[House Report 119-698]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 119-698
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027
----------
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 8800
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
June 15, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_____________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-993 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Nineteenth Congress
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ADAM SMITH, Washington
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia, Vice JOHN GARAMENDI, California
Chair DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
SAM GRAVES, Missouri SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York RO KHANNA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
DON BACON, Nebraska JASON CROW, Colorado
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine
RONNY JACKSON, Texas SARA JACOBS, California
PAT FALLON, Texas MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida PATRICK RYAN, New York
NANCY MACE, South Carolina GABE VASQUEZ, New Mexico
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER R. DELUZIO,
MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas Pennsylvania
JENNIFER A. KIGGANS, Virginia JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
CORY MILLS, Florida GILBERT RAY CISNEROS Jr.,
RICHARD McCORMICK, Georgia California
LANCE GOODEN, Texas ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana MAGGIE GOODLANDER, New Hampshire
DERRICK VAN ORDEN, Wisconsin SARAH ELFRETH, Maryland
JOHN J. McGUIRE III, Virginia GEORGE WHITESIDES, California
PAT HARRIGAN, North Carolina DEREK TRAN, California
MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana EUGENE SIMON VINDMAN, Virginia
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas WESLEY BELL, Missouri
JEFF CRANK, Colorado HERBERT C. CONAWAY, Jr., New
ABRAHAM J. HAMADEH, Arizona Jersey
Geoff Gosselin, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Purpose of the Legislation....................................... 1
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 2
Committee Position............................................... 3
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 3
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 3
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations in the Bill.............. 4
Budget Authority Implication..................................... 4
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027.......... 4
Sec. 1--Short Title........................................ 4
Sec. 2--Organization of Act Into Divisions; Table of
Contents................................................. 4
Sec. 3--Congressional Defense Committees................... 5
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS................. 5
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 5
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 5
Items of Special Interest.................................. 5
Army National Guard Aviation Modernization and
Recapitalization....................................... 5
Electrostatic Discharge and Electromagnetic Interference
on Army Rotorcraft..................................... 5
Litter Basket Stabilization Technology for MEDEVAC and
Hoist Operations....................................... 6
Non-Kinetic Solutions for Countering Drone Swarms........ 6
Vibration Mitigation for Army Rotary Wing Aircraft....... 6
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 7
Items of Special Interest.................................. 7
Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb...................... 7
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..... 7
Items of Special Interest.................................. 7
M240 and M249 operationally ready inventory.............. 7
Precision Grenadier System Program....................... 8
Rapidly Deployable Stabilizing Devices on Individual
Rifles................................................. 9
Procurement of Ammunition, Army.............................. 9
Items of Special Interest.................................. 9
Acquisition Strategy for Next Generation Artillery Rounds 9
Ammunition Industrial Base............................... 9
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 10
Items of Special Interest.................................. 10
Accelerated Fielding of Fixed Counter-UAS Capabilities
for Soldier Protection................................. 10
Accelerated Fielding of Mobile Counter-UAS Capabilities
for Soldier Protection................................. 10
Advanced Combat Tracked Vehicle Transmissions and
Drivetrain Ar-chitecture-Reciprocity, Industrial Base
Resilience, and EMD Trans-parency...................... 11
Advanced Load-Carrying Technologies for Dismounted
Soldiers............................................... 12
Army Fixed Wing Capability............................... 13
Army Mobile Tactical Cannon Modernization and Soldier
