Navy to use its in-kind fund, established in the
Ford Island master development agreement, to invest in new
electrical infrastructure to hasten the development efforts at
the former NAS Barbers Point.
Pacific Deterrence Initiative: Planning & Design, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command
The committee is concerned that the U.S. force posture in
the Indo-Pacific has not sufficiently evolved to support
implementation of the National Defense Strategy or to address
the strategic and operational challenges posed by the People's
Republic of China. Additional resources for planning and design
would support acceleration of critical military construction
investments in the Indo-Pacific. Furthermore, the unfunded
priorities list submitted by the Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command, included additional funding for planning and design.
The committee notes that contained in the 4601 tables of
this Act is an increase of $15.0 million to Military
Construction, Defense-wide, for Pacific Deterrence Initiative-
Planning and Design, to be utilized specifically by U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command.
Strategic basing criteria briefing
The committee understands that military departments do not
always disclose the scoring criteria and rankings used to make
strategic basing decisions. In this process, the concerned
Secretary could make a final subjective decision based on a
variety of data, which remain internal to his or her military
department. The committee believes that this limits the ability
to perform oversight with respect to strategic basing
decisions.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to provide a briefing to the Committee on
Armed Services of the Senate no later than December 1, 2020, on
all criteria, data, score sheets, and rankings related to
strategic basing decisions. The briefing shall include insight
into the ranking and scoring process for three basing decisions
for each military service made in the last 12 months.
Use of O&M for MILCON without tracking dollars
The committee notes the importance of infrastructure to
support the 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS). The committee
further notes that, historically, the military construction
budget averages roughly 1.0 to 1.5 percent of the total
Department of Defense budget, which highlights the limited
resources that the Department devotes to crucial assets both
domestically and globally.
The committee notes that, in 2016, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, titled ``Defense
Infrastructure: Actions Needed to Enhance Oversight of
Construction Projects Supporting Military Contingency
Operations'' (GAO-16-406), that found that, ``[s]ince
contingency operations began in Iraq and Afghanistan, the
Department of Defense (DOD) has not tracked the universe and
cost of all U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) contingency
construction projects supporting operations.'' The GAO
identified operation and maintenance (O&M) funded construction
costs for fiscal years 2009-12 of at least $944.0 million for
2,202 of these projects in Afghanistan, costs that are
significant compared with the $3.9 billion that the DOD
reported as enacted for MILCON-funded projects in Afghanistan
in the same period. The DOD has routinely used O&M funding to
more quickly meet requirements because the MILCON review
process can take up to 2 years. However, the DOD's use of O&M
funding, according to the GAO, has posed risks to the financial
risk of projects exceeding the statutory O&M maximum, resulting
in potential Antideficiency Act (Public Law 97-258) violations.
The GAO also found duplication risk in this practice where, in
the same fiscal year, O&M funds were used to build a facility
and military construction funding was requested, authorized,
and appropriated for the same facility.
The committee notes that the Department has not implemented
any of the GAO's six recommendations to date. Those
recommendations include that the DOD: 1) Track the universe and
cost of O&M-funded projects (the DOD did not concur); 2) Review
construction projects to ensure that funds were properly used
(the DOD did not concur); 3) Examine approaches to shorten
project approval times (the DOD partially concurred); 4)
Document level-of-construction determinations (the DOD
partially concurred); and 5) Require project reviews when
missions change (the DOD partially concurred). The GAO
maintains that its recommendations are still open and valid.
Accordingly, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense
to implement the recommendations of GAO-16-406.
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included $349.8 million for military
construction in fiscal year 2021 for overseas contingency
operations.
The committee recommends $349.8 million for military
construction in fiscal year 2021 for overseas contingency
operations.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2901)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Navy military construction projects for fiscal year 2021 for
overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2902)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2021
for overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2903)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Defense Agencies military construction projects for fiscal year
2021 for overseas contingency operations. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Replenishment of certain military construction funds (sec. 2904)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$3.6 billion in military construction, overseas contingency
operations, for the purposes of replenishing funds for
previously authorized military construction projects that were
repurposed under section 2808 of title 10, United States Code,
with the national emergency declared on the southern border
under the National Emergencies Act (Public Law 94-412). Under
this provision: these transfers are exempt from General
Transfer Authority; the transfer amounts may not exceed what
was originally expended under section 2808 authority for each
project; the aggregate amount after the transfer for any given
project cannot exceed the original authorization for
appropriation amount; and funds can only be transferred until
September 31, 2021.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the activities of the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
defense environmental cleanup activities.
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's other
defense activities.
Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
nuclear energy activities.
Subtitle B--Budget of the National Nuclear Security Administration
Review of adequacy of nuclear weapons budget (sec. 3111)
The committee recommends a provision that would make a
number of changes to the budget preparation process of the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). First, the
Secretary of Energy would be required to transmit the proposed
budget request of the NNSA to the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC)
before the request is submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). The NWC would then review the budget and
determine whether it is adequate to implement Department of
Defense (DOD) nuclear weapons objectives. The NWC would submit
back to the Secretary of Energy either confirmation of adequacy
of the budget or a written description of funding levels and
specific initiatives required to make the budget request
adequate to implement those objectives.
If the NWC determines that the budget request is inadequate
and submits such written description, the Secretary of Energy
would be required to include those funding levels and specific
initiatives in the proposed budget submitted to the OMB. The
Secretary would include in the submission an annex containing a
description of changes made to the proposed NNSA budget through
this process. The Secretary would also be required to submit
that annex to the Congress along with the President's budget
request.
Finally, the Secretary would be required to transmit the
complete proposed budget submission to the NWC at the same time
as it is submitted to the OMB. After reviewing the submission,
the NWC would be required to determine whether it contains the
funding levels and initiatives described above and to submit to
the Congress either a certification that the budget request is
adequate to meet DOD objectives or a statement that it is not.
Treatment of budget of National Nuclear Security Administration (sec.
3112)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
budget of the National Nuclear Security Administration to be
submitted in a budget subfunction separate from the other
atomic energy defense activities currently funded in the 053
subfunction.
Responsibility of Administrator for Nuclear Security for ensuring
National Nuclear Security Administration budget satisfies
nuclear weapons needs of Department of Defense (sec. 3113)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) to ensure that the NNSA's budget is adequate to satisfy
requirements of the Department of Defense related to nuclear
weapons programs.
Participation of Secretary of Defense in planning, programming,
budgeting, and execution process of National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3114)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Nuclear Weapons
Council, to provide annual guidance to the Administrator of the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) on the
development of the President's budget request for the NNSA,
including on the future years nuclear security program.
Requirement for updated planning, programming, budgeting, and execution
guidance for National Nuclear Security Administration (sec.
3115)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to issue revised planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution (PPBE) guidance for the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to replace NAP
130.1A in order to better reflect coordination between the NNSA
and the Department of Defense (DOD) during the PPBE process.
The committee notes that the current guidance contains no
mention of the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) or any DOD
official. This does not reflect existing requirements in law
that mandate the participation of the NWC in the NNSA PPBE
process. The committee also expects the updated guidance to
reflect the improvements to coordination with the NWC and the
DOD required by other provisions in this Act.
Cross-training in budget processes of Department of Defense and
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3116)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to establish a joint
program to cross-train budget and programming personnel from
each department in the other's systems and processes.
The committee notes that lack of familiarity, in particular
of Department of Defense personnel with NNSA budget structures,
has hindered effective communication and cooperation in the
past.
Subtitle C--Personnel Matters
National Nuclear Security Administration Personnel System (sec. 3121)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) to adapt the demonstration project
carried out by the NNSA since 2008 into a permanent alternative
personnel system.
Inclusion of certain employees and contractors of Department of Energy
in definition of public safety officer for purposes of certain
death benefits (sec. 3122)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
eligible for certain death and dismemberment benefits the
National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear material
couriers as well as those designated as members of an emergency
response team conducting operations.
This provision would align agents of the Office of Secure
Transportation, charged with protecting nuclear material in
transit in the United States, with members of other Federal law
enforcement elements in cases of death or catastrophic injury
in the line of duty. The committee believes that these agents,
as well as those would who mobilize to render safe a weapon of
mass destruction in a U.S. city, for example, deserve similar
consideration as others who put their lives on the line in
service of protecting the American public.
Reimbursement for liability insurance for nuclear materials couriers
(sec. 3123)
The committee recommends a provision that would align
officers of the National Nuclear Security Administration's
Office of Secure Transportation with other federal law
enforcement officers for purposes of professional liability
insurance.
Transportation and moving expenses for immediate family of deceased
nuclear materials couriers (sec. 3124)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
eligible immediate family of officers of the National Nuclear
Security Administration's Office of Secure Transportation for
compensation for a last move home in the case of an officer's
death in the line of duty.
Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific,
engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3125)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
special appointment authorities granted to the Department of
Energy under the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2701(c))
until September 30, 2021.
Subtitle D--Cybersecurity
Reporting on penetrations of networks of contractors and subcontractors
(sec. 3131)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
contractors or subcontractors of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) to report penetrations of their covered
networks to the NNSA within 60 days. The provision would
require the Administrator for Nuclear Security to define the
networks covered by this requirement and to establish
procedures for facilitating access to equipment owned or used
by the contractors for the purposes of forensic analysis. The
provision would make appropriate allowances for protection of
trade secrets and personal or commercially-sensitive
information.
The committee notes that this provision would align
reporting requirements for the NNSA's industrial base with that
of the Department of Defense, as established in section 393 of
title 10, United States Code.
Clarification of responsibility for cybersecurity of National Nuclear
Security Administration facilities (sec. 3132)
The committee recommends a provision that would better
align assignment of responsibility for cybersecurity in the
National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401 et
seq.) with the current organization of the National Nuclear
Security Administration, in which the Associate Administrator
for Information Management performs the duties of Chief
Information Officer.
Subtitle E--Defense Environmental Cleanup
Public statement of environmental liabilities for facilities undergoing
defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3141)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to make public, at the same time as the
submission of the President's budget request each year, the
environmental liability for each defense nuclear cleanup site.
As noted in the February 2019 Government Accountability
Office report titled ``Nuclear Waste: DOE Should Take Actions
to Improve Oversight of Cleanup Milestones'' (GAO-19-207), the
Office of Environmental Management has frequently failed to
provide the required annual future-years defense environmental
cleanup plan since the creation of the requirement in the Ike
Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011
(Public Law 111-383). In light of the Department of Energy's
regular failure to meet this reporting requirement, the
committee believes that a basic amount of information should be
available to the public to track overall progress in reducing
the U.S. Government's environmental liabilities.
Inclusion of missed milestones in future-years defense environmental
cleanup plan (sec. 3142)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management (EM)
to include missed, postponed, or renegotiated milestones in the
annual future-years defense environmental cleanup plan.
The February 2019 Government Accountability Office report
titled ``Nuclear Waste: DOE Should Take Actions to Improve
Oversight of Cleanup Milestones'' (GAO-19-207) noted that EM
``does not accurately track met, missed, or postponed cleanup-
related milestones,'' and that, as a result, ``EM's milestone
reporting to Congress is incomplete.'' The committee believes
that the ability to track progress against consistent goals is
essential to effective oversight.
Classification of defense environmental cleanup as capital asset
projects or operations activities (sec. 3143)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management (EM)
to establish a requirement for the classification of defense EM
projects as capital asset projects or operations activities.
The provision would require the Assistant Secretary to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees no later than
March 1, 2021, on the established requirement along with an
assessment of whether any ongoing projects should be
reclassified.
The February 2019 Government Accountability Office report
titled ``Nuclear Waste Cleanup: DOE Could Improve Program and
Project Management by Better Classifying Work and Following
Leading Practices'' (GAO-19-223) noted that 77 percent of EM's
budget request for fiscal year 2019 was for activities
classified as operations. Programs classified as capital asset
projects, on the other hand, are subject to DOE Order 413.3B,
which requires adherence to much more stringent program and
project management standards. While not all EM efforts should
fall under Order 413.3B, the committee believes that EM should
apply a consistent standard across sites and projects in order
to better manage cost and schedule risk across the EM complex.
Continued analysis of approaches for supplemental treatment of low-
activity waste at Hanford Nuclear Reservation (sec. 3144)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to enter into a contract with a federally
funded research and development center to conduct a follow-on
study of the analysis required by section 3134 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) on approaches to treating low-activity waste at the
Hanford Nuclear Reservation in eastern Washington. The
provision would require the Secretary to submit this study,
along with a review conducted by the National Academy of
Sciences, to the congressional defense committees not later
than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Modifications to enhanced procurement authority to manage supply chain
risk (sec. 3151)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
enhanced procurement authority available to the Secretary of
Energy to exclude a supplier that may present a significant
supply chain risk from procurements of covered systems. The
provision would allow the Secretary to delegate his or her
authority to the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA), for procurements within that agency, or
to the senior procurement executive of the Department of Energy
for procurements outside the NNSA. The provision would also
allow a determination to be made for multiple contracts at one
time.
The committee notes that this authority was originally
provided by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) but that, as the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) noted, most recently in its report
dated August 8, 2019, ``Nuclear Supply Chain: NNSA Should
Notify Congress of Its Recommendations to Improve the Enhanced
Procurement Authority'' (GAO-19-606R), the Secretary has never
exercised the authority. This provision is in line with the
recommendations made by the GAO in that report, and the
committee believes that it would improve the process for the
use of the enhanced procurement authority in situations for
which it is appropriate.
Laboratory- or production facility-directed research and development
programs (sec. 3152)
The committee recommends a provision that would align
requirements and restrictions on production facility-directed
research and development with those applied to laboratory-
directed research and development by section 4811 of the Atomic
Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2791).
The committee notes that many of these programs are already
administered similarly by the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). The committee believes that innovation
in manufacturing, as well as recruitment and retention of the
highest quality staff at the NNSA's production facilities, are
crucial to the success of future nuclear programs.
Prohibition on use of laboratory- or production facility-directed
research and development funds for general and administrative
overhead costs (sec. 3153)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of laboratory- or production facility-directed research
and development (LDRD or PDRD) funds for general and
administrative overhead costs at the National Nuclear Security
Administration's laboratories, sites, and plants.
The committee notes that this change was a top
recommendation of the final report of the Commission to Review
the Effectiveness of the National Energy Laboratories in 2015.
The Commission noted at the time that reductions in LDRD
through direct cuts or burdening with overhead costs resulted
in ``substantial cuts to the size of recruitment and retention
programs'' as well as reductions in specific types of projects
at the laboratories.
The committee further notes that section 3119 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public
Law 114-328) temporarily implemented this prohibition as part
of a 3-year pilot program, which was extended an additional
year by section 3118 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). Section 3119, as
amended by section 3118, required the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to submit to the congressional defense committees a
report on this pilot program, assessing the costs, benefits,
risks, and other effects of the program. This report was due
February 15, 2020, but the committee does not expect to receive
the report until July 2020 at the earliest and believes that
this pilot program should be converted to a permanent program
regardless.
Monitoring of industrial base for nuclear weapons components,
subsystems, and materials (sec. 3154)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to designate a senior
official within the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) responsible for monitoring the industrial base
supporting NNSA's nuclear weapons programs. The provision would
require the Administrator to provide that official with
sufficient resources to carry out this responsibility and to
consult with other relevant officials at the Department of
Defense and Department of Energy. Finally, the provision would
require the Administrator to provide annual briefings to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the implementation of this requirement no
later than April 1 each year through 2024.
The committee notes that the NNSA industrial base shares
many of the same challenges faced by that of the Department of
Defense (DOD): parts and materials are procured in small
quantities, at irregular intervals, and with exacting
performance specifications. Unlike the DOD, however, the NNSA
does not comprehensively monitor the health of its industrial
base and instead has left this responsibility to individual
programs or contractors. As a result, efforts are fragmented
and duplicative, as identified by the Department of Energy
Inspector General in a July 2018 report titled ``Supplier
Quality Management at National Nuclear Security Administration
Sites'' (DOE-IG-18-41). The committee believes that this
provision would help the NNSA reduce cost, schedule, and
performance risk in future programs.
Prohibition on use of funds for advanced naval nuclear fuel system
based on low-enriched uranium (sec. 3155)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of any fiscal year 2021 funds at
the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to conduct
research and development of an advanced naval nuclear fuel
system based on low-enriched uranium unless the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of Energy, and the Secretary of the Navy
submit certain certifications to the congressional defense
committees. The provision would also require the Administrator
of the NNSA to submit to the congressional defense committees
not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act a report outlining activities undertaken using fiscal year
2020 funds for this purpose, including progress made toward
either technological or nonproliferation goals.
The committee notes that the Secretaries of Energy and the
Navy stated in a letter to the congressional defense committees
dated March 25, 2018, that such a research and development
effort would cost about $1.0 billion over a 10-to-15-year
period, ``with success not assured.'' It would also result in a
reactor design that would be ``less capable, more expensive,
and unlikely to support current life-of-ship submarine
reactors,'' which would reduce operational availability and
increase force structure requirements.
Authorization of appropriations for W93 nuclear warhead program (sec.
3156)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the W93 warhead modernization program, in accordance with
section 4209(a)(1)(B) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50
U.S.C. 2529(a)(1)(B)). The committee notes that this program is
also authorized in the funding tables in section 4701 of this
Act.
Review of future of computing beyond exascale at the National Nuclear
Security Administration (sec. 3157)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) to enter into an agreement with the National Academy of
Sciences to review the future of advanced computing at the
NNSA. The review would consider a number of factors related to
NNSA requirements and technical capabilities. The Administrator
would be required to submit a report on the review's findings
not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
Application of requirement for independent cost estimates and reviews
to new nuclear weapons systems (sec. 3158)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
existing requirements for selected acquisition reports and
independent cost estimates of warhead life extension programs
to new nuclear weapon systems.
Extension and expansion of limitations on importation of uranium from
Russian Federation (sec. 3159)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through 2035 the limitations on importation of low-enriched
uranium to the United States from the Russian Federation
originally imposed under the terms of the Russian Suspension
Agreement and make certain changes to those limitations. The
provision would allow for the harmonization of the limitations
with those imposed through an agreement between the Department
of Commerce and the Russian Federation if such agreement is
reached before December 31, 2020. Finally, the provision would
require the Secretary of Energy to submit a report to the
Congress not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment
of this Act, and at least once every 3 years after, related to
these limitations.
Integration of stockpile stewardship and nonproliferation missions
(sec. 3160)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the stockpile stewardship capabilities
of the National Nuclear Security Administration should continue
to be applied to efforts to assess and counter current and
emerging nuclear threats.
Technology development and integration program (sec. 3161)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to establish a program to
improve the safety and security of the nuclear weapons
stockpile.
Advanced manufacturing development program (sec. 3162)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to establish an advanced
manufacturing development program.
Materials science program (sec. 3163)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to establish a materials
science program to develop new materials to replace those that
are no longer available for weapons sustainment.
Modifications to Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield
program (sec. 3164)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to establish a working group
to identify and implement recommendations issued by the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as
required by section 3137 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). The provision
would also require the Administrator to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees no later than March 31, 2021,
on the timelines for completing implementation of these
recommendations.
Earned value management program for life extension programs (sec. 3165)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to establish a program to
set earned value management (EVM) standards for technology
readiness for life extension programs and ensure that
appropriate risk mitigation measures are taken to meet the cost
and schedule requirements of these programs. The provision
would also require the Administrator to enter into an
arrangement with an independent entity to review EVM standards
of contractors of the National Nuclear Security Administration.
Use of high performance computing capabilities for COVID-19 research
(sec. 3166)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Energy to make available the unclassified high
performance computing capabilities of the Department of Energy
for research relating to COVID-19, so long as doing so does not
negatively affect the stockpile stewardship mission of the
National Nuclear Security Administration.
Availability of stockpile responsiveness funds for projects to reduce
time necessary to execute a nuclear test (sec. 3167)
The committee recommends a provision that would require not
less than $10.0 million of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act for the Stockpile Responsiveness
Program to be made available for projects related to reducing
the time required to execute a nuclear test if necessary.
Budget Items
Cleanup activities at Los Alamos National Laboratory
The budget request included $5.1 billion for defense
environmental management (EM) programs, of which $120.0 million
was for activities at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).
The committee supports EM's surface and groundwater
management efforts at LANL as well as those focused on
remediation of contaminated sites.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0
million for defense EM activities at LANL.
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
The budget request included $317.0 million for the
Department of Energy's Office of Legacy Management, of which
$150.0 million was requested to support cleanup activities that
would continue to be performed by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) at Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action
Program (FUSRAP) sites.
The committee does not see reason to introduce risk into
cleanup activities at FUSRAP sites by transitioning
administration of the program to a different organization when
USACE has successfully administered the program in the past.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $150.0
million, for a total of $167.0 million, for the Office of
Legacy Management.
Items of Special Interest
Comptroller General review of uncosted balances for Atomic Energy
Defense Activities
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
provides regular base financial reports to the congressional
defense committees containing a number of metrics. While
useful, some of these metrics have led to confusion regarding
the status of these balances. This committee has not previously
received similar data on a regular basis from the Department of
Energy's Office of Environmental Management (EM) or other
defense activities within the Atomic Energy Defense Activities
account.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to undertake a review of NNSA and EM
carryover balances, including: (1) The extent and type of
carryover balances; (2) How the application of the thresholds
used by EM and NNSA to assess carryover balances has changed
over time; (3) The extent to which carryover balances are
associated with either completed efforts or old budget
structures; (4) An analysis of the statutory and policy
constraints on the movement of previously appropriated NNSA and
EM carryover balances within or between appropriations accounts
and within or between congressional controls; (5) Any ongoing
efforts within NNSA or EM to improve management of carryover
balances; and (6) To the extent practicable, how these
practices compare to other Federal Government agencies outside
the Department of Energy. The committee requests that the
Comptroller General provide an interim briefing to the
congressional defense committees no later than February 26,
2021, with the timing of a final report to be determined at the
time of the briefing.
Continued Comptroller General review of the Hanford Waste Treatment
Plant
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management (EM) continues to appear in the
Government Accountability Office's High Risk List report, which
cites programs vulnerable to waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement. EM's largest project, in Hanford, Washington,
has faced numerous technical challenges, cost overruns, and
schedule delays.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to continue its ongoing evaluation of
environmental cleanup efforts at the Hanford Site, including
the Waste Treatment Plant. Reviews should include assessment of
cost and schedule performance, technology readiness levels,
contractor assurance, and project management, as well as the
start of Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste treatment and Hanford's
long-term schedule and budget needs. The committee directs the
Comptroller General to continue these reviews through December
2023--the current amended consent decree milestone for Low-
Activity Waste commissioning--with briefings to the
congressional defense committees on a periodic basis agreeable
to both parties.
Domestic uranium enrichment technologies
The committee recognizes that reconstituting a domestic
uranium enrichment capability is important for present and
future U.S. national security interests, including to support
naval nuclear propulsion, warhead programs, high-assay low-
enriched uranium for research reactor conversion, and nuclear
thermal propulsion. To advance and maintain this capability,
the committee commends the ongoing efforts of the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to establish and
implement long-term plans for continued research, development,
and demonstration of enrichment technologies. The committee
supports the NNSA's analysis of alternatives process, which is
considering both commercial and government approaches to
meeting national security mission requirements and taking into
account the benefits of industry and Federal expertise. The
committee directs the Administrator of the NNSA to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than November 1, 2020, on the assessed benefits or drawbacks of
both commercial and Federal approaches to this mission.
Responsibility for Los Alamos Plutonium Facility 4 and Technical Area
55
Plutonium Facility 4 (PF-4) at Los Alamos National
Laboratory's Technical Area 55 is the primary plutonium
handling facility within the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). PF-4 is currently undergoing major
modifications to produce war reserve plutonium pits, with a
production goal of 30 pits per year by 2026. Given the limited
space and high cost of operations in PF-4, coordination of
programmatic efforts within the facility are paramount.
At the same time, PF-4 is used for a number of other
missions involving the handling and processing of plutonium.
The second-largest requirement for space in the facility is the
Advanced Recovery and Integrated Extraction System (ARIES)
program, which converts excess plutonium, shipped from the
Pantex Plant in Texas, to oxide powder. The powder is then
shipped to the Savannah River Site (SRS), in South Carolina, to
be packaged and then shipped back to the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. The committee notes that the
Government Accountability Office's October 2019 report titled
``Surplus Plutonium Disposition: NNSA's Long Term Plutonium
Oxide Production Plans Are Uncertain'' (GAO-20-166) found that
the NNSA was planning to increase oxide production in PF-4
through the 2020s, requiring additional space and even a new
entrance to the facility. Both of these changes would almost
certainly increase risk to plutonium pit production goals in
the same time period.
Given competing demands on space in PF-4 and the cost of
and risk inherent in shipping plutonium, the committee believes
that the NNSA should consider alternative locations for the
oxide production mission, including at the SRS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator of the
NNSA to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees no later than March 1, 2021, on options for
continued plutonium oxide operations, including continuing the
mission in PF-4 and moving it to the SRS. In the analysis of
continuing operations in PF-4, the Administrator shall list
estimated annual costs as well as the expected impact to the
priority PF-4 mission of plutonium pit production of 30 pits
per year and at a surge level of 50 pits per year. In the
analysis of moving the ARIES mission to the SRS, the
Administrator shall include the estimated timeline and costs
for doing so and estimated annual cost of operations. Either
option should also include consideration of the need to meet
the requirements to remove a certain amount of plutonium from
the state of South Carolina by the end of next year.
Finally, the report shall also include the designation of
one official at the NNSA to coordinate and approve all
programmatic operations in PF-4, including weapons programs and
nonproliferation programs, in order to deconflict valuable
space. That individual shall be below the Deputy Administrator
level and shall also consider other facilities in Technical
Area 55 related to plutonium science, including the
Radiological Laboratory Utility Office Building.
Review of plutonium infrastructure at the National Nuclear Security
Administration
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is
rebuilding its plutonium infrastructure to meet DOD and
statutory requirements to annually produce 80 plutonium pits by
2030. This effort includes two new line item construction
projects and an annual expenditure of operational funds to
refurbish and expand existing plutonium capabilities.
Given the importance of the plutonium mission, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to periodically review the NNSA's plutonium modernization
plans. This review should include the requirements, cost,
schedule, and technology readiness levels, as appropriate, of
the projects and related plutonium operations, including:
(1) The Los Alamos Plutonium Pit Production Project
(21-D-512) and associated plutonium modernization
operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory;
(2) The Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility
(21-D-511) and associated modernization operations at
the Savannah River Site; and
(3) The integration of these two projects with the
NNSA's overall plutonium operations and capability
sustainment program.
The committee requests a preliminary briefing on the status
of these efforts no later than March 1, 2021, with subsequent
reviews to be conducted in consultation with this committee and
in consideration of the critical decision process for the
projects and the NNSA program management requirements. The
briefing and reviews may be coordinated with the Comptroller
General's activities in monitoring the NNSA's progress on pit
production activities pursuant to the request in the House
Committee Report accompanying H.R. 2960 (H. Rept. 116-83) of
the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2020.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
Authorization (sec. 3201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board at
$28.8 million, consistent with the budget request.
Nonpublic collaborative discussions by Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board (sec. 3202)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow
members of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to hold
nonpublic meetings to discuss official business. The members
would not be able to take any formal or informal votes, or
other official actions, at such meetings and would be subject
to other restrictions. The Board would be required to disclose
certain information about these meetings to the public after
the fact.
The committee appreciates the value of government
transparency both to the public and to the Congress. The
committee notes, however, that a 2018 National Academy of
Public Administration report, ``Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board Organizational Assessment,'' identified the
inability to hold regular and candid conversations among board
members as one factor, among many, leading to pervasive
dysfunction at the Board. This provision would help the Board
reach a better balance between transparency and communication.
The committee also notes that this provision is modeled on
currently enacted law allowing similar conversations of the
National Transportation Safety Board, Federal Maritime
Commission, and Surface Transportation Board.
Improvements to operations of Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
(sec. 3203)
The committee recommends a provision that would more
accurately define personnel covered under the adequate
protection standard of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board under section 312 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2286a). The provision would also clarify the
``unfettered access'' to Department of Energy nuclear
facilities that the Secretary of Energy is required to provide
the Board pursuant to section 314 (42 U.S.C. 2286c).
The committee appreciates the efforts of the Department of
Energy to revise or clarify the intent of DOE Order 140.1,
which governs the interface between the Board and the
Department. The committee believes that the most effective way
to clarify implementation of Order 140.1 would be for the Board
and the Department to jointly draft and sign a memorandum of
agreement (MOA) or similar document.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy
and the Chairman of the Board to provide a joint briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than November 1, 2020, on how they
intend to come to a common understanding of Order 140.1 and its
implementation across the defense nuclear enterprise. The
committee encourages both parties to work toward an MOA or
similar document prior to this briefing.
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)
The committee recommends a provision that would reauthorize
certain aspects of the Maritime Administration.
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES
Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
the allocation of funds among programs, projects, and
activities in accordance with the tables in division D of this
Act, subject to reprogramming in accordance with established
procedures.
Consistent with the previously expressed views of the
committee, the provision would also require that decisions by
an agency head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on
authorized, transparent, statutory criteria, or merit-based
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of
sections 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, and
other applicable provisions of law.
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
NATIONAL DEFENSE BASE BUDGET
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................ 3,074,594 185,000 3,259,594
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................. 3,491,507 136,085 3,627,592
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY............................ 3,696,740 -55,500 3,641,240
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY....................... 2,777,716 2,777,716
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................... 8,625,206 60,033 8,685,239
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................ 17,127,378 280,500 17,407,878
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................. 4,884,995 48,800 4,933,795
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC........................ 883,602 883,602
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY..................... 19,902,757 1,351,339 21,254,096
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................... 10,948,518 -372,300 10,576,218
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS............................. 2,903,976 59,600 2,963,576
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................... 17,908,145 1,160,321 19,068,466
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE........................ 2,396,417 2,396,417
SPACE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.......................... 2,446,064 12,500 2,458,564
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE.................. 596,338 596,338
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.......................... 23,695,720 20,200 23,715,920
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE............................. 5,324,487 444,100 5,768,587
SUBTOTAL, TITLE I--PROCUREMENT........................ 130,684,160 3,330,678 134,014,838
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY.............. 12,587,343 123,000 12,710,343
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY.............. 21,427,048 -390,242 21,036,806
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF................ 37,391,826 437,480 37,829,306
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, SF................ 10,327,595 -26,500 10,301,095
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW................ 24,280,891 265,114 24,546,005
OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE...................... 210,090 27,000 237,090
SUBTOTAL, TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND 106,224,793 435,852 106,660,645
EVALUATION...........................................
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY......................... 40,312,968 -6,641 40,306,327
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES..................... 2,934,717 -11,439 2,923,278
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG......................... 7,420,014 -59,952 7,360,062
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY......................... 49,692,742 -582,187 49,110,555
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS................. 7,328,607 -28,257 7,300,350
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES..................... 1,127,046 -30,938 1,096,108
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE................... 284,656 -1,246 283,410
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.................... 34,750,597 -522,301 34,228,296
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.................. 2,531,294 -400 2,530,894
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE................... 3,350,284 -18,763 3,331,521
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.......................... 6,753,642 -125,152 6,628,490
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE............... 38,649,079 181,661 38,830,740
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 1,494,850 148,499 1,643,349
SUBTOTAL, TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........ 196,630,496 -1,057,116 195,573,380
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL.................................... 150,524,104 -2,548,090 147,976,014
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS... 8,372,741 8,372,741
SUBTOTAL, TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................ 158,896,845 -2,548,090 156,348,755
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND.................................. 1,348,910 -140,000 1,208,910
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION................... 889,500 889,500
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF.......... 769,629 15,800 785,429
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL....................... 371,439 371,439
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM................................ 32,690,372 5,000 32,695,372
SUBTOTAL, TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS............. 36,069,850 -119,200 35,950,650
TOTAL, DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 628,506,144 42,124 628,548,268
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY.................................................. 650,336 219,200 869,536
NAVY.................................................. 1,975,606 -118,670 1,856,936
AIR FORCE............................................. 767,132 -71,578 695,554
DEFENSE-WIDE.......................................... 2,027,520 -198,587 1,828,933
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD................................... 321,437 49,835 371,272
AIR NATIONAL GUARD.................................... 64,214 29,500 93,714
ARMY RESERVE.......................................... 88,337 2,500 90,837
NAVY RESERVE.......................................... 70,995 12,800 83,795
AIR FORCE RESERVE..................................... 23,117 25,000 48,117
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM...................... 173,030 173,030
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION....................... 6,161,724 -50,000 6,111,724
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY.................................... 119,400 119,400
O&M, ARMY............................................. 367,142 367,142
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS................... 42,897 42,897
O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS............................ 346,493 25,000 371,493
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE............................... 97,214 97,214
O&M, AIR FORCE........................................ 317,021 25,000 342,021
O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE..................................... 54,728 54,728
IMPROVEMENT FUND...................................... 5,897 5,897
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND................................ 600 600
SUBTOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING.............................. 1,351,392 50,000 1,401,392
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY BRAC............................................. 66,060 66,060
NAVY BRAC............................................. 125,165 125,165
AIR FORCE BRAC........................................ 109,222 109,222
SUBTOTAL, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE................ 300,447 300,447
TOTAL, DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 7,813,563 7,813,563
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB- 636,319,707 42,124 636,361,831
FUNCTION 051)........................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)
DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS
ENERGY PROGRAMS
NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................ 137,800 137,800
SUBTOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS............................. 137,800 0 137,800
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES......................... 454,000 454,000
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.................................... 15,602,000 15,602,000
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION...................... 2,031,000 2,031,000
NAVAL REACTORS........................................ 1,684,000 1,684,000
SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.... 19,771,000 0 19,771,000
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP......................... 4,983,608 100,000 5,083,608
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.............................. 1,054,727 -150,000 904,727
SUBTOTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.... 6,038,335 -50,000 5,988,335
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS......... 25,947,135 -50,000 25,897,135
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILTIIES SAFETY BOARD............... 28,836 28,836
SUBTOTAL, INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION.... 28,836 0 28,836
TOTAL, DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL 25,975,971 -50,000 25,925,971
SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 25,975,971 -50,000 25,925,971
053).................................................
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE FUNDING, BASE BUDGET REQUEST.. 662,295,678 -7,876 662,287,802
NATIONAL DEFENSE OCO BUDGET REQUEST
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................ 461,080 461,080
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................. 881,592 -176,585 705,007
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY............................ 15,225 15,225
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY....................... 110,668 110,668
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................... 924,077 79,400 1,003,477
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................ 33,241 33,241
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................. 5,572 5,572
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC........................ 95,942 95,942
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................... 343,526 343,526
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS............................. 47,963 47,963
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................... 569,155 569,155
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE........................ 223,772 223,772
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE.................. 802,455 802,455
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.......................... 355,339 355,339
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE............................. 258,491 258,491
SUBTOTAL, PROCUREMENT................................. 5,128,098 -97,185 5,030,913
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY.............. 182,824 182,824
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY.............. 59,562 59,562
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF................ 5,304 6,500 11,804
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW................ 82,818 82,818
SUBTOTAL, RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION.. 330,508 6,500 337,008
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY......................... 17,137,754 30,740 17,168,494
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES..................... 33,399 33,399
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG......................... 79,792 79,792
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND...................... 4,015,612 4,015,612
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY......................... 10,700,305 10,700,305
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS................. 1,102,600 17,500 1,120,100
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES..................... 21,492 21,492
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE................... 8,707 8,707
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.................. 77,115 77,115
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.................... 17,930,020 15,445 17,945,465
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE................... 30,090 30,090
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.......................... 175,642 175,642
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE............... 6,022,254 349,500 6,371,754
SUBTOTAL,OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.................... 57,334,782 413,185 57,747,967
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL.................................... 4,602,593 4,602,593
SUBTOTAL,MILITARY PERSONNEL........................... 4,602,593 0 4,602,593
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND.................................. 20,090 20,090
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL....................... 24,069 24,069
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM................................ 365,098 365,098
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF).............. 845,000 -322,500 522,500
SUBTOTAL, OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS........................ 1,254,257 -322,500 931,757
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY.................................................. 15,873 15,873
NAVY.................................................. 70,020 70,020
AIR FORCE............................................. 263,869 263,869
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION....................... 349,762 349,762
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050) OCO 69,000,000 0 69,000,000
BUDGET REQUEST.......................................
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050)......... 731,295,678 -7,876 731,287,802
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XIV--ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME (FUNCTION 600) 64,300 64,300
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADDS)
TITLE X--GENERAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY................... [5,000,000] [4,000,000]
TITLE XV--SPECIAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY.................. [4,500,000] [2,000,000]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY, BASE BUDGET (051)............... 636,319,707 42,124 636,361,831
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053).......................... 25,975,971 -50,000 25,925,971
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS................................. 69,000,000 69,000,000
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)................................... 731,295,678 (7,876) 731,287,802
TRANSFER OF AUTHORIZED AMOUNTS TO NON-DEFENSE FUNCTIONS
TRANSFER FROM DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
CAPTAIN JAMES A. LOVELL FEDERAL HEALTH CARE CENTER.............. -130,400 -130,400
DOD-VA HEALTH CARE SHARING INCENTIVE FUND....................... -15,000 -15,000
SUBTOTAL, TRANSFER FROM DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051).... -145,400 -145,400
OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS PROGRAMS OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE OR
ALREADY AUTHORIZED
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)............................ 0 0
DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES................................ 182,000 182,000
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: DISPOSAL OF DOD REAL PROPERTY............... 9,000 9,000
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: LEASE OF DOD REAL PROPERTY.................. 36,000 36,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051).................. 227,000 0 227,000
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)
OTHER DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS.................................... 9,131,000 9,131,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)...................... 9,131,000 0 9,131,000
TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS (050)......... 9,212,600 0 9,212,600
DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
NATIONAL DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY (051)........................... 705,319,707 42,124 705,361,831
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053).......................... 25,975,971 -50,000 25,925,971
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)................................ 9,212,600 9,212,600
TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION, 050.......... 740,508,278 -7,876 740,500,402
NATIONAL DEFENSE MANDATORY PROGRAMS, CURRENT LAW (CB0 BASELINE)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
CONCURRENT RECEIPT ACCRUAL PAYMENTS TO THE MILITARY RETIREMENT 9,799,000 9,799,000
FUND...........................................................
REVOLVING, TRUST AND OTHER DOD MANDATORY........................ 1,833,000 1,833,000
OFFSETTING RECEIPTS............................................. -1,989,000 -1,989,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051).................. 9,643,000 0 9,643,000
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITES (053)
ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS AND 1,682,000 1,682,000
OTHER..........................................................
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)................ 1,682,000 0 1,682,000
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)
RADIATION EXPOSURE COMPENSATION TRUST FUND...................... 61,000 61,000
PAYMENT TO CIA RETIREMENT FUND AND OTHER........................ 514,000 514,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)...................... 575,000 0 575,000
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE MANDATORY PROGRAMS (050)................ 11,900,000 0 11,900,000
DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY (051)........................... 714,962,707 42,124 715,004,831
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053).......................... 27,657,971 -50,000 27,607,971
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)................................ 9,787,600 9,787,600
TOTAL, BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)....................... 752,408,278 -7,876 752,400,402
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Line Program Name FY 2021 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENHANCE FORCE DESIGN AND POSTURE
Other Procurement, Army
150 PDI: Bulk fuel distribution................. 4,271 0 4,271
164 PDI: Theater watercraft (incl. OPA lines 43,025 0 43,025
166, 183)..................................
165 PDI: Theater MSV-L ships.................... 76,576 0 76,576
Operations and Maintenance, Navy
1CCHPDI: Movement Coordination Center........... 1,000 0 1,000
Military Construction, Navy
N/A PDI: Joint Communication Upgrade............ 166,000 0 166,000
Military Construction, Air Force
N/A PDI: Guam Stand Off Weapons Complex, MSA 2.. 56,000 0 56,000
N/A PDI: Tinian Airfield Development Phase 1 20,000 0 20,000
(Inc 2)....................................
N/A PDI: Tinian Fuel Tanks with Pipeline & 7,000 0 7,000
Hydrant Sys (Inc 2)........................
N/A PDI: Parking Apron (Inc 2).................. 15,000 0 15,000
Military Construction, Defense-Wide
N/A PDI: Planning and Design, INDOPACOM......... 0 15,000 15,000
Subtotal, ENHANCE FORCE DESIGN AND POSTURE.. 388,872 15,000 403,872
EXERCISES, EXPERIMENTATION, AND INNOVATION
Operations and Maintenance, Army
111 PDI: Defender 2021 home station training.... 150,000 0 150,000
111 PDI: Defender 2021 expanded Pacific 214,000 0 214,000
deployment exercise........................
121 PDI: Defender 2021 support transportation/ 12,793 0 12,793
personnel..................................
Operations and Maintenance, Navy
4GTD PDI: Pacific Partnership.................... 5,830 0 5,830
1CCHPDI: Range study/program review............. 1,000 0 1,000
Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
8PL1 PDI: Joint Exercise Program 1253 requirement 125,260 0 125,260
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation,
Army
0604759A PDI: Reagan Test Site T&E investments....... 6,280 0 6,280
Subtotal, EXERCISES, EXPERIMENTATION, AND 515,163 0 515,163
INNOVATION.................................
INCREASE JOINT FORCE LETHALITY
Research and Development, Defense-Wide
0604880C PDI: Guam Defense System--systems 0 76,800 76,800
engineering................................
0605125J PDI: Guam Defense System J8 AoA............. 1,000 0 1,000
Subtotal, INCREASE JOINT FORCE LETHALITY.... 1,000 76,800 77,800
STRENGTHEN COOPERATION WITH ALLIES AND
PARTNERS
Other Procurement, Air Force
14 PDI: Mission Partner Environment BICES-X.... 0 1,500 1,500
49 PDI: Mission Partner Environment PACNET..... 0 14,000 14,000
Operations and Maintenance, Air Force
12A PDI: Mission Partner Environment 0 30,800 30,800
implementation.............................
Research and Development, Air Force
0305600F PDI: Mission Partner Environment BICES-X 0 3,680 3,680
Project 675898.............................
Operations and Maintenance, Navy
1CCMPDI: Joint Task Force Indo-Pacific (SOCPAC). 0 6,300 6,300
1CCMPDI: Singapore CTIF fusion center........... 0 2,000 2,000
1CCHPDI: Asia-Pacific Regional Initiative....... 10,000 5,000 15,000
1CCSPDI: countering Chinese malign influence in 0 17,700 17,700
Indo-Pacific...............................
Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
4GTE PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West 0 13,000 13,000
Project 3309...............................
4GTE PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West 0 2,800 2,800
Project 9202...............................
4GTD PDI: Defense Security Cooperation Agency 254,662 -163,000 91,662
Sec. 333...................................
4GTD PDI: Capacity building (Maritime Security 37,000 163,000 200,000
Initiative)................................
Subtotal, STRENGTHEN COOPERATION WITH ALLIES 301,662 96,780 398,442
AND PARTNERS...............................
Total, PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE........ 1,206,697 188,580 1,395,277
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
Line Item -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Cost Qty Cost Qty Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
FIXED WING
2 MQ-1 UAV.......... 0 0 0 165,000 0 165,000
Reverse [0] [165,000]
planned
temporary
procurement
pause.........
3 FUTURE UAS FAMILY. 0 1,100 0 1,100
4 RQ-11 (RAVEN)..... 0 20,851 0 20,851
ROTARY
7 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 50 792,027 50 792,027
IIIA REMAN.......
8 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 0 169,460 0 169,460
IIIA REMAN AP....
11 UH-60 BLACKHAWK M 36 742,998 36 742,998
MODEL (MYP)......
12 UH-60 BLACKHAWK M 0 87,427 0 87,427
MODEL (MYP) AP...
13 UH-60 BLACK HAWK L 24 172,797 24 172,797
AND V MODELS.....
14 CH-47 HELICOPTER.. 6 160,750 6 160,750
15 CH-47 HELICOPTER 0 18,372 0 18,372
AP...............
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
18 UNIVERSAL GROUND 0 7,509 0 7,509
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
(UAS)............
19 GRAY EAGLE MODS2.. 0 16,280 0 16,280
20 MULTI SENSOR ABN 0 35,864 0 35,864
RECON (MIP)......
21 AH-64 MODS........ 0 118,316 0 118,316
22 CH-47 CARGO 0 15,548 0 20,000 0 35,548
HELICOPTER MODS
(MYP)............
IVCS.......... [0] [20,000]
23 GRCS SEMA MODS 0 2,947 0 2,947
(MIP)............
24 ARL SEMA MODS 0 9,598 0 9,598
(MIP)............
25 EMARSS SEMA MODS 0 2,452 0 2,452
(MIP)............
26 UTILITY/CARGO 0 13,868 0 13,868
AIRPLANE MODS....
27 UTILITY HELICOPTER 0 25,842 0 25,842
MODS.............
28 NETWORK AND 0 77,432 0 77,432
MISSION PLAN.....
29 COMMS, NAV 0 101,355 0 101,355
SURVEILLANCE.....
31 AVIATION ASSURED 0 54,609 0 54,609
PNT..............
32 GATM ROLLUP....... 0 12,180 0 12,180
34 UAS MODS.......... 0 4,204 0 4,204
GROUND SUPPORT
AVIONICS
35 AIRCRAFT 0 49,455 0 49,455
SURVIVABILITY
EQUIPMENT........
36 SURVIVABILITY CM.. 0 8,035 0 8,035
37 CMWS.............. 0 10,567 0 10,567
38 COMMON INFRARED 120 237,467 120 237,467
COUNTERMEASURES
(CIRCM)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
39 AVIONICS SUPPORT 0 1,789 0 1,789
EQUIPMENT........
40 COMMON GROUND 0 17,584 0 17,584
EQUIPMENT........
41 AIRCREW INTEGRATED 0 48,265 0 48,265
SYSTEMS..........
42 AIR TRAFFIC 0 26,408 0 26,408
CONTROL..........
44 LAUNCHER, 2.75 0 2,256 0 2,256
ROCKET...........
45 LAUNCHER GUIDED 0 8,982 0 8,982
MISSILE: LONGBOW
HELLFIRE XM2.....
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 236 3,074,594 0 185,000 236 3,259,594
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
SURFACE-TO-AIR
MISSILE SYSTEM
2 M-SHORAD-- 50 378,654 50 378,654
PROCUREMENT......
3 MSE MISSILE....... 122 603,188 46 176,585 168 779,773
Transfer [46] [176,585]
missiles from
EDI OCO.......
4 PRECISION STRIKE 30 49,941 30 49,941
MISSILE (PRSM)...
5 INDIRECT FIRE 0 106,261 0 -40,500 0 65,761
PROTECTION
CAPABILITY INC 2-
I................
Army- [0] [-40,500]
identified
funding early
to need.......
AIR-TO-SURFACE
MISSILE SYSTEM
6 HELLFIRE SYS 428 91,225 428 91,225
SUMMARY..........
7 JOINT AIR-TO- 657 213,397 657 213,397
GROUND MSLS
(JAGM)...........
8 LONG RANGE 0 45,307 0 45,307
PRECISION
MUNITION.........
ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
MISSILE SYS
9 JAVELIN (AAWS-M) 773 190,325 773 190,325
SYSTEM SUMMARY...
10 TOW 2 SYSTEM 1,405 121,074 1,405 121,074
SUMMARY..........
11 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 5,384 850,157 5,384 850,157
(GMLRS)..........
12 MLRS REDUCED RANGE 3,270 30,836 3,270 30,836
PRACTICE ROCKETS
(RRPR)...........
13 HIGH MOBILITY 5 41,226 5 41,226
ARTILLERY ROCKET
SYSTEM (HIMARS...
MODIFICATIONS
16 PATRIOT MODS...... 0 278,050 0 278,050
17 ATACMS MODS....... 0 141,690 0 141,690
20 AVENGER MODS...... 0 13,942 0 13,942
21 ITAS/TOW MODS..... 0 5,666 0 5,666
22 MLRS MODS......... 0 310,419 0 310,419
23 HIMARS 0 6,081 0 6,081
MODIFICATIONS....
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
24 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 5,090 0 5,090
PARTS............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
25 AIR DEFENSE 0 8,978 0 8,978
TARGETS..........
TOTAL MISSILE 12,124 3,491,507 46 136,085 12,170 3,627,592
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
PROCUREMENT OF
W&TCV, ARMY
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
2 ARMORED MULTI 32 192,971 0 -20,000 32 172,971
PURPOSE VEHICLE
(AMPV)...........
Program [0] [-20,000]
decrease......
MODIFICATION OF
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
4 STRYKER UPGRADE... 154 847,212 154 847,212
5 BRADLEY PROGRAM 0 493,109 0 -20,000 0 473,109
(MOD)............
UBIS slip..... [0] [-20,000]
6 M109 FOV 0 26,893 0 26,893
MODIFICATIONS....
7 PALADIN INTEGRATED 30 435,825 30 435,825
MANAGEMENT (PIM).
9 ASSAULT BRIDGE 0 5,074 0 5,074
(MOD)............
10 ASSAULT BREACHER 4 19,500 4 19,500
VEHICLE..........
11 M88 FOV MODS...... 0 18,382 0 -5,000 0 13,382
Unjustified [0] [-5,000]
growth........
12 JOINT ASSAULT 14 72,178 0 -10,500 14 61,678
BRIDGE...........
IOTE and [0] [-10,500]
testing delay.
13 M1 ABRAMS TANK 0 392,013 0 392,013
(MOD)............
14 ABRAMS UPGRADE 89 1,033,253 89 1,033,253
PROGRAM..........
WEAPONS & OTHER
COMBAT VEHICLES
16 MULTI-ROLE ANTI- 0 17,864 0 17,864
ARMOR ANTI-
PERSONNEL WEAPON
S................
18 MORTAR SYSTEMS.... 0 10,288 0 10,288
19 XM320 GRENADE 0 5,969 0 5,969
LAUNCHER MODULE
(GLM)............
20 PRECISION SNIPER 0 10,137 0 10,137
RIFLE............
21 COMPACT SEMI- 0 999 0 999
AUTOMATIC SNIPER
SYSTEM...........
22 CARBINE........... 0 7,411 0 7,411
23 NEXT GENERATION 0 35,822 0 35,822
SQUAD WEAPON.....
24 COMMON REMOTELY 0 24,534 0 24,534
OPERATED WEAPONS
STATION..........
25 HANDGUN........... 0 4,662 0 4,662
MOD OF WEAPONS AND
OTHER COMBAT VEH
26 MK-19 GRENADE 0 6,444 0 6,444
MACHINE GUN MODS.
27 M777 MODS......... 0 10,983 0 10,983
28 M4 CARBINE MODS... 0 4,824 0 4,824
31 M240 MEDIUM 0 6,385 0 6,385
MACHINE GUN MODS.
32 SNIPER RIFLES 0 1,898 0 1,898
MODIFICATIONS....
33 M119 MODIFICATIONS 0 2,009 0 2,009
34 MORTAR 0 1,689 0 1,689
MODIFICATION.....
35 MODIFICATIONS LESS 0 2,604 0 2,604
THAN $5.0M (WOCV-
WTCV)............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
36 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 2,763 0 2,763
$5.0M (WOCV-WTCV)
37 PRODUCTION BASE 0 3,045 0 3,045
SUPPORT (WOCV-
WTCV)............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 323 3,696,740 0 -55,500 323 3,641,240
OF W&TCV, ARMY...
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, ARMY
SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
AMMUNITION
1 CTG, 5.56MM, ALL 0 68,472 0 68,472
TYPES............
2 CTG, 7.62MM, ALL 0 109,933 0 109,933
TYPES............
3 NEXT GENERATION 0 11,988 0 11,988
SQUAD WEAPON
AMMUNITION.......
4 CTG, HANDGUN, ALL 0 853 0 853
TYPES............
5 CTG, .50 CAL, ALL 0 58,280 0 58,280
TYPES............
6 CTG, 20MM, ALL 0 31,708 0 31,708
TYPES............
7 CTG, 25MM, ALL 0 9,111 0 9,111
TYPES............
8 CTG, 30MM, ALL 0 58,172 0 58,172
TYPES............
9 CTG, 40MM, ALL 0 114,638 0 114,638
TYPES............
MORTAR AMMUNITION
10 60MM MORTAR, ALL 0 31,222 0 31,222
TYPES............
11 81MM MORTAR, ALL 0 42,857 0 42,857
TYPES............
12 120MM MORTAR, ALL 0 107,762 0 107,762
TYPES............
TANK AMMUNITION
13 CARTRIDGES, TANK, 0 233,444 0 233,444
105MM AND 120MM,
ALL TYPES........
ARTILLERY
AMMUNITION
14 ARTILLERY 0 35,963 0 35,963
CARTRIDGES, 75MM
& 105MM, ALL
TYPES............
15 ARTILLERY 0 293,692 0 293,692
PROJECTILE,
155MM, ALL TYPES.
16 PROJ 155MM 597 69,159 597 69,159
EXTENDED RANGE
M982.............
17 ARTILLERY 0 232,913 0 232,913
PROPELLANTS,
FUZES AND
PRIMERS, ALL.....
MINES
18 MINES & CLEARING 0 65,278 0 65,278
CHARGES, ALL
TYPES............
19 CLOSE TERRAIN 0 4,995 0 4,995
SHAPING OBSTACLE.
ROCKETS
20 SHOULDER LAUNCHED 0 69,112 0 69,112
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
21 ROCKET, HYDRA 70, 0 125,915 0 125,915
ALL TYPES........
OTHER AMMUNITION
22 CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES 0 8,891 0 8,891
23 DEMOLITION 0 54,043 0 54,043
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
24 GRENADES, ALL 0 28,931 0 28,931
TYPES............
25 SIGNALS, ALL TYPES 0 27,036 0 27,036
26 SIMULATORS, ALL 0 10,253 0 10,253
TYPES............
MISCELLANEOUS
27 AMMO COMPONENTS, 0 3,476 0 3,476
ALL TYPES........
29 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 10,569 0 10,569
MILLION (AMMO)...
30 AMMUNITION 0 12,338 0 12,338
PECULIAR
EQUIPMENT........
31 FIRST DESTINATION 0 15,908 0 15,908
TRANSPORTATION
(AMMO)...........
32 CLOSEOUT 0 99 0 99
LIABILITIES......
PRODUCTION BASE
SUPPORT
33 INDUSTRIAL 0 592,224 0 592,224
FACILITIES.......
34 CONVENTIONAL 0 235,112 0 235,112
MUNITIONS
DEMILITARIZATION.
35 ARMS INITIATIVE... 0 3,369 0 3,369
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 597 2,777,716 0 0 597 2,777,716
OF AMMUNITION,
ARMY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
ARMY
TACTICAL VEHICLES
1 TACTICAL TRAILERS/ 0 12,986 0 12,986
DOLLY SETS.......
2 SEMITRAILERS, 0 31,443 0 31,443
FLATBED:.........
3 SEMITRAILERS, 0 17,082 0 17,082
TANKERS..........
4 HI MOB MULTI-PURP 0 44,795 0 44,795
WHLD VEH (HMMWV).
5 GROUND MOBILITY 0 37,932 0 37,932
VEHICLES (GMV)...
8 JOINT LIGHT 0 894,414 0 894,414
TACTICAL VEHICLE
FAMILY OF VEHICL.
9 TRUCK, DUMP, 20T 0 29,368 0 29,368
(CCE)............
10 FAMILY OF MEDIUM 0 95,092 0 95,092
TACTICAL VEH
(FMTV)...........
11 FAMILY OF COLD 0 999 0 999
WEATHER ALL-
TERRAIN VEHICLE
(C...............
12 FIRETRUCKS & 0 27,687 0 27,687
ASSOCIATED
FIREFIGHTING
EQUIP............
14 PLS ESP........... 0 21,969 0 21,969
15 HVY EXPANDED 0 65,635 0 65,635
MOBILE TACTICAL
TRUCK EXT SERV...
16 HMMWV 0 5,927 0 5,927
RECAPITALIZATION
PROGRAM..........
17 TACTICAL WHEELED 0 36,497 0 36,497
VEHICLE
PROTECTION KITS..
18 MODIFICATION OF IN 0 114,977 0 114,977
SVC EQUIP........
NON-TACTICAL
VEHICLES
20 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 1,246 0 1,246
VEHICLES.........
21 NONTACTICAL 0 19,870 0 19,870
VEHICLES, OTHER..
COMM--JOINT
COMMUNICATIONS
22 SIGNAL 0 160,469 0 160,469
MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM..........
23 TACTICAL NETWORK 0 360,379 0 5,000 0 365,379
TECHNOLOGY MOD IN
SVC..............
MDTF scalable [0] [5,000]
node equipment
24 SITUATION 0 63,396 0 63,396
INFORMATION
TRANSPORT........
26 JCSE EQUIPMENT 0 5,170 0 5,170
(USRDECOM).......
COMM--SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
29 DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 0 101,498 0 101,498
WIDEBAND SATCOM
SYSTEMS..........
30 TRANSPORTABLE 0 72,450 0 2,400 0 74,850
TACTICAL COMMAND
COMMUNICATIONS...
AFRICOM force [0] [1,000]
protection
upgrades......
MDTF support [0] [1,400]
requirements..
31 SHF TERM.......... 0 13,173 0 13,173
32 ASSURED 0 134,928 0 134,928
POSITIONING,
NAVIGATION AND
TIMING...........
33 SMART-T (SPACE)... 0 8,611 0 8,611
34 GLOBAL BRDCST SVC-- 0 8,191 0 8,191
GBS..............
COMM--C3 SYSTEM
36 COE TACTICAL 0 94,871 0 94,871
SERVER
INFRASTRUCTURE
(TSI)............
COMM--COMBAT
COMMUNICATIONS
37 HANDHELD MANPACK 0 550,848 0 1,500 0 552,348
SMALL FORM FIT
(HMS)............
AFRICOM force [0] [1,500]
protection
upgrades......
38 RADIO TERMINAL 0 8,237 0 8,237
SET, MIDS LVT(2).
41 SPIDER FAMILY OF 0 13,967 0 -13,967 0 0
NETWORKED
MUNITIONS INCR...
Program [0] [-13,967]
cancelation...
43 UNIFIED COMMAND 0 19,579 0 19,579
SUITE............
44 COTS 0 94,156 0 94,156
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIPMENT........
45 FAMILY OF MED COMM 0 18,313 0 18,313
FOR COMBAT
CASUALTY CARE....
46 ARMY 0 51,480 0 51,480
COMMUNICATIONS &
ELECTRONICS......
COMM--INTELLIGENCE
COMM
48 CI AUTOMATION 0 13,146 0 13,146
ARCHITECTURE
(MIP)............
49 DEFENSE MILITARY 0 5,624 0 5,624
DECEPTION
INITIATIVE.......
INFORMATION
SECURITY
51 INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 4,596 0 4,596
SECURITY PROGRAM-
ISSP.............
52 COMMUNICATIONS 0 159,272 0 159,272
SECURITY (COMSEC)
53 DEFENSIVE CYBER 0 54,753 0 900 0 55,653
OPERATIONS.......
MDTF cyber [0] [900]
defense and EW
tools.........
54 INSIDER THREAT 0 1,760 0 1,760
PROGRAM--UNIT
ACTIVITY MONITO..
56 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 260 0 260
$5M (INFO
SECURITY)........
COMM--LONG HAUL
COMMUNICATIONS
57 BASE SUPPORT 0 29,761 0 1,000 0 30,761
COMMUNICATIONS...
AFRICOM UFR [0] [1,000]
force
protection
upgrades......
COMM--BASE
COMMUNICATIONS
58 INFORMATION 0 147,696 0 147,696
SYSTEMS..........
59 EMERGENCY 0 4,900 0 4,900
MANAGEMENT
MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM..........
60 HOME STATION 0 15,227 0 15,227
MISSION COMMAND
CENTERS (HSMCC)..
61 JOINT INFORMATION 0 3,177 0 3,177
ENVIRONMENT (JIE)
62 INSTALLATION INFO 0 300,035 0 300,035
INFRASTRUCTURE
MOD PROGRAM......
ELECT EQUIP--TACT
INT REL ACT
(TIARA)
65 JTT/CIBS-M (MIP).. 0 5,304 0 5,304
66 TERRESTRIAL LAYER 0 8,081 0 8,081
SYSTEMS (TLS)
(MIP)............
68 DCGS-A (MIP)...... 0 151,886 0 151,886
70 TROJAN (MIP)...... 0 17,593 0 17,593
71 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 28,558 0 28,558
EQUIP (INTEL SPT)
(MIP)............
73 BIOMETRIC TACTICAL 0 999 0 999
COLLECTION
DEVICES (MIP)....
ELECT EQUIP--
ELECTRONIC
WARFARE (EW)
75 LIGHTWEIGHT 0 5,332 0 5,332
COUNTER MORTAR
RADAR............
76 EW PLANNING & 0 7,849 0 7,849
MANAGEMENT TOOLS
(EWPMT)..........
77 AIR VIGILANCE (AV) 0 8,160 0 8,160
(MIP)............
79 MULTI-FUNCTION 0 8,669 0 8,669
ELECTRONIC
WARFARE (MFEW)
SYST.............
81 COUNTERINTELLIGENC 0 0 0 13,400 0 13,400
E/SECURITY
COUNTERMEASURES..
MDTF advanced [0] [13,400]
intel systems
remote
collection....
82 CI MODERNIZATION 0 300 0 300
(MIP)............
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL SURV.
(TAC SURV)
83 SENTINEL MODS..... 0 58,884 0 58,884
84 NIGHT VISION 0 1,127,375 0 1,127,375
DEVICES..........
86 SMALL TACTICAL 0 13,954 0 13,954
OPTICAL RIFLE
MOUNTED MLRF.....
88 INDIRECT FIRE 0 10,069 0 4,000 0 14,069
PROTECTION FAMILY
OF SYSTEMS.......
AFRICOM UFR [0] [4,000]
force
protection
upgrades......
89 FAMILY OF WEAPON 0 133,590 0 133,590
SIGHTS (FWS).....
91 JOINT BATTLE 0 243,850 0 243,850
COMMAND--PLATFORM
(JBC-P)..........
92 JOINT EFFECTS 0 69,641 0 69,641
TARGETING SYSTEM
(JETS)...........
94 COMPUTER 0 7,509 0 7,509
BALLISTICS: LHMBC
XM32.............
95 MORTAR FIRE 0 3,800 0 3,800
CONTROL SYSTEM...
96 MORTAR FIRE 0 7,292 0 7,292
CONTROL SYSTEMS
MODIFICATIONS....
97 COUNTERFIRE RADARS 0 72,421 0 72,421
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL C2
SYSTEMS
98 ARMY COMMAND POST 0 49,947 0 49,947
INTEGRATED
INFRASTRUCTURE (.
99 FIRE SUPPORT C2 0 9,390 0 9,390
FAMILY...........
100 AIR & MSL DEFENSE 0 47,374 0 47,374
PLANNING &
CONTROL SYS......
101 IAMD BATTLE 0 201,587 0 201,587
COMMAND SYSTEM...
102 LIFE CYCLE 0 4,495 0 4,495
SOFTWARE SUPPORT
(LCSS)...........
103 NETWORK MANAGEMENT 0 18,651 0 18,651
INITIALIZATION
AND SERVICE......
105 GLOBAL COMBAT 0 2,792 0 2,792
SUPPORT SYSTEM-
ARMY (GCSS-A)....
106 INTEGRATED 0 9,071 0 9,071
PERSONNEL AND PAY
SYSTEM-ARMY (IPP.
107 RECONNAISSANCE AND 0 12,117 0 12,117
SURVEYING
INSTRUMENT SET...
108 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 3,004 0 3,004
EQUIPMENT
(ENFIRE).........
ELECT EQUIP--
AUTOMATION
109 ARMY TRAINING 0 14,574 0 14,574
MODERNIZATION....
110 AUTOMATED DATA 0 140,619 0 140,619
PROCESSING EQUIP.
111 GENERAL FUND 0 4,448 0 4,448
ENTERPRISE
BUSINESS SYSTEMS
FAM..............
112 HIGH PERF 0 68,405 0 68,405
COMPUTING MOD PGM
(HPCMP)..........
113 CONTRACT WRITING 0 8,459 0 8,459
SYSTEM...........
114 CSS COMMUNICATIONS 0 57,651 0 57,651
115 RESERVE COMPONENT 0 14,848 0 14,848
AUTOMATION SYS
(RCAS)...........
ELECT EQUIP--AUDIO
VISUAL SYS (A/V)
117 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 4,995 0 4,995
$5M (SURVEYING
EQUIPMENT).......
ELECT EQUIP--
SUPPORT
119 BCT EMERGING 0 16,983 0 3,900 0 20,883
TECHNOLOGIES.....
MDTF advanced [0] [3,900]
intel systems
remote
collection....
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 1,582 0 1,582
PROGRAMS.........
CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
EQUIPMENT
123 CBRN DEFENSE...... 0 28,456 0 14,000 0 42,456
WMD CST [0] [14,000]
equipment.....
124 SMOKE & OBSCURANT 0 13,995 0 13,995
FAMILY: SOF (NON
AAO ITEM)........
BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
125 TACTICAL BRIDGING. 0 10,545 0 10,545
126 TACTICAL BRIDGE, 0 72,074 0 72,074
FLOAT-RIBBON.....
127 BRIDGE 0 32,493 0 32,493
SUPPLEMENTAL SET.
128 COMMON BRIDGE 0 62,978 0 62,978
TRANSPORTER (CBT)
RECAP............
ENGINEER (NON-
CONSTRUCTION)
EQUIPMENT
129 HANDHELD STANDOFF 0 5,570 0 5,570
MINEFIELD
DETECTION SYS-HST
130 GRND STANDOFF MINE 0 2,497 0 2,497
DETECTN SYSM
(GSTAMIDS).......
132 HUSKY MOUNTED 0 109,069 0 109,069
DETECTION SYSTEM
(HMDS)...........
134 EOD ROBOTICS 0 36,584 0 36,584
SYSTEMS
RECAPITALIZATION.
135 ROBOTICS AND 0 179,544 0 179,544
APPLIQUE SYSTEMS.
137 RENDER SAFE SETS 0 64,583 0 64,583
KITS OUTFITS.....
139 FAMILY OF BOATS 0 5,289 0 5,289
AND MOTORS.......
COMBAT SERVICE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
140 HEATERS AND ECU'S. 0 8,200 0 8,200
142 PERSONNEL RECOVERY 0 4,625 0 4,625
SUPPORT SYSTEM
(PRSS)...........
143 GROUND SOLDIER 0 154,937 0 154,937
SYSTEM...........
144 MOBILE SOLDIER 0 34,297 0 34,297
POWER............
147 CARGO AERIAL DEL & 0 53,021 0 53,021
PERSONNEL
PARACHUTE SYSTEM.
148 FAMILY OF ENGR 0 23,324 0 23,324
COMBAT AND
CONSTRUCTION SETS
149 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 8,014 0 8,014
$5M (ENG SPT)....
PETROLEUM
EQUIPMENT
150 DISTRIBUTION 0 78,448 0 78,448
SYSTEMS,
PETROLEUM & WATER
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
151 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 59,485 0 59,485
MEDICAL..........
MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT
152 MOBILE MAINTENANCE 0 40,337 0 40,337
EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS
153 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 5,386 0 5,386
$5.0M (MAINT EQ).
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT
154 GRADER, ROAD MTZD, 0 5,406 0 5,406
HVY, 6X4 (CCE)...
155 SCRAPERS, 0 4,188 0 4,188
EARTHMOVING......
156 LOADERS........... 0 4,521 0 4,521
157 HYDRAULIC 0 5,186 0 5,186
EXCAVATOR........
158 TRACTOR, FULL 0 4,715 0 4,715
TRACKED..........
159 ALL TERRAIN CRANES 0 70,560 0 70,560
162 CONST EQUIP ESP... 0 8,925 0 8,925
RAIL FLOAT
CONTAINERIZATION
EQUIPMENT
164 ARMY WATERCRAFT 0 40,910 0 40,910
ESP..............
165 MANEUVER SUPPORT 0 76,576 0 76,576
VESSEL (MSV).....
166 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 1,844 0 1,844
$5.0M (FLOAT/
RAIL)............
GENERATORS
167 GENERATORS AND 0 53,433 0 53,433
ASSOCIATED EQUIP.
168 TACTICAL ELECTRIC 0 22,216 0 22,216
POWER
RECAPITALIZATION.
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
169 FAMILY OF 0 16,145 0 16,145
FORKLIFTS........
TRAINING EQUIPMENT
170 COMBAT TRAINING 0 90,580 0 90,580
CENTERS SUPPORT..
171 TRAINING DEVICES, 0 161,814 0 161,814
NONSYSTEM........
172 SYNTHETIC TRAINING 0 13,063 0 13,063
ENVIRONMENT (STE)
175 GAMING TECHNOLOGY 0 1,950 0 1,950
IN SUPPORT OF
ARMY TRAINING....
TEST MEASURE AND
DIG EQUIPMENT
(TMD)
176 CALIBRATION SETS 0 2,511 0 2,511
EQUIPMENT........
177 INTEGRATED FAMILY 0 78,578 0 78,578
OF TEST EQUIPMENT
(IFTE)...........
178 TEST EQUIPMENT 0 14,941 0 14,941
MODERNIZATION
(TEMOD)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
180 RAPID EQUIPPING 0 8,629 0 8,629
SOLDIER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT........
181 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 75,499 0 12,000 0 87,499
SYSTEMS (OPA3)...
AFRICOM UFR [0] [12,000]
force
protection
upgrades......
182 BASE LEVEL COMMON 0 27,444 0 27,444
EQUIPMENT........
183 MODIFICATION OF IN- 0 32,485 0 15,900 0 48,385
SVC EQUIPMENT
(OPA-3)..........
Expeditionary [0] [15,900]
Solid Waste
Disposal
System........
187 SPECIAL EQUIPMENT 0 39,436 0 39,436
FOR TEST AND
EVALUATION.......
OPA2
189 INITIAL SPARES-- 0 9,950 0 9,950
C&E..............
TOTAL OTHER 0 8,625,206 0 60,033 0 8,685,239
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
1 F/A-18E/F 24 1,761,146 24 1,761,146
(FIGHTER) HORNET.
3 JOINT STRIKE 21 2,181,780 2 200,000 23 2,381,780
FIGHTER CV.......
Additional [2] [200,000]
aircraft......
4 JOINT STRIKE 0 330,386 0 330,386
FIGHTER CV AP....
5 JSF STOVL......... 10 1,109,393 2 125,500 12 1,234,893
Additional 2 F- [2] [125,500]
35B aircraft..
6 JSF STOVL AP...... 0 303,035 0 303,035
7 CH-53K (HEAVY 7 813,324 0 -20,000 7 793,324
LIFT)............
Force Design [0] [-20,000]
2030
realignment
NRE excess....
8 CH-53K (HEAVY 0 201,188 0 -10,000 0 191,188
LIFT) AP.........
Force Design [0] [-10,000]
2030
realignment...
9 V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT) 9 934,793 9 934,793
10 V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT) 0 39,547 0 39,547
AP...............
11 H-1 UPGRADES (UH- 0 7,267 0 7,267
1Y/AH-1Z)........
13 P-8A POSEIDON..... 0 80,134 0 80,134
15 E-2D ADV HAWKEYE.. 4 626,109 4 626,109
16 E-2D ADV HAWKEYE 0 123,166 0 123,166
AP...............
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
17 ADVANCED 36 269,867 36 269,867
HELICOPTER
TRAINING SYSTEM..
OTHER AIRCRAFT
18 KC-130J........... 5 380,984 5 380,984
19 KC-130J AP........ 0 67,022 0 67,022
21 MQ-4 TRITON....... 0 150,570 0 -50,000 0 100,570
Excess funding [0] [-50,000]
given
procurement
pause until
FY23..........
23 MQ-8 UAV.......... 0 40,375 0 40,375
24 STUASL0 UAV....... 0 30,930 0 30,930
26 VH-92A EXECUTIVE 5 610,231 5 610,231
HELO.............
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
28 F-18 A-D UNIQUE... 0 208,261 0 208,261
29 F-18E/F AND EA-18G 0 468,954 0 468,954
MODERNIZATION AND
SUSTAINM.........
30 AEA SYSTEMS....... 0 21,061 0 21,061
31 AV-8 SERIES....... 0 34,082 0 34,082
32 INFRARED SEARCH 0 158,055 0 158,055
AND TRACK (IRST).
33 ADVERSARY......... 0 42,946 0 42,946
34 F-18 SERIES....... 0 379,351 0 379,351
35 H-53 SERIES....... 0 74,771 0 74,771
36 MH-60 SERIES...... 0 131,584 0 131,584
37 H-1 SERIES........ 0 185,140 0 185,140
38 EP-3 SERIES....... 0 26,602 0 26,602
40 E-2 SERIES........ 0 175,540 0 175,540
41 TRAINER A/C SERIES 0 7,085 0 7,085
42 C-2A.............. 0 9,525 0 9,525
43 C-130 SERIES...... 0 141,705 0 141,705
44 FEWSG............. 0 684 0 684
45 CARGO/TRANSPORT A/ 0 8,911 0 8,911
C SERIES.........