Lethality.............................................. 13
Army Watercraft Recapitalization Strategy................ 14
Assessment of the Army's Body-Worn Mission-Command
Platform Acquisition Pathways.......................... 14
Autonomous Vehicle Retrofits for Installation Logistics.. 15
Carbon Nanotubes on Army Mission Critical Systems........ 16
Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems Software Upgrade for
Tactical Communications................................ 16
Digital Night Vision Helmet Mounted Display for Rotary
Wing Pilots............................................ 17
Domestic Electric and Hybrid Propulsion Motor Systems for
Defense Platforms...................................... 17
Ground Autonomy Procurement Strategy..................... 18
Hybrid Soldier Protection Solutions...................... 18
Infrastructure to Accelerate and Sustain Counter-Small
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Effectiveness................ 19
Integrated Solution for Soldier Borne Mission Command.... 19
Next Generation Command and Control Transport Layer...... 20
Next-Generation Auxiliary Power for Ground Vehicles and
Next Gen-eration Command and Control................... 21
Report on Army Autonomous Resupply Vessel Investment
Strategy............................................... 21
Sustainment of the Army Long-Range Persistent
Surveillance System.................................... 22
Unmanned Surface Vessels for Escort of Army Watercraft... 22
Unmanned, Autonomous, Runway-Agnostic Aerial Cargo
Delivery for Contested Logistics....................... 23
Wireless intercommunication systems for Army ground
vehicles............................................... 24
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 24
Items of Special Interest.................................. 24
Scaling Production and Proliferating Capability of the
Collaborative Combat Aircraft.......................... 24
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 25
Items of Special Interest.................................. 25
Anti-Ship Missile Portfolio Review....................... 25
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile Surface and Ground Launch... 26
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps............. 27
Items of Special Interest.................................. 27
Affordable Expeditionary Long-Range Precision Fires...... 27
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 27
Items of Special Interest.................................. 27
Advanced Manufacturing and Fabrication for the Submarine
Industrial Base........................................ 27
Assessment of the Ford Class Aircraft Carrier Program.... 28
BBG(X) Program Impact on the U.S. Maritime Industrial
Base................................................... 28
Design for T-AH(X)....................................... 29
Domestic Production Capacity and Supply of Military-
Specification Welding Wire in Shipbuilding............. 30
Navy Implementation of the Hedge Strategy................ 30
Power and Propulsion Architecture for Large Surface
Combatant.............................................. 31
Submarine Construction Wage Enhancements and Impacts to
Supply Chain........................................... 32
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 32
Items of Special Interest.................................. 32
Acquisition and Sustainment of Large Diameter Unmanned
Undersea Vehicles...................................... 32
Extra-Large Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Fielding
Acceleration........................................... 33
Low-Cost Undersea Effectors.............................. 33
Multi-Mission Reconnaissance Boat........................ 34
Payload Integration for Unmanned Surface Vessels......... 35
Plan to Accelerate Procurement and Integration of
Commercially Available sUSVs........................... 35
Sonobuoy Procurement..................................... 36
Torpedo Tube Launch and Recovery Capability for Unmanned
Undersea Vehicles...................................... 36
Unmanned Surface Vessel Industrial Base.................. 37
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Detection and Deterrence..... 37
Use Cases for Autonomous Undersea Platforms.............. 37
V-22 Safety Investments.................................. 38
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 39
Items of Special Interest.................................. 39
Common End User Device Plan for the Marine Corps......... 39
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 40
Items of Special Interest.................................. 40
A-10 Combat Legacy, Current Operational Use, and
Modernization Outlook.................................. 40
Active Protection for Aerial Refueling Tankers........... 41
Assessment of the Feasibility of Restarting the
Production Line of the C-17............................ 42
Attritable Jet-Powered Aircraft for Distributed
Operations............................................. 42
Autonomous Intratheater Airlift.......................... 43
B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program............... 43
Blended Wing Body........................................ 43
C-130J Simulator Funding................................. 44
Commercial Preference and Sole-Source Awards in the
Acquisition of Aerial Firefighting Capabilities........ 44
Increasing B-21 Program of Record........................ 45
Looking Glass-Next Procurement........................... 45
MH-139A Mission Set at Joint Base Andrews................ 46
Mobility Connectivity.................................... 46
Retained KC-135 Basing................................... 46
Survivable Airborne Operations Center.................... 47
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 47
Items of Special Interest.................................. 47
Scalable Short-Range Air Defense Interceptor Missiles.... 47
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 47
Items of Special Interest.................................. 47
Air Base Air Defense..................................... 47
Air Force Installation Counter-UAS Acquisition Oversight. 48
Airborne Battle Management and Moving Target Indicator
Capability Continuity.................................. 49
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 49
Items of Special Interest.................................. 49
Affordable, Long-Endurance Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance Platforms........................... 49
Attrition-Ready Low-Cost Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System
Interceptors........................................... 50
Counter Unmanned Aircraft System Interoperability........ 50
Counter-UAS Guided Rocket Proximity Fuze Production and
Modernization.......................................... 51
Electronic Warfare and Modular Payload Integration....... 52
F-35 Organic Sustainment Transition to Military Services. 52
F-35 Technical Data Required to Support Sustainment
Strategy Activities.................................... 54
Ground and Maritime Tactical Network Resilience.......... 55
Health and Usage Monitoring Systems Modernization........ 55
High-Performance Group 3 Unmanned Aircraft Systems....... 56
Industrial Base for Unmanned and Counter-Unmanned
Aircraft Systems....................................... 57
Low-Cost Cross Domain Fixed-Wing Aerial-Underwater
Vehicles............................................... 57
Report on Digital Airworthiness Certification............ 58
Scalable Cost-Effective Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Interception Capacity.................................. 58
Scale Production-Ready Low-Cost Munitions................ 58
Transitioning Items of the F-35 Parts and Supply Chain to
Advanced Manufacturing Technologies.................... 59
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 60
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 60
Sec. 101--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 60
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 60
Sec. 111--Standards for Networked, Autonomous, Kinetic
Capabilities to Protect Against Small Unmanned Aircraft
Systems.................................................. 60
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 60
Sec. 121--Temporary Unavailability of Amphibious Warfare
Ships.................................................... 60
Sec. 122--Authority to Use Incremental Funding for Long
Lead-Time Components for Virginia Class Submarines....... 60
Sec. 123--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Arleigh Burke
Class Destroyers......................................... 60
Sec. 124--Multiyear Procurement Authority for John Lewis
Class Oilers............................................. 60
Sec. 125--Procurement Authorities for Certain Amphibious
Ship-building Programs................................... 60
Sec. 126--Contract Authority for Submarine Tender Program.. 61
Sec. 127--Multiyear Procurement Authority For E-2D Advanced
Hawk-eye Aircraft........................................ 61
Sec. 128--Authority to Use Incremental Funding for the
Construction of a Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG)......... 61
Sec. 129--Authority for Advance Procurement of Components
for Ship-to-Shore Connector Class Craft.................. 61
Sec. 130--Torpedo Modernization, Testing, and Inventory
Sufficiency for Two Simultaneous Regional Conflicts...... 61
Sec. 131--Limitation On Construction of Battleship Pending
Certifi-cation On Technology Readiness Levels............ 61
Sec. 132--Strategy for Iterative Development and Flight
Modifications for FF(X) Class Frigates................... 61
Sec. 133--Report on Continuity of Mission and Readiness
During Tran-sition of F-5 to F/A-1 8E/F Aircraft for the
Navy Reserve............................................. 62
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 62
Sec. 141--Inventory Requirements for Certain Fighter