46 E-6 SERIES........ 0 197,206 0 197,206
47 EXECUTIVE 0 29,086 0 29,086
HELICOPTERS
SERIES...........
49 T-45 SERIES....... 0 155,745 0 155,745
50 POWER PLANT 0 24,633 0 24,633
CHANGES..........
51 JPATS SERIES...... 0 22,682 0 22,682
52 AVIATION LIFE 0 40,401 0 5,000 0 45,401
SUPPORT MODS.....
Aviation body [0] [5,000]
armor vest....
53 COMMON ECM 0 138,480 0 138,480
EQUIPMENT........
54 COMMON AVIONICS 0 143,322 0 143,322
CHANGES..........
55 COMMON DEFENSIVE 0 2,142 0 2,142
WEAPON SYSTEM....
56 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 35,999 0 35,999
57 P-8 SERIES........ 0 180,530 0 180,530
58 MAGTF EW FOR 0 27,794 0 27,794
AVIATION.........
59 MQ-8 SERIES....... 0 28,774 0 28,774
60 V-22 (TILT/ROTOR 0 334,405 0 334,405
ACFT) OSPREY.....
61 NEXT GENERATION 0 176,638 0 176,638
JAMMER (NGJ).....
62 F-35 STOVL SERIES. 0 153,588 0 153,588
63 F-35 CV SERIES.... 0 105,452 0 105,452
64 QRC............... 0 126,618 0 126,618
65 MQ-4 SERIES....... 0 12,998 0 12,998
66 RQ-21 SERIES...... 0 18,550 0 18,550
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
70 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 2,198,460 0 30,000 0 2,228,460
PARTS............
Additional F- [0] [30,000]
35B/C spares..
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIP &
FACILITIES
71 COMMON GROUND 0 543,559 0 543,559
EQUIPMENT........
72 AIRCRAFT 0 75,685 0 75,685
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES.......
73 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 40,633 0 40,633
74 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 21,194 0 21,194
CHARGES..........
75 SPECIAL SUPPORT 0 155,179 0 155,179
EQUIPMENT........
76 FIRST DESTINATION 0 2,121 0 2,121
TRANSPORTATION...
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 121 17,127,378 4 280,500 125 17,407,878
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
WEAPONS
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
1 TRIDENT II MODS... 0 1,173,837 0 1,173,837
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
2 MISSILE INDUSTRIAL 0 7,275 0 7,275
FACILITIES.......
STRATEGIC MISSILES
3 TOMAHAWK.......... 155 277,694 10 26,000 165 303,694
Program [10] [26,000]
increase for
USMC Tomahawk.
TACTICAL MISSILES
4 AMRAAM............ 325 326,952 325 326,952
5 SIDEWINDER........ 270 126,485 270 126,485
7 STANDARD MISSILE.. 125 456,206 125 456,206
8 STANDARD MISSILE 0 66,716 0 66,716
AP...............
9 SMALL DIAMETER 357 78,867 357 78,867
BOMB II..........
10 RAM............... 100 90,533 100 90,533
11 JOINT AIR GROUND 203 49,386 203 49,386
MISSILE (JAGM)...
14 AERIAL TARGETS.... 0 174,336 0 174,336
15 DRONES AND DECOYS. 68 41,256 68 41,256
16 OTHER MISSILE 0 3,501 0 3,501
SUPPORT..........
17 LRASM............. 48 168,845 10 35,000 58 203,845
Additional [10] [35,000]
Navy LRASM
missiles......
18 LCS OTH MISSILE... 15 32,910 15 32,910
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
19 TOMAHAWK MODS..... 0 164,915 0 164,915
20 ESSM.............. 120 215,375 120 215,375
22 HARM MODS......... 24 147,572 24 147,572
23 STANDARD MISSILES 0 83,654 0 83,654
MODS.............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
24 WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL 0 1,996 0 1,996
FACILITIES.......
25 FLEET SATELLITE 0 53,401 0 53,401
COMM FOLLOW-ON...
ORDNANCE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
27 ORDNANCE SUPPORT 0 215,659 0 215,659
EQUIPMENT........
TORPEDOES AND
RELATED EQUIP
28 SSTD.............. 0 5,811 0 -2,200 0 3,611
Insufficient [0] [-2,200]
justification
for ADC non-
recurring
costs.........
29 MK-48 TORPEDO..... 110 284,901 110 284,901
30 ASW TARGETS....... 0 13,833 0 13,833
MOD OF TORPEDOES
AND RELATED EQUIP
31 MK-54 TORPEDO MODS 0 110,286 0 -10,000 0 100,286
Mk 54 Mod 0 [0] [-10,000]
production
delays........
32 MK-48 TORPEDO 0 57,214 0 57,214
ADCAP MODS.......
33 MARITIME MINES.... 0 5,832 0 5,832
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
34 TORPEDO SUPPORT 0 97,581 0 97,581
EQUIPMENT........
35 ASW RANGE SUPPORT. 0 4,159 0 4,159
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION
36 FIRST DESTINATION 0 4,106 0 4,106
TRANSPORTATION...
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
37 SMALL ARMS AND 0 16,030 0 16,030
WEAPONS..........
MODIFICATION OF
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
38 CIWS MODS......... 0 37,147 0 37,147
39 COAST GUARD 0 45,804 0 45,804
WEAPONS..........
40 GUN MOUNT MODS.... 0 74,427 0 74,427
41 LCS MODULE WEAPONS 32 4,253 32 4,253
42 AIRBORNE MINE 0 6,662 0 6,662
NEUTRALIZATION
SYSTEMS..........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
45 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 159,578 0 159,578
PARTS............
TOTAL WEAPONS 1,952 4,884,995 20 48,800 1,972 4,933,795
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMO, NAVY & MC
NAVY AMMUNITION
1 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 41,496 0 41,496
BOMBS............
2 JDAM.............. 2,865 64,631 2,865 64,631
3 AIRBORNE ROCKETS, 0 60,719 0 60,719
ALL TYPES........
4 MACHINE GUN 0 11,158 0 11,158
AMMUNITION.......
5 PRACTICE BOMBS.... 0 51,409 0 51,409
6 CARTRIDGES & CART 0 64,694 0 64,694
ACTUATED DEVICES.
7 AIR EXPENDABLE 0 51,523 0 51,523
COUNTERMEASURES..
8 JATOS............. 0 6,761 0 6,761
9 5 INCH/54 GUN 0 31,517 0 31,517
AMMUNITION.......
10 INTERMEDIATE 0 38,005 0 38,005
CALIBER GUN
AMMUNITION.......
11 OTHER SHIP GUN 0 40,626 0 40,626
AMMUNITION.......
12 SMALL ARMS & 0 48,202 0 48,202
LANDING PARTY
AMMO.............
13 PYROTECHNIC AND 0 9,766 0 9,766
DEMOLITION.......
15 AMMUNITION LESS 0 2,115 0 2,115
THAN $5 MILLION..
MARINE CORPS
AMMUNITION
16 MORTARS........... 0 46,781 0 46,781
17 DIRECT SUPPORT 0 119,504 0 119,504
MUNITIONS........
18 INFANTRY WEAPONS 0 83,220 0 83,220
AMMUNITION.......
19 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 32,650 0 32,650
MUNITIONS........
20 AMMO MODERNIZATION 0 15,144 0 15,144
21 ARTILLERY 0 59,539 0 59,539
MUNITIONS........
22 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 4,142 0 4,142
MILLION..........
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 2,865 883,602 0 0 2,865 883,602
OF AMMO, NAVY &
MC...............
SHIPBUILDING AND
CONVERSION, NAVY
FLEET BALLISTIC
MISSILE SHIPS
1 OHIO REPLACEMENT 1 2,891,475 1 2,891,475
SUBMARINE........
2 OHIO REPLACEMENT 0 1,123,175 0 175,000 0 1,298,175
SUBMARINE AP.....
Submarine [0] [175,000]
supplier
stability.....
OTHER WARSHIPS
3 CARRIER 0 997,544 0 997,544
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM..........
4 CVN-81............ 0 1,645,606 0 1,645,606
5 VIRGINIA CLASS 1 2,334,693 0 -74,400 1 2,260,293
SUBMARINE........
Unjustified [0] [-74,400]
cost growth...
6 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 1,901,187 0 472,000 0 2,373,187
SUBMARINE AP.....
Long lead [0] [472,000]
material for
option ship...
7 CVN REFUELING 0 1,878,453 0 1,878,453
OVERHAULS........
8 CVN REFUELING 0 17,384 0 17,384
OVERHAULS AP.....
9 DDG 1000.......... 0 78,205 0 78,205
10 DDG-51............ 2 3,040,270 0 -30,000 2 3,010,270
Available [0] [-30,000]
prior-year
funds.........
11 DDG-51 AP......... 0 29,297 0 435,000 0 464,297
LLTM for FY22 [0] [260,000]
DDG-51s.......
Surface ship [0] [175,000]
supplier
stability.....
13 FFG-FRIGATE....... 1 1,053,123 1 1,053,123
AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
14 LPD FLIGHT II..... 1 1,155,801 -1 -250,000 0 905,801
Transfer to [0] [-250,000]
Line 15.......
Previously [-1]
authorized....
15 LPD FLIGHT II AP.. 0 0 0 500,000 0 500,000
LPD-32 and LPD- [0] [250,000]
33 program
increase......
Transfer from [0] [250,000]
Line 14 for
LPD-32 and LPD-
33............
17 LHA REPLACEMENT... 0 0 0 250,000 0 250,000
LHA-9 program [0] [250,000]
increase......
AUXILIARIES, CRAFT
AND PRIOR YR
PROGRAM COST
22 TOWING, SALVAGE, 2 168,209 2 168,209
AND RESCUE SHIP
(ATS)............
23 LCU 1700.......... 5 87,395 -1 -17,000 4 70,395
Insufficient [-1] [-17,000]
justification.
24 OUTFITTING........ 0 825,586 0 -78,300 0 747,286
Unjustified [0] [-78,300]
cost growth...
26 SERVICE CRAFT..... 0 249,781 0 25,500 0 275,281
Accelerate YP- [0] [25,500]
703 Flight II.
27 LCAC SLEP......... 3 56,461 -3 -56,461 0 0
Insufficient [-3] [-56,461]
justification.
28 COMPLETION OF PY 0 369,112 0 369,112
SHIPBUILDING
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL SHIPBUILDING 16 19,902,757 -5 1,351,339 11 21,254,096
AND CONVERSION,
NAVY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
NAVY
SHIP PROPULSION
EQUIPMENT
1 SURFACE POWER 0 11,738 0 11,738
EQUIPMENT........
GENERATORS
2 SURFACE COMBATANT 0 58,497 0 -20,000 0 38,497
HM&E.............
Hardware and [0] [15,000]
software
upgrades for 5
previously
procured HED
ship sets.....
HED [0] [-35,000]
installation
early to need.
NAVIGATION
EQUIPMENT
3 OTHER NAVIGATION 0 74,084 0 74,084
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SHIPBOARD
EQUIPMENT
4 SUB PERISCOPE, 0 204,806 0 204,806
IMAGING AND SUPT
EQUIP PROG.......
5 DDG MOD........... 0 547,569 0 -50,000 0 497,569
Installation [0] [-50,000]
excess unit
cost growth...
6 FIREFIGHTING 0 18,394 0 18,394
EQUIPMENT........
7 COMMAND AND 0 2,374 0 2,374
CONTROL
SWITCHBOARD......
8 LHA/LHD MIDLIFE... 0 78,265 0 78,265
9 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 23,035 0 23,035
EQUIPMENT........
10 SUBMARINE SUPPORT 0 64,632 0 64,632
EQUIPMENT........
11 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 22,868 0 22,868
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
12 LCS CLASS SUPPORT 0 3,976 0 3,976
EQUIPMENT........
13 SUBMARINE 0 31,322 0 31,322
BATTERIES........
14 LPD CLASS SUPPORT 0 50,475 0 50,475
EQUIPMENT........
15 DDG 1000 CLASS 0 42,279 0 42,279
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
16 STRATEGIC PLATFORM 0 15,429 0 15,429
SUPPORT EQUIP....
17 DSSP EQUIPMENT.... 0 2,918 0 2,918
18 CG MODERNIZATION.. 0 87,978 0 87,978
19 LCAC.............. 0 9,366 0 9,366
20 UNDERWATER EOD 0 16,842 0 16,842
EQUIPMENT........
21 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 105,715 0 105,715
MILLION..........
22 CHEMICAL WARFARE 0 3,044 0 3,044
DETECTORS........
23 SUBMARINE LIFE 0 5,885 0 5,885
SUPPORT SYSTEM...
REACTOR PLANT
EQUIPMENT
24 SHIP MAINTENANCE, 0 1,260,721 0 1,260,721
REPAIR AND
MODERNIZATION....
25 REACTOR POWER 0 5,305 0 5,305
UNITS............
26 REACTOR COMPONENTS 0 415,404 0 415,404
OCEAN ENGINEERING
27 DIVING AND SALVAGE 0 11,143 0 11,143
EQUIPMENT........
SMALL BOATS
28 STANDARD BOATS.... 0 52,371 0 52,371
PRODUCTION
FACILITIES
EQUIPMENT
29 OPERATING FORCES 0 233,667 0 233,667
IPE..............
OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
30 LCS COMMON MISSION 0 39,714 0 -22,300 0 17,414
MODULES EQUIPMENT
MCM containers [0] [-22,300]
and MPCE sonar
processing
insufficient
justification.
31 LCS MCM MISSION 0 218,822 0 -123,500 0 95,322
MODULES..........
Excess [0] [-123,500]
procurement
ahead of
satisfactory
testing.......
32 LCS ASW MISSION 0 61,759 0 -57,000 0 4,759
MODULES..........
Excess [0] [-57,000]
procurement
ahead of
satisfactory
testing.......
33 LCS SUW MISSION 0 24,412 0 24,412
MODULES..........
34 LCS IN-SERVICE 0 121,848 0 121,848
MODERNIZATION....
35 SMALL & MEDIUM UUV 0 67,709 0 -30,100 0 37,609
SMCM UUV [0] [-30,100]
excess
procurement
ahead of
satisfactory
testing.......
SHIP SONARS
37 SPQ-9B RADAR...... 0 27,517 0 27,517
38 AN/SQQ-89 SURF ASW 0 128,664 0 128,664
COMBAT SYSTEM....
39 SSN ACOUSTIC 0 374,737 0 374,737
EQUIPMENT........
40 UNDERSEA WARFARE 0 9,286 0 9,286
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
ASW ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
41 SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 0 26,066 0 26,066
WARFARE SYSTEM...
42 SSTD.............. 0 13,241 0 13,241
43 FIXED SURVEILLANCE 0 193,446 0 193,446
SYSTEM...........
44 SURTASS........... 0 63,838 0 63,838
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
EQUIPMENT
45 AN/SLQ-32......... 0 387,195 0 -56,400 0 330,795
Early to need. [0] [-56,400]
RECONNAISSANCE
EQUIPMENT
46 SHIPBOARD IW 0 235,744 0 235,744
EXPLOIT..........
47 AUTOMATED 0 3,862 0 3,862
IDENTIFICATION
SYSTEM (AIS).....
OTHER SHIP
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
48 COOPERATIVE 0 26,006 0 -7,300 0 18,706
ENGAGEMENT
CAPABILITY.......
Common Array [0] [-7,300]
Block antenna
program delays
49 NAVAL TACTICAL 0 15,385 0 15,385
COMMAND SUPPORT
SYSTEM (NTCSS)...
50 ATDLS............. 0 103,835 0 103,835
51 NAVY COMMAND AND 0 3,594 0 3,594
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NCCS)...........
52 MINESWEEPING 0 15,744 0 15,744
SYSTEM
REPLACEMENT......
53 SHALLOW WATER MCM. 0 5,493 0 5,493
54 NAVSTAR GPS 0 38,043 0 38,043
RECEIVERS (SPACE)
55 AMERICAN FORCES 0 2,592 0 2,592
RADIO AND TV
SERVICE..........
56 STRATEGIC PLATFORM 0 7,985 0 7,985
SUPPORT EQUIP....
AVIATION
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
57 ASHORE ATC 0 83,475 0 83,475
EQUIPMENT........
58 AFLOAT ATC 0 65,113 0 65,113
EQUIPMENT........
59 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 23,815 0 23,815
60 JOINT PRECISION 0 100,751 0 100,751
APPROACH AND
LANDING SYSTEM (.
61 NAVAL MISSION 0 13,947 0 13,947
PLANNING SYSTEMS.
OTHER SHORE
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
62 MARITIME 0 1,375 0 1,375
INTEGRATED
BROADCAST SYSTEM.
63 TACTICAL/MOBILE 0 22,771 0 22,771
C4I SYSTEMS......
64 DCGS-N............ 0 18,872 0 18,872
65 CANES............. 0 389,585 0 389,585
66 RADIAC............ 0 10,335 0 10,335
67 CANES-INTELL...... 0 48,654 0 48,654
68 GPETE............. 0 8,133 0 8,133
69 MASF.............. 0 4,150 0 4,150
70 INTEG COMBAT 0 5,934 0 5,934
SYSTEM TEST
FACILITY.........
71 EMI CONTROL 0 4,334 0 4,334
INSTRUMENTATION..
72 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 159,815 0 -54,800 0 105,015
MILLION..........
NGSSR [0] [-54,800]
available
prior year
funds.........
SHIPBOARD
COMMUNICATIONS
73 SHIPBOARD TACTICAL 0 56,106 0 56,106
COMMUNICATIONS...
74 SHIP 0 124,288 0 124,288
COMMUNICATIONS
AUTOMATION.......
75 COMMUNICATIONS 0 45,120 0 45,120
ITEMS UNDER $5M..
SUBMARINE
COMMUNICATIONS
76 SUBMARINE 0 31,133 0 31,133
BROADCAST SUPPORT
77 SUBMARINE 0 62,214 0 62,214
COMMUNICATION
EQUIPMENT........
SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
78 SATELLITE 0 47,421 0 47,421
COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEMS..........
79 NAVY MULTIBAND 0 64,552 0 64,552
TERMINAL (NMT)...
SHORE
COMMUNICATIONS
80 JOINT 0 4,398 0 4,398
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
CRYPTOGRAPHIC
EQUIPMENT
81 INFO SYSTEMS 0 157,551 0 157,551
SECURITY PROGRAM
(ISSP)...........
82 MIO INTEL 0 985 0 985
EXPLOITATION TEAM
CRYPTOLOGIC
EQUIPMENT
83 CRYPTOLOGIC 0 15,906 0 15,906
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIP............
OTHER ELECTRONIC
SUPPORT
90 COAST GUARD 0 70,689 0 70,689
EQUIPMENT........
SONOBUOYS
92 SONOBUOYS--ALL 0 237,639 0 49,100 0 286,739
TYPES............
Program [0] [49,100]
increase for
sonobuoys.....
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
93 MINOTAUR.......... 0 5,077 0 5,077
94 WEAPONS RANGE 0 83,969 0 83,969
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
95 AIRCRAFT SUPPORT 0 187,758 0 187,758
EQUIPMENT........
96 ADVANCED ARRESTING 0 16,059 0 16,059
GEAR (AAG).......
97 METEOROLOGICAL 0 15,192 0 15,192
EQUIPMENT........
99 LEGACY AIRBORNE 0 6,674 0 6,674
MCM..............
100 LAMPS EQUIPMENT... 0 1,189 0 1,189
101 AVIATION SUPPORT 0 58,873 0 58,873
EQUIPMENT........
102 UMCS-UNMAN CARRIER 0 60,937 0 60,937
AVIATION(UCA)MISS
ION CNTRL........
SHIP GUN SYSTEM
EQUIPMENT
103 SHIP GUN SYSTEMS 0 5,540 0 5,540
EQUIPMENT........
SHIP MISSILE
SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
104 HARPOON SUPPORT 0 208 0 208
EQUIPMENT........
105 SHIP MISSILE 0 262,077 0 262,077
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
106 TOMAHAWK SUPPORT 0 84,087 0 84,087
EQUIPMENT........
FBM SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
107 STRATEGIC MISSILE 0 258,910 0 258,910
SYSTEMS EQUIP....
ASW SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
108 SSN COMBAT CONTROL 0 173,770 0 173,770
SYSTEMS..........
109 ASW SUPPORT 0 26,584 0 26,584
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER ORDNANCE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
110 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 7,470 0 7,470
DISPOSAL EQUIP...
111 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 6,356 0 6,356
MILLION..........
OTHER EXPENDABLE
ORDNANCE
112 ANTI-SHIP MISSILE 0 86,356 0 86,356
DECOY SYSTEM.....
113 SUBMARINE TRAINING 0 69,240 0 69,240
DEVICE MODS......
114 SURFACE TRAINING 0 192,245 0 192,245
EQUIPMENT........
CIVIL ENGINEERING
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
115 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 6,123 0 6,123
VEHICLES.........
116 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 2,693 0 2,693
TRUCKS...........
117 CONSTRUCTION & 0 47,301 0 47,301
MAINTENANCE EQUIP
118 FIRE FIGHTING 0 10,352 0 10,352
EQUIPMENT........
119 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 31,475 0 31,475
121 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 2,630 0 2,630
EQUIPMENT........
122 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 47,972 0 47,972
MILLION..........
123 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 1,171 0 1,171
VEHICLES.........
SUPPLY SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
124 SUPPLY EQUIPMENT.. 0 19,693 0 19,693
125 FIRST DESTINATION 0 4,956 0 4,956
TRANSPORTATION...
126 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 668,639 0 668,639
SUPPLY SYSTEMS...
TRAINING DEVICES
127 TRAINING SUPPORT 0 4,026 0 4,026
EQUIPMENT........
128 TRAINING AND 0 73,454 0 73,454
EDUCATION
EQUIPMENT........
COMMAND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
129 COMMAND SUPPORT 0 32,390 0 32,390
EQUIPMENT........
130 MEDICAL SUPPORT 0 974 0 974
EQUIPMENT........
132 NAVAL MIP SUPPORT 0 5,606 0 5,606
EQUIPMENT........
133 OPERATING FORCES 0 16,024 0 16,024
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
134 C4ISR EQUIPMENT... 0 6,697 0 6,697
135 ENVIRONMENTAL 0 27,503 0 27,503
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
136 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 138,281 0 138,281
EQUIPMENT........
137 ENTERPRISE 0 42,680 0 42,680
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
OTHER
140 NEXT GENERATION 0 184,443 0 184,443
ENTERPRISE
SERVICE..........
141 CYBERSPACE 0 16,523 0 16,523
ACTIVITIES.......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 18,446 0 18,446
PROGRAMS.........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
142 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 374,195 0 374,195
PARTS............
TOTAL OTHER 0 10,948,518 0 -372,300 0 10,576,218
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT,
MARINE CORPS
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
1 AAV7A1 PIP........ 0 87,476 0 87,476
2 AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT 72 478,874 72 478,874
VEHICLE FAMILY OF
VEHICLES.........
3 LAV PIP........... 0 41,988 0 41,988
ARTILLERY AND
OTHER WEAPONS
4 155MM LIGHTWEIGHT 0 59 0 59
TOWED HOWITZER...
5 ARTILLERY WEAPONS 0 174,687 36 59,600 36 234,287
SYSTEM...........
Ground-Based [36] [59,600]
Anti-Ship
Missile NSM...
6 WEAPONS AND COMBAT 0 24,867 0 24,867
VEHICLES UNDER $5
MILLION..........
OTHER SUPPORT
7 MODIFICATION KITS. 0 3,067 0 3,067
GUIDED MISSILES
8 GROUND BASED AIR 0 18,920 0 18,920
DEFENSE..........
9 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 98 19,888 98 19,888
JAVELIN..........
10 FAMILY ANTI-ARMOR 0 21,891 0 21,891
WEAPON SYSTEMS
(FOAAWS).........
11 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 0 34,985 0 34,985
TOW..............
12 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 952 133,689 952 133,689
(GMLRS)..........
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEMS
13 COMMON AVIATION 0 35,057 0 35,057
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM (C
REPAIR AND TEST
EQUIPMENT
14 REPAIR AND TEST 0 24,405 0 24,405
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SUPPORT
(TEL)
15 MODIFICATION KITS. 0 1,006 0 1,006
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NON-TEL)
16 ITEMS UNDER $5 0 69,725 0 69,725
MILLION (COMM &
ELEC)............
17 AIR OPERATIONS C2 0 15,611 0 15,611
SYSTEMS..........
RADAR + EQUIPMENT
(NON-TEL)
19 GROUND/AIR TASK 8 284,283 8 284,283
ORIENTED RADAR (G/
ATOR)............
INTELL/COMM
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL)
20 GCSS-MC........... 0 1,587 0 1,587
21 FIRE SUPPORT 0 24,934 0 24,934
SYSTEM...........
22 INTELLIGENCE 0 50,728 0 50,728
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
24 UNMANNED AIR 0 24,853 0 24,853
SYSTEMS (INTEL)..
25 DCGS-MC........... 0 38,260 0 38,260
26 UAS PAYLOADS...... 0 5,489 0 5,489
OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
TEL)
29 NEXT GENERATION 0 78,922 0 78,922
ENTERPRISE
NETWORK (NGEN)...
30 COMMON COMPUTER 0 35,349 0 35,349
RESOURCES........
31 COMMAND POST 0 33,713 0 33,713
SYSTEMS..........
32 RADIO SYSTEMS..... 0 343,250 0 343,250
33 COMM SWITCHING & 0 40,627 0 40,627
CONTROL SYSTEMS..
34 COMM & ELEC 0 43,782 0 43,782
INFRASTRUCTURE
SUPPORT..........
35 CYBERSPACE 0 53,896 0 53,896
ACTIVITIES.......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 3,797 0 3,797
PROGRAMS.........
ADMINISTRATIVE
VEHICLES
37 COMMERCIAL CARGO 0 22,460 0 22,460
VEHICLES.........
TACTICAL VEHICLES
38 MOTOR TRANSPORT 0 10,739 0 10,739
MODIFICATIONS....
39 JOINT LIGHT 752 381,675 752 381,675
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
40 FAMILY OF TACTICAL 0 2,963 0 2,963
TRAILERS.........
ENGINEER AND OTHER
EQUIPMENT
42 ENVIRONMENTAL 0 385 0 385
CONTROL EQUIP
ASSORT...........
43 TACTICAL FUEL 0 501 0 501
SYSTEMS..........
44 POWER EQUIPMENT 0 23,430 0 23,430
ASSORTED.........
45 AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT 0 5,752 0 5,752
EQUIPMENT........
46 EOD SYSTEMS....... 0 20,939 0 20,939
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
47 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 23,063 0 23,063
EQUIPMENT........
GENERAL PROPERTY
48 FIELD MEDICAL 0 4,187 0 4,187
EQUIPMENT........
49 TRAINING DEVICES.. 0 101,765 0 101,765
50 FAMILY OF 0 19,305 0 19,305
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT........
51 ULTRA-LIGHT 0 678 0 678
TACTICAL VEHICLE
(ULTV)...........
OTHER SUPPORT
52 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 9,174 0 9,174
MILLION..........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
53 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 27,295 0 27,295
PARTS............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 1,882 2,903,976 36 59,600 1,918 2,963,576
MARINE CORPS.....
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
TACTICAL FORCES
1 F-35.............. 48 4,567,018 12 976,667 60 5,543,685
Additional 12 [12] [976,667]
F-35As........
2 F-35.............. 0 610,800 0 610,800
4 F-15EX............ 12 1,269,847 12 1,269,847
5 F-15EX............ 0 133,500 0 133,500
TACTICAL AIRLIFT
7 KC-46A MDAP....... 15 2,850,151 15 2,850,151
OTHER AIRLIFT
8 C-130J............ 0 37,131 0 37,131
10 MC-130J........... 4 362,807 4 362,807
11 MC-130J........... 0 39,987 0 39,987
HELICOPTERS
12 UH-1N REPLACEMENT. 8 194,016 8 194,016
13 COMBAT RESCUE 16 973,473 16 973,473
HELICOPTER.......
MISSION SUPPORT
AIRCRAFT
15 CIVIL AIR PATROL A/ 0 2,811 0 2,811
C................
OTHER AIRCRAFT
16 TARGET DRONES..... 38 133,273 38 133,273
18 COMPASS CALL...... 0 161,117 0 161,117
20 MQ-9.............. 0 29,409 0 50,000 0 79,409
Program [0] [50,000]
increase......
STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
22 B-1............... 0 3,853 0 -3,853 0 0
USAF-requested [0] [-3,853]
transfer to
RDAF Line 174.
23 B-2A.............. 0 31,476 0 31,476
24 B-1B.............. 0 21,808 0 -493 0 21,315
USAF-requested [0] [-493]
transfer to
RDAF Line 174.
25 B-52.............. 0 53,949 0 53,949
26 LARGE AIRCRAFT 0 9,999 0 9,999
INFRARED
COUNTERMEASURES..
TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
27 A-10.............. 0 135,793 0 135,793
28 E-11 BACN/HAG..... 0 33,645 0 33,645
29 F-15.............. 0 349,304 0 349,304
30 F-16.............. 0 615,760 0 25,000 0 640,760
Additional [0] [25,000]
radars........
32 F-22A............. 0 387,905 0 387,905
33 F-35 MODIFICATIONS 0 322,185 0 322,185
34 F-15 EPAW......... 6 31,995 6 31,995
35 INCREMENT 3.2B.... 0 5,889 0 5,889
36 KC-46A MDAP....... 0 24,085 0 24,085
AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
37 C-5............... 0 62,108 0 62,108
38 C-17A............. 0 66,798 0 66,798
40 C-32A............. 0 2,947 0 2,947
41 C-37A............. 0 12,985 0 12,985
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
42 GLIDER MODS....... 0 977 0 977
43 T-6............... 0 26,829 0 26,829
44 T-1............... 0 4,465 0 4,465
45 T-38.............. 0 36,806 0 7,700 0 44,506
T-38 ejection [0] [7,700]
seats.........
OTHER AIRCRAFT
46 U-2 MODS.......... 0 110,618 0 110,618
47 KC-10A (ATCA)..... 0 117 0 117
49 VC-25A MOD........ 0 1,983 0 1,983
50 C-40.............. 0 9,252 0 9,252
51 C-130............. 0 5,871 0 5,871
52 C-130J MODS....... 0 140,032 0 140,032
53 C-135............. 0 88,250 0 88,250
55 COMPASS CALL...... 0 193,389 0 193,389
57 RC-135............ 0 191,332 0 191,332
58 E-3............... 0 172,141 0 172,141
59 E-4............... 0 58,803 0 -14,700 0 44,103
Funds rephased [0] [-14,700]
to future
fiscal years..
60 E-8............... 0 11,037 0 10,000 0 21,037
Secure [0] [10,000]
information
transmission
capability....
61 AIRBORNE WARNING 0 53,343 0 53,343
AND CNTRL SYS
(AWACS) 40/45....
62 FAMILY OF BEYOND 0 1,573 0 1,573
LINE-OF-SIGHT
TERMINALS........
63 H-1............... 0 4,410 0 4,410
64 H-60.............. 0 44,538 0 44,538
65 RQ-4 MODS......... 0 40,468 0 40,468
66 HC/MC-130 0 20,780 0 20,780
MODIFICATIONS....
67 OTHER AIRCRAFT.... 0 100,774 0 100,774
68 MQ-9 MODS......... 0 188,387 0 188,387
70 CV-22 MODS........ 0 122,306 0 5,000 0 127,306
CV-22 ABSS.... [0] [5,000]
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
71 INITIAL SPARES/ 0 926,683 0 30,000 0 956,683
REPAIR PARTS.....
F-35A initial [0] [30,000]
spares
increase......
COMMON SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
73 AIRCRAFT 0 132,719 0 132,719
REPLACEMENT
SUPPORT EQUIP....
POST PRODUCTION
SUPPORT
74 B-2A.............. 0 1,683 0 1,683
75 B-2B.............. 0 46,734 0 46,734
76 B-52.............. 0 1,034 0 1,034
79 E-11 BACN/HAG..... 0 63,419 0 63,419
80 F-15.............. 0 2,632 0 2,632
81 F-16.............. 0 14,163 0 14,163
83 OTHER AIRCRAFT.... 0 4,595 0 4,595
84 RQ-4 POST 0 32,585 0 32,585
PRODUCTION
CHARGES..........
INDUSTRIAL
PREPAREDNESS
85 INDUSTRIAL 0 18,215 0 18,215
RESPONSIVENESS...
WAR CONSUMABLES
86 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 36,046 0 36,046
OTHER PRODUCTION
CHARGES
87 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 1,439,640 0 75,000 0 1,514,640
CHARGES..........
Classified [0] [75,000]
increase......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 21,692 0 21,692
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 147 17,908,145 12 1,160,321 159 19,068,466
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
MISSILE
REPLACEMENT
EQUIPMENT--BALLIS
TIC
1 MISSILE 0 75,012 0 75,012
REPLACEMENT EQ-
BALLISTIC........
TACTICAL
2 REPLAC EQUIP & WAR 0 4,495 0 4,495
CONSUMABLES......
4 JOINT AIR-SURFACE 376 475,949 -60 -75,000 316 400,949
STANDOFF MISSILE.
Realignment to [-60] [-75,000]
support NDS
requirements
in Pacific....
5 LRASM0............ 5 19,800 20 75,000 25 94,800
Additional Air [20] [75,000]
Force LRASM
missiles......
6 SIDEWINDER (AIM- 331 164,769 331 164,769
9X)..............
7 AMRAAM............ 414 453,223 414 453,223
8 PREDATOR HELLFIRE 548 40,129 548 40,129
MISSILE..........
9 SMALL DIAMETER 1,179 45,475 1,179 45,475
BOMB.............
10 SMALL DIAMETER 1,133 273,272 1,133 273,272
BOMB II..........
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES
11 INDUSTR'L 0 814 0 814
PREPAREDNS/POL
PREVENTION.......
CLASS IV
13 ICBM FUZE MOD..... 20 3,458 20 3,458
14 ICBM FUZE MOD AP.. 0 43,450 0 43,450
15 MM III 0 85,310 0 85,310
MODIFICATIONS....
16 AGM-65D MAVERICK.. 0 298 0 298
17 AIR LAUNCH CRUISE 0 52,924 0 52,924
MISSILE (ALCM)...
MISSILE SPARES AND
REPAIR PARTS
18 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 9,402 0 9,402
PARTS (INITIAL)..
19 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 84,671 0 84,671
PARTS (REPLEN)...
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
25 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 23,501 0 23,501
PROGRAMS.........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 540,465 0 540,465
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL MISSILE 4,006 2,396,417 -40 0 3,966 2,396,417
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT, SPACE
FORCE
SPACE PROCUREMENT,
SF
1 ADVANCED EHF...... 0 14,823 0 14,823
2 AF SATELLITE COMM 0 48,326 0 48,326
SYSTEM...........
3 COUNTERSPACE 0 65,540 0 65,540
SYSTEMS..........
4 FAMILY OF BEYOND 0 66,190 0 66,190
LINE-OF-SIGHT
TERMINALS........
5 GENERAL 0 3,299 0 3,299
INFORMATION TECH--
SPACE............
6 GPSIII FOLLOW ON.. 2 627,796 2 627,796
7 GPS III SPACE 0 20,122 0 20,122
SEGMENT..........
8 GLOBAL POSTIONING 0 2,256 0 2,256
(SPACE)..........
9 SPACEBORNE EQUIP 0 35,495 0 35,495
(COMSEC).........
10 MILSATCOM......... 0 15,795 0 15,795
11 SBIR HIGH (SPACE). 0 160,891 0 160,891
12 SPECIAL SPACE 0 78,387 0 78,387
ACTIVITIES.......
13 NATIONAL SECURITY 3 1,043,171 3 1,043,171
SPACE LAUNCH.....
14 NUDET DETECTION 0 6,638 0 6,638
SYSTEM...........
15 ROCKET SYSTEMS 0 47,741 0 47,741
LAUNCH PROGRAM...
16 SPACE FENCE....... 0 11,279 0 11,279
17 SPACE MODS........ 0 96,551 0 12,500 0 109,051
Cobra Dane [0] [12,500]
service life
extension.....
18 SPACELIFT RANGE 0 100,492 0 100,492
SYSTEM SPACE.....
SPARES
19 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 1,272 0 1,272
PARTS............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 5 2,446,064 0 12,500 5 2,458,564
SPACE FORCE......
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, AIR
FORCE
ROCKETS
1 ROCKETS........... 0 14,962 0 14,962
CARTRIDGES
2 CARTRIDGES........ 0 123,365 0 123,365
BOMBS
3 PRACTICE BOMBS.... 0 59,725 0 59,725
6 JOINT DIRECT 10,000 206,989 10,000 206,989
ATTACK MUNITION..
7 B61............... 0 35,634 0 35,634
OTHER ITEMS
9 CAD/PAD........... 0 47,830 0 47,830
10 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 6,232 0 6,232
DISPOSAL (EOD)...
11 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 542 0 542
PARTS............
12 MODIFICATIONS..... 0 1,310 0 1,310
13 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 4,753 0 4,753
$5,000,000.......
FLARES
15 FLARES............ 0 40,088 0 40,088
FUZES
16 FUZES............. 0 40,983 0 40,983
SMALL ARMS
17 SMALL ARMS........ 0 13,925 0 13,925
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 10,000 596,338 0 0 10,000 596,338
OF AMMUNITION,
AIR FORCE........
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE
PASSENGER CARRYING
VEHICLES
1 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 9,016 0 9,016
VEHICLES.........
CARGO AND UTILITY
VEHICLES
2 MEDIUM TACTICAL 0 15,058 0 15,058
VEHICLE..........
3 CAP VEHICLES...... 0 1,059 0 1,059
4 CARGO AND UTILITY 0 38,920 0 38,920
VEHICLES.........
SPECIAL PURPOSE
VEHICLES
5 JOINT LIGHT 0 30,544 0 30,544
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
6 SECURITY AND 0 319 0 319
TACTICAL VEHICLES
7 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 43,157 0 43,157
VEHICLES.........
FIRE FIGHTING
EQUIPMENT
8 FIRE FIGHTING/ 0 8,621 0 8,621
CRASH RESCUE
VEHICLES.........
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
9 MATERIALS HANDLING 0 12,897 0 12,897
VEHICLES.........
BASE MAINTENANCE
SUPPORT
10 RUNWAY SNOW REMOV 0 3,577 0 3,577
AND CLEANING EQU.
11 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 43,095 0 43,095
SUPPORT VEHICLES.
COMM SECURITY
EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
13 COMSEC EQUIPMENT.. 0 54,864 0 54,864
INTELLIGENCE
PROGRAMS
14 INTERNATIONAL 0 9,283 0 1,500 0 10,783
INTEL TECH &
ARCHITECTURES....
PDI: Mission [0] [1,500]
Partner
Environment
BICES-X local
upgrades......
15 INTELLIGENCE 0 6,849 0 6,849
TRAINING
EQUIPMENT........
16 INTELLIGENCE COMM 0 33,471 0 33,471
EQUIPMENT........
ELECTRONICS
PROGRAMS
17 AIR TRAFFIC 0 29,409 0 29,409
CONTROL & LANDING
SYS..............
18 BATTLE CONTROL 0 7,909 0 7,909
SYSTEM--FIXED....
19 THEATER AIR 0 32,632 0 32,632
CONTROL SYS
IMPROVEMEN.......
20 WEATHER 0 33,021 0 33,021
OBSERVATION
FORECAST.........
21 STRATEGIC COMMAND 0 31,353 0 31,353
AND CONTROL......
22 CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN 0 10,314 0 10,314
COMPLEX..........
23 MISSION PLANNING 0 15,132 0 15,132
SYSTEMS..........
25 INTEGRATED STRAT 0 9,806 0 9,806
PLAN & ANALY
NETWORK (ISPAN)..
SPCL COMM-
ELECTRONICS
PROJECTS
26 GENERAL 0 39,887 0 39,887
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
27 AF GLOBAL COMMAND 0 2,602 0 2,602
& CONTROL SYS....
29 MOBILITY COMMAND 0 10,541 0 10,541
AND CONTROL......
30 AIR FORCE PHYSICAL 0 96,277 0 96,277
SECURITY SYSTEM..
31 COMBAT TRAINING 0 195,185 0 195,185
RANGES...........
32 MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 0 29,664 0 29,664
EMERGENCY COMM N.
33 WIDE AREA 0 59,633 0 59,633
SURVEILLANCE
(WAS)............
34 C3 COUNTERMEASURES 0 105,584 0 105,584
36 DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 0 899 0 899
ACCOUNTING & MGT
SYS..............
38 THEATER BATTLE MGT 0 3,392 0 3,392
C2 SYSTEM........
39 AIR & SPACE 0 24,983 0 24,983
OPERATIONS CENTER
(AOC)............
AIR FORCE
COMMUNICATIONS
41 BASE INFORMATION 0 19,147 0 19,147
TRANSPT INFRAST
(BITI) WIRED.....
42 AFNET............. 0 84,515 0 84,515
43 JOINT 0 6,185 0 6,185
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
44 USCENTCOM......... 0 19,649 0 19,649
45 USSTRATCOM........ 0 4,337 0 4,337
ORGANIZATION AND
BASE
46 TACTICAL C-E 0 137,033 0 137,033
EQUIPMENT........
47 RADIO EQUIPMENT... 0 15,264 0 15,264
49 BASE COMM 0 132,281 0 14,000 0 146,281
INFRASTRUCTURE...
PDI: Mission [0] [14,000]
Partner
Environment
PACNET........
MODIFICATIONS
50 COMM ELECT MODS... 0 21,471 0 21,471
PERSONAL SAFETY &
RESCUE EQUIP
51 PERSONAL SAFETY 0 49,578 0 49,578
AND RESCUE
EQUIPMENT........
DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS
HANDLING EQ
52 POWER CONDITIONING 0 11,454 0 11,454
EQUIPMENT........
53 MECHANIZED 0 12,110 0 12,110
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIP............
BASE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
54 BASE PROCURED 0 21,142 0 21,142
EQUIPMENT........
55 ENGINEERING AND 0 7,700 0 7,700
EOD EQUIPMENT....
56 MOBILITY EQUIPMENT 0 18,266 0 4,700 0 22,966
Insulation [0] [4,700]
system for Air
Force shelters
57 FUELS SUPPORT 0 9,601 0 9,601
EQUIPMENT (FSE)..
58 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 42,078 0 42,078
AND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT........
SPECIAL SUPPORT
PROJECTS
60 DARP RC135........ 0 27,164 0 27,164
61 DCGS-AF........... 0 121,528 0 121,528
63 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 782,641 0 782,641
PROGRAM..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 21,086,112 0 21,086,112
PROGRAMS.........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
64 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 1,664 0 1,664
PARTS (CYBER)....
65 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 15,847 0 15,847
PARTS............
TOTAL OTHER 0 23,695,720 0 20,200 0 23,715,920
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT,
DEFENSE-WIDE
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DCMA
2 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 1,398 0 1,398
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DCSA
3 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 2,212 0 2,212
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DHRA
5 PERSONNEL 0 4,213 0 4,213
ADMINISTRATION...
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DISA
11 INFORMATION 0 17,211 0 17,211
SYSTEMS SECURITY.
12 TELEPORT PROGRAM.. 0 29,841 0 29,841
13 JOINT FORCES 0 3,091 0 3,091
HEADQUARTERS--DOD
IN...............
14 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 41,569 0 41,569
MILLION..........
16 DEFENSE 0 26,978 0 26,978
INFORMATION
SYSTEM NETWORK...
17 WHITE HOUSE 0 44,161 0 44,161
COMMUNICATION
AGENCY...........
18 SENIOR LEADERSHIP 0 35,935 0 35,935
ENTERPRISE.......
19 JOINT REGIONAL 0 88,741 0 -11,100 0 77,641
SECURITY STACKS
(JRSS)...........
JRSS SIPR [0] [-11,100]
funding.......
20 JOINT SERVICE 0 157,538 0 157,538
PROVIDER.........
21 FOURTH ESTATE 0 42,084 0 42,084
NETWORK
OPTIMIZATION
(4ENO)...........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DLA
23 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 417,459 0 417,459
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DMACT
24 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 7,993 0 7,993
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DODEA
25 AUTOMATION/ 0 1,319 0 1,319
EDUCATIONAL
SUPPORT &
LOGISTICS........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DPAA
26 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 10 500 10 500
DPAA.............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE SECURITY
COOPERATION
AGENCY
27 REGIONAL CENTER 0 1,598 0 1,598
PROCUREMENT......
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE THREAT
REDUCTION AGENCY
28 VEHICLES.......... 0 215 0 215
29 OTHER MAJOR 0 9,994 0 9,994
EQUIPMENT........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
MISSILE DEFENSE
AGENCY
31 THAAD............. 41 495,396 0 106,400 41 601,796
8th THAAD [0] [76,300]
battery
components....
HEMTT life-of- [0] [30,100]
type buy......
34 AEGIS BMD......... 34 356,195 34 356,195
35 AEGIS BMD AP...... 0 44,901 0 44,901
36 BMDS AN/TPY-2 0 0 0 243,300 0 243,300
RADARS...........
8th THAAD [0] [243,300]
battery radar
equipment.....
37 SM-3 IIAS......... 6 218,322 5 128,000 11 346,322
Additional SM- [5] [128,000]
3 Block IIA
interceptors..
38 ARROW 3 UPPER TIER 1 77,000 1 77,000
SYSTEMS..........
39 SHORT RANGE 1 50,000 1 50,000
BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE (SRBMD)..
40 AEGIS ASHORE PHASE 0 39,114 0 39,114
III..............
41 IRON DOME......... 1 73,000 1 73,000
42 AEGIS BMD HARDWARE 49 104,241 49 104,241
AND SOFTWARE.....
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
NSA
48 INFORMATION 0 101 0 101
SYSTEMS SECURITY
PROGRAM (ISSP)...
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
OSD
49 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 3,099 0 3,099
OSD..............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
TJS
50 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 8,329 0 8,329
TJS..............
51 MAJOR EQUIPMENT-- 0 1,247 0 1,247
TJS CYBER........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
WHS
53 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 515 0 515
WHS..............
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 554,264 0 554,264
PROGRAMS.........
AVIATION PROGRAMS
55 ARMED OVERWATCH/ 5 101,000 0 -101,000 5 0
TARGETING........
Lack of [0] [-101,000]
validated
requirement
and analysis..
56 MANNED ISR........ 0 0 0 40,100 0 40,100
SOCOM DHC-8 [0] [40,100]
combat loss
replacement...
59 ROTARY WING 0 211,041 0 211,041
UPGRADES AND
SUSTAINMENT......
60 UNMANNED ISR...... 0 25,488 0 25,488
61 NON-STANDARD 0 61,874 0 61,874
AVIATION.........
62 U-28.............. 0 3,825 0 24,700 0 28,525
SOCOM aircraft [0] [24,700]
maintenance
support combat
loss
replacement...
63 MH-47 CHINOOK..... 0 135,482 0 135,482
64 CV-22 MODIFICATION 0 14,829 0 14,829
65 MQ-9 UNMANNED 0 6,746 0 6,746
AERIAL VEHICLE...
66 PRECISION STRIKE 0 243,111 0 243,111
PACKAGE..........
67 AC/MC-130J........ 0 163,914 0 163,914
68 C-130 0 20,414 0 20,414
MODIFICATIONS....
SHIPBUILDING
69 UNDERWATER SYSTEMS 0 20,556 0 20,556
AMMUNITION
PROGRAMS
70 ORDNANCE ITEMS 0 186,197 0 186,197
<$5M.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMS
71 INTELLIGENCE 0 94,982 0 13,400 0 108,382
SYSTEMS..........
Transfer from [0] [13,400]
MMP-Light to
man-pack......
72 DISTRIBUTED COMMON 0 11,645 0 11,645
GROUND/SURFACE
SYSTEMS..........
73 OTHER ITEMS <$5M.. 0 96,333 0 96,333
74 COMBATANT CRAFT 0 17,278 0 17,278
SYSTEMS..........
75 SPECIAL PROGRAMS.. 0 78,865 0 78,865
76 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 30,158 0 30,158
77 WARRIOR SYSTEMS 0 260,733 0 -12,200 0 248,533
<$5M.............
MMP-Light [0] [-12,200]
unexecutable,
transfer to
man-pack......
78 COMBAT MISSION 0 19,848 0 19,848
REQUIREMENTS.....
79 GLOBAL VIDEO 0 2,401 0 2,401
SURVEILLANCE
ACTIVITIES.......
80 OPERATIONAL 0 13,861 0 13,861
ENHANCEMENTS
INTELLIGENCE.....
81 OPERATIONAL 0 247,038 0 12,500 0 259,538
ENHANCEMENTS.....
SOCOM Syria [0] [12,500]
exfiltration
reconsitution.
CBDP
82 CHEMICAL 0 147,150 0 147,150
BIOLOGICAL
SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS........
83 CB PROTECTION & 0 149,944 0 149,944
HAZARD MITIGATION
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 148 5,324,487 5 444,100 153 5,768,587
DEFENSE-WIDE.....
TOTAL PROCUREMENT. 34,422 130,684,160 78 3,330,678 34,500 134,014,838
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4102. PROCUREMENT FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4102. PROCUREMENT FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
Line Item ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Cost Qty Cost Qty Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
ROTARY
9 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 2 69,154 0 2 69,154
IIIB NEW BUILD....
14 CH-47 HELICOPTER... 1 50,472 0 1 50,472
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
17 MQ-1 PAYLOAD (MIP). 0 5,968 0 0 5,968
20 MULTI SENSOR ABN 0 122,520 0 0 122,520
RECON (MIP).......
25 EMARSS SEMA MODS 0 26,460 0 0 26,460
(MIP).............
30 DEGRADED VISUAL 0 1,916 0 0 1,916
ENVIRONMENT.......
GROUND SUPPORT
AVIONICS
37 CMWS............... 0 149,162 0 0 149,162
38 COMMON INFRARED 0 32,400 0 0 32,400
COUNTERMEASURES
(CIRCM)...........
OTHER SUPPORT
41 AIRCREW INTEGRATED 0 3,028 0 0 3,028
SYSTEMS...........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 3 461,080 0 0 3 461,080
PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
SURFACE-TO-AIR
MISSILE SYSTEM
2 M-SHORAD-- 22 158,300 0 22 158,300
PROCUREMENT.......
3 MSE MISSILE........ 46 176,585 -46 -176,585 0 0
Inappropriate [-46] [-176,585]
for EDI,
transfer to
base...........
AIR-TO-SURFACE
MISSILE SYSTEM
6 HELLFIRE SYS 3,090 236,265 0 3,090 236,265
SUMMARY...........
ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
MISSILE SYS
11 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 904 127,015 0 904 127,015
(GMLRS)...........
15 LETHAL MINIATURE 1,130 84,993 0 1,130 84,993
AERIAL MISSILE
SYSTEM (LMAMS.....
MODIFICATIONS
17 ATACMS MODS........ 0 78,434 0 0 78,434
22 MLRS MODS.......... 0 20,000 0 0 20,000
TOTAL MISSILE 5,192 881,592 -46 -176,585 5,146 705,007
PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
PROCUREMENT OF
W&TCV, ARMY
WEAPONS & OTHER
COMBAT VEHICLES
16 MULTI-ROLE ANTI- 0 4,765 0 0 4,765
ARMOR ANTI-
PERSONNEL WEAPON S
18 MORTAR SYSTEMS..... 0 10,460 0 0 10,460
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 0 15,225 0 0 0 15,225
OF W&TCV, ARMY....
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, ARMY
SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
AMMUNITION
1 CTG, 5.56MM, ALL 0 567 0 0 567
TYPES.............
2 CTG, 7.62MM, ALL 0 40 0 0 40
TYPES.............
4 CTG, HANDGUN, ALL 0 17 0 0 17
TYPES.............
5 CTG, .50 CAL, ALL 0 189 0 0 189
TYPES.............
8 CTG, 30MM, ALL 0 24,900 0 0 24,900
TYPES.............
ARTILLERY
AMMUNITION
16 PROJ 155MM EXTENDED 275 29,213 0 275 29,213
RANGE M982........
17 ARTILLERY 0 21,675 0 0 21,675
PROPELLANTS, FUZES
AND PRIMERS, ALL..
ROCKETS
20 SHOULDER LAUNCHED 0 176 0 0 176
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES.............
21 ROCKET, HYDRA 70, 0 33,880 0 0 33,880
ALL TYPES.........
MISCELLANEOUS
29 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 11 0 0 11
MILLION (AMMO)....
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 275 110,668 0 0 275 110,668
OF AMMUNITION,
ARMY..............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
ARMY
TACTICAL VEHICLES
13 FAMILY OF HEAVY 0 6,500 0 0 6,500
TACTICAL VEHICLES
(FHTV)............
14 PLS ESP............ 0 15,163 0 0 15,163
17 TACTICAL WHEELED 0 27,066 0 0 27,066
VEHICLE PROTECTION
KITS..............
COMM--SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
30 TRANSPORTABLE 0 2,700 0 0 2,700
TACTICAL COMMAND
COMMUNICATIONS....
32 ASSURED 0 12,566 0 0 12,566
POSITIONING,
NAVIGATION AND
TIMING............
33 SMART-T (SPACE).... 0 289 0 0 289
34 GLOBAL BRDCST SVC-- 0 319 0 0 319
GBS...............
COMM--COMBAT
COMMUNICATIONS
45 FAMILY OF MED COMM 0 1,257 0 0 1,257
FOR COMBAT
CASUALTY CARE.....
COMM--INTELLIGENCE
COMM
48 CI AUTOMATION 0 1,230 0 0 1,230
ARCHITECTURE (MIP)
INFORMATION
SECURITY
52 COMMUNICATIONS 0 128 0 0 128
SECURITY (COMSEC).
COMM--BASE
COMMUNICATIONS
58 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 0 15,277 0 0 15,277
62 INSTALLATION INFO 0 74,004 0 6,000 0 80,004
INFRASTRUCTURE MOD
PROGRAM...........
EDI: NATO [0] [6,000]
Response Force
(NRF) networks.
ELECT EQUIP--TACT
INT REL ACT
(TIARA)
68 DCGS-A (MIP)....... 0 47,709 0 0 47,709
70 TROJAN (MIP)....... 0 1,766 0 0 1,766
71 MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP 0 61,450 0 0 61,450
(INTEL SPT) (MIP).
73 BIOMETRIC TACTICAL 0 12,337 0 0 12,337
COLLECTION DEVICES
(MIP).............
ELECT EQUIP--
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
(EW)
80 FAMILY OF 0 44,293 0 0 44,293
PERSISTENT
SURVEILLANCE CAP.
(MIP).............
81 COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/ 0 49,100 0 0 49,100
SECURITY
COUNTERMEASURES...
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL SURV.
(TAC SURV)
83 SENTINEL MODS...... 0 33,496 0 0 33,496
84 NIGHT VISION 0 643 0 0 643
DEVICES...........
87 RADIATION 0 11 0 0 11
MONITORING SYSTEMS
88 INDIRECT FIRE 0 37,000 0 0 37,000
PROTECTION FAMILY
OF SYSTEMS........
94 COMPUTER 0 280 0 0 280
BALLISTICS: LHMBC
XM32..............
95 MORTAR FIRE CONTROL 0 13,672 0 0 13,672
SYSTEM............
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL C2
SYSTEMS
100 AIR & MSL DEFENSE 0 15,143 0 0 15,143
PLANNING & CONTROL
SYS...............
ELECT EQUIP--
AUTOMATION
109 ARMY TRAINING 0 4,688 0 0 4,688
MODERNIZATION.....
110 AUTOMATED DATA 0 16,552 0 0 16,552
PROCESSING EQUIP..
CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
EQUIPMENT
121 FAMILY OF NON- 0 25,480 0 0 25,480
LETHAL EQUIPMENT
(FNLE)............
122 BASE DEFENSE 0 98,960 0 0 98,960
SYSTEMS (BDS).....
123 CBRN DEFENSE....... 0 18,887 0 0 18,887
BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
125 TACTICAL BRIDGING.. 0 50,400 0 0 50,400
ENGINEER (NON-
CONSTRUCTION)
EQUIPMENT
137 RENDER SAFE SETS 0 84,000 0 0 84,000
KITS OUTFITS......
COMBAT SERVICE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
140 HEATERS AND ECU'S.. 0 370 0 0 370
142 PERSONNEL RECOVERY 0 3,721 0 0 3,721
SUPPORT SYSTEM
(PRSS)............
145 FORCE PROVIDER..... 0 56,400 0 73,400 0 129,800
EDI: [0] [73,400]
Improvements to
living quarters
for rotational
forces in
Europe.........
146 FIELD FEEDING 0 2,279 0 0 2,279
EQUIPMENT.........
147 CARGO AERIAL DEL & 0 2,040 0 0 2,040
PERSONNEL
PARACHUTE SYSTEM..
PETROLEUM EQUIPMENT
150 DISTRIBUTION 0 4,374 0 0 4,374
SYSTEMS, PETROLEUM
& WATER...........
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
151 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 6,390 0 0 6,390
MEDICAL...........
MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT
152 MOBILE MAINTENANCE 0 7,769 0 0 7,769
EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS.
153 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 184 0 0 184
$5.0M (MAINT EQ)..
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT
156 LOADERS............ 0 3,190 0 0 3,190
157 HYDRAULIC EXCAVATOR 0 7,600 0 0 7,600
158 TRACTOR, FULL 0 7,450 0 0 7,450
TRACKED...........
160 HIGH MOBILITY 0 3,703 0 0 3,703
ENGINEER EXCAVATOR
(HMEE)............
162 CONST EQUIP ESP.... 0 657 0 0 657
GENERATORS
167 GENERATORS AND 0 106 0 0 106
ASSOCIATED EQUIP..
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
169 FAMILY OF FORKLIFTS 0 1,885 0 0 1,885
OTHER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
180 RAPID EQUIPPING 0 8,500 0 0 8,500
SOLDIER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.........
181 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 3,248 0 0 3,248
SYSTEMS (OPA3)....
185 BUILDING, PRE-FAB, 0 31,845 0 0 31,845
RELOCATABLE.......
TOTAL OTHER 0 924,077 0 79,400 0 1,003,477
PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
OTHER AIRCRAFT
24 STUASL0 UAV........ 0 7,921 0 0 7,921
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
53 COMMON ECM 0 3,474 0 0 3,474
EQUIPMENT.........
55 COMMON DEFENSIVE 0 3,339 0 0 3,339
WEAPON SYSTEM.....
64 QRC................ 0 18,507 0 0 18,507
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 0 33,241 0 0 0 33,241
PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
WEAPONS
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
TACTICAL MISSILES
12 HELLFIRE........... 115 5,572 0 115 5,572
TOTAL WEAPONS 115 5,572 0 0 115 5,572
PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMO, NAVY & MC
NAVY AMMUNITION
1 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 8,068 0 0 8,068
BOMBS.............
2 JDAM............... 673 15,529 0 673 15,529
3 AIRBORNE ROCKETS, 0 23,000 0 0 23,000
ALL TYPES.........
4 MACHINE GUN 0 22,600 0 0 22,600
AMMUNITION........
6 CARTRIDGES & CART 0 3,927 0 0 3,927
ACTUATED DEVICES..
7 AIR EXPENDABLE 0 15,978 0 0 15,978
COUNTERMEASURES...
8 JATOS.............. 0 2,100 0 0 2,100
11 OTHER SHIP GUN 0 2,611 0 0 2,611
AMMUNITION........
12 SMALL ARMS & 0 1,624 0 0 1,624
LANDING PARTY AMMO
13 PYROTECHNIC AND 0 505 0 0 505
DEMOLITION........
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 673 95,942 0 0 673 95,942
OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
NAVY
SMALL BOATS
28 STANDARD BOATS..... 0 19,104 0 0 19,104
OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
35 SMALL & MEDIUM UUV. 0 2,946 0 0 2,946
ASW ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
43 FIXED SURVEILLANCE 0 213,000 0 0 213,000
SYSTEM............
SONOBUOYS
92 SONOBUOYS--ALL 0 26,196 0 0 26,196
TYPES.............
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
95 AIRCRAFT SUPPORT 0 60,217 0 0 60,217
EQUIPMENT.........
OTHER ORDNANCE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
110 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 2,124 0 0 2,124
DISPOSAL EQUIP....
CIVIL ENGINEERING
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
115 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 177 0 0 177
VEHICLES..........
116 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 416 0 0 416
TRUCKS............
118 FIRE FIGHTING 0 801 0 0 801
EQUIPMENT.........
SUPPLY SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
125 FIRST DESTINATION 0 520 0 0 520
TRANSPORTATION....
TRAINING DEVICES
128 TRAINING AND 0 11,500 0 0 11,500
EDUCATION
EQUIPMENT.........
COMMAND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
130 MEDICAL SUPPORT 0 3,525 0 0 3,525
EQUIPMENT.........
136 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 3,000 0 0 3,000
EQUIPMENT.........
TOTAL OTHER 0 343,526 0 0 0 343,526
PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
PROCUREMENT, MARINE
CORPS
GUIDED MISSILES
12 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 120 17,456 0 120 17,456
(GMLRS)...........
OTHER SUPPORT (TEL)
15 MODIFICATION KITS.. 0 4,200 0 0 4,200
INTELL/COMM
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL)
22 INTELLIGENCE 0 10,124 0 0 10,124
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
TACTICAL VEHICLES
38 MOTOR TRANSPORT 0 16,183 0 0 16,183
MODIFICATIONS.....
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 120 47,963 0 0 120 47,963
MARINE CORPS......
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
HELICOPTERS
13 COMBAT RESCUE 3 174,000 0 3 174,000
HELICOPTER........
OTHER AIRCRAFT
20 MQ-9............... 0 142,490 0 0 142,490
21 RQ-20B PUMA........ 0 13,770 0 0 13,770
STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
26 LARGE AIRCRAFT 0 57,521 0 0 57,521
INFRARED
COUNTERMEASURES...
OTHER AIRCRAFT
46 U-2 MODS........... 0 9,600 0 0 9,600
55 COMPASS CALL....... 0 12,800 0 0 12,800
66 HC/MC-130 0 58,020 0 0 58,020
MODIFICATIONS.....
69 MQ-9 UAS PAYLOADS.. 0 46,100 0 0 46,100
70 CV-22 MODS......... 0 6,290 0 0 6,290
AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
REPAIR PARTS
71 INITIAL SPARES/ 0 10,700 0 0 10,700
REPAIR PARTS......
72 MQ-9............... 0 12,250 0 0 12,250
COMMON SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
73 AIRCRAFT 0 25,614 0 0 25,614
REPLACEMENT
SUPPORT EQUIP.....
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 3 569,155 0 0 3 569,155
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE.............
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
TACTICAL
4 JOINT AIR-SURFACE 24 30,000 0 24 30,000
STANDOFF MISSILE..
8 PREDATOR HELLFIRE 3,969 143,420 0 3,969 143,420
MISSILE...........
9 SMALL DIAMETER BOMB 1,283 50,352 0 1,283 50,352
TOTAL MISSILE 5,276 223,772 0 0 5,276 223,772
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE.............
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, AIR
FORCE
ROCKETS
1 ROCKETS............ 0 19,489 0 0 19,489
CARTRIDGES
2 CARTRIDGES......... 0 40,434 0 0 40,434
BOMBS
4 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 369,566 0 0 369,566
BOMBS.............
6 JOINT DIRECT ATTACK 6,800 237,723 0 6,800 237,723
MUNITION..........
FLARES
15 FLARES............. 0 21,171 0 0 21,171
FUZES
16 FUZES.............. 0 107,855 0 0 107,855
SMALL ARMS
17 SMALL ARMS......... 0 6,217 0 0 6,217
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 6,800 802,455 0 0 6,800 802,455
OF AMMUNITION, AIR
FORCE.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE
PASSENGER CARRYING
VEHICLES
1 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 1,302 0 0 1,302
VEHICLES..........
CARGO AND UTILITY
VEHICLES
2 MEDIUM TACTICAL 0 3,400 0 0 3,400
VEHICLE...........
4 CARGO AND UTILITY 0 12,475 0 0 12,475
VEHICLES..........
SPECIAL PURPOSE
VEHICLES
5 JOINT LIGHT 0 26,150 0 0 26,150
TACTICAL VEHICLE..
7 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 51,254 0 0 51,254
VEHICLES..........
FIRE FIGHTING
EQUIPMENT
8 FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH 0 24,903 0 0 24,903
RESCUE VEHICLES...
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
9 MATERIALS HANDLING 0 14,167 0 0 14,167
VEHICLES..........
BASE MAINTENANCE
SUPPORT
10 RUNWAY SNOW REMOV 0 5,759 0 0 5,759
AND CLEANING EQU..
11 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 20,653 0 0 20,653
SUPPORT VEHICLES..
SPCL COMM-
ELECTRONICS
PROJECTS
26 GENERAL INFORMATION 0 5,100 0 0 5,100
TECHNOLOGY........
30 AIR FORCE PHYSICAL 0 56,496 0 0 56,496
SECURITY SYSTEM...
ORGANIZATION AND
BASE
49 BASE COMM 0 30,717 0 0 30,717
INFRASTRUCTURE....
BASE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
55 ENGINEERING AND EOD 0 13,172 0 0 13,172
EQUIPMENT.........
56 MOBILITY EQUIPMENT. 0 33,694 0 0 33,694
57 FUELS SUPPORT 0 1,777 0 0 1,777
EQUIPMENT (FSE)...
58 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 31,620 0 0 31,620
AND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.........
SPECIAL SUPPORT
PROJECTS
61 DCGS-AF............ 0 18,700 0 0 18,700
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
65 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 4,000 0 0 4,000
PARTS.............
TOTAL OTHER 0 355,339 0 0 0 355,339
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE.............
PROCUREMENT,
DEFENSE-WIDE
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DISA
16 DEFENSE INFORMATION 0 6,120 0 0 6,120
SYSTEM NETWORK....
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE THREAT
REDUCTION AGENCY
30 COUNTER IMPROVISED 0 2,540 0 0 2,540
THREAT
TECHNOLOGIES......
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS 0 3,500 0 0 3,500
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
AVIATION PROGRAMS
56 MANNED ISR......... 0 5,000 0 0 5,000
57 MC-12.............. 0 5,000 0 0 5,000
60 UNMANNED ISR....... 0 8,207 0 0 8,207
AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
70 ORDNANCE ITEMS <$5M 0 105,355 0 0 105,355
OTHER PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMS
71 INTELLIGENCE 0 16,234 0 0 16,234
SYSTEMS...........
73 OTHER ITEMS <$5M... 0 984 0 0 984
76 TACTICAL VEHICLES.. 0 2,990 0 0 2,990
77 WARRIOR SYSTEMS 0 32,573 0 0 32,573
<$5M..............
78 COMBAT MISSION 0 10,000 0 0 10,000
REQUIREMENTS......
80 OPERATIONAL 0 6,724 0 0 6,724
ENHANCEMENTS
INTELLIGENCE......
81 OPERATIONAL 0 53,264 0 0 53,264
ENHANCEMENTS......
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 0 258,491 0 0 0 258,491
DEFENSE-WIDE......
TOTAL PROCUREMENT.. 18,457 5,128,098 -46 -97,185 18,411 5,030,913
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND
EVALUATION
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Line Program Element Item FY 2021 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, ARMY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
2 0601102A DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 303,257 12,000 315,257
..................... AI human performance [2,000]
optimization.
..................... Increase in basic [10,000]
research.
3 0601103A UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 67,148 67,148
INITIATIVES.
4 0601104A UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY 87,877 87,877
RESEARCH CENTERS.
5 0601121A CYBER COLLABORATIVE 5,077 5,077
RESEARCH ALLIANCE.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 463,359 12,000 475,359
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
7 0602115A BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.... 11,835 4,000 15,835
..................... Pandemic vaccine [4,000]
response.
11 0602134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 2,000 2,000
ADVANCED STUDIES.
12 0602141A LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY..... 42,425 3,000 45,425
..................... Hybrid additive [3,000]
manufacturing.
13 0602142A ARMY APPLIED RESEARCH.... 30,757 3,000 33,757
..................... Pathfinder Air [3,000]
Assault.
14 0602143A SOLDIER LETHALITY 125,435 10,500 135,935
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Harnessing Emerging [2,500]
Research
Opportunities to
Empower Soldiers
Program.
..................... Metal-based display [3,000]
technologies.
..................... Pathfinder Airborne.. [5,000]
15 0602144A GROUND TECHNOLOGY........ 28,047 2,000 30,047
..................... Ground technology [2,000]
advanced
manufacturing,
materials and process
initiative.
16 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 217,565 10,000 227,565
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Ground combat vehicle [2,000]
platform
electrification.
..................... Immersive virtual [5,000]
modeling and
simulation techniques.
..................... Next Generation [3,000]
Combat Vehicle
modeling and
simulation.
17 0602146A NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY... 114,404 12,000 126,404
..................... Backpackable [5,000]
Communications
Intelligence System.
..................... Defense resiliency [3,000]
platform against
extreme cold weather.
..................... Multi-drone multi- [2,000]
sensor ISR capability.
..................... Quantum computing [2,000]
base materials
optimization.
18 0602147A LONG RANGE PRECISION 60,553 7,000 67,553
FIRES TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Composite artillery [7,000]
tube and propulsion
prototyping.
19 0602148A FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT 96,484 96,484
TECHNOLOGY.
20 0602150A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 56,298 10,000 66,298
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Counter unmanned [5,000]
aerial systems threat
R&D.
..................... Counter unmanned [5,000]
aircraft systems
research.
22 0602213A C3I APPLIED CYBER........ 18,816 18,816
40 0602785A MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/ 20,766 20,766
TRAINING TECHNOLOGY.
42 0602787A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY....... 95,496 2,000 97,496
..................... Research for [2,000]
coronavirus vaccine.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 920,881 63,500 984,381
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
44 0603002A MEDICAL ADVANCED 38,896 38,896
TECHNOLOGY.
49 0603007A MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND 11,659 11,659
TRAINING ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
52 0603115A MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT...... 27,723 27,723
53 0603117A ARMY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 62,663 62,663
DEVELOPMENT.
54 0603118A SOLDIER LETHALITY 109,608 2,000 111,608
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
..................... 3D advanced [2,000]
manufacturing.
55 0603119A GROUND ADVANCED 14,795 6,000 20,795
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Cybersecurity for [3,000]
industrial control
systems and building
automation.
..................... Graphene applications [3,000]
for military
engineering.
59 0603134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 25,000 25,000
SIMULATION.
63 0603457A C3I CYBER ADVANCED 23,357 23,357
DEVELOPMENT.
64 0603461A HIGH PERFORMANCE 188,024 5,000 193,024
COMPUTING MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM.
..................... High performance [5,000]
computing
modernization.
65 0603462A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 199,358 27,500 226,858
VEHICLE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Carbon fiber and [10,000]
graphitic composites.
..................... Cyber and connected [5,000]
vehicle innovation
research.
..................... Small unit ground [7,500]
robotic capabilities.
..................... Virtual [5,000]
experimentations
enhancement.
66 0603463A NETWORK C3I ADVANCED 158,608 158,608
TECHNOLOGY.
67 0603464A LONG RANGE PRECISION 121,060 3,000 124,060
FIRES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Hyper velocity [3,000]
projectile--extended
range technologies.
68 0603465A FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 156,194 156,194
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
69 0603466A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 58,130 15,500 73,630
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Electromagnetic [5,000]
effects research to
support fires and AMD
CFTs.
..................... High-energy laser [10,500]
system
characterization lab.
77 0603920A HUMANITARIAN DEMINING.... 8,515 8,515
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,203,590 59,000 1,262,590
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
78 0603305A ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE 11,062 3,000 14,062
SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.
..................... Hypersonic hot air [3,000]
tunnel test
environment.
79 0603308A ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS 26,230 26,230
INTEGRATION.
80 0603327A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 26,482 26,482
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
81 0603619A LANDMINE WARFARE AND 64,092 64,092
BARRIER--ADV DEV.
83 0603639A TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER 92,753 92,753
AMMUNITION.
84 0603645A ARMORED SYSTEM 151,478 151,478
MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
85 0603747A SOLDIER SUPPORT AND 5,841 5,841
SURVIVABILITY.
86 0603766A TACTICAL ELECTRONIC 194,775 194,775
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
DEV.
87 0603774A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS 24,316 24,316
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
88 0603779A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 13,387 13,387
TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
89 0603790A NATO RESEARCH AND 4,762 4,762
DEVELOPMENT.