Aircraft................................................. 62
Sec. 142--Extension of Prohibition on Retirement of F-22
Aircraft................................................. 62
Sec. 143--Limitation on Retirement of E-3 Airborne Warning
and Control System Aircraft and Requirements Relating to
E-7 Aircraft............................................. 62
Sec. 144--Evaluation for Potential Transfer of Certain A-10
Aircraft Among Military Departments...................... 62
Sec. 145--Extension of Requirements Relating to C-130
Aircraft................................................. 62
Sec. 146--Limitation On Availability of Funds for C-37
Aircraft Recapitalization Program........................ 62
Sec. 147--Limitation on Retirement of MQ-9 Reaper Aircraft. 62
Sec. 148--Analysis of Alternatives for Next Generation
Airlift Capabilities..................................... 63
Sec. 149--Authorization of Transitional Activities to
Improve Airlift Operations............................... 63
Sec. 150--Conveyance of Certain F-14 Aircraft to U.S. Space
and Rocket Center Commission in Huntsville, Alabama...... 63
Sec. 151--Report On the Feasibility of Restoring Nuclear
Capability to the B-1B Lancer Bomber Aircraft............ 63
Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters.... 63
Sec. 161--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-15 EX
Aircraft................................................. 63
Sec. 162--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-35 Aircraft 63
Sec. 163--Prohibition on Procurement and Use of Humanoid
Robotic Systems Produced, Developed, or Controlled by
Foreign Adversaries...................................... 64
Sec. 164--Limitation On Availability of Funds to Retire or
Decommission Certain Radar Systems....................... 64
Sec. 165--Standards for Common Operating System for Small
Un-manned Aircraft Systems............................... 64
Sec. 166--Minimum Annual Procurement Goal for AbilityOne
Program.................................................. 64
Sec. 167--Implementation of Comptroller General
Recommendations on F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Technical
Data Needs for Sustainment............................... 64
Sec. 168--Implementation of GAO Recommendation on F-35
Joint Strike Fighter Use of Contract Incentive Fees...... 64
Sec. 169--Study on Fuel Procurement Practices of the
Department of Defense.................................... 65
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 65
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army............ 65
Items of Special Interest.................................. 65
Advanced LIDAR Integration for Defense Systems........... 65
AI-Enabled Autopilot Systems for Unmanned Aerial Systems. 65
Anti-Tamper and Incursion Response Technologies.......... 66
Artillery Production Scalability and Manufacturing
Modernization.......................................... 67
Design for Manufacturing in Munitions and Energetics..... 67
Expanding the Innovation Ecosystem at the United States
Military Academies..................................... 68
Improved Energetics Manufacturing........................ 68
Mobile Unmanned Aircraft System Launch Capability........ 68
Next Generation Ballistic Plate.......................... 69
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy............ 69
Items of Special Interest.................................. 69
Academic Partnerships for Submarine and Undersea Vehicle
Research and Manufacturing............................. 69
Advanced Warhead Effects................................. 70
Airborne Augmented Reality Capability for Department of
the Navy............................................... 71
Close In Weapon System Technology Refresh................ 71
Concepts to Scale a Commercial Logistics Fleet........... 72
Continuity in Communications Degraded Environments....... 72
Digital Combat Console for Aegis Baseline Integration.... 73
Evaluation of Systems for the Management of Seabed Data
from Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Operations............ 73
Navy Digital Engineering Interoperability................ 74
Next Generation Shipboard Data Centers................... 75
Rapid Unmanned Surface Vessel On-Demand Manufacturing.... 75
Report on the Adoption of Autonomous Vertical Takeoff and
Landing Platforms...................................... 76
Unmanned Surface Vessel Operability in the Arctic Ocean.. 77
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force....... 77
Items of Special Interest.................................. 77
Advanced High Mach Turbine Engines Using Additive
Manufacturing.......................................... 77
Anti-Jam Capability Assessment........................... 77
Atmospheric Dominance Research and Monitoring............ 78
Collaborative Combat Aircraft Testing and Tactics
Development............................................ 78
Defense Quantum Networking Research...................... 79
Electro-Optical and Infrared Signature Modeling for