90 0603801A AVIATION--ADV DEV........ 647,937 5,000 652,937
..................... Future Long Range [5,000]
Assault Aircraft
(FLRAA).
91 0603804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 4,761 4,761
EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
92 0603807A MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV. 28,520 28,520
93 0603827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED 26,138 26,138
DEVELOPMENT.
94 0604017A ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT..... 121,207 121,207
96 0604021A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 22,840 22,840
TECHNOLOGY MATURATION
(MIP).
97 0604035A LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) 22,678 22,678
SATELLITE CAPABILITY.
98 0604100A ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES. 10,082 10,082
99 0604101A SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 1,378 1,378
VEHICLE (SUAV) (6.4).
100 0604113A FUTURE TACTICAL UNMANNED 40,083 40,083
AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (FTUAS).
101 0604114A LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE 376,373 376,373
DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
102 0604115A TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 156,834 -10,000 146,834
INITIATIVES.
..................... OpFires lack of [-10,000]
transition pathway.
103 0604117A MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR 4,995 4,995
DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
105 0604119A ARMY ADVANCED COMPONENT 170,490 170,490
DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
106 0604120A ASSURED POSITIONING, 128,125 128,125
NAVIGATION AND TIMING
(PNT).
107 0604121A SYNTHETIC TRAINING 129,547 129,547
ENVIRONMENT REFINEMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
108 0604134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 13,831 13,831
DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
109 0604182A HYPERSONICS.............. 801,417 -5,000 796,417
..................... Lack of hypersonic [-5,000]
prototyping
coordination.
111 0604403A FUTURE INTERCEPTOR....... 7,992 7,992
112 0604541A UNIFIED NETWORK TRANSPORT 40,677 40,677
115 0305251A CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 50,525 50,525
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 3,421,608 -7,000 3,414,608
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
118 0604201A AIRCRAFT AVIONICS........ 2,764 2,764
119 0604270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 62,426 62,426
DEVELOPMENT.
121 0604601A INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS. 91,574 91,574
122 0604604A MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES. 8,523 8,523
123 0604611A JAVELIN.................. 7,493 7,493
124 0604622A FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL 24,792 24,792
VEHICLES.
125 0604633A AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL...... 3,511 3,511
126 0604642A LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED 1,976 1,976
VEHICLES.
127 0604645A ARMORED SYSTEMS 135,488 135,488
MODERNIZATION (ASM)--ENG
DEV.
128 0604710A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG 61,445 61,445
DEV.
129 0604713A COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, 2,814 2,814
AND EQUIPMENT.
130 0604715A NON-SYSTEM TRAINING 28,036 28,036
DEVICES--ENG DEV.
131 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, 43,651 40,000 83,651
CONTROL AND
INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
..................... Joint Counter-UAS [17,500]
Office acceleration.
..................... Joint Counter-UAS [7,500]
Office SOCOM advanced
capabilities.
..................... Joint Counter-UAS [15,000]
Office SOCOM
demonstrations.
132 0604742A CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION 10,150 10,150
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
133 0604746A AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT 5,578 5,578
DEVELOPMENT.
134 0604760A DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE 7,892 7,892
SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG
DEV.
135 0604768A BRILLIANT ANTI-ARMOR 24,975 24,975
SUBMUNITION (BAT).
136 0604780A COMBINED ARMS TACTICAL 3,568 3,568
TRAINER (CATT) CORE.
137 0604798A BRIGADE ANALYSIS, 19,268 19,268
INTEGRATION AND
EVALUATION.
138 0604802A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS-- 265,811 800 266,611
ENG DEV.
..................... Increase NGSW soldier [800]
touchpoints.
139 0604804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 49,694 49,694
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
140 0604805A COMMAND, CONTROL, 11,079 11,079
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
141 0604807A MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL 49,870 49,870
BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
142 0604808A LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER-- 9,589 9,589
ENG DEV.
143 0604818A ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & 162,513 162,513
CONTROL HARDWARE &
SOFTWARE.
144 0604820A RADAR DEVELOPMENT........ 109,259 109,259
145 0604822A GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE 21,201 21,201
BUSINESS SYSTEM (GFEBS).
146 0604823A FIREFINDER............... 20,008 20,008
147 0604827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR 6,534 6,534
DEM/VAL.
148 0604852A SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY 82,459 47,000 129,459
ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
..................... Bradley and Stryker [47,000]
APS.
149 0604854A ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD... 11,611 11,611
150 0605013A INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 142,678 5,000 147,678
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Integrated data [5,000]
software pilot
program.
151 0605018A INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND 115,286 115,286
PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
152 0605028A ARMORED MULTI-PURPOSE 96,594 96,594
VEHICLE (AMPV).
154 0605030A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 16,264 16,264
CENTER (JTNC).
155 0605031A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 31,696 31,696
(JTN).
157 0605033A GROUND-BASED OPERATIONAL 5,976 5,976
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--
EXPEDITIONARY (GBOSS-E).
159 0605035A COMMON INFRARED 23,321 23,321
COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
161 0605038A NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL 4,846 4,846
CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE
VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR
SUITE.
162 0605041A DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL 28,544 -12,000 16,544
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Army Cyber SU program [-12,000]
163 0605042A TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO 28,178 28,178
SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
164 0605047A CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM.. 22,860 22,860
166 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 35,893 35,893
DEVELOPMENT.
167 0605052A INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION 235,770 -47,800 187,970
CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK
1.
..................... Army-identified [-47,800]
funding early to need.
168 0605053A GROUND ROBOTICS.......... 13,710 13,710
169 0605054A EMERGING TECHNOLOGY 294,739 294,739
INITIATIVES.
170 0605145A MEDICAL PRODUCTS AND 954 954
SUPPORT SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
171 0605203A ARMY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT & 150,201 150,201
DEMONSTRATION.
172 0605205A SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 5,999 5,999
VEHICLE (SUAV) (6.5).
174 0605450A JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND 8,891 8,891
MISSILE (JAGM).
175 0605457A ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND 193,929 193,929
MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
176 0605625A MANNED GROUND VEHICLE.... 327,732 -80,000 247,732
..................... OMFV program reset... [-80,000]
177 0605766A NATIONAL CAPABILITIES 7,670 7,670
INTEGRATION (MIP).
178 0605812A JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 1,742 1,742
VEHICLE (JLTV)
ENGINEERING AND
MANUFACTURING
DEVELOPMENT PH.
179 0605830A AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT 1,467 1,467
EQUIPMENT.
180 0303032A TROJAN--RH12............. 3,451 3,451
183 0304270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 55,855 55,855
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 3,199,798 -47,000 3,152,798
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
185 0604256A THREAT SIMULATOR 14,515 14,515
DEVELOPMENT.
186 0604258A TARGET SYSTEMS 10,668 10,668
DEVELOPMENT.
187 0604759A MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 106,270 106,270
188 0605103A RAND ARROYO CENTER....... 13,481 13,481
189 0605301A ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL..... 231,824 231,824
190 0605326A CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION 54,898 54,898
PROGRAM.
192 0605601A ARMY TEST RANGES AND 350,359 15,000 365,359
FACILITIES.
..................... Program increase-- [15,000]
Army directed energy
T&E.
193 0605602A ARMY TECHNICAL TEST 48,475 48,475
INSTRUMENTATION AND
TARGETS.
194 0605604A SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY 36,001 36,001
ANALYSIS.
195 0605606A AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION... 2,736 2,736
196 0605702A METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TO 6,488 6,488
RDT&E ACTIVITIES.
197 0605706A MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS 21,859 21,859
198 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN 7,936 7,936
ITEMS.
199 0605712A SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL 54,470 54,470
TESTING.
200 0605716A ARMY EVALUATION CENTER... 63,141 63,141
201 0605718A ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD 2,572 2,572
COLLABORATION & INTEG.
202 0605801A PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES... 87,472 87,472
203 0605803A TECHNICAL INFORMATION 26,244 26,244
ACTIVITIES.
204 0605805A MUNITIONS 40,133 40,133
STANDARDIZATION,
EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
205 0605857A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1,780 1,780
TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
206 0605898A ARMY DIRECT REPORT 55,045 55,045
HEADQUARTERS--R&D - MHA.
208 0606002A RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC 71,306 71,306
MISSILE DEFENSE TEST
SITE.
209 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN 1,063 1,063
INTEL MODERNIZATION.
210 0606105A MEDICAL PROGRAM-WIDE 19,891 19,891
ACTIVITIES.
211 0606942A ASSESSMENTS AND 4,496 4,496
EVALUATIONS CYBER
VULNERABILITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,333,123 15,000 1,348,123
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
214 0603778A MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 10,157 10,157
PROGRAM.
216 0605024A ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 8,682 8,682
SUPPORT.
217 0607131A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS 20,409 20,409
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS.
219 0607134A LONG RANGE PRECISION 122,733 -7,500 115,233
FIRES (LRPF).
..................... Excess funds due to [-7,500]
second vendor dropped.
221 0607136A BLACKHAWK PRODUCT 11,236 11,236
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
222 0607137A CHINOOK PRODUCT 46,091 46,091
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
224 0607139A IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE 249,257 249,257
PROGRAM.
225 0607142A AVIATION ROCKET SYSTEM 17,155 17,155
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT.
226 0607143A UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM 7,743 7,743
UNIVERSAL PRODUCTS.
227 0607145A APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 77,177 77,177
228 0607150A INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT.. 14,652 14,652
229 0607312A ARMY OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS 35,851 35,851
DEVELOPMENT.
230 0607665A FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS..... 1,324 1,324
231 0607865A PATRIOT PRODUCT 187,840 187,840
IMPROVEMENT.
232 0203728A JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP 44,691 44,691
OPERATION COORDINATION
SYSTEM (JADOCS).
233 0203735A COMBAT VEHICLE 268,919 268,919
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
234 0203743A 155MM SELF-PROPELLED 427,254 427,254
HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS.
235 0203744A AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS/ 11,688 11,688
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS.
236 0203752A AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 80 80
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
237 0203758A DIGITIZATION............. 4,516 4,516
238 0203801A MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE 1,288 1,288
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM.
239 0203802A OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT 79,424 79,424
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
243 0205412A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 259 259
TECHNOLOGY--OPERATIONAL
SYSTEM DEV.
244 0205456A LOWER TIER AIR AND 166 166
MISSILE DEFENSE (AMD)
SYSTEM.
245 0205778A GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH 75,575 17,500 93,075
ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
..................... Qualification of [17,500]
second SRM source.
246 0208053A JOINT TACTICAL GROUND 9,510 9,510
SYSTEM.
249 0303140A INFORMATION SYSTEMS 29,270 29,270
SECURITY PROGRAM.
250 0303141A GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT 86,908 86,908
SYSTEM.
251 0303142A SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT 18,684 18,684
(SPACE).
256 0305179A INTEGRATED BROADCAST 467 467
SERVICE (IBS).
257 0305204A TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL 4,051 4,051
VEHICLES.
258 0305206A AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 13,283 13,283
SYSTEMS.
259 0305208A DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 47,204 47,204
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
264 0708045A END ITEM INDUSTRIAL 61,012 17,500 78,512
PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
..................... Functional fabrics [7,500]
manufacturing.
..................... Nanoscale materials [5,000]
manufacturing.
..................... Tungsten [5,000]
manufacturing for
armanents.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 3,983 3,983
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 1,998,539 27,500 2,026,039
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
267 0608041A DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE 46,445 46,445
PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 46,445 0 46,445
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 12,587,343 123,000 12,710,343
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, ARMY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, NAVY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601103N UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 116,816 2,000 118,816
INITIATIVES.
..................... Defense University [2,000]
Research and
Instrumentation
Program.
2 0601152N IN-HOUSE LABORATORY 19,113 19,113
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
3 0601153N DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 467,158 13,000 480,158
..................... Increase in basic [10,000]
research.
..................... Predictive modeling [3,000]
for undersea vehicles.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 603,087 15,000 618,087
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
4 0602114N POWER PROJECTION APPLIED 17,792 17,792
RESEARCH.
5 0602123N FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED 122,281 18,000 140,281
RESEARCH.
..................... Direct air capture [8,000]
and blue carbon
removal technology
program.
..................... Electric propulsion [2,000]
for military craft
and advanced planning
hulls.
..................... Expeditionary [5,000]
unmanned systems
launch and recovery.
..................... Testbed for [3,000]
autonomous ship
systems.
6 0602131M MARINE CORPS LANDING 50,623 3,000 53,623
FORCE TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Interdisciplinary [3,000]
cybersecurity
research.
7 0602235N COMMON PICTURE APPLIED 48,001 48,001
RESEARCH.
8 0602236N WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT 67,765 7,000 74,765
APPLIED RESEARCH.
..................... Humanoid robotics [4,000]
research.
..................... Social networks and [3,000]
computational social
science.
9 0602271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 84,994 84,994
APPLIED RESEARCH.
10 0602435N OCEAN WARFIGHTING 63,392 63,392
ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
RESEARCH.
11 0602651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 6,343 6,343
APPLIED RESEARCH.
12 0602747N UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED 56,397 7,500 63,897
RESEARCH.
..................... Navy and academia [7,500]
submarine
partnerships.
13 0602750N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 167,590 167,590
APPLIED RESEARCH.
14 0602782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 30,715 30,715
WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
15 0602792N INNOVATIVE NAVAL 160,537 7,300 167,837
PROTOTYPES (INP) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
..................... Thermoplastic [7,300]
materials.
16 0602861N SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 76,745 76,745
MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
ACITIVITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 953,175 42,800 995,975
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
17 0603123N FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED 24,410 24,410
TECHNOLOGY.
18 0603271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 8,008 8,008
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
19 0603640M USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 219,045 3,000 222,045
DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
..................... Mission planning [3,000]
advanced technology
demonstration.
20 0603651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 13,301 13,301
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
21 0603673N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 246,054 246,054
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
22 0603680N MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 60,122 60,122
PROGRAM.
23 0603729N WARFIGHTER PROTECTION 4,851 4,851
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
24 0603758N NAVY WARFIGHTING 40,709 40,709
EXPERIMENTS AND
DEMONSTRATIONS.
25 0603782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 1,948 1,948
WARFARE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
26 0603801N INNOVATIVE NAVAL 141,948 141,948
PROTOTYPES (INP)
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 760,396 3,000 763,396
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
27 0603178N MEDIUM AND LARGE UNMANNED 464,042 -464,042
SURFACE VEHICLES (USVS).
..................... Excess procurement [-464,042]
ahead of satisfactory
testing.
28 0603207N AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL 35,386 35,386
APPLICATIONS.
29 0603216N AVIATION SURVIVABILITY... 13,428 13,428
30 0603239N ISO NAVAL CONSTRUCTION 2,350 2,350
FORCES.
31 0603251N AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS......... 418 418
32 0603254N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.. 15,719 15,719
33 0603261N TACTICAL AIRBORNE 3,411 3,411
RECONNAISSANCE.
34 0603382N ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS 70,218 -14,100 56,118
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Project 3416: HIJENKS [-7,000]
insufficient schedule
justification.
..................... Project 3422: SHARC [-7,100]
excess platforms
ahead of satisfactory
testing.
35 0603502N SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER 52,358 -28,200 24,158
MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
..................... Project 2989: [-28,200]
Barracuda program
delay.
36 0603506N SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO 12,816 12,816
DEFENSE.
37 0603512N CARRIER SYSTEMS 7,559 7,559
DEVELOPMENT.
38 0603525N PILOT FISH............... 358,757 358,757
39 0603527N RETRACT LARCH............ 12,562 12,562
40 0603536N RETRACT JUNIPER.......... 148,000 148,000
41 0603542N RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL..... 778 778
42 0603553N SURFACE ASW.............. 1,161 1,161
43 0603561N ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM 185,356 10,000 195,356
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Out-of-autoclave [20,000]
submarine technology
development.
..................... Project 9710: EDMs [-10,000]
early to need.
44 0603562N SUBMARINE TACTICAL 10,528 10,528
WARFARE SYSTEMS.
45 0603563N SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED 126,396 -63,100 63,296
DESIGN.
..................... Project 2196: Future [-19,100]
surface combatant
early to need.
..................... Project 3161: Program [16,000]
increase for CBM+
initiative.
..................... Project 4044: Medium [-30,000]
amphibious ship early
to need.
..................... Project 4045: Medium [-30,000]
logistics ship early
to need.
46 0603564N SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & 70,270 -41,300 28,970
FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
..................... Project 0411: LSC [-41,300]
preliminary design
and CDD early to need.
47 0603570N ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER 149,188 149,188
SYSTEMS.
48 0603573N ADVANCED SURFACE 38,449 200,000 238,449
MACHINERY SYSTEMS.
..................... Accelerate ITF to [75,000]
achieve full test
capability in FY23.
..................... Accelerate [10,000]
qualification of
silicon carbide power
modules.
..................... USV autonomy [45,000]
development.
..................... USV engine and [70,000]
generator
qualification testing.
49 0603576N CHALK EAGLE.............. 71,181 71,181
50 0603581N LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP 32,178 -5,000 27,178
(LCS).
..................... Project 3096: [-5,000]
Available prior year
funds.
51 0603582N COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION 17,843 17,843
52 0603595N OHIO REPLACEMENT......... 317,196 317,196
53 0603596N LCS MISSION MODULES...... 67,875 -35,000 32,875
..................... Project 2550: LCS MCM [-20,000]
MP outdated IMS and
TEMP.
..................... Project 2551: LCS ASW [-15,000]
MP available prior
year funds due to
testing delays.
54 0603597N AUTOMATED TEST AND 4,797 4,797
ANALYSIS.
55 0603599N FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT...... 82,309 82,309
56 0603609N CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 9,922 -7,800 2,122
..................... Project 0363: [-7,800]
Insufficient
justification.
57 0603635M MARINE CORPS GROUND 189,603 189,603
COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM.
58 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 43,084 43,084
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
59 0603713N OCEAN ENGINEERING 6,346 6,346
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
60 0603721N ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. 20,601 20,601
61 0603724N NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM...... 23,422 23,422
62 0603725N FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT... 4,664 4,664
63 0603734N CHALK CORAL.............. 545,763 545,763
64 0603739N NAVY LOGISTIC 3,884 3,884
PRODUCTIVITY.
65 0603746N RETRACT MAPLE............ 353,226 353,226
66 0603748N LINK PLUMERIA............ 544,388 544,388
67 0603751N RETRACT ELM.............. 86,730 86,730
68 0603764M LINK EVERGREEN........... 236,234 236,234
70 0603790N NATO RESEARCH AND 6,880 6,880
DEVELOPMENT.
71 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY... 10,578 10,578
72 0603851M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 28,435 28,435
TESTING.
73 0603860N JOINT PRECISION APPROACH 33,612 33,612
AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
VAL.
74 0603925N DIRECTED ENERGY AND 128,845 -15,000 113,845
ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
..................... Project 3402: Excess [-15,000]
engineering and
sustainment support.
75 0604014N F/A -18 INFRARED SEARCH 84,190 84,190
AND TRACK (IRST).
76 0604027N DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE... 54,699 54,699
77 0604028N SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED 53,942 53,942
UNDERSEA VEHICLES.
78 0604029N UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE 40,060 40,060
CORE TECHNOLOGIES.
79 0604030N RAPID PROTOTYPING, 12,100 12,100
EXPERIMENTATION AND
DEMONSTRATION..
80 0604031N LARGE UNMANNED UNDERSEA 78,122 -36,000 42,122
VEHICLES.
..................... Project 2094: Excess [-36,000]
procurement ahead of
phase 1 testing.
81 0604112N GERALD R. FORD CLASS 107,895 107,895
NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
(CVN 78--80).
82 0604126N LITTORAL AIRBORNE MCM.... 17,366 17,366
83 0604127N SURFACE MINE 18,754 18,754
COUNTERMEASURES.
84 0604272N TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL 59,776 59,776
INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
(TADIRCM).
86 0604292N FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 5,097 5,097
(MARITIME STRIKE).
87 0604320M RAPID TECHNOLOGY 3,664 3,664
CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE.
88 0604454N LX (R)................... 10,203 10,203
89 0604536N ADVANCED UNDERSEA 115,858 -20,000 95,858
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Orca UUV testing [-10,000]
delay and uncertified
test strategy.
..................... Snakehead UUV [-10,000]
uncertified test
strategy.
90 0604636N COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 14,259 14,259
SYSTEMS (C-UAS).
91 0604659N PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS 1,102,387 -57,000 1,045,387
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
..................... Lack of hypersonic [-5,000]
prototyping
coordination.
..................... Project 3334: Excess [-52,000]
Virginia-class CPS
modification and
installation costs.
92 0604707N SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 7,657 7,657
WARFARE (SEW)
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
SUPPORT.
93 0604786N OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE 35,750 35,750
WARFARE WEAPON
DEVELOPMENT.
94 0303354N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT-- 9,151 9,151
MIP.
95 0304240M ADVANCED TACTICAL 22,589 22,589
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
97 0304270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 809 809
DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 6,503,074 -576,542 5,926,532
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
98 0603208N TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT. 4,332 4,332
99 0604212N OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT... 18,133 5,000 23,133
..................... Program increase for [5,000]
Attack and Utility
Replacement Aircraft.
100 0604214M AV-8B AIRCRAFT--ENG DEV.. 20,054 20,054
101 0604215N STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT.... 4,237 4,237
102 0604216N MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER 27,340 27,340
UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
104 0604221N P-3 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM 606 606
105 0604230N WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM... 9,065 9,065
106 0604231N TACTICAL COMMAND SYSTEM.. 97,968 97,968
107 0604234N ADVANCED HAWKEYE......... 309,373 309,373
108 0604245M H-1 UPGRADES............. 62,310 62,310
109 0604261N ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS.. 47,182 47,182
110 0604262N V-22A.................... 132,624 132,624
111 0604264N AIR CREW SYSTEMS 21,445 21,445
DEVELOPMENT.
112 0604269N EA-18.................... 106,134 106,134
113 0604270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 134,194 134,194
DEVELOPMENT.
114 0604273M EXECUTIVE HELO 99,321 99,321
DEVELOPMENT.
115 0604274N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 477,680 477,680
(NGJ).
116 0604280N JOINT TACTICAL RADIO 232,818 232,818
SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
117 0604282N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 170,039 170,039
(NGJ) INCREMENT II.
118 0604307N SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT 403,712 403,712
SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
119 0604311N LPD-17 CLASS SYSTEMS 945 945
INTEGRATION.
120 0604329N SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB) 62,488 62,488
121 0604366N STANDARD MISSILE 386,225 386,225
IMPROVEMENTS.
122 0604373N AIRBORNE MCM............. 10,909 10,909
123 0604378N NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE 44,548 44,548
CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
124 0604419N ADVANCED SENSORS 13,673 13,673
APPLICATION PROGRAM
(ASAP).
125 0604501N ADVANCED ABOVE WATER 87,809 87,809
SENSORS.
126 0604503N SSN-688 AND TRIDENT 93,097 93,097
MODERNIZATION.
127 0604504N AIR CONTROL.............. 38,863 38,863
128 0604512N SHIPBOARD AVIATION 9,593 9,593
SYSTEMS.
129 0604518N COMBAT INFORMATION CENTER 12,718 12,718
CONVERSION.
130 0604522N AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 78,319 78,319
RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
131 0604530N ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR 65,834 65,834
(AAG).
132 0604558N NEW DESIGN SSN........... 259,443 259,443
133 0604562N SUBMARINE TACTICAL 63,878 -5,000 58,878
WARFARE SYSTEM.
..................... AN/BYG-1 APB17 and [-5,000]
APB19 testing delays.
134 0604567N SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ 51,853 14,900 66,753
LIVE FIRE T&E.
..................... Advanced degaussing [14,900]
DDG-51 retrofit and
demonstration.
135 0604574N NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER 3,853 3,853
RESOURCES.
136 0604601N MINE DEVELOPMENT......... 92,607 92,607
137 0604610N LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO 146,012 -30,000 116,012
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Project 1412: HAAWC [-10,000]
operational testing
delays.
..................... Project 3418: Mk 54 [-20,000]
Mod 2 contract delays.
138 0604654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 8,383 8,383
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
139 0604657M USMC GROUND COMBAT/ 33,784 33,784
SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
140 0604703N PERSONNEL, TRAINING, 8,599 8,599
SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
FACTORS.
141 0604727N JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON 73,744 73,744
SYSTEMS.
142 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT 157,490 157,490
& CONTROL).
143 0604756N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 121,761 121,761
(ENGAGE: HARD KILL).
144 0604757N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 89,373 89,373
(ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW).
145 0604761N INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING. 15,716 15,716
146 0604771N MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT...... 2,120 2,120
147 0604777N NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM..... 50,180 50,180
148 0604800M JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER 561 561
(JSF)--EMD.
149 0604800N JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER 250 250
(JSF)--EMD.
150 0604850N SSN(X)................... 1,000 1,000
151 0605013M INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 974 974
DEVELOPMENT.
152 0605013N INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 356,173 356,173
DEVELOPMENT.
153 0605024N ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 7,810 7,810
SUPPORT.
154 0605212M CH-53K RDTE.............. 406,406 406,406
155 0605215N MISSION PLANNING......... 86,134 86,134
156 0605217N COMMON AVIONICS.......... 54,540 54,540
157 0605220N SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR 5,155 5,155
(SSC).
158 0605327N T-AO 205 CLASS........... 5,148 5,148
159 0605414N UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION 266,970 266,970
(UCA).
160 0605450M JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND 12,713 12,713
MISSILE (JAGM).
161 0605500N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 24,424 24,424
AIRCRAFT (MMA).
162 0605504N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 182,870 182,870
(MMA) INCREMENT III.
163 0605611M MARINE CORPS ASSAULT 41,775 41,775
VEHICLES SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
164 0605813M JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,541 2,541
VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
165 0204202N DDG-1000................. 208,448 208,448
169 0304785N TACTICAL CRYPTOLOGIC 111,434 111,434
SYSTEMS.
170 0306250M CYBER OPERATIONS 26,173 26,173
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 6,263,883 -15,100 6,248,783
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
171 0604256N THREAT SIMULATOR 22,075 22,075
DEVELOPMENT.
172 0604258N TARGET SYSTEMS 10,224 10,224
DEVELOPMENT.
173 0604759N MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 85,195 85,195
175 0605152N STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 3,089 3,089
SUPPORT--NAVY.
176 0605154N CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES 43,517 43,517
179 0605804N TECHNICAL INFORMATION 932 932
SERVICES.
180 0605853N MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 94,297 94,297
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
181 0605856N STRATEGIC TECHNICAL 3,813 3,813
SUPPORT.
183 0605863N RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT 104,822 104,822
SUPPORT.
184 0605864N TEST AND EVALUATION 446,960 446,960
SUPPORT.
185 0605865N OPERATIONAL TEST AND 27,241 27,241
EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
186 0605866N NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 15,787 15,787
WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
187 0605867N SEW SURVEILLANCE/ 8,559 8,559
RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
188 0605873M MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE 42,749 42,749
SUPPORT.
189 0605898N MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 41,094 41,094
190 0606355N WARFARE INNOVATION 37,022 37,022
MANAGEMENT.
193 0305327N INSIDER THREAT........... 2,310 2,310
194 0902498N MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS 1,536 1,536
(DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES).
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 991,222 0 991,222
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
199 0604227N HARPOON MODIFICATIONS.... 697 697
200 0604840M F-35 C2D2................ 379,549 379,549
201 0604840N F-35 C2D2................ 413,875 413,875
202 0607658N COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT 143,667 143,667
CAPABILITY (CEC).
204 0101221N STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS 173,056 173,056
SYSTEM SUPPORT.
205 0101224N SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY 45,970 45,970
PROGRAM.
206 0101226N SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 69,190 -8,000 61,190
WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... CRAW EDM (TI-2) early [-8,000]
to need.
207 0101402N NAVY STRATEGIC 42,277 42,277
COMMUNICATIONS.
208 0204136N F/A-18 SQUADRONS......... 171,030 171,030
210 0204228N SURFACE SUPPORT.......... 33,482 33,482
211 0204229N TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK 200,308 200,308
MISSION PLANNING CENTER
(TMPC).
212 0204311N INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE 102,975 50,000 152,975
SYSTEM.
..................... Accelerate sensor and [25,000]
signal processing
development.
..................... Program increase for [25,000]
spiral 1 TRAPS units.
213 0204313N SHIP-TOWED ARRAY 10,873 10,873
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS.
214 0204413N AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL 1,713 5,000 6,713
SUPPORT UNITS
(DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
..................... Program increase for [5,000]
LCAC composite
component
manufacturing.
215 0204460M GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED 22,205 83,600 105,805
RADAR (G/ATOR).
..................... Program increase for [10,000]
G/ATOR and SM-6 stand-
alone engagement
analysis.
..................... Program increase for [73,600]
USMC G/ATOR and SM-6
demonstration.
216 0204571N CONSOLIDATED TRAINING 83,956 83,956
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
218 0204575N ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) 56,791 56,791
READINESS SUPPORT.
219 0205601N HARM IMPROVEMENT......... 146,166 146,166
221 0205620N SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM 29,348 29,348
INTEGRATION.
222 0205632N MK-48 ADCAP.............. 110,349 110,349
223 0205633N AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS.... 133,953 133,953
224 0205675N OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER 110,313 110,313
SYSTEMS.
225 0206313M MARINE CORPS 207,662 207,662
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
226 0206335M COMMON AVIATION COMMAND 4,406 4,406
AND CONTROL SYSTEM
(CAC2S).
227 0206623M MARINE CORPS GROUND 61,381 61,381
COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
SYSTEMS.
228 0206624M MARINE CORPS COMBAT 10,421 10,421
SERVICES SUPPORT.
229 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ 29,977 29,977
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
SYSTEMS (MIP).
230 0206629M AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT 6,469 6,469
VEHICLE.
231 0207161N TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 5,859 5,859
232 0207163N ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 44,323 44,323
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
236 0303109N SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS 41,978 41,978
(SPACE).
237 0303138N CONSOLIDATED AFLOAT 29,684 29,684
NETWORK ENTERPRISE
SERVICES (CANES).
238 0303140N INFORMATION SYSTEMS 39,094 39,094
SECURITY PROGRAM.
239 0305192N MILITARY INTELLIGENCE 6,154 6,154
PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
240 0305204N TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL 7,108 7,108
VEHICLES.
241 0305205N UAS INTEGRATION AND 62,098 62,098
INTEROPERABILITY.
242 0305208M DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 21,500 21,500
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
244 0305220N MQ-4C TRITON............. 11,120 11,120
245 0305231N MQ-8 UAV................. 28,968 28,968
246 0305232M RQ-11 UAV................ 537 537
247 0305234N SMALL (LEVEL 0) TACTICAL 8,773 8,773
UAS (STUASL0).
248 0305239M RQ-21A................... 10,853 10,853
249 0305241N MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR 60,413 60,413
DEVELOPMENT.
250 0305242M UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 5,000 5,000
(UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
251 0305251N CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 34,967 10,000 44,967
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
..................... Cyber tool [10,000]
development.
252 0305421N RQ-4 MODERNIZATION....... 178,799 178,799
253 0307577N INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 2,120 2,120
(IMD).
254 0308601N MODELING AND SIMULATION 8,683 8,683
SUPPORT.
255 0702207N DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON- 45,168 45,168
IF).
256 0708730N MARITIME TECHNOLOGY 6,697 6,697
(MARITECH).
257 1203109N SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS 70,056 70,056
(SPACE).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 1,795,032 1,795,032
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 5,327,043 140,600 5,467,643
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
258 0608013N RISK MANAGEMENT 14,300 14,300
INFORMATION--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
259 0608231N MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND 10,868 10,868
AND CONTROL (MTC2)--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 25,168 0 25,168
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 21,427,048 -390,242 21,036,806
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, NAVY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, AF
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102F DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 315,348 10,000 325,348
..................... Increase in basic [10,000]
research.
2 0601103F UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 161,861 161,861
INITIATIVES.
3 0601108F HIGH ENERGY LASER 15,085 15,085
RESEARCH INITIATIVES.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 492,294 10,000 502,294
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
4 0602020F FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES 100,000 100,000
APPLIED RESEARCH.
5 0602102F MATERIALS................ 140,781 19,500 160,281
..................... High-energy [5,000]
synchotron x-ray
program.
..................... Materials maturation [5,000]
for high mach systems.
..................... Metals Affordability [5,000]
Initiative.
..................... Qualification of [2,000]
additive
manufacturing
processes.
..................... Techniques to repair [2,500]
fasteners.
6 0602201F AEROSPACE VEHICLE 349,225 10,000 359,225
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Hypersonic materials. [10,000]
7 0602202F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 115,222 115,222
APPLIED RESEARCH.
9 0602204F AEROSPACE SENSORS........ 211,301 211,301
11 0602298F SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 8,926 8,926
MANAGEMENT-- MAJOR
HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
12 0602602F CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 132,425 132,425
13 0602605F DIRECTED ENERGY 128,113 128,113
TECHNOLOGY.
14 0602788F DOMINANT INFORMATION 178,668 178,668
SCIENCES AND METHODS.
15 0602890F HIGH ENERGY LASER 45,088 45,088
RESEARCH.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 1,409,749 29,500 1,439,249
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
17 0603030F AF FOUNDATIONAL 103,280 103,280
DEVELOPMENT/DEMOS.
18 0603032F FUTURE AF INTEGRATED 157,619 -50,000 107,619
TECHNOLOGY DEMOS.
..................... Golden Horde too [-50,000]
mature for science
and technology
prototype.
19 0603033F NEXT GEN PLATFORM DEV/ 199,556 9,000 208,556
DEMO.
..................... B-52 pylon fairings.. [3,000]
..................... C-130 finlets........ [3,000]
..................... KC-135 aft body drag. [3,000]
20 0603034F PERSISTENT KNOWLEDGE, 102,276 102,276
AWARENESS, & C2 TECH.
21 0603035F NEXT GEN EFFECTS DEV/ 215,817 215,817
DEMOS.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 778,548 -41,000 737,548
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
38 0603260F INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED 4,320 4,320
DEVELOPMENT.
39 0603742F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION 26,396 26,396
TECHNOLOGY.
40 0603790F NATO RESEARCH AND 3,647 3,647
DEVELOPMENT.
41 0603851F INTERCONTINENTAL 32,959 32,959
BALLISTIC MISSILE--DEM/
VAL.
43 0604002F AIR FORCE WEATHER 869 869
SERVICES RESEARCH.
44 0604003F ADVANCED BATTLE 302,323 302,323
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ABMS).
45 0604004F ADVANCED ENGINE 636,495 50,000 686,495
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... AETP program [50,000]
acceleration.
46 0604015F LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER 2,848,410 2,848,410
47 0604032F DIRECTED ENERGY 20,964 5,000 25,964
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Directed energy [5,000]
counter-Unmanned
Aerial Systems (CUAS).
48 0604033F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING.. 381,862 65,000 446,862
..................... HAWC program increase [65,000]
50 0604257F ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND 24,747 24,747
SENSORS.
51 0604288F NATIONAL AIRBORNE OPS 76,417 76,417
CENTER (NAOC) RECAP.
52 0604317F TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER...... 3,011 3,011
53 0604327F HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED 52,921 52,921
TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
(HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
54 0604414F CYBER RESILIENCY OF 69,783 69,783
WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS.
55 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 25,835 25,835
ENTERPRISE R&D.
56 0604858F TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM.. 219,252 236,000 455,252
..................... Agile software [4,500]
development and
operations.
..................... Initial polar [46,000]
MILSATCOM capability.
..................... KC-135 vertical [2,000]
wipers.
..................... KC-135 winglets...... [10,000]
..................... LCAAT program [128,000]
acceleration.
..................... Long-endurance UAS... [33,500]
..................... Rapid repair of high [6,000]
performance materials.
..................... Small satellite [6,000]
acceleration.
57 0605230F GROUND BASED STRATEGIC 1,524,759 1,524,759
DETERRENT.
59 0207110F NEXT GENERATION AIR 1,044,089 1,044,089
DOMINANCE.
60 0207455F THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG- 19,356 19,356
RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
61 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE 8,737 8,737
SYSTEMS (ABADS).
62 0208099F UNIFIED PLATFORM (UP).... 5,990 5,990
63 0305236F COMMON DATA LINK 39,293 39,293
EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA).
65 0305601F MISSION PARTNER 11,430 11,430
ENVIRONMENTS.
66 0306250F CYBER OPERATIONS 259,823 259,823
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
67 0306415F ENABLED CYBER ACTIVITIES. 10,560 10,560
68 0401310F C-32 EXECUTIVE TRANSPORT 9,908 9,908
RECAPITALIZATION.
69 0901410F CONTRACTING INFORMATION 8,662 8,662
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
74 1206427F SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 8,787 8,787
TRANSITIONS (SSPT).
77 1206730F SPACE SECURITY AND 56,311 56,311
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 7,737,916 356,000 8,093,916
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
82 0604200F FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON 25,161 25,161
ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
83 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 38,564 38,564
IMPROVEMENTS.
84 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT.. 35,033 35,033
85 0604270F ELECTRONIC WARFARE 2,098 2,098
DEVELOPMENT.
86 0604281F TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS 131,909 131,909
ENTERPRISE.
87 0604287F PHYSICAL SECURITY 6,752 6,752
EQUIPMENT.
88 0604329F SMALL DIAMETER BOMB 17,280 17,280
(SDB)--EMD.
89 0604429F AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC 0 30,000 30,000
ATTACK.
..................... STiTCHES integration. [30,000]
90 0604602F ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE 23,076 23,076
DEVELOPMENT.
91 0604604F SUBMUNITIONS............. 3,091 3,091
92 0604617F AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT..... 20,609 20,609
93 0604618F JOINT DIRECT ATTACK 7,926 7,926
MUNITION.
94 0604706F LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS..... 23,660 23,660
95 0604735F COMBAT TRAINING RANGES... 8,898 8,898
96 0604800F F-35--EMD................ 5,423 5,423
97 0604932F LONG RANGE STANDOFF 474,430 474,430
WEAPON.
98 0604933F ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION.. 167,099 167,099
100 0605056F OPEN ARCHITECTURE 30,547 30,547
MANAGEMENT.
102 0605223F ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING.. 248,669 6,000 254,669
..................... SLATE/VR training.... [6,000]
103 0605229F COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER. 63,169 63,169
105 0101125F NUCLEAR WEAPONS 9,683 9,683
MODERNIZATION.
106 0207171F F-15 EPAWSS.............. 170,679 170,679
107 0207328F STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON... 160,438 160,438
108 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 9,422 9,422
TRAINING.
110 0305176F COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER 973 973
LOCATOR.
111 0401221F KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS.. 106,262 106,262
113 0401319F VC-25B................... 800,889 800,889
114 0701212F AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS... 10,673 10,673
115 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS.... 4,479 4,479
116 0901299F AF A1 SYSTEMS............ 8,467 8,467
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 2,615,359 36,000 2,651,359
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
131 0604256F THREAT SIMULATOR 57,725 57,725
DEVELOPMENT.
132 0604759F MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 208,680 15,000 223,680
..................... Gulf Range telemetric [15,000]
modernization.
133 0605101F RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE... 35,803 35,803
135 0605712F INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST 13,557 13,557
& EVALUATION.
136 0605807F TEST AND EVALUATION 764,606 764,606
SUPPORT.
142 0605831F ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY 1,362,038 1,362,038
INTEGRATION.
143 0605832F ACQ WORKFORCE- ADVANCED 40,768 40,768
PRGM TECHNOLOGY.
144 0605833F ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR 179,646 179,646
SYSTEMS.
145 0605898F MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 5,734 5,734
146 0605976F FACILITIES RESTORATION 70,985 70,985
AND MODERNIZATION--TEST
AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.
147 0605978F FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT-- 29,880 29,880
TEST AND EVALUATION
SUPPORT.
148 0606017F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND 63,381 63,381
MATURATION.
149 0606398F MANAGEMENT HQ--T&E....... 5,785 5,785
150 0303255F COMMAND, CONTROL, 24,564 24,564
COMMUNICATION, AND
COMPUTERS (C4)--STRATCOM.
151 0308602F ENTEPRISE INFORMATION 9,883 -7,500 2,383
SERVICES (EIS).
..................... Acq strat [-7,500]
incompatible with AF
digital mod strategy.
152 0702806F ACQUISITION AND 13,384 13,384
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
153 0804731F GENERAL SKILL TRAINING... 1,262 1,262
155 1001004F INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES. 3,599 3,599
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 2,891,280 7,500 2,898,780
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
163 0604233F SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE 8,777 8,777
FLIGHT TRAINING.
164 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 499 499
ENTERPRISE R&D.
165 0604840F F-35 C2D2................ 785,336 785,336
166 0605018F AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL 27,035 -20,000 7,035
AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
..................... Poor agile [-20,000]
development strategy.
167 0605024F ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 50,508 50,508
EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
168 0605117F FOREIGN MATERIEL 71,229 71,229
ACQUISITION AND
EXPLOITATION.
169 0605278F HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E.... 24,705 24,705
170 0606018F NC3 INTEGRATION.......... 26,356 26,356
172 0101113F B-52 SQUADRONS........... 520,023 520,023
173 0101122F AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE 1,433 1,433
MISSILE (ALCM).
174 0101126F B-1B SQUADRONS........... 15,766 10,800 26,566
..................... USAF-requested [10,800]
transfer from APAF
Lines 22, 24.
175 0101127F B-2 SQUADRONS............ 187,399 187,399
176 0101213F MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS...... 116,569 116,569
177 0101316F WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC 27,235 27,235
COMMUNICATIONS.
178 0101324F INTEGRATED STRATEGIC 24,227 24,227
PLANNING & ANALYSIS
NETWORK.
179 0101328F ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES.... 112,753 112,753
181 0102110F UH-1N REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 44,464 44,464
182 0102326F REGION/SECTOR OPERATION 5,929 5,929
CONTROL CENTER
MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
183 0102412F NORTH WARNING SYSTEM 100 100
(NWS).
184 0205219F MQ-9 UAV................. 162,080 162,080
186 0207131F A-10 SQUADRONS........... 24,535 24,535
187 0207133F F-16 SQUADRONS........... 223,437 223,437
188 0207134F F-15E SQUADRONS.......... 298,908 298,908
189 0207136F MANNED DESTRUCTIVE 14,960 14,960
SUPPRESSION.
190 0207138F F-22A SQUADRONS.......... 665,038 665,038
191 0207142F F-35 SQUADRONS........... 132,229 132,229
192 0207146F F-15EX................... 159,761 159,761
193 0207161F TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 19,417 19,417
194 0207163F ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 51,799 51,799
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
195 0207227F COMBAT RESCUE--PARARESCUE 669 669
196 0207247F AF TENCAP................ 21,644 21,644
197 0207249F PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS 9,261 9,261
PROCUREMENT.
198 0207253F COMPASS CALL............. 15,854 15,854
199 0207268F AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 95,896 95,896
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
200 0207325F JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE 70,792 70,792
STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
201 0207410F AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS 51,187 51,187
CENTER (AOC).
202 0207412F CONTROL AND REPORTING 16,041 16,041
CENTER (CRC).
203 0207417F AIRBORNE WARNING AND 138,303 138,303
CONTROL SYSTEM (AWACS).
204 0207418F AFSPECWAR--TACP.......... 4,223 4,223
206 0207431F COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE 16,564 16,564
SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
207 0207438F THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT 7,858 7,858
(TBM) C4I.
208 0207444F TACTICAL AIR CONTROL 12,906 12,906
PARTY-MOD.
210 0207452F DCAPES................... 14,816 14,816
211 0207521F AIR FORCE CALIBRATION 1,970 1,970
PROGRAMS.
212 0207573F NATIONAL TECHNICAL 396 396
NUCLEAR FORENSICS.
213 0207590F SEEK EAGLE............... 29,680 29,680
214 0207601F USAF MODELING AND 17,666 17,666
SIMULATION.
215 0207605F WARGAMING AND SIMULATION 6,353 6,353
CENTERS.
216 0207610F BATTLEFIELD ABN COMM NODE 6,827 6,827
(BACN).
217 0207697F DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND 3,390 3,390
EXERCISES.
218 0208006F MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS. 91,768 91,768
219 0208007F TACTICAL DECEPTION....... 2,370 2,370
220 0208064F OPERATIONAL HQ--CYBER.... 5,527 5,527
221 0208087F DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE 68,279 68,279
OPERATIONS.
222 0208088F AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE 15,165 15,165
OPERATIONS.
223 0208097F JOINT CYBER COMMAND AND 38,480 38,480
CONTROL (JCC2).
224 0208099F UNIFIED PLATFORM (UP).... 84,645 84,645
230 0301025F GEOBASE.................. 2,767 2,767
231 0301112F NUCLEAR PLANNING AND 32,759 32,759
EXECUTION SYSTEM (NPES).
238 0301401F AIR FORCE SPACE AND CYBER 2,904 2,904
NON-TRADITIONAL ISR FOR
BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
239 0302015F E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE 3,468 3,468
OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
240 0303131F MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 61,887 61,887
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
242 0303140F INFORMATION SYSTEMS 10,351 10,351
SECURITY PROGRAM.
243 0303142F GLOBAL FORCE MANAGEMENT-- 1,346 1,346
DATA INITIATIVE.
246 0304260F AIRBORNE SIGINT 128,110 128,110
ENTERPRISE.
247 0304310F COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC 4,042 4,042
ANALYSIS.
251 0305020F CCMD INTELLIGENCE 1,649 1,649
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
252 0305022F ISR MODERNIZATION & 19,265 19,265
AUTOMATION DVMT (IMAD).
253 0305099F GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC 4,645 4,645
MANAGEMENT (GATM).
254 0305103F CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 384 384
255 0305111F WEATHER SERVICE.......... 23,640 23,640
256 0305114F AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, 6,553 6,553
APPROACH, AND LANDING
SYSTEM (ATCALS).
257 0305116F AERIAL TARGETS........... 449 449
260 0305128F SECURITY AND 432 432
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
262 0305146F DEFENSE JOINT 4,890 4,890
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
264 0305179F INTEGRATED BROADCAST 8,864 8,864
SERVICE (IBS).
265 0305202F DRAGON U-2............... 18,660 18,660
267 0305206F AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 121,512 121,512
SYSTEMS.
268 0305207F MANNED RECONNAISSANCE 14,711 14,711
SYSTEMS.
269 0305208F DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 14,152 14,152
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
270 0305220F RQ-4 UAV................. 134,589 134,589
271 0305221F NETWORK-CENTRIC 15,049 15,049
COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
272 0305238F NATO AGS................. 36,731 36,731
273 0305240F SUPPORT TO DCGS 33,547 33,547
ENTERPRISE.
274 0305600F INTERNATIONAL 13,635 3,680 17,315
INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY
AND ARCHITECTURES.
..................... PDI: Mission Partner [3,680]
Environment BICES-X
Project 675898.
275 0305881F RAPID CYBER ACQUISITION.. 4,262 4,262
276 0305984F PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,207 2,207
COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2).
277 0307577F INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 6,277 6,277
(IMD).
278 0401115F C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON... 41,973 41,973
279 0401119F C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS 32,560 32,560
(IF).
280 0401130F C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF)....... 9,991 3,000 12,991
..................... C-17 microvanes...... [3,000]
281 0401132F C-130J PROGRAM........... 10,674 10,674
282 0401134F LARGE AIRCRAFT IR 5,507 5,507
COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
283 0401218F KC-135S.................. 4,591 4,591
286 0401318F CV-22.................... 18,419 18,419
288 0408011F SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT 7,673 7,673
CONTROL.
290 0708055F MAINTENANCE, REPAIR & 24,513 24,513
OVERHAUL SYSTEM.
291 0708610F LOGISTICS INFORMATION 35,225 -20,000 15,225
TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
..................... Poor agile [-20,000]
development strategy.
292 0708611F SUPPORT SYSTEMS 11,838 11,838
DEVELOPMENT.
293 0804743F OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING.... 1,332 1,332
295 0901202F JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,092 2,092
AGENCY.
296 0901218F CIVILIAN COMPENSATION 3,869 3,869
PROGRAM.
297 0901220F PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION. 1,584 1,584
298 0901226F AIR FORCE STUDIES AND 1,197 1,197
ANALYSIS AGENCY.
299 0901538F FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 7,006 7,006
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
300 0901554F DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACNTNG 45,638 45,638
AND MGT SYS (DEAMS).
301 1201017F GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED 1,889 1,889
ON NETWORK (GSIN).
302 1201921F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 993 993
STRATCOM--SPACE
ACTIVITIES.
303 1202140F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 8,999 8,999
SPACECOM ACTIVITIES.
314 1203400F SPACE SUPERIORITY 16,810 16,810
INTELLIGENCE.
316 1203620F NATIONAL SPACE DEFENSE 2,687 2,687
CENTER.
318 1203906F NCMC--TW/AA SYSTEM....... 6,990 6,990
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 15,777,856 62,000 15,839,856
..................... Air-to-air weapons [62,000]
development increase.
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 21,466,680 39,480 21,506,160
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 37,391,826 437,480 37,829,306
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, AF.
.....................
..................... RDTE, SPACE FORCE
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
1 1206601SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY......... 130,874 3,000 133,874
..................... Small satellite [3,000]
mission operations
facility.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 130,874 3,000 133,874
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
2 1203164SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL 390,704 -20,000 370,704
POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER
EQUIPMENT) (SPACE).
..................... MGUE program slip.... [-20,000]
3 1203710SF EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS.... 131,000 131,000
4 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON. 83,384 83,384
5 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 33,359 33,359
SYSTEMS.
6 1206427SF SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 142,808 142,808
TRANSITIONS (SSPT).
7 1206438SF SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. 35,575 35,575
8 1206760SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 114,390 114,390
ENTERPRISE SERVICE
(PTES).
9 1206761SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 205,178 205,178
SERVICE (PTS).
10 1206855SF EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM 71,395 71,395
(ESS).
11 1206857SF SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES 103,518 103,518
OFFICE.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,311,311 -20,000 1,291,311
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
12 1203269SF GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS 263,496 263,496
IIIF).
13 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 41,897 41,897
OPERATIONS.
14 1206421SF COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS..... 54,689 54,689
15 1206422SFZ WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON. 2,526 2,526
16 1206425SFZ SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 173,074 173,074
SYSTEMS.
17 1206431SF ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM 138,257 138,257
(SPACE).
18 1206432SF POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE).. 190,235 190,235
19 1206442SF NEXT GENERATION OPIR..... 2,318,864 2,318,864
20 1206853SF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE 560,978 30,000 590,978
LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)--
EMD.
..................... NSSL Phase 3 [30,000]
integration
activities program.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 3,744,016 30,000 3,774,016
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
21 1206116SF SPACE TEST AND TRAINING 20,281 20,281
RANGE DEVELOPMENT.
22 1206392SF ACQ WORKFORCE--SPACE & 183,930 183,930
MISSILE SYSTEMS.
23 1206398SF SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS 9,765 9,765
CENTER--MHA.
24 1206860SF ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH 17,993 17,993
PROGRAM (SPACE).
25 1206864SF SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP). 26,541 26,541
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 258,510 0 258,510
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
26 1201017SF GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED 3,708 3,708
ON NETWORK (GSIN).
27 1203001SF FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS 247,229 247,229
TERMINALS (FAB-T).
28 1203110SF SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK 75,480 75,480
(SPACE).
29 1203165SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL 1,984 1,984
POSITIONING SYSTEM
(SPACE AND CONTROL
SEGMENTS).
30 1203173SF SPACE AND MISSILE TEST 4,397 4,397
AND EVALUATION CENTER.
31 1203174SF SPACE INNOVATION, 44,746 44,746
INTEGRATION AND RAPID
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
32 1203182SF SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM 11,020 11,020
(SPACE).
33 1203265SF GPS III SPACE SEGMENT.... 10,777 10,777
34 1203873SF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 28,179 18,500 46,679
RADARS.
..................... Cobra Dane service [18,500]
life extension.
35 1203913SF NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM 29,157 29,157
(SPACE).
36 1203940SFZ SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 44,809 7,000 51,809
OPERATIONS.
..................... Commercial SSA....... [7,000]
37 1206423SF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM 481,999 -65,000 416,999
III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
SEGMENT.
..................... Funds available [-65,000]
prioritized to other
space missions.
41 1206770SF ENTERPRISE GROUND 116,791 116,791
SERVICES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 3,632,866 3,632,866
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 4,733,142 -39,500 4,693,642
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
42 1203614SF JSPOC MISSION SYSTEM..... 149,742 149,742
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 149,742 0 149,742
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RDTE, SPACE FORCE.. 10,327,595 -26,500 10,301,095
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, DW
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601000BR DTRA BASIC RESEARCH...... 14,617 14,617
2 0601101E DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 479,958 479,958
3 0601110D8Z BASIC RESEARCH 35,565 37,000 72,565
INITIATIVES.
..................... DEPSCoR.............. [20,000]
..................... Minerva Research [17,000]
initiative restore
DWR cut.
4 0601117E BASIC OPERATIONAL MEDICAL 53,730 5,000 58,730
RESEARCH SCIENCE.
..................... Traumatic brain [5,000]
injury medical
research.
5 0601120D8Z NATIONAL DEFENSE 100,241 100,241
EDUCATION PROGRAM.
6 0601228D8Z HISTORICALLY BLACK 30,975 7,000 37,975
COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
INSTITUTIONS.
..................... Aerospace education, [2,000]
research, and
innovation activities.
..................... HBCU/Minority [5,000]
Institutions.
7 0601384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 45,300 45,300
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 760,386 49,000 809,386
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
8 0602000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS 19,409 19,409
TECHNOLOGY.
9 0602115E BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.... 107,568 107,568
11 0602230D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 35,000 35,000
INNOVATION.
12 0602234D8Z LINCOLN LABORATORY 41,080 41,080
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
13 0602251D8Z APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE 60,722 60,722
ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
PRIORITIES.
14 0602303E INFORMATION & 435,920 435,920
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY.
15 0602383E BIOLOGICAL WARFARE 26,950 26,950
DEFENSE.
16 0602384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 201,807 201,807
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
17 0602668D8Z CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH.. 15,255 15,255
18 0602702E TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY...... 233,271 233,271
19 0602715E MATERIALS AND BIOLOGICAL 250,107 40,000 290,107
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Increase in emerging [40,000]
biotech research.
20 0602716E ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY... 322,693 322,693
21 0602718BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 174,571 174,571
DESTRUCTION APPLIED
RESEARCH.
22 0602751D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 9,573 9,573
INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
23 1160401BB SOF TECHNOLOGY 42,464 42,464
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 1,976,390 40,000 2,016,390
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
24 0603000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED 22,920 22,920
TECHNOLOGY.
25 0603121D8Z SO/LIC ADVANCED 4,914 4,914
DEVELOPMENT.
26 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM 51,089 51,089
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
27 0603133D8Z FOREIGN COMPARATIVE 25,183 25,183
TESTING.
29 0603160BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 366,659 366,659
DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
30 0603176C ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND 14,910 14,910
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
32 0603180C ADVANCED RESEARCH........ 18,687 18,687
33 0603225D8Z JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS 18,873 18,873
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
34 0603286E ADVANCED AEROSPACE 230,978 -20,000 210,978
SYSTEMS.
..................... OpFires lack of [-20,000]
transition pathway.
35 0603287E SPACE PROGRAMS AND 158,439 158,439
TECHNOLOGY.
36 0603288D8Z ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS..... 23,775 23,775
37 0603289D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 36,524 36,524
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
38 0603291D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 14,703 14,703
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS--
MHA.
39 0603294C COMMON KILL VEHICLE 11,058 11,058
TECHNOLOGY.
40 0603338D8Z DEFENSE MODERNIZATION AND 133,375 -7,000 126,375
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Lack of hypersonic [-20,000]
prototype
coordination efforts.
..................... Stratospheric balloon [13,000]
research.
42 0603342D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 26,141 26,141
(DIU).
43 0603375D8Z TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION.... 27,709 27,709
44 0603384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 188,001 188,001
DEFENSE PROGRAM--
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
45 0603527D8Z RETRACT LARCH............ 130,283 130,283
46 0603618D8Z JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED 15,164 15,164
TECHNOLOGY.
47 0603648D8Z JOINT CAPABILITY 85,452 85,452
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATIONS.
48 0603662D8Z NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS 5,882 5,882
CAPABILITIES.
49 0603680D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE 93,817 5,000 98,817
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
..................... Rapid prototyping [5,000]
using digital
manufacturing.
50 0603680S MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 40,025 15,000 55,025
PROGRAM.
..................... Defense supply chain [5,000]
technologies.
..................... Steel performance [10,000]
initiative.
52 0603712S GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D 10,235 10,235
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATIONS.
53 0603716D8Z STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL 53,862 53,862
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
54 0603720S MICROELECTRONICS 124,049 124,049
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
AND SUPPORT.
55 0603727D8Z JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM 3,871 3,871
56 0603739E ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 95,864 95,864
TECHNOLOGIES.
57 0603760E COMMAND, CONTROL AND 221,724 221,724
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
58 0603766E NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE 661,158 -10,000 651,158
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Lack of coordination. [-10,000]
59 0603767E SENSOR TECHNOLOGY........ 200,220 200,220
60 0603769D8Z DISTRIBUTED LEARNING 6,765 6,765
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
61 0603781D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 12,598 12,598
INSTITUTE.
64 0603924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 105,410 105,410
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM.
65 0603941D8Z TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE 187,065 187,065
& TECHNOLOGY.
67 0604055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 0 65,000 65,000
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
..................... Restoration of funds. [65,000]
70 1160402BB SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 89,072 89,072
DEVELOPMENT.
71 1206310SDA SPACE SCIENCE AND 72,422 72,422
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 3,588,876 48,000 3,636,876
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
72 0603161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 32,636 32,636
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
73 0603600D8Z WALKOFF.................. 106,529 106,529
75 0603851D8Z ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY 61,345 15,000 76,345
TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
PROGRAM.
..................... Joint Storage Program [15,000]
76 0603881C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 412,627 412,627
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
77 0603882C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 1,004,305 1,004,305
MIDCOURSE DEFENSE
SEGMENT.
78 0603884BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 76,167 76,167
DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
79 0603884C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 281,957 281,957
SENSORS.
80 0603890C BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS.... 599,380 599,380
81 0603891C SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA.... 420,216 420,216
82 0603892C AEGIS BMD................ 814,936 814,936
83 0603896C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 593,353 593,353
COMMAND AND CONTROL,
BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
COMMUNICATI.
84 0603898C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 49,560 49,560
JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
85 0603904C MISSILE DEFENSE 55,356 55,356
INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS
CENTER (MDIOC).
86 0603906C REGARDING TRENCH......... 11,863 11,863
87 0603907C SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR 118,318 118,318
(SBX).
88 0603913C ISRAELI COOPERATIVE 300,000 300,000
PROGRAMS.
89 0603914C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 378,302 378,302
TEST.
90 0603915C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 536,133 536,133
TARGETS.
92 0603923D8Z COALITION WARFARE........ 10,129 10,129
93 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION 449,000 449,000
INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY (5G).
94 0604016D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 3,325 3,325
CORROSION PROGRAM.
95 0604115C TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 67,389 67,389
INITIATIVES.
98 0604181C HYPERSONIC DEFENSE....... 206,832 206,832
99 0604250D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 730,508 -100,000 630,508
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Program decrease..... [-100,000]
100 0604294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 489,076 489,076
MICROELECTRONICS.
101 0604331D8Z RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM 102,023 -20,000 82,023
..................... Lack of hypersonic [-20,000]
prototype
coordination efforts.
102 0604341D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 13,255 13,255
(DIU) PROTOTYPING.
103 0604400D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 2,787 2,787
(DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM
COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
105 0604672C HOMELAND DEFENSE RADAR-- 0 162,000 162,000
HAWAII (HDR-H).
..................... Continue radar [162,000]
development.
107 0604682D8Z WARGAMING AND SUPPORT FOR 3,469 3,469
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (SSA).
109 0604826J JOINT C5 CAPABILITY 19,190 19,190
DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
AND INTEROPERABILITY
ASSESSMENTS.
110 0604873C LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION 137,256 137,256
RADAR (LRDR).
111 0604874C IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE 664,138 -310,000 354,138
INTERCEPTORS.
..................... Contract award delay. [-310,000]
112 0604876C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 7,768 7,768
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
TEST.
113 0604878C AEGIS BMD TEST........... 170,880 170,880
114 0604879C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 76,456 76,456
SENSOR TEST.
115 0604880C LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3).. 56,628 76,800 133,428
..................... PDI: Guam Defense [76,800]
System--systems
engineering.
116 0604887C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 67,071 67,071
MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
118 0300206R ENTERPRISE INFORMATION 2,198 2,198
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.
119 0303191D8Z JOINT ELECTROMAGNETIC 997 997
TECHNOLOGY (JET) PROGRAM.
120 0305103C CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 1,148 1,148
121 1206410SDA SPACE TECHNOLOGY 215,994 110,000 325,994
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Execution of HBTSS by [-20,000]
MDA.
..................... Space-based target [130,000]
custody layer.
122 1206893C SPACE TRACKING & 34,144 34,144
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.
123 1206895C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 32,068 120,000 152,068
SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
..................... Hypersonic and [120,000]
Ballistic Tracking
Space Sensor (HBTSS).
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 9,416,712 53,800 9,470,512
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
124 0604161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 7,173 7,173
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
126 0604384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 319,976 3,000 322,976
DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
..................... Stryker NBCRV sensor [3,000]
suite upgrade.
127 0604771D8Z JOINT TACTICAL 54,985 54,985
INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM (JTIDS).
128 0605000BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 15,650 15,650
DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
129 0605013BL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1,441 1,441
DEVELOPMENT.
130 0605021SE HOMELAND PERSONNEL 7,287 7,287
SECURITY INITIATIVE.
131 0605022D8Z DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY 12,928 12,928
PROGRAM.
132 0605027D8Z OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT 10,259 10,259
INITIATIVES.
133 0605070S DOD ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS 1,377 1,377
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
134 0605075D8Z CMO POLICY AND 1,648 1,648
INTEGRATION.
135 0605080S DEFENSE AGENCY 20,537 20,537
INITIATIVES (DAI)--
FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
136 0605090S DEFENSE RETIRED AND 1,638 1,638
ANNUITANT PAY SYSTEM
(DRAS).
137 0605141BR MISSION ASSURANCE RISK 5,500 5,500
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
(MARMS).
138 0605210D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC 8,279 8,279
PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
139 0605294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 107,585 107,585
MICROELECTRONICS.
140 0605772D8Z NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, 3,685 3,685
& COMMUNICATIONS.
143 0305304D8Z DOD ENTERPRISE ENERGY 3,275 3,275
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
(EEIM).
144 0305310D8Z CWMD SYSTEMS: SYSTEM 20,585 20,585
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 603,808 3,000 606,808
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
145 0603829J JOINT CAPABILITY 11,239 11,239
EXPERIMENTATION.
146 0604774D8Z DEFENSE READINESS 9,793 9,793
REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS).
147 0604875D8Z JOINT SYSTEMS 8,497 8,497
ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT.
148 0604940D8Z CENTRAL TEST AND 422,451 30,000 452,451
EVALUATION INVESTMENT
DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP).
..................... Joint Counter-UAS [15,000]
Office assessment
infrastructure.
..................... Telemetry range [15,000]
extension wave glider
relay.
149 0604942D8Z ASSESSMENTS AND 18,379 18,379
EVALUATIONS.
150 0605001E MISSION SUPPORT.......... 74,334 74,334
151 0605100D8Z JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT 79,046 79,046
TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
153 0605126J JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND 50,255 50,255
MISSILE DEFENSE
ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
155 0605142D8Z SYSTEMS ENGINEERING...... 49,376 49,376
156 0605151D8Z STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 5,777 2,000 7,777
SUPPORT--OSD.
..................... National Academies of [2,000]
Science study on
comparison of talent
programs.
157 0605161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL 16,552 16,552
SECURITY.
158 0605170D8Z SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND 9,582 9,582
INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
159 0605200D8Z GENERAL SUPPORT TO USD 1,940 1,940
(INTELLIGENCE).
160 0605384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 122,951 122,951
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
167 0605790D8Z SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION 3,582 3,582
RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER.
168 0605797D8Z MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY 29,566 29,566
ADVANTAGE.
169 0605798D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 29,059 29,059
ANALYSIS.
170 0605801KA DEFENSE TECHNICAL 59,369 -50,000 9,369
INFORMATION CENTER
(DTIC).
..................... Insufficient progress [-50,000]
on data sharing and
open repositories.
171 0605803SE R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD 29,420 29,420
ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
EVALUATION.
172 0605804D8Z DEVELOPMENT TEST AND 27,198 27,198
EVALUATION.
173 0605898E MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 13,434 13,434
174 0605998KA MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE 2,837 2,837
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
CENTER (DTIC).
175 0606100D8Z BUDGET AND PROGRAM 13,173 13,173
ASSESSMENTS.
176 0606225D8Z ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND 3,200 3,200
RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
177 0606589D8W DEFENSE DIGITAL SERVICE 999 999
(DDS) DEVELOPMENT
SUPPORT.
180 0203345D8Z DEFENSE OPERATIONS 3,099 3,099
SECURITY INITIATIVE
(DOSI).
181 0204571J JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL 3,058 3,058
SUPPORT.
182 0208045K C4I INTEROPERABILITY..... 59,813 59,813
185 0303140SE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1,112 1,112
SECURITY PROGRAM.
186 0303166J SUPPORT TO INFORMATION 545 545
OPERATIONS (IO)
CAPABILITIES.
187 0303260D8Z DEFENSE MILITARY 1,036 1,036
DECEPTION PROGRAM OFFICE
(DMDPO).
188 0305172K COMBINED ADVANCED 30,824 30,824
APPLICATIONS.
190 0305208K DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 3,048 3,048
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
194 0804768J COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT 31,125 31,125
AND TRAINING
TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
NON-MHA.
195 0808709SE DEFENSE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 100 100
MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
(DEOMI).
196 0901598C MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA....... 26,902 26,902
197 0903235K JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER 3,138 3,138
(JSP).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 41,583 41,583
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,297,392 -18,000 1,279,392
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
199 0604130V ENTERPRISE SECURITY 14,378 14,378
SYSTEM (ESS).
200 0604532K JOINT ARTIFICIAL 132,058 132,058
INTELLIGENCE.
201 0605127T REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL 1,986 1,986
OUTREACH (RIO) AND
PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
INFORMATION MANA.
202 0605147T OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN 316 316
ASSISTANCE SHARED
INFORMATION SYSTEM
(OHASIS).
203 0607210D8Z INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS 9,151 61,000 70,151
AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
..................... Advanced machine tool [20,000]
research.
..................... Cold spray [5,000]
manufacturing
technologies.
..................... Domestic organic LED [5,000]
manufacturing.
..................... Implementation of [5,000]
radar supplier
resiliency plan.
..................... Manufacturing for [6,000]
reuse of NdFeB
magnets.
..................... Submarine industrial [20,000]
base workforce
training pipeline.
204 0607310D8Z CWMD SYSTEMS: OPERATIONAL 19,082 19,082
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
205 0607327T GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY 3,992 3,992
COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
TSCMIS).
206 0607384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 39,530 39,530
DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
207 0208043J PLANNING AND DECISION AID 3,039 3,039
SYSTEM (PDAS).
212 0302019K DEFENSE INFO 16,324 16,324
INFRASTRUCTURE
ENGINEERING AND
INTEGRATION.
213 0303126K LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS-- 11,884 11,884
DCS.
214 0303131K MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 5,560 5,560
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
215 0303136G KEY MANAGEMENT 73,356 73,356
INFRASTRUCTURE (KMI).
216 0303140D8Z INFORMATION SYSTEMS 46,577 20,000 66,577
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Workforce [20,000]
transformation cyber
initiative pilot
program.
217 0303140G INFORMATION SYSTEMS 356,713 356,713
SECURITY PROGRAM.
218 0303140K INFORMATION SYSTEMS 8,922 10,000 18,922
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Execution of [10,000]
orchestration pilot.
219 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND 3,695 3,695
CONTROL SYSTEM.
220 0303153K DEFENSE SPECTRUM 20,113 20,113
ORGANIZATION.
223 0303228K JOINT REGIONAL SECURITY 9,728 -486 9,242
STACKS (JRSS).
..................... JRSS SIPR funding.... [-486]
231 0305128V SECURITY AND 5,700 5,700
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
235 0305186D8Z POLICY R&D PROGRAMS...... 7,144 7,144
236 0305199D8Z NET CENTRICITY........... 21,793 21,793
238 0305208BB DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 6,066 6,066
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
245 0305387D8Z HOMELAND DEFENSE 2,190 2,190
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PROGRAM.
252 0708012K LOGISTICS SUPPORT 1,654 1,654
ACTIVITIES.
253 0708012S PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS. 1,785 1,785
254 0708047S DEFENSE PROPERTY 7,301 7,301
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
256 1105219BB MQ-9 UAV................. 21,265 21,265
258 1160403BB AVIATION SYSTEMS......... 230,812 230,812
259 1160405BB INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS 19,558 19,558
DEVELOPMENT.
260 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS. 136,041 136,041
261 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS.......... 59,511 -1,200 58,311
..................... MMP-Light [-1,200]
unexecutable,
transfer to man-pack.
262 1160432BB SPECIAL PROGRAMS......... 10,500 10,500
263 1160434BB UNMANNED ISR............. 19,154 19,154
264 1160480BB SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES.... 9,263 9,263
265 1160483BB MARITIME SYSTEMS......... 59,882 59,882
266 1160489BB GLOBAL VIDEO SURVEILLANCE 4,606 4,606
ACTIVITIES.
267 1160490BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS 11,612 11,612
INTELLIGENCE.
268 1203610K TELEPORT PROGRAM......... 3,239 3,239
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 4,746,466 4,746,466
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 6,161,946 89,314 6,251,260
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
269 0608197V NATIONAL BACKGROUND 121,676 121,676
INVESTIGATION SERVICES--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
270 0608648D8Z ACQUISITION VISIBILITY-- 16,848 16,848
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
271 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND 86,750 86,750
CONTROL SYSTEM.
272 0308588D8Z ALGORITHMIC WARFARE CROSS 250,107 250,107
FUNCTIONAL TEAMS--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 475,381 0 475,381
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 24,280,891 265,114 24,546,005
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, DW.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
DEFENSE
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
1 0605118OTE OPERATIONAL TEST AND 100,021 100,021
EVALUATION.
2 0605131OTE LIVE FIRE TEST AND 70,933 70,933
EVALUATION.
3 0605814OTE OPERATIONAL TEST 39,136 27,000 66,136
ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES.
..................... Advanced satellite [5,000]
navigation receiver.
..................... Joint Test and [22,000]
Evaluation DWR
funding restoration.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 210,090 27,000 237,090
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST & 210,090 27,000 237,090
EVAL, DEFENSE.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RDT&E.............. 106,224,793 435,852 106,660,645
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Line Program Element Item FY 2021 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, ARMY
...................... APPLIED RESEARCH
16 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 2,000 2,000
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.
...................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 2,000 0 2,000
......................
...................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
80 0603327A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 500 500
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
114 0604785A INTEGRATED BASE DEFENSE 2,020 2,020
(BUDGET ACTIVITY 4).
...................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 2,520 0 2,520
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
......................
...................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
131 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, 27,000 27,000
CONTROL AND
INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
159 0605035A COMMON INFRARED 2,300 2,300
COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
166 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 64,625 64,625
DEVELOPMENT.
183 0304270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 3,900 3,900
DEVELOPMENT.
...................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 97,825 0 97,825
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
......................
...................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
198 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN 1,000 1,000
ITEMS.
209 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN 4,137 4,137
INTEL MODERNIZATION.
...................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 5,137 0 5,137
SUPPORT.
......................
...................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
239 0203802A OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT 2,300 2,300
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
248 0303028A SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE 23,367 23,367
ACTIVITIES.
257 0305204A TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL 34,100 34,100
VEHICLES.
258 0305206A AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 15,575 15,575
SYSTEMS.
...................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 75,342 0 75,342
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
......................
...................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 182,824 0 182,824
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, ARMY.
......................
...................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, NAVY
...................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
39 0603527N RETRACT LARCH............ 36,500 36,500
58 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 14,461 14,461
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
63 0603734N CHALK CORAL.............. 3,000 3,000
71 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY... 1,457 1,457
...................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 55,418 0 55,418
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
......................
...................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
142 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT 1,144 1,144
& CONTROL).
...................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 1,144 0 1,144
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
......................
...................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
229 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ 3,000 3,000
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
SYSTEMS (MIP).
...................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 3,000 0 3,000
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
......................