Collaborative Combat Aircraft.......................... 79
Magnetic Gearing for Advanced Manufacturing and Space
Applications........................................... 80
Modular Air-to-Air Capability Integration for
Collaborative Combat Aircraft.......................... 80
Nationwide Integration of Time Resiliency for Operations
(NITRO)................................................ 81
Next Generation Escape System for United States Air Force
F-16 Aircraft.......................................... 81
Report on Assessment of Turbine Based Combine Cycle
Facilities at Arnold Air Force Base.................... 83
Reusable Hypersonics Development and Transition.......... 83
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.... 83
Items of Special Interest.................................. 83
Advanced Military Prosthetic Technologies................ 83
Analog In-Memory Compute Architectures for Defense
Applications........................................... 84
Analytical Tools to Improve Department of Defense
Research Security...................................... 85
Biochemical Sensing Technologies for Warfighter Readiness 85
Biodefense Research and Development Activities........... 86
Collaborative Combat Aircraft Cost and Capability
Assessment............................................. 86
Commercial Radar for Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems..... 87
Commercialization Potential of Shelf-Stable Blood........ 88
Countering Biotechnology Threats from Foreign Adversaries 88
Defense Innovation Unit Collaboration with Service
Portfolio Acquisition Executives....................... 88
Design for Robotic Assembly in Weapon System Development. 89
Digital Engineering Integration and Governance Across the
Department of Defense.................................. 89
Dual-Use Small Unmanned Aircraft System Component
Manufacturing.......................................... 90
Establishment of National Security and Defense Artificial
Intelligence Institute................................. 91
F-35 Power Thermal Management System Modernization....... 92
Fiber-Optic Drone Production............................. 93
Foreign Weather Modification Capabilities................ 94
Group 1 and Group 2 Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems.... 94
Hypersonic Test and Evaluation Workforce Development
Partnerships........................................... 95
Integrating Lethality Metrics and Industrial Base Agility
for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.................... 95
Medium Class Multi-Mission Optionally Piloted Vessel
(M30PV)................................................ 96
Multi-Service Advanced Capability Hypersonic Test Bed
Funding Transparency................................... 96
National Security Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics Talent Development......................... 97
Physics-Based Location Modeling.......................... 98
Privately Funded Dual-Use Innovation Exchanges........... 99
Protecting Defense Innovation from Adversaries........... 99
Quantum-Enabled Radar Synchronization.................... 100
Ultra Short Reach Interconnect and Advanced Packaging for
Defense Systems........................................ 100
Workflow Automation and Synchronization for Operational
Planning............................................... 101
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 101
Items of Special Interest.................................. 101
Modern Software for Test and Evaluation Data............. 101
Support for Multi-Service Advanced Capability Hypersonic
Test Bed............................................... 102
Weapon System Survivability in Combined Environments..... 102
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 103
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 103
Sec. 201--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 103
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 103
Sec. 211--Budget Review and Certification for Certain
Categories of Research and Development................... 103
Sec. 212--Deputy Directors of Operational Test and
Evaluation............................................... 103
Sec. 213--Repeal of Pilot Authority for Use of Other
Transactions for Installation or Facility Prototyping.... 103
Sec. 214--Modifications to Responsibilities of the Defense
InnovationUnit........................................... 103
Sec. 215--Test and Evaluation Repository and Regional Test
Hubs of the Test Resource Management Center.............. 103
Sec. 216--Weapon System Platform Modernization and Cyber
Hardening................................................ 104
Sec. 217--Repeal of Requirement for Secretary of Defense to
Act Through a Specified Official for NATO Innovation
Program.................................................. 104
Sec. 218--Modification to Test Program for Engineering
Plant of Certain Vessels................................. 104
Sec. 219--United States-Israel Defense Technology
Cooperation Initiative................................... 104
Sec. 220--Establishment of Synthetic Training Environment
to Support Indo-Pacific Operations....................... 104
Sec. 221--Requirement to Establish Test and Training
Corridors for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems and
Associated Capabilities.................................. 104
Sec. 222--Operational Autonomy Requirements for Unmanned
Surface Vessels.......................................... 105
Sec. 223--Realignment of the National Strategic Research
Institute to the Department of the Air Force............. 105
Sec. 224--Reimbursement of National Guard for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation Expenses............... 105
Sec. 225--Use of Innovative and Emerging Food Production
Tech-nologies for Components of Military Rations......... 105
Sec. 226--Support for Advanced Technologies that Strengthen
United States Agricultural Production, Agrifood Systems,
and Associated Bioindustrial Manufacturing Capacity...... 105
Sec. 227--Prize Competitions to Support the Research and
Development of Biotechnology for the Department of
Defense.................................................. 105
Sec. 228--Pilot Program to Recognize Outstanding
Achievements in Technology and Prototype Development..... 106
Sec. 229--Pilot Program on Forward Deployable
Biomanufacturing Capabilities............................ 106
Sec. 230--Pilot Program on the Use of Automated Data
Security Posture Management Technologies for Artificial
Intelligence Systems..................................... 106
Sec. 231--Pilot Program on Technologies to Strengthen
Authentication and Attribution of Human Authorization for
Consequential Actions.................................... 106
Sec. 232--Cloud Laboratory Pilot Program................... 106
Sec. 233--Pilot Program to Test and Evaluate Muzzle Blast
Over-pressure Mitigation Devices......................... 106
Sec. 234--Space Technology Demonstration of Advanced
Nuclear Pro-pulsion Technologies......................... 106
Sec. 235--Prohibition on Pilot Trainees Operating T-7
Aircraft Pending Testing and Corrective Actions.......... 106
Sec. 236--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Gain of
Function Research........................................ 107
Sec. 237--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Animal
Research in Collaboration with Foreign Countries of
Concern.................................................. 107
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters................ 107
Sec. 251--Policy to Guide the Development and Acquisition
of Quantum Computing Systems for the Department of
Defense.................................................. 107
Sec. 252--Plan for Competitive Experimentation Relating to
Autono-mous and Nontraditional Capabilities Relevant to
the A-10 Mission Set..................................... 107
Sec. 253--Plan for Establishment and Evaluation of
Experimental, Drone-Centric Reconnaissance and Security
Formations............................................... 107
Sec. 254--Plan for Use of Certain Aircraft for Research and
Development Purposes..................................... 107
Sec. 255--Sonobuoy Modernization, Testing, and Inventory
Sufficiency for Two Simultaneous Regional Conflicts...... 108
Sec. 256--Review and Implementation of Strategies to
Accelerate the Qualification Process for Domestically
Produced Advanced Energetic Materials.................... 108
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 108
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 108
Energy Issues................................................ 108
Advanced Medium Mobile Power Sources (AMMPS)............... 108
Advanced Nuclear Energy Resilience and Critical
Infrastructure Hubs...................................... 108
Army Lithium Battery Systems Research and Transition....... 109
Comptroller General Review of Advanced Nuclear Reactors at
Military Installations................................... 110
Definition of Hybrid Power Systems Employed by the Armed
Forces................................................... 111
Department of Defense Planning for Used Nuclear Fuel
Management, Recycling, and Reuse......................... 111
Deployable Advanced Nuclear Power for Operational Energy... 113
Domestic Production of Synthetic Aviation Fuel............. 114
Domestic Supplied Installation Resilience.................. 114
Enhancing Warfighter Readiness Through Energy Resiliency at
Defense Installations.................................... 115
Grid Resilience to Severe Weather Conditions............... 115
Guam Energy Infrastructure................................. 115
Hybrid Tactical Microgrid Control Node..................... 116
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Power Systems........................... 116
Hydrogen-Powered Aviation for Operational Energy........... 117
Large Power Transformer Security and Resilience............ 117
Mobile Substations for Critical Defense Facilities......... 118
National Energy Storage Systems (NESS) Program............. 119
Nondestructive Inspection of Advanced Batteries Procured
Under a Section 154 Waiver............................... 119
Nuclear Power System for Strategic Command................. 120
Physical Security Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear
Reactor Programs......................................... 121
Small Modular Reactor Pilot Program Implementation......... 121
Synthetic Aviation Fuel Certification Process Concurrent
with ASTM................................................ 122
Technically Acceptable Source Selection Criteria for Bulk
Fuel Contracts........................................... 123
West Coast Refinery Impact on Bulk Fuel.................... 124
Logistics And Sustainment Issues............................... 125
Advanced Aircraft Engine Wash Technology................... 125
Aerial Contested Logistics Cross-Functional Team Capability
Transition............................................... 126
Amphibious Fleet Sustainment Through Additive Manufacturing 126
Apitong Hardwood for Military Applications................. 127
Army Depot Workforce Reductions and Statutory Workload
Obligations.............................................. 128
Army Sustainment Planning for New Systems.................. 129
Assessment of In-Theater Water Logistics and Alternative
Sustainment Technologies................................. 129
Assessment of Logistics Management Tools and Connectivity
in Department of Defense Facilities...................... 130
Assessment of Navy Private Sector Ship Repair Utilization.. 131
Assessment of West Coast Port Facility Operational Needs
and Capabilities......................................... 131
Autonomous External Cargo Handling for Contested Logistics. 132
Commercial Software for Contested Logistics................ 133
Commercial Software for Production and Sustainment Supply
Chain Orchestration...................................... 134
Comprehensive Air Force Maintenance Enterprise
Modernization............................................ 134
Comptroller General Review of Air and Army National Guard
Sustainment.............................................. 135
Dedicated Intermediate Aircraft Maintenance Facility
Utilizing Public-Private Partnership Opportunities at
Barksdale Air Force Base/Louisiana....................... 135
Equipment Modernization of Critical Reserve Component
Forces................................................... 136
Evaluation of Side Folding Intermodal Container Systems.... 137
F-35 Global Sustainment Spares Reset....................... 138
F139 Engine Maintenance Contract........................... 139
Guam Ship Repair........................................... 139
Implementation of Section 341 of the Fiscal Year 2026
National Defense Authorization Act....................... 139
Leveraging Investments to Support Contested Logistics...... 140
Navy Wartime Sustainment and Surge Capacity in the Indo-
Pacific.................................................. 141
Rapid Logistics Using Cargo Delivery from Air/High Altitude
Balloon and Space........................................ 141
Review of Corrosion Control and Prevention Implementation
and Sustained Cost Impacts............................... 142
Sea-Based Petroleum Distribution System.................... 143
Streamlining Low-Dollar Reserve Component Sustainment...... 143
Readiness Issues............................................. 144
Advanced Airlift Tactics Training Center/Joint Maritime
Over-Water Training/and Mobility Air Force Operations.... 144
Advanced Mobility Tactics and Survivability Center (AMTSC). 145
Amphibious Warship Operational Availability, Maintenance
Capacity, and Sustaining a Continuous Three Marine
Expeditionary Unit Presence.............................. 146
Army European Prepositioned Stocks......................... 147
Army Soldier Virtual Trainer............................... 148
Availability of Milk at Dining Facilities on Military
Installations............................................ 149
Briefing on Servicemember Exposure to Non-DoD Open-Air Burn
Pits..................................................... 149
Comptroller General Review of Aircraft Readiness Metrics... 150
Comptroller General Review of Department of Defense
Prioritization and Funding of PFAS Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Studies.................................. 150
Comptroller General Review of the Military Munitions
Response Funding and Contracts........................... 151
Contested Logistics........................................ 152
Cost Recovery of Major Range and Test Facility Bases....... 152
Data and Digitization for Construction and Sustainment..... 152
Department of Defense Training in the Arctic Region........ 153
Dieldrin in Guam........................................... 154
Effects of Decommissioning Army Prepositioned Stocks--
Afloat and Alternatives.................................. 154
Enhancing Food