...................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 59,562 0 59,562
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, NAVY.
......................
...................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, AF
...................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
65 0305601F MISSION PARTNER 6,500 6,500
ENVIRONMENTS.
...................... EDI: Mission Partner [6,500]
Environment (MPE).
...................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 6,500 6,500
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
......................
...................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
185 0205671F JOINT COUNTER RCIED 4,080 4,080
ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
228 0208288F INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS.. 1,224 1,224
...................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 5,304 0 5,304
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
......................
...................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 5,304 6,500 11,804
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, AF.
......................
...................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, DW
...................... APPLIED RESEARCH
10 0602134BR COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 3,699 3,699
ADVANCED STUDIES.
...................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 3,699 0 3,699
......................
...................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
26 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM 19,288 19,288
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
28 0603134BR COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 3,861 3,861
SIMULATION.
...................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 23,149 0 23,149
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
......................
...................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
97 0604134BR COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 19,931 19,931
DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
...................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 19,931 0 19,931
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
......................
9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 24,057 24,057
...................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
260 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS. 1,186 1,186
261 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS.......... 5,796 5,796
263 1160434BB UNMANNED ISR............. 5,000 5,000
...................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 36,039 0 36,039
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
......................
...................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 82,818 0 82,818
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, DW.
......................
...................... TOTAL RDT&E.............. 330,508 6,500 337,008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
OPERATING FORCES
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 159,834 159,834
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 663,751 663,751
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 956,477 956,477
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 1,157,635 10,300 1,167,935
Joint Counter-UAS IOC acceleration.............. [10,300]
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,453,024 1,453,024
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 4,713,660 4,713,660
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 404,161 404,161
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 1,413,359 1,413,359
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 8,220,093 126,000 8,346,093
Child Development Center playground equipment [79,000]
and furniture increases.........................
Child Youth Service improvements................ [47,000]
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 3,581,071 234,460 3,815,531
FSRM increase................................... [62,360]
MDTF EUCOM and INDOPACOM FSRM................... [126,800]
Revitalization of Army deployment infrastructure [45,300]
120 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 411,844 411,844
160 US AFRICA COMMAND................................... 239,387 102,500 341,887
AFRICOM force protection upgrades............... [2,500]
AFRICOM ISR improvements........................ [64,000]
AFRICOM UFR CASEVAC improvements................ [36,000]
170 US EUROPEAN COMMAND................................. 160,761 160,761
180 US SOUTHERN COMMAND................................. 197,826 197,826
190 US FORCES KOREA..................................... 65,152 65,152
200 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 430,109 5,000 435,109
Additional access and operations support........ [5,000]
210 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 464,117 464,117
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 24,692,261 478,260 25,170,521
MOBILIZATION
220 STRATEGIC MOBILITY.................................. 402,236 402,236
230 ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS........................... 324,306 324,306
240 INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS............................. 3,653 3,653
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 730,195 0 730,195
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
250 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 165,142 165,142
260 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 76,509 76,509
270 ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING........................... 88,523 88,523
280 SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.............. 535,578 535,578
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 981,436 981,436
300 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 1,204,768 1,204,768
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 215,195 215,195
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 575,232 575,232
330 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 722,612 722,612
340 EXAMINING........................................... 185,522 185,522
350 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 221,503 221,503
360 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 154,651 154,651
370 JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS............... 173,286 173,286
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 5,299,957 0 5,299,957
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
390 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 491,926 -25,000 466,926
Historical underexecution....................... [-25,000]
400 CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES........................... 812,613 812,613
410 LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES......................... 676,178 676,178
420 AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT............................... 437,774 437,774
430 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 438,048 438,048
440 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 1,638,872 1,638,872
450 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 300,046 300,046
460 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 701,103 -1,000 700,103
Historical underexecution....................... [-4,000]
Servicewomen's commemorative partnerships....... [3,000]
470 OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT............................... 1,887,133 1,887,133
480 ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES.............................. 195,291 195,291
490 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 229,537 229,537
500 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS............ 306,370 306,370
510 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS................. 373,030 373,030
520 MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS...................... 32,719 32,719
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,069,915 1,069,915
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 9,590,555 -26,000 9,564,555
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -458,901 -458,901
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-185,801]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-135,400]
Foreign currency adjustments.................... [-137,700]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -458,901 -458,901
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY................. 40,312,968 -6,641 40,306,327
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 10,784 10,784
020 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 530,425 530,425
030 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 123,737 123,737
040 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 589,582 589,582
050 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 89,332 89,332
060 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 387,545 387,545
070 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 97,569 97,569
080 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 43,148 43,148
090 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 587,098 587,098
100 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 327,180 5,260 332,440
FSRM increase................................... [5,260]
110 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 28,783 28,783
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 2,745 2,745
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 7,438 7,438
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 2,825,366 5,260 2,830,626
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
140 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 15,530 15,530
150 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 17,761 17,761
160 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 14,256 14,256
170 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 6,564 6,564
180 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 55,240 55,240
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 109,351 0 109,351
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -16,699 -16,699
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-11,999]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-4,700]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -16,699 -16,699
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES............. 2,934,717 -11,439 2,923,278
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 769,449 769,449
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 204,604 204,604
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 812,072 812,072
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 103,650 103,650
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 32,485 32,485
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,011,142 1,011,142
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 712,881 712,881
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 47,732 47,732
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 265,408 265,408
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 1,106,704 1,106,704
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 876,032 11,220 887,252
FSRM increase................................... [11,220]
120 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 1,050,257 1,050,257
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 7,998 3,000 10,998
Pilot program for National Guard cybersecurity.. [3,000]
140 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 7,756 7,756
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 7,008,170 14,220 7,022,390
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
150 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 8,018 8,018
160 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 74,309 74,309
170 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 66,140 66,140
180 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 9,087 9,087
190 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 251,714 251,714
200 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 2,576 2,576
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 411,844 0 411,844
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -74,172 -74,172
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-36,372]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-37,800]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -74,172 -74,172
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG................. 7,420,014 -59,952 7,360,062
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 5,738,746 5,738,746
020 FLEET AIR TRAINING.................................. 2,213,673 2,213,673
030 AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES...... 57,144 57,144
040 AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT................... 171,949 171,949
050 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT................................. 838,767 838,767
060 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 1,459,447 1,459,447
070 AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT................... 57,789 57,789
080 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 1,264,665 1,264,665
100 SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING.................. 1,117,067 1,117,067
110 SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE.............................. 7,859,104 7,859,104
120 SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT....................... 2,262,196 2,262,196
130 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........ 1,521,360 1,521,360
140 SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE...................... 274,087 274,087
150 WARFARE TACTICS..................................... 741,609 741,609
160 OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............ 401,382 401,382
170 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 1,546,273 1,546,273
180 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.. 177,951 177,951
190 COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS................ 61,484 5,000 66,484
PDI: Asia-Pacific Regional Initiative........... [5,000]
200 COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT......... 102,330 8,300 110,630
PDI: Joint Task Force Indo-Pacific (SOCPAC)..... [6,300]
PDI: Singapore CTIF fusion center............... [2,000]
210 MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS............. 8,810 17,700 26,510
PDI: Countering Chinese malign influence in Indo- [17,700]
Pacific.........................................
220 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 567,496 567,496
230 FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE............................. 1,428,102 1,428,102
240 WEAPONS MAINTENANCE................................. 995,762 995,762
250 OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................ 524,008 524,008
260 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 1,229,056 1,229,056
270 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 3,453,099 3,453,099
280 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 4,627,966 4,627,966
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 40,701,322 31,000 40,732,322
MOBILIZATION
290 SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE....................... 849,993 849,993
300 READY RESERVE FORCE................................. 436,029 436,029
310 SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS...................... 286,416 286,416
320 EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS............... 99,402 11,600 111,002
USNS Mercy SLEP................................. [11,600]
330 COAST GUARD SUPPORT................................. 25,235 25,235
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 1,697,075 11,600 1,708,675
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
340 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 186,117 186,117
350 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 13,206 13,206
360 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..................... 163,683 163,683
370 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 947,841 947,841
380 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 367,647 367,647
390 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 254,928 254,928
400 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 206,305 206,305
410 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 103,799 103,799
420 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 66,060 66,060
430 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 56,276 56,276
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 2,365,862 0 2,365,862
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
440 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,249,410 1,249,410
450 CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 189,625 189,625
460 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 499,904 499,904
470 MEDICAL ACTIVITIES.................................. 196,747 196,747
480 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 165,708 165,708
500 PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM SUPPORT.......... 519,716 5,000 524,716
Energy Security Programs Office................. [5,000]
510 ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT............... 751,184 751,184
520 INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES................. 747,519 747,519
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 608,670 608,670
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 4,928,483 5,000 4,933,483
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -629,787 -629,787
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-54,987]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-526,100]
Foreign currency adjustments.................... [-48,700]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -629,787 -629,787
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY................. 49,692,742 -582,187 49,110,555
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATIONAL FORCES.................................. 941,143 941,143
020 FIELD LOGISTICS..................................... 1,277,798 1,277,798
030 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 206,907 206,907
040 MARITIME PREPOSITIONING............................. 103,614 103,614
050 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 215,974 215,974
060 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION............ 938,063 938,063
070 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 2,264,680 2,264,680
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 5,948,179 0 5,948,179
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
080 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 20,751 20,751
090 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 1,193 1,193
100 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 110,149 110,149
110 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 69,509 69,509
120 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 412,613 412,613
130 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 215,464 215,464
140 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 33,719 33,719
150 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 25,784 25,784
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 889,182 0 889,182
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
160 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 32,005 32,005
170 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 399,363 399,363
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 59,878 59,878
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 491,246 0 491,246
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -28,257 -28,257
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-7,457]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-7,300]
Foreign currency adjustments.................... [-13,500]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -28,257 -28,257
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS......... 7,328,607 -28,257 7,300,350
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 635,070 635,070
020 INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................ 8,713 8,713
030 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 105,088 105,088
040 AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT................... 398 398
050 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 27,284 27,284
070 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS............................... 17,894 17,894
080 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 132,862 132,862
090 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 453 453
100 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 26,073 26,073
110 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 48,762 48,762
120 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 103,580 103,580
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 1,106,177 0 1,106,177
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
130 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,927 1,927
140 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 15,895 15,895
150 ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.................. 3,047 3,047
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 20,869 0 20,869
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -30,938 -30,938
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-6,438]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-24,500]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -30,938 -30,938
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES............. 1,127,046 -30,938 1,096,108
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATING FORCES.................................... 104,616 104,616
020 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 17,053 17,053
030 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 41,412 41,412
040 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 107,773 107,773
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 270,854 0 270,854
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
050 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 13,802 13,802
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 13,802 0 13,802
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -1,246 -1,246
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-1,046]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-200]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -1,246 -1,246
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE........... 284,656 -1,246 283,410
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 731,511 1,700 733,211
Premature reduction of A-10 squadrons........... [1,700]
020 COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES........................... 1,275,485 1,275,485
030 AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)...... 1,437,095 12,400 1,449,495
Premature reduction of A-10 squadrons........... [12,400]
050 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 3,241,216 101,800 3,343,016
FSRM increase................................... [101,800]
060 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 235,816 235,816
070 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 1,508,342 -30,445 1,477,897
Transfer to OCO................................. [-30,445]
080 FLYING HOUR PROGRAM................................. 4,458,457 105,700 4,564,157
KC-10 tanker divestment reversal................ [16,200]
KC-135 tanker divestment reversal............... [36,600]
Premature reduction of A-10 squadrons........... [52,900]
090 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 7,497,288 7,497,288
100 GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................ 849,842 30,800 880,642
PDI: Mission Partner Environment implementation. [30,800]
110 OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS....................... 1,067,055 1,067,055
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 698,579 698,579
150 SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS............................... 34,194 34,194
160 US NORTHCOM/NORAD................................... 204,268 204,268
170 US STRATCOM......................................... 526,809 526,809
180 US CYBERCOM......................................... 314,524 41,700 356,224
Additional access and operations support........ [25,000]
Hunt Forward missions........................... [13,800]
Secure the DODIN................................ [2,900]
190 US CENTCOM.......................................... 186,116 186,116
200 US SOCOM............................................ 9,881 9,881
210 US TRANSCOM......................................... 1,046 1,046
230 USSPACECOM.......................................... 249,022 249,022
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,289,339 1,289,339
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 25,815,885 263,655 26,079,540
MOBILIZATION
240 AIRLIFT OPERATIONS.................................. 1,350,031 1,350,031
250 MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS........................... 647,168 647,168
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 1,997,199 0 1,997,199
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
260 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 142,548 142,548
270 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 25,720 25,720
280 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC).............. 128,295 128,295
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 417,335 417,335
300 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 615,033 615,033
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 298,795 298,795
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 85,844 85,844
330 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 155,065 -20,000 135,065
Ahead of need................................... [-20,000]
340 EXAMINING........................................... 4,474 4,474
350 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 219,349 219,349
360 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 361,570 361,570
370 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 72,126 72,126
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 2,526,154 -20,000 2,506,154
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
380 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................ 672,426 672,426
390 TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................ 145,130 145,130
400 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 851,251 851,251
410 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 28,554 28,554
420 OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................ 1,188,414 1,188,414
430 CIVIL AIR PATROL.................................... 28,772 28,772
450 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............................... 158,803 158,803
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,338,009 1,338,009
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 4,411,359 0 4,411,359
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -765,956 -765,956
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-89,856]
COVID-related throughput carryover adjustment... [-75,800]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-560,200]
Foreign currency adjustments.................... [-40,100]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -765,956 -765,956
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............ 34,750,597 -522,301 34,228,296
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
020 GLOBAL C3I & EARLY WARNING.......................... 276,109 276,109
030 SPACE LAUNCH OPERATIONS............................. 177,056 177,056
040 SPACE OPERATIONS.................................... 475,338 475,338
050 EDUCATION & TRAINING................................ 18,660 18,660
060 SPECIAL PROGRAMS.................................... 137,315 137,315
070 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 250,324 250,324
080 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS & SYSTEM SUPPORT............... 1,063,969 1,063,969
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 2,398,771 0 2,398,771
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE WIDE ACTIVITIES
090 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 132,523 132,523
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE WIDE ACTIVITIES. 132,523 0 132,523
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -400 -400
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-400]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -400 -400
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.......... 2,531,294 -400 2,530,894
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 1,782,016 1,782,016
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 215,209 215,209
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 453,896 55,200 509,096
KC-10 tanker divestment reversal................ [48,400]
KC-135 tanker divestment reversal............... [3,400]
Premature reduction of A-10 squadrons........... [3,400]
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 103,414 4,200 107,614
FSRM increase................................... [4,200]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 224,977 224,977
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 452,468 452,468
070 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 2,259 2,259
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 3,234,239 59,400 3,293,639
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
080 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 74,258 74,258
090 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 23,121 -5,000 18,121
Ahead of need................................... [-5,000]
100 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC).............. 12,006 12,006
110 OTHER PERS SUPPORT (DISABILITY COMP)................ 6,165 6,165
120 AUDIOVISUAL......................................... 495 495
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES.. 116,045 -5,000 111,045
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -73,163 -73,163
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-10,863]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-62,300]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -73,163 -73,163
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE........... 3,350,284 -18,763 3,331,521
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
OPERATING FORCES
010 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS................................. 2,476,205 2,476,205
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 611,325 611,325
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 1,138,919 1,138,919
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 323,605 8,900 332,505
FSRM increase................................... [8,900]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 1,100,828 1,100,828
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 962,438 962,438
070 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 27,028 27,028
080 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 16,380 3,000 19,380
Pilot program for National Guard cybersecurity.. [3,000]
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 6,656,728 11,900 6,668,628
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES
090 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 48,218 48,218
100 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 48,696 -15,000 33,696
Ahead of need................................... [-15,000]
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES. 96,914 -15,000 81,914
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -122,052 -122,052
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-15,852]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-106,200]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -122,052 -122,052
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.................. 6,753,642 -125,152 6,628,490
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
OPERATING FORCES
010 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 439,111 439,111
020 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CE2T2........................ 535,728 535,728
030 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CYBER........................ 24,728 24,728
040 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT DEVELOPMENT 1,069,971 3,000 1,072,971
ACTIVITIES.........................................
SOCOM Syria exfiltration reconsitution.......... [3,000]
050 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES.... 9,800 9,800
060 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND INTELLIGENCE............. 561,907 561,907
070 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MAINTENANCE.............. 685,097 22,000 707,097
Airborne ISR restoration........................ [22,000]
080 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONAL 158,971 158,971
HEADQUARTERS.......................................
090 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT...... 1,062,748 1,062,748
100 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER FORCES........... 2,598,385 1,300 2,599,685
Airborne ISR restoration........................ [1,300]
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 7,146,446 26,300 7,172,746
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
120 DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY...................... 162,963 162,963
130 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 95,684 95,684
140 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 33,301 33,301
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 291,948 0 291,948
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
160 CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS............................. 147,993 31,900 179,893
Innovative Readiness Training................... [16,900]
STARBASE........................................ [15,000]
180 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY....................... 604,835 604,835
190 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY--CYBER................ 3,282 3,282
210 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY.................. 1,370,681 56,400 1,427,081
DWR restore activities.......................... [56,400]
220 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY--CYBER........... 22,532 22,532
230 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY..... 949,008 3,000 952,008
DWR restore: Congressional oversight............ [3,000]
250 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY-- 9,577 9,577
CYBER..............................................
260 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY.................... 799,952 799,952
270 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY--CYBER............. 20,806 20,806
280 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.................. 1,883,190 40,000 1,923,190
Secure the DODIN................................ [40,000]
290 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY--CYBER........... 582,639 -4,700 577,939
JRSS SIPR funding............................... [-4,700]
330 DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY....................... 37,637 37,637
340 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY............................ 382,084 3,600 385,684
DWR restore: blankets for homeless.............. [3,600]
350 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY.............................. 196,997 196,997
360 DEFENSE PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING AGENCY................. 129,225 129,225
370 DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY................. 598,559 598,559
Defense Institute for International Legal [2,000]
Studies.........................................
Institute for Security Governance............... [-2,000]
PDI: Maritime Security Initiative INDOPACOM UFR. [163,000]
PDI: Transfer from Sec. 333 to Maritime Security [-163,000]
Initiative......................................
400 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.......... 38,432 38,432
410 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY..................... 591,780 591,780
430 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY--CYBER.............. 24,635 24,635
440 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............ 2,941,429 71,500 3,012,929
DWR restore: maintain student-teacher ratios in [1,500]
DODEA schools...................................
Impact Aid for children with severe disabilities [20,000]
Impact Aid for schools with military dependent [50,000]
students........................................
450 MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY.............................. 505,858 505,858
480 OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT....................... 40,272 50,000 90,272
Defense Community Infrastruture Program infusion [50,000]
490 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.................. 1,540,446 73,500 1,613,946
AI National Security Commission................. [2,500]
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup......................... [15,000]
Black Start ERREs............................... [2,000]
CDC PFAS health assessment...................... [10,000]
Commission on Confederate symbols and displays.. [2,000]
Cooperative program for Vietnam personnel MIA... [2,000]
DWR restore: Congressional background [-3,000]
investigations..................................
Energy performance contracts.................... [10,000]
ESOH personnel in ASD(S)........................ [2,000]
FY20 NDAA Sec. 575 interstate spousal licensing. [4,000]
National Cyber Director independent study....... [2,000]
REPI............................................ [25,000]
500 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE--CYBER........... 51,630 51,630
510 SPACE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY............................ 48,166 48,166
530 WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES.................... 340,291 3,000 343,291
DWR restore: support to commissions............. [3,000]
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 17,348,749 17,348,749
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 31,210,685 328,200 31,538,885
UNDISTRIBUTED
999 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -172,839 -172,839
COVID-related ops/training slowdown............. [-129,339]
Excessive standard price for fuel............... [-14,800]
Foreign currency adjustments.................... [-28,700]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -172,839 -172,839
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE....... 38,649,079 181,661 38,830,740
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE
010 US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE... 15,211 15,211
SUBTOTAL US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, 15,211 0 15,211
DEFENSE............................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 15,211 0 15,211
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID
010 OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID....... 109,900 109,900
SUBTOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC 109,900 0 109,900
AID................................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 109,900 0 109,900
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
010 COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION........................ 238,490 50,000 288,490
DWR restore: Biological Threat Reduction Program [50,000]
SUBTOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION............... 238,490 50,000 288,490
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 238,490 50,000 288,490
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
010 ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD................................ 58,181 98,499 156,680
DWR restore OSD-level acquisition workforce [98,499]
activities......................................
SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.......... 58,181 98,499 156,680
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 58,181 98,499 156,680
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
050 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY..................... 207,518 207,518
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY............ 207,518 0 207,518
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 207,518 0 207,518
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY
060 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY..................... 335,932 335,932
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY............ 335,932 0 335,932
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 335,932 0 335,932
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE
070 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE................ 303,926 303,926
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE....... 303,926 0 303,926
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 303,926 0 303,926
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
080 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE.................. 9,105 9,105
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE......... 9,105 0 9,105
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 9,105 0 9,105
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES
090 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES....... 216,587 216,587
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED 216,587 0 216,587
SITES..............................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 216,587 0 216,587
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE....................... 196,630,496 -1,057,116 195,573,380
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 4,114,001 4,114,001
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 32,811 32,811
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 2,542,760 2,650 2,545,410
EDI: Support to deterrent activities............ [2,650]
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 162,557 162,557
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 204,396 204,396
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 5,716,734 4,490 5,721,224
EDI: Support to deterrent activities PE 0202218A [1,490]
EDI: Support to deterrent activities PE 1001010A [3,000]
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 180,048 180,048
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 81,125 81,125
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 219,029 219,029
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 301,017 301,017
130 ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES............................... 966,649 966,649
140 COMMANDER'S EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM.............. 2,500 -500 2,000
Hero payments funded by ASFF.................... [-500]
150 RESET............................................... 403,796 403,796
160 US AFRICA COMMAND................................... 100,422 100,422
170 US EUROPEAN COMMAND................................. 120,043 24,100 144,143
EDI: Continuity of operations support........... [2,100]
EDI: Modernizing Mission Partner Environment [22,000]
(MPE)...........................................
200 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 98,461 98,461
210 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 21,256 21,256
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 15,267,605 30,740 15,298,345
MOBILIZATION
230 ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS........................... 103,052 103,052
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 103,052 0 103,052
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 89,943 89,943
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 2,550 2,550
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 92,493 0 92,493
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
390 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 521,090 521,090
400 CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES........................... 43,897 43,897
410 LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES......................... 68,423 68,423
420 AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT............................... 29,162 29,162
440 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 11,447 11,447
470 OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT............................... 5,839 5,839
490 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 48,782 48,782
510 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS................. 50,000 50,000
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 895,964 895,964
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 1,674,604 0 1,674,604
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY................. 17,137,754 30,740 17,168,494
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
OPERATING FORCES
020 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 17,193 17,193
060 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 440 440
090 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 15,766 15,766
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 33,399 0 33,399
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES............. 33,399 0 33,399
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 25,746 25,746
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 40 40
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 983 983
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 22 22
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 20,624 20,624
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 7,914 7,914
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 24,417 24,417
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 79,746 0 79,746
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
170 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 46 46
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 46 0 46
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG................. 79,792 0 79,792
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY
010 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 1,065,932 1,065,932
020 INFRASTRUCTURE...................................... 64,501 64,501
030 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 47,854 47,854
040 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 56,780 56,780
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY....................... 1,235,067 0 1,235,067
AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE
050 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 434,500 434,500
060 INFRASTRUCTURE...................................... 448 448
070 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 108,231 108,231
080 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 58,993 58,993
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE..................... 602,172 0 602,172
AFGHAN AIR FORCE
090 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 534,102 534,102
100 INFRASTRUCTURE...................................... 9,532 9,532
110 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 58,487 58,487
120 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 233,803 233,803
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN AIR FORCE........................... 835,924 0 835,924
AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES
130 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 680,024 680,024
140 INFRASTRUCTURE...................................... 2,532 2,532
150 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 486,808 486,808
160 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 173,085 173,085
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES............. 1,342,449 0 1,342,449
TOTAL AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND.............. 4,015,612 0 4,015,612
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 382,062 382,062
030 AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES...... 832 832
040 AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT................... 17,840 17,840
050 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT................................. 210,692 210,692
060 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 170,580 170,580
070 AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT................... 5,854 5,854
080 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 33,707 33,707
090 MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS................... 5,817,696 5,817,696
100 SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING.................. 20,741 20,741
110 SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE.............................. 2,072,470 2,072,470
130 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........ 59,254 59,254
140 SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE...................... 18,000 18,000
150 WARFARE TACTICS..................................... 17,324 17,324
160 OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............ 22,581 22,581
170 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 772,441 772,441
180 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.. 5,788 5,788
200 COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT......... 24,800 24,800
220 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 369 369
240 WEAPONS MAINTENANCE................................. 567,247 567,247
250 OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................ 12,571 12,571
270 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 70,041 70,041
280 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 218,792 218,792
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 10,521,682 0 10,521,682
MOBILIZATION
320 EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS............... 22,589 22,589
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 22,589 0 22,589
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
370 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 53,204 53,204
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 53,204 0 53,204
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
440 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 9,983 9,983
460 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 7,805 7,805
480 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 72,097 72,097
510 ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT............... 11,354 11,354
520 INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES................. 1,591 1,591
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 102,830 0 102,830
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY................. 10,700,305 0 10,700,305
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATIONAL FORCES.................................. 727,989 17,500 745,489
EDI: Globally Integrated Exercise 20-4/Austere [10,000]
Challenge 21.3..................................
EDI: Marine European training program........... [7,500]
020 FIELD LOGISTICS..................................... 195,001 195,001
030 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 55,183 55,183
050 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 10,000 10,000
070 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 24,569 24,569
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 1,012,742 17,500 1,030,242
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
120 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 28,458 28,458
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 28,458 0 28,458
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
160 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 61,400 61,400
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 61,400 0 61,400
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS......... 1,102,600 17,500 1,120,100
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
OPERATING FORCES
020 INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................ 522 522
030 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 11,861 11,861
080 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 9,109 9,109
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 21,492 0 21,492
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES............. 21,492 0 21,492
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATING FORCES.................................... 7,627 7,627
040 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 1,080 1,080
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 8,707 0 8,707
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE........... 8,707 0 8,707
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 125,551 125,551
020 COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES........................... 916,538 916,538
030 AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)...... 93,970 93,970
040 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 3,528,059 3,528,059
050 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 147,264 147,264
060 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 10,842 10,842
070 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 7,187,100 30,445 7,217,545
Transfer from base.............................. [30,445]
080 FLYING HOUR PROGRAM................................. 2,031,548 2,031,548
090 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 1,540,444 1,540,444
100 GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................ 13,709 13,709
110 OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS....................... 345,800 345,800
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 17,936 17,936
130 TACTICAL INTEL AND OTHER SPECIAL ACTIVITIES......... 36,820 36,820
140 LAUNCH FACILITIES................................... 70 70
150 SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS............................... 1,450 1,450
160 US NORTHCOM/NORAD................................... 725 725
170 US STRATCOM......................................... 856 856
180 US CYBERCOM......................................... 35,189 35,189
190 US CENTCOM.......................................... 126,934 126,934
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 16,160,805 30,445 16,191,250
MOBILIZATION
240 AIRLIFT OPERATIONS.................................. 1,271,439 1,271,439
250 MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS........................... 120,866 120,866
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 1,392,305 0 1,392,305
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
260 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 200 200
270 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 352 352
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 27,010 27,010
300 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 844 844
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 1,199 1,199
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 1,320 1,320
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 30,925 0 30,925
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
380 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................ 164,701 164,701
390 TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................ 11,782 11,782
400 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 3,886 3,886
410 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 355 355
420 OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................ 100,831 -15,000 85,831
OSC-I transition to normalized security [-15,000]
cooperation.....................................
450 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............................... 29,928 29,928
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 34,502 34,502
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 345,985 -15,000 330,985
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............ 17,930,020 15,445 17,945,465
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
020 GLOBAL C3I & EARLY WARNING.......................... 227 227
030 SPACE LAUNCH OPERATIONS............................. 321 321
040 SPACE OPERATIONS.................................... 15,135 15,135
070 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 18,268 18,268
080 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS & SYSTEM SUPPORT............... 43,164 43,164
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 77,115 0 77,115
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.......... 77,115 0 77,115
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 24,408 24,408
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 5,682 5,682
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 30,090 0 30,090
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE........... 30,090 0 30,090
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
OPERATING FORCES
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 3,739 3,739
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 61,862 61,862
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 97,108 97,108
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 12,933 12,933
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 175,642 0 175,642
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.................. 175,642 0 175,642
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
OPERATING FORCES
010 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 3,799 3,799
020 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CE2T2........................ 6,634 6,634
040 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT DEVELOPMENT 898,024 898,024
ACTIVITIES.........................................
060 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND INTELLIGENCE............. 1,244,553 1,244,553
070 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MAINTENANCE.............. 354,951 27,000 381,951
Airborne ISR restoration........................ [27,000]
090 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT...... 104,535 104,535
100 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER FORCES........... 757,744 757,744
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 3,370,240 27,000 3,397,240
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
180 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY....................... 1,247 1,247
210 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY.................. 21,723 21,723
280 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.................. 56,256 56,256
290 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY--CYBER........... 3,524 3,524
330 DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY....................... 156,373 156,373
350 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY.............................. 3,555 3,555
370 DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY................. 1,557,763 322,500 1,880,263
Transfer from CTEF for Iraq train and equip [322,500]
requirements....................................
410 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY..................... 297,486 297,486
490 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.................. 16,984 16,984
530 WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES.................... 1,997 1,997
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 535,106 535,106
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 2,652,014 322,500 2,974,514
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE....... 6,022,254 349,500 6,371,754
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE....................... 57,334,782 413,185 57,747,967
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2021 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS................... 150,524,104 -2,548,090 147,976,014
COVID related endstrength decreases................. [-755,000]
Foreign currency adjustments, Air Force............. [-81,800]
Foreign currency adjustments, Army.................. [-44,400]
Foreign currency adjustments, Marine Corps.......... [-13,900]
Foreign currency adjustments, Navy.................. [-41,300]
Military personnel historical underexecution........ [-1,611,690]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS.......... 150,524,104 -2,548,090 147,976,014
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS. 8,372,741 8,372,741
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND 8,372,741 0 8,372,741
CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................ 158,896,845 -2,548,090 156,348,755
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2021 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 0 0
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS................... 4,602,593 4,602,593
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS.......... 4,602,593 0 4,602,593
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................ 4,602,593 0 4,602,593
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
010 INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS........................... 32,551 -27,000 5,551
One-time COVID-related carryover decrease... [-27,000]
020 SUPPLY MANAGEMENT--ARMY......................... 24,166 -23,000 1,166
One-time COVID-related carryover decrease... [-23,000]
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY............. 56,717 -50,000 6,717
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
020 SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.......................... 95,712 -90,000 5,712
Air Force cash corpus for energy [10,000]
optimization................................
One-time COVID-related carryover decrease... [-100,000]
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........ 191,424 -90,000 101,424
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
020 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT--DEF.................... 49,821 49,821
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE..... 49,821 0 49,821
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
010 WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA...................... 1,146,660 1,146,660
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA............. 1,146,660 0 1,146,660
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND...................... 1,444,622 -140,000 1,304,622
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
1 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--O&M...................... 106,691 106,691
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 106,691 0 106,691
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
2 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--RDT&E.................... 782,193 782,193
SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND 782,193 0 782,193
EVALUATION.....................................
PROCUREMENT
3 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--PROC..................... 616 616
SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................ 616 0 616
TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION....... 889,500 0 889,500
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
DRUG INTRDCTN
010 COUNTER-NARCOTICS SUPPORT....................... 546,203 15,800 562,003
PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West [13,000]
Project 3309................................
PDI: Joint Interagency Task Force--West [2,800]
Project 9202................................
SUBTOTAL DRUG INTRDCTN.......................... 546,203 15,800 562,003
DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
020 DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM................... 123,704 123,704
SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM.......... 123,704 0 123,704
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
030 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM............. 94,211 94,211
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM.... 94,211 0 94,211
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS
040 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS............. 5,511 5,511
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS.... 5,511 0 5,511
TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 769,629 15,800 785,429
DEF............................................
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
010 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL................. 368,279 368,279
030 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL--CYBER.......... 1,204 1,204
040 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL................. 1,098 1,098
050 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL................. 858 858
SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........ 371,439 0 371,439
TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........... 371,439 0 371,439
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
010 IN-HOUSE CARE................................... 9,560,564 9,560,564
020 PRIVATE SECTOR CARE............................. 15,841,887 15,841,887
030 CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT..................... 1,338,269 1,338,269
040 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.......................... 2,039,910 2,039,910
050 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES........................... 330,627 330,627
060 EDUCATION AND TRAINING.......................... 315,691 315,691
070 BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS.................. 1,922,605 5,000 1,927,605
National Disaster Medical System pilot [5,000]
program.....................................
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 31,349,553 5,000 31,354,553
RDT&E
080 R&D RESEARCH.................................... 8,913 8,913
090 R&D EXPLORATRY DEVELOPMENT...................... 73,984 73,984
100 R&D ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT........................ 225,602 225,602
110 R&D DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION.................... 132,331 132,331
120 R&D ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT..................... 55,748 55,748
130 R&D MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT...................... 48,672 48,672
140 R&D CAPABILITIES ENHANCEMENT.................... 17,215 17,215
SUBTOTAL RDT&E.................................. 562,465 0 562,465
PROCUREMENT
150 PROC INITIAL OUTFITTING......................... 22,932 22,932
160 PROC REPLACEMENT & MODERNIZATION................ 215,618 215,618
170 PROC MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM--DESKTOP TO 70,872 70,872
DATACENTER.....................................
180 PROC DOD HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 308,504 308,504
MODERNIZATION..................................
SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................ 617,926 0 617,926
SOFTWARE & DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS
190 SOFTWARE & DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS.... 160,428 160,428
SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE & DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT 160,428 0 160,428
PROGRAMS.......................................
TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................... 32,690,372 5,000 32,695,372
TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 36,711,765 -119,200 36,592,565
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
020 SUPPLY MANAGEMENT--ARMY......................... 20,090 20,090
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY............. 20,090 0 20,090
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND...................... 20,090 0 20,090
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
010 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL................. 24,069 24,069
SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........ 24,069 0 24,069
TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........... 24,069 0 24,069
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
010 IN-HOUSE CARE................................... 65,072 65,072
020 PRIVATE SECTOR CARE............................. 296,828 296,828
030 CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT..................... 3,198 3,198
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 365,098 0 365,098
TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................... 365,098 0 365,098
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
010 IRAQ............................................ 645,000 -322,500 322,500
Transfer traditional BPC activities to DSCA. [-322,500]
020 SYRIA........................................... 200,000 200,000
SUBTOTAL COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND 845,000 -322,500 522,500
(CTEF).........................................
TOTAL COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF).. 845,000 -322,500 522,500
TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 1,254,257 -322,500 931,757
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Account State/ Country Installation Project Title Request Senate Change Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
Army Alaska Fort Wainwright Child Development Center.. 0 55,000 55,000
Army Alaska Fort Wainwright Unaccompanied Enlisted 0 59,000 59,000
Personnel Housing.
Army Arizona Yuma Proving Ground Ready Building............ 14,000 14,000
Army California Military Ocean Ammunition Holding 0 46,000 46,000
Terminal Concord Facility.
Army Colorado Fort Carson Physical Fitness Facility. 28,000 28,000
Army Florida JIATF-S Operations Planning & Design......... 0 8,000 8,000
Center
Army Georgia Fort Gillem Forensic Laboratory....... 71,000 71,000
Army Georgia Fort Gordon Adv Individual Training 80,000 80,000
Barracks Cplx, Ph3.
Army Hawaii Aliamanu Military Child Development Center-- 0 71,000 71,000
Reservation School Age.
Army Hawaii Schofield Barracks Child Development Center.. 0 39,000 39,000
Army Hawaii Wheeler Army Air Field Aircraft Maintenance 89,000 89,000
Hangar.
Army Italy Casmera Renato Dal Din Access Control Point...... 0 10,200 10,200
Army Louisiana Fort Polk Information Systems 25,000 25,000
Facility.
Army Oklahoma McAlester AAP Ammunition Demolition Shop 35,000 35,000
Army Pennsylvania Carlisle Barracks General Instruction 38,000 -30,000 8,000
Building (Inc 2).
Army South Carolina Fort Jackson Trainee Barracks Complex 0 7,000 7,000
3, Ph2.
Army Virginia Humphreys Engineer Training Support Facility. 51,000 51,000
Center
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 129,436 -70,000 59,436
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Host Nation Support....... 39,000 39,000
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 50,900 24,000 74,900
Locations Construction.
SUBTOTAL ARMY 650,336 219,200 869,536
....................... ......................
NAVY
Navy Bahrain Island SW Asia Ship to Shore Utility 68,340 68,340
Services.
Navy California Camp Pendleton Combat Water Survival 0 25,200 25,200
Training Facility.
Navy California Camp Pendleton Warehouse Consolidation 0 21,800 21,800
and Modernization.
Navy California Camp Pendleton I MEF Consolidated 37,000 37,000
Information Center (INC).
Navy California Camp Pendleton 1ST MARDIV Operations 68,530 68,530
Complex.
Navy California Lemoore F-35C Simulator Facility & 59,150 59,150
Electrical Upgrade.
Navy California Lemoore F-35C Hangar 6 Phase 2 128,070 -75,070 53,000
(Mod 3/4).
Navy California Point Mugu Directed Energy Test 0 26,700 26,700
Facility.
Navy California Port Hueneme Combat Vehicle Maintenance 0 43,500 43,500
Facilities.
Navy California San Diego Pier 6 Replacement........ 128,500 -65,000 63,500
Navy California Seal Beach Magazines................. 0 46,800 46,800
Navy California Twentynine Palms Wastewater Treatment Plant 76,500 76,500
Navy Greece Souda Bay Communication Center...... 50,180 50,180
Navy Guam Andersen Air Force Ordnance Operations Admin. 21,280 21,280
Base
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas DAR Road Strengthening.... 70,760 70,760
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas DAR Bridge Improvements... 40,180 40,180
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Central Fuel Station...... 35,950 -18,000 17,950
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Distribution Warehouse.... 77,930 77,930
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Combined EOD Facility..... 37,600 37,600
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Bachelor Enlisted Quarters 80,000 -70,000 10,000
(Inc).
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Joint Communication 166,000 -140,000 26,000
Upgrade.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Base Warehouse............ 55,410 55,410
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Individual Combat Skills 17,430 17,430
Training.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Central Issue Facility.... 45,290 45,290
Navy Hawaii Joint Base Pearl Waterfront Improvements 65,910 65,910
Harbor-Hickam Wharves S8-S10.
Navy Hawaii Joint Base Pearl Waterfront Improve, 48,990 48,990
Harbor-Hickam Wharves S1,S11-13,S20-21.
Navy Honduras Comalapa Long Range Maritime Patrol 0 28,000 28,000
Aircraft Hangar and Ramp.
Navy Japan Yokosuka Pier 5 (Berths 2 and 3) 74,692 -30,000 44,692
(Inc).
Navy Maine Kittery Multi-Mission Drydock #1 160,000 160,000
Exten., Ph 1 (Inc).
Navy Maine NCTAMS LANT Detachment Perimeter Security........ 0 26,100 26,100
Cutler
Navy Nevada Fallon Range Training Complex, 29,040 29,040
Phase 1.
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune II MEF Operations Center 20,000 20,000
Replacement (Inc).
Navy North Carolina Cherry Point Fitness Center Replacement 0 51,900 51,900
and Training Pool.
Navy Spain Rota MH-60R Squadron Support 60,110 60,110
Facilities.
Navy Virginia Norfolk Sub Logistics Support..... 0 9,400 9,400
Navy Virginia Norfolk MH60 & CMV-22B Corrosion 17,671 17,671
Control & Paint Facility.
Navy Virginia Norfolk E-2D Training Facility.... 30,400 30,400
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 38,983 38,983
Locations Construction.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 165,710 165,710
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY 1,975,606 -118,670 1,856,936
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE
Air Force Colorado Schriever Air Force Consolidated Space 88,000 88,000
Base Operations Facility, (Inc
2).
Air Force Colorado United States Air Cadet Preparatory School 0 49,000 49,000
Force Academy Dormitory.
Air Force Guam Joint Region Marianas Stand Off Weapons Complex, 56,000 56,000
MSA 2.
Air Force Mariana Islands Tinian Fuel Tanks with Pipeline & 7,000 7,000
Hydrant Sys, (Inc 2).
Air Force Mariana Islands Tinian Airfield Development Phase 20,000 20,000
1, (Inc 2).
Air Force Mariana Islands Tinian Parking Apron, (Inc 2).... 15,000 15,000
Air Force Montana Malmstrom Air Force Weapons Storage & 25,000 25,000
Base Maintenance Facility,
(Inc 2).
Air Force New Jersey Joint Base McGuire-Dix- Munitions Storage Area.... 22,000 22,000
Lakehurst
Air Force Qatar Al Udeid Cargo Marshalling Yard.... 26,000 26,000
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 2-Bay LO Restoration 0 10,000 10,000
Base Facility.
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Antonio BMT Recruit Dormitory 8, 36,000 36,000
(Inc 2).
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Antonio T-X ADAL Ground Based Trng 19,500 19,500
Sys Sim.
Air Force Utah Hill Air Force Base GBSD Organic Software 0 20,000 20,000
Sustainment Center.
Air Force Utah Hill Air Force Base GBSD Mission Integration 68,000 68,000
Facility, (Inc 2).
Air Force Virginia Joint Base Langley- Access Control Point Main 19,500 19,500
Eustis Gate With Land Acq.
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Cost to Complete.......... 0 29,422 29,422
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 296,532 -180,000 116,532
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 68,600 68,600
Locations Construction.
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE 767,132 -71,578 695,554
....................... ......................
DEFENSE-WIDE
Defense-Wide Alabama Anniston Army Depot Demilitarization Facility. 18,000 18,000
Defense-Wide Alaska Fort Greely Communications Center..... 48,000 48,000
Defense-Wide Albama Fort Rucker Construct 10MW Generation 0 24,000 24,000
& Microgrid.
Defense-Wide Arizona Fort Huachuca Laboratory Building....... 33,728 33,728
Defense-Wide Arizona Yuma SOF Hangar................ 49,500 49,500
Defense-Wide Arkansas Fort Smith Air PV Arrays and Battery 0 2,600 2,600
National Guard Base Storage.
Defense-Wide California Beale Air Force Base Bulk Fuel Tank............ 22,800 22,800
Defense-Wide Colorado Fort Carson SOF Tactical Equipment 15,600 15,600
Maintenance Facility.
Defense-Wide Conus Unspecified CONUS Unspecified Training Target Structure. 14,400 14,400
Defense-Wide Florida Hurlburt Field SOF Special Tactics Ops 44,810 44,810
Facility (23 STS).
Defense-Wide Florida Hurlburt Field SOF Combat Aircraft 38,310 38,310
Parking Apron-North.
Defense-Wide Georgia Fort Benning Construct 4.8MW Generation 0 17,000 17,000
& Microgrid.
Defense-Wide Germany Rhine Ordnance Medical Center Replacement 200,000 -200,000 0
Barracks (Inc 9).
Defense-Wide Japan Def Fuel Support Point Fuel Wharf................ 49,500 49,500
Tsurumi
Defense-Wide Japan Yokosuka Kinnick High School (Inc). 30,000 -30,000 0
Defense-Wide Kentucky Fort Knox Van Voorhis Elementary 69,310 69,310
School.
Defense-Wide Maryland Bethesda Naval MEDCEN Addition/Alteration 180,000 -130,000 50,000
Hospital (Inc 4).
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW Recapitalize Building 250,000 250,000
#3 (Inc).
Defense-Wide Mississippi MTA Camp Shelby Construct 10MW Generation 0 30,000 30,000
Plant and Microgrid
System.
Defense-Wide Missouri Fort Leonard Wood Hospital Replacement (Inc 40,000 40,000
3).
Defense-Wide Missouri St Louis Next NGA West (N2W) 119,000 -59,000 60,000
Complex Phase 2 (Inc).
Defense-Wide New Mexico Kirtland Air Force Administrative Building... 46,600 46,600
Base
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOTF Chilled Water Upgrade 0 6,100 6,100
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Military Working Dog 17,700 17,700
Facility.
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Group Headquarters.... 53,100 53,100
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Operations Facility... 43,000 43,000
Defense-Wide Ohio Wright-Patterson Air Intelligence Facility 0 35,000 35,000
Force Base Central Utility Plant.
Defense-Wide Ohio Wright-Patterson Air Hydrant Fuel System....... 23,500 23,500
Force Base
Defense-Wide Tennessee Memphis International PV Arrays and Battery 0 4,780 4,780
Airport Storage.
Defense-Wide Texas Fort Hood Fuel Facilities........... 32,700 32,700
Defense-Wide Virginia Joint Expeditionary SOF DCS Operations Fac. 54,500 54,500
Base Little Creek-- and Command Center.
Story
Defense-Wide Virginia Joint Expeditionary SOF NSWG-2 NSWTG CSS 58,000 58,000
Base Little Creek-- Facilities.
Story
Defense-Wide Washington Joint Base Lewis- Fuel Facilities (Lewis 10,900 10,900
Mcchord North).
Defense-Wide Washington Joint Base Lewis- Fuel Facilities (Lewis 10,900 10,900
Mcchord Main).
Defense-Wide Washington Manchester Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks 82,000 82,000
Phase 1.
Defense-Wide Washington DC Joint Base Anacostia- DIA HQ Cooling Towers and 0 1,963 1,963
Bolling Cond Pumps.
Defense-Wide Washington DC Joint Base Anacostia- Industrial Controls System 0 8,749 8,749
Bolling Modernization.
Defense-Wide Washington DC Joint Base Anacostia- PV Carports............... 0 25,221 25,221
Bolling
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 8,000 8,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 27,746 27,746
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 4,922 4,922
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 17,698 17,698
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 20,000 20,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Energy Resilience and 142,500 142,500
Locations Conserv. Invest. Prog..
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 3,000 3,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 10,647 10,647
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide ERCIP Design.............. 14,250 14,250
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 10,303 10,303
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Exercise Related Minor 5,840 5,840
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning and Design....... 32,624 32,624
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Unspecified Minor 9,726 9,726
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning and Design....... 64,406 64,406
Locations
Defense-Wide Worlwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design-- 0 50,000 50,000
Locations Military Installation
Resiliency.
Defense-Wide Worlwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design--Pacific 0 15,000 15,000
Locations Deterrence Initiative.
SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE 2,027,520 -198,587 1,828,933
....................... ......................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Army National Guard Arizona Tucson National Guard Readiness 18,100 18,100
Center.
Army National Guard Arkansas Fort Chaffee National Guard Readiness 0 15,000 15,000
Center.
Army National Guard California Bakersfield National Guard Vehicle 0 9,300 9,300
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Colorado Peterson Air Force National Guard Readiness 15,000 15,000
Base Center.
Army National Guard Indiana Shelbyville National Guard/Reserve 12,000 12,000
Center Building Add/Al.
Army National Guard Kentucky Frankfort National Guard/Reserve 15,000 15,000
Center Building.
Army National Guard Mississippi Brandon National Guard Vehicle 10,400 10,400
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Nebraska North Platte National Guard Vehicle 9,300 9,300
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard New Jersey Joint Base McGuire-Dix- National Guard Readiness 15,000 15,000
Lakehurst Center.
Army National Guard Ohio Columbus National Guard Readiness 15,000 15,000
Center.
Army National Guard Oklahoma Ardmore National Guard Vehicle 0 9,800 9,800
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Oregon Hermiston Enlisted Barracks, 0 15,735 15,735
Transient Training.
Army National Guard Oregon Hermiston Enlisted Barracks, 9,300 9,300
Transient Training.
Army National Guard Puerto Rico Fort Allen National Guard Readiness 37,000 37,000
Center.
Army National Guard South Carolina Joint Base Charleston National Guard Readiness 15,000 15,000
Center.
Army National Guard Tennessee McMinnville National Guard Readiness 11,200 11,200
Center.
Army National Guard Texas Fort Worth National Guard Vehicle 7,800 7,800
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Texas Fort Worth Aircraft Maintenance 6,000 6,000
Hangar Addition/Alt.
Army National Guard Utah Nephi National Guard Readiness 12,000 12,000
Center.
Army National Guard Virgin Islands St. Croix Army Aviation Support 28,000 28,000
Facility (AASF).
Army National Guard Virgin Islands St. Croix CST Ready Building........ 11,400 11,400
Army National Guard Wisconsin Appleton National Guard Readiness 11,600 11,600
Center Add/Alt.
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 32,744 32,744
Locations Construction.
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 29,593 29,593
Locations
SUBTOTAL ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 321,437 49,835 371,272
....................... ......................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD
Air National Guard Alabama Montgomery Regional Base Supply Complex....... 0 12,000 12,000
Airport
Air National Guard Alabama Montgomery Regional F-35 Simulator Facility... 11,600 11,600
Airport
Air National Guard Guam Joint Region Marianas Space Control Facility #5. 20,000 20,000
Air National Guard Maryland Joint Base Andrews F-16 Mission Training 9,400 9,400
Center.
Air National Guard North Dakota Hector International Consolidated RPA 0 17,500 17,500
Airport Operations Facility.
Air National Guard Texas Joint Base San Antonio F-16 Mission Training 10,800 10,800
Center.
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 9,000 9,000
Locations Construction.
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning and Design....... 3,414 3,414
Locations
SUBTOTAL AIR NATIONAL GUARD 64,214 29,500 93,714
....................... ......................
ARMY RESERVE
Army Reserve Florida Gainesville ECS TEMF/Warehouse........ 36,000 36,000
Army Reserve Massachusetts Devens Reserve Forces Automated Multipurpose 8,700 8,700
Training Area Machine Gun Range.
Army Reserve North Carolina Asheville Army Reserve Center/Land.. 24,000 24,000
Army Reserve Wisconsin Fort McCoy Transient Training 0 2,500 2,500
Barracks.
Army Reserve Wisconsin Fort McCoy Scout Reconnaissance Range 14,600 14,600
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 3,819 3,819
Locations Construction.
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design....... 1,218 1,218
Locations
SUBTOTAL ARMY RESERVE 88,337 2,500 90,837
....................... ......................
NAVY RESERVE
Navy Reserve Maryland Reisterstown Reserve Training Center, 39,500 39,500
Camp Fretterd, MD.
Navy Reserve Minnesota NOSC Minneapolis Joint Reserve Intel Center 0 12,800 12,800
Navy Reserve Utah Hill Air Force Base Naval Operational Support 25,010 25,010
Center.
Navy Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Planning & Design.... 3,485 3,485
Locations
Navy Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Minor Construction... 3,000 3,000
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY RESERVE 70,995 12,800 83,795
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE RESERVE
Air Force Reserve Texas Fort Worth F-35 Squadron Ops / 0 25,000 25,000
Aircraft Maintenance Unit.
Air Force Reserve Texas Fort Worth F-35A Simulator Facility.. 14,200 14,200
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 3,270 3,270
Locations
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 5,647 5,647
Locations Construction.
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE RESERVE 23,117 25,000 48,117
....................... ......................
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
NATO Security Investment Worldwide Unspecified NATO Security Nato Security Investment 173,030 173,030
Program Investment Program Program.
SUBTOTAL NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM 173,030 0 173,030
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 6,161,724 -50,000 6,111,724
....................... ......................
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
Construction, Army Italy Vicenza Family Housing New 84,100 84,100
Construction.
Construction, Army Kwajalein Kwajalein Atoll Family Housing Replacement 32,000 32,000
Construction.
Construction, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Family Housing P & D...... 3,300 3,300
Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, ARMY 119,400 0 119,400
....................... ......................
O&M, ARMY
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 39,716 39,716
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 8,135 8,135
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 18,004 18,004
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 526 526
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 97,789 -27,000 70,789
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 41,183 41,183
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 123,841 123,841
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privitization 37,948 27,000 64,948
Locations Support.
SUBTOTAL O&M, ARMY 367,142 0 367,142
....................... ......................
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide USMC DPRI/GUAM PLANNING 2,726 2,726
Marine Corps Locations AND DESIGN.
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Construction Improvements. 37,043 37,043
Marine Corps Locations
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 3,128 3,128
Marine Corps Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS 42,897 0 42,897
....................... ......................
O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 58,429 58,429
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 17,977 17,977
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 51,006 51,006
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 350 350
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 16,743 16,743
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 62,658 62,658
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 85,630 85,630
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization 53,700 25,000 78,700
Locations Support.
SUBTOTAL O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS 346,493 25,000 371,493
....................... ......................
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
Construction, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Construction Improvements. 94,245 94,245
Locations
Construction, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 2,969 2,969
Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE 97,214 0 97,214
....................... ......................
O&M, AIR FORCE
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization..... 23,175 25,000 48,175
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 43,173 43,173
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 64,732 64,732
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 7,968 7,968
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 25,805 25,805
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 2,184 2,184
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 9,318 9,318
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 140,666 140,666
Locations
SUBTOTAL O&M, AIR FORCE 317,021 25,000 342,021
....................... ......................
O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 4,100 4,100
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 82 82
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 13 13
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 12,996 12,996
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 32 32
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 645 645
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 36,860 36,860
Locations
SUBTOTAL O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE 54,728 0 54,728
....................... ......................
IMPROVEMENT FUND
Improvement Fund Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative Expenses-- 5,897 5,897
Locations FHIF.
SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 5,897 0 5,897
....................... ......................
UNACCMP HSG IMPROVEMENT FUND
Unaccmp HSG Improvement Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative Expenses-- 600 600
Fund Locations UHIF.
SUBTOTAL UNACCMP HSG IMPROVEMENT FUND 600 0 600
....................... ......................
TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING 1,351,392 50,000 1,401,392
....................... ......................
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY BRAC
Army BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Base Realignment & Base Realignment and 66,060 66,060
Closure, Army Closure.
SUBTOTAL ARMY BRAC 66,060 0 66,060
....................... ......................
NAVY BRAC
Navy BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Base Realignment & Closure 125,165 125,165
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY BRAC 125,165 0 125,165
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE BRAC
Air Force BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide DoD BRAC Activities--Air 109,222 109,222
Locations Force.
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE BRAC 109,222 0 109,222
....................... ......................
TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE 300,447 300,447
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC 7,813,563 7,813,563
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2021 Senate
Account State/ Country Installation Project Title Request Senate Change Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide EDI: Planning and Design.. 11,903 11,903
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide EDI: Minor Construction... 3,970 3,970
Locations
SUBTOTAL ARMY 15,873 0 15,873
....................... ......................
NAVY
Navy Spain Rota EDI: Expeditionary 27,470 27,470
Maintenance Facility.
Navy Spain Rota EDI: EOD Boat Shop........ 31,760 31,760
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 10,790 10,790
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY 70,020 0 70,020
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE
Air Force Germany Ramstein EDI: RAPID AIRFIELD DAMAGE 36,345 36,345
REPAIR STORAGE.
Air Force Germany Spangdahlem AB EDI: RAPID AIRFIELD DAMAGE 25,824 25,824
REPAIR STORAGE.
Air Force Romania Campia Turzii EDI: DANGEROUS CARGO PAD.. 11,000 11,000
Air Force Romania Campia Turzii EDI: POL INCREASE CAPACITY 32,000 32,000
Air Force Romania Campia Turzii EDI: ECAOS DABS-FEV 68,000 68,000
STORAGE COMPLEX.
Air Force Romania Campia Turzii EDI: PARKING APRON........ 19,500 19,500
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide EDI: Unspecified Minor 16,400 16,400
Locations Military Construction.
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide EDI: Planning & Design.... 54,800 54,800
Locations
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE 263,869 0 263,869
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 349,762 0 349,762
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC 349,762 0 349,762
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL
SECURITY PROGRAMS
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Program FY 2021 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary by Appropriation
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriation Summary:
Energy Programs
Nuclear energy...................................... 137,800 0 137,800
Atomic Energy Defense Activities
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Federal Salaries and Expenses..................... 454,000 0 454,000
Weapons activities................................ 15,602,000 0 15,602,000
Defense nuclear nonproliferation.................. 2,031,000 0 2,031,000
Naval reactors.................................... 1,684,000 0 1,684,000
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration..... 19,771,000 0 19,771,000
Defense environmental cleanup....................... 4,983,608 100,000 5,083,608
Other defense activities............................ 1,054,727 -150,000 904,727
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities............... 25,809,335 -50,000 25,759,335
Total, Discretionary Funding.............................. 25,947,135 -50,000 25,897,135
Nuclear Energy
Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.................. 137,800 137,800
Total, Nuclear Energy..................................... 137,800 0 137,800
National Nuclear Security Administration
Federal Salaries and Expenses
Program direction....................................... 454,000 0 454,000
Weapons Activities
Stockpile management
Stockpile major modernization
B61 Life extension program.......................... 815,710 815,710
W76 Life extension program.......................... 0 0
W76-2 Modification program.......................... 0 0
W88 Alteration program.............................. 256,922 256,922
W80-4 Life extension program........................ 1,000,314 1,000,314
W87-1 Modification Program (formerly IW1)........... 541,000 541,000
W93................................................. 53,000 53,000
Total, Stockpile major modernization.................. 2,666,946 0 2,666,946
Stockpile sustainment................................. 998,357 998,357
Weapons dismantlement and disposition................. 50,000 50,000
Production operations................................. 568,941 568,941
Total, Stockpile management............................. 4,284,244 0 4,284,244
Production modernization
Primary capability modernization
Plutonium modernization
Los Alamos plutonium modernization
Los Alamos Plutonium Operations................. 610,599 610,599
21-D-512, Plutonium Pit Production Project, LANL 226,000 226,000
Subtotal, Los Alamos plutonium modernization...... 836,599 0 836,599
Savannah River plutonium modernization
Savannah River plutonium operations............. 200,000 200,000
21-D-511, Savannah River Plutonium Processing 241,896 241,896
Facility, SRS..................................
Subtotal, Savannah River plutonium modernization.. 441,896 0 441,896
Enterprise Plutonium Support...................... 90,782 90,782
Total, Plutonium Modernization...................... 1,369,277 0 1,369,277
High Explosives & Energetics........................ 67,370 67,370
Total, Primary capability modernization............... 1,436,647 0 1,436,647
Secondary Capability Modernization.................... 457,004 457,004
Tritium and Domestic Uranium Enrichment............... 457,112 457,112
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization.................. 107,137 107,137
Total, Production modernization......................... 2,457,900 0 2,457,900
Stockpile research, technology, and engineering
Assessment science.................................... 773,111 773,111
Engineering and integrated assessments................ 337,404 337,404
Intertial confinement fusion.......................... 554,725 554,725
Advanced simulation and computing..................... 732,014 732,014
Weapon technology and manufacturing maturation........ 297,965 297,965
Academic programs..................................... 86,912 86,912
Total, Stockpile research, technology, and engineering.. 2,782,131 0 2,782,131
Infrastructure and operations
Operating
Operations of facilities............................ 1,014,000 1,014,000
Safety and Environmental Operations................. 165,354 165,354
Maintenance and Repair of Facilities................ 792,000 792,000
Recapitalization
Infrastructure and Safety......................... 670,000 670,000
Capabilities Based Investments.................... 149,117 149,117
Planning for Programmatic Construction (Pre-CD-1). 84,787 84,787
Subtotal, Recapitalization.......................... 903,904 0 903,904
Total, Operating...................................... 2,875,258 0 2,875,258
I&O: Construction
Programmatic
21-D-510, HE Synthesis, Formulation, and 31,000 31,000
Production Facility, PX..........................
18-D-690, Lithium Processing Facility, Y-12....... 109,405 109,405
18-D-650, Tritium Finishing Facility, SRS......... 27,000 27,000
18-D-620, Exascale Computing Facility 29,200 29,200
Modernization Project, LLNL......................
17-D-640, U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS.. 160,600 160,600
15-D-302, TA-55 Reinvestment Project--Phase 3, 30,000 30,000
LANL.............................................
15-D-301, HE Science & Engineering Facility, PX... 43,000 43,000
07-D-220-04, Transuranic Liquid Waste Facility, 36,687 36,687
LANL.............................................
06-D-141, Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12....... 750,000 750,000
04-D-125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Research 169,427 169,427
Replacement Project, LANL........................
Total, Programmatic................................. 1,386,319 0 1,386,319
Mission enabling
19-D-670, 138kV Power Transmission System 59,000 59,000
Replacement, NNSS................................
15-D-612, Emergency Operations Center, LLNL....... 27,000 27,000
15-D-611, Emergency Operations Center, SNL........ 36,000 36,000
Total, Mission enabling............................. 122,000 0 122,000
Total, I&O construction............................... 1,508,319 0 1,508,319
Total, Infrastructure and operations.................... 4,383,577 0 4,383,577
Secure transportation asset
Operations and equipment.............................. 266,390 266,390
Program direction..................................... 123,684 123,684
Total, Secure transportation asset...................... 390,074 0 390,074
Defense nuclear security
Operations and maintenance............................ 815,895 815,895
Security improvements program......................... 0 0
Construction:
17-D-710, West end protected area reduction project, 11,000 11,000
Y-12...............................................
Subtotal, construction................................ 11,000 0 11,000
Total, Defense nuclear security......................... 826,895 0 826,895
Information technology and cybersecurity................ 375,511 375,511
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 101,668 101,668
Total, Weapons activities................................. 16,056,000 0 16,056,000
Adjustments
Use of prior year balances............................ 0 0
Total, Adjustments...................................... 0 0 0
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 15,602,000 0 15,602,000
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs
Material management and minimization
Conversion (formerly HEU Reactor Conversion)........ 170,000 170,000
Nuclear material removal............................ 40,000 40,000
Material disposition................................ 190,711 190,711
Laboratory and partnership support.................. 0 0
Total, Material management & minimization............. 400,711 0 400,711
Global material security.............................. 0
International nuclear security...................... 66,391 66,391
Domestic radiological security...................... 101,000 101,000
International radiological security................. 73,340 73,340
Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence.......... 159,749 159,749
Total, Global material security....................... 400,480 0 400,480
Nonproliferation and arms control..................... 138,708 138,708
National Technical Nuclear Forensics R&D.............. 40,000 40,000
Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D
Proliferation detection............................. 235,220 235,220
Nonproliferation Stewardship program.............. 59,900 59,900
Nuclear detonation detection........................ 236,531 236,531
Nonproliferation fuels development.................. 0 0
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D........... 531,651 0 531,651
Nonproliferation construction
U. S. Construction:
18-D-150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project.... 148,589 148,589
99-D-143, Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication 0 0
Facility, SRS....................................
Total, U. S. Construction:.......................... 148,589 0 148,589
Total, Nonproliferation construction.................. 148,589 0 148,589
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs........ 1,660,139 0 1,660,139
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 14,348 14,348
Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program
Emergency Operations.................................. 36,000 36,000
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation............. 341,513 341,513
Total, Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response 377,513 0 377,513
program................................................
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................ 2,052,000 0 2,052,000
Adjustments
Use of prior year balances............................ -21,000 -21,000
Total, Adjustments...................................... -21,000 0 -21,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................... 2,031,000 0 2,031,000
Naval Reactors
Naval reactors development.............................. 590,306 590,306
Columbia-Class reactor systems development.............. 64,700 64,700
S8G Prototype refueling................................. 135,000 135,000
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............ 506,294 506,294
Program direction....................................... 53,700 53,700
Construction:
21-D-530 KL Steam and Condensate Upgrades............. 4,000 4,000
14-D-901, Spent fuel handling recapitalization 330,000 330,000
project, NRF.........................................
Total, Construction..................................... 334,000 0 334,000
Transfer to NE--Advanced Test Reactor (non-add)......... 0 0
Total, Naval Reactors..................................... 1,684,000 0 1,684,000
TOTAL, National Nuclear Security Administration........... 19,771,000 0 19,771,000
Defense Environmental Cleanup
Closure sites administration.......................... 4,987 4,987
Richland:
River corridor and other cleanup operations........... 54,949 54,949
Central plateau remediation........................... 498,335 498,335
Richland community and regulatory support............. 2,500 2,500
18-D-404 Modification of Waste Encapsulation and 0 0
Storage Facility.....................................
Total, Richland......................................... 555,784 0 555,784
Office of River Protection:
Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning.... 50,000 50,000
Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition... 597,757 597,757
Construction:
18-D-16 Waste treatment and immobilization plant-- 609,924 609,924
LBL/Direct feed LAW..............................
15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system, 0 0
ORP..............................................
01-D-16 D, High-level waste facility.............. 0 0
01-D-16 E, Pretreatment Facility.................. 0 0
Total, Construction................................... 609,924 0 609,924
ORP Low-level waste offsite disposal.................. 0 0
Total, Office of River Protection....................... 1,257,681 0 1,257,681
Idaho National Laboratory:
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition................... 257,554 257,554
ID Excess facilities R&D.............................. 0 0
Idaho community and regulatory support................ 2,400 2,400
Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................ 259,954 0 259,954
NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................ 1,764 1,764
LLNL Excess facilities R&D............................ 0 0
Separations Process Research Unit..................... 15,000 15,000
Nevada Test Site...................................... 60,737 60,737
Sandia National Laboratories.......................... 4,860 4,860
Los Alamos National Laboratory........................ 120,000 100,000 220,000
Execute achievable scope of work.................... (100,000)
Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.................. 202,361 100,000 302,361
Oak Ridge Reservation:
OR Nuclear facility D & D............................. 109,077 109,077
U233 Disposition Program.............................. 45,000 45,000
OR cleanup and waste disposition...................... 58,000 58,000
Construction:
17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility............ 22,380 22,380
14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility..... 20,500 20,500
Subtotal, Construction:............................... 42,880 0 42,880
OR community & regulatory support..................... 4,930 4,930
OR technology development and deployment.............. 3,000 3,000
Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................ 262,887 0 262,887
Savannah River Site:
Savannah River risk management operations............. 455,122 455,122
SR community and regulatory support................... 4,989 4,989
Radioactive liquid tank waste:
Construction:
20-D-402 Advanced Manufacturing Collaborative 25,000 25,000
Facility (AMC).....................................
20-D-401 Saltstone Disposal Unit #10, 11, 12........ 0 0
19-D-701 SR Security system replacement............. 0 0
18-D-402,Saltstone disposal unit #8/9............... 65,500 65,500
17-D-402--Saltstone Disposal Unit #7................ 10,716 10,716
05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, SRS........ 0 0
Total, Construction, Radioactive liquid tank waste.... 101,216 0 101,216
Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization........... 970,332 970,332
Total, Savannah River Site.............................. 1,531,659 0 1,531,659
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant........................... 323,260 323,260
Construction:
15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation 0 0
system, WIPP.......................................
15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP........................ 50,000 50,000
21-D-401 Hoisting Capability Project................ 10,000 10,000
Total, Construction................................... 60,000 0 60,000
Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...................... 383,260 0 383,260
Program direction--Defense Environment Cleanup.......... 275,285 275,285
Program support--Defense Environment Cleanup............ 12,979 12,979
Safeguards and Security--Defense Environment Cleanup.... 320,771 320,771
Technology development and deployment................... 25,000 25,000
Use of prior year balances.............................. 0 0
Subtotal, Defense environmental cleanup................... 5,092,608 100,000 5,192,608
Rescission:
Rescission of prior year balances..................... -109,000 -109,000
TOTAL, Defense Environmental Cleanup...................... 4,983,608 100,000 5,083,608
Other Defense Activities
Environment, health, safety and security
Environment, health, safety and security mission 134,320 134,320
support..............................................
Program direction..................................... 75,368 75,368
Total, Environment, health, safety and security......... 209,688 0 209,688
Independent enterprise assessments
Enterprise assessments................................ 26,949 26,949
Program direction--Office of Enterprise Assessments... 54,635 0 54,635
Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments................. 81,584 0 81,584
Specialized security activities......................... 258,411 258,411
Office of Legacy Management
Legacy management activities--defense................. 293,873 -150,000 143,873
Maintain current program administration............. (-150,000)
Program direction..................................... 23,120 23,120
Total, Office of Legacy Management...................... 316,993 -150,000 166,993
Defense related administrative support.................. 183,789 183,789
Office of hearings and appeals.......................... 4,262 4,262
Subtotal, Other defense activities........................ 1,054,727 -150,000 904,727
Use of prior year balances.............................. 0 0
Total, Other Defense Activities........................... 1,054,727 -150,000 904,727
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Departmental Recommendations
Three packages of legislative proposals on the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 were submitted
as executive communications to the President of the Senate by
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs of
the Department of Defense and subsequently referred to the
committee. Information on these executive communications
appears below. These executive communications are available for
review at the committee.
Executive Communication No. EC-4038
Dated February 27, 2020
Received in the Committee on Armed Services on February 28,
2020
Executive Communication No. EC-4193
Dated March 5, 2020
Received in the Committee on Armed Services on March 6,
2020
Executive Communication No. EC-4296
Dated March 17, 2020
Received in the Committee on Armed Services on March 18,
2020
The committee notes that an additional 9 packages of
legislative proposals on the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 were submitted to the committee informally
due to delivery restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Committee Action
Senate Armed Services Committee
ROLL CALL VOTES DURING FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021
In compliance with Rule XXVI 7(3)(b) of the Standing Rules
of the Senate, listed below is a tabulation of the roll call
votes.
1. MOTION: To include a provision that would require
certain funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act be made
available for projects related to reducing the time required to
execute a nuclear test if necessary
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
2. MOTION: To include a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should conduct
port calls in Taiwan with the USNS Comfort and USNS Mercy.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 20-7
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, McSally, Scott, Blackburn,
Hawley, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, and
Jones
Opposed: Senators Perdue, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand,
Blumenthal, Hirono, and Warren
3. MOTION: To include a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Minister of
Defense of Israel, to establish a United States-Israel
Operations-Technology Working Group.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 27-0
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
4. MOTION: To include a provision to require a minimum of
twelve year of experience in military justice assignment to
qualify as a military judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals
and require the entire Court of Criminal Appeals review a
determination by a panel of the Court that a finding was
against the weight of the evidence.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 26-1
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott, Blackburn,
Hawley, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine,
King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senator Inhofe
5. MOTION: To include a provision that would require the
Commander of Navy Region Mid-Atlantic to establish and carry
out a 5-year fire fighter alternative work schedule
demonstration project.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 20-7
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, McSally, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand,
Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters,
Manchin, Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Cotton, Tillis, Perdue, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
6. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the
Secretary of Defense from approving the Secretary of the Army's
determination of eligibility for burial or inurnment of a
President or Vice President who is either not a member of the
Armed Forces or a veteran.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
7. MOTION: To include a provision to state the policy of
the United States with respect to the supply of strategic
minerals and metals for Department of Defense purposes.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 23-4
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono,
Kaine, King, Peters, Manchin, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Reed, Heinrich, Warren, and Duckworth
8. MOTION: To include a provision to require the Secretary
of Defense to issue an official charter specifying the duties
and responsibilities of the Chief Management Officer of the
Department of Defense, and to provide a report to Congress
describing the actions to be undertaken to reaffirm the
independent authority of the Chief Management Officer.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
9. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the
use of funds authorized for Fiscal Year 2021 to provide support
under section 284 or 2808 of title 10, United States Code, to
construct or provide support for the construction of such a
wall, fence, or road.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
10. MOTION: To include a provision to require the
Department of Defense to prescribe in regulations a policy
regarding the handling of minor collateral misconduct involving
a member of the Armed Forces who is the alleged victim of
sexual assault that applies to all members of the Armed Forces
and cadets and midshipmen at the military service academies.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 20-7
In favor: Senators Fischer, Rounds, Ernst, Sullivan,
Cramer, Blackburn, Hawley, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand,
Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters,
Manchin, Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Cotton, Tillis, Perdue,
McSally, and Scott
11. MOTION: To include a provision that would permit the
Department of Defense to transfer individuals detained at
United States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United
States temporarily for emergency or critical medical treatment
not available at Guantanamo.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
12. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the
Insurrection Act.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
13. MOTION: To include a provision to require action by the
Department of Defense with respect to the release of
perfluoroalkyl substances and polyfluoroalkyl substances by the
Department.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, Peters, Manchin,
Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, and Hawley
14. MOTION: To favorably report to the Senate the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 25-2
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cramer, McSally, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, Reed, Shaheen, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine,
King, Heinrich, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, and Jones
Opposed: Senators Gillibrand and Warren
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during Senate floor debate on the
legislation.
Regulatory Impact
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2021.
Changes in Existing Law
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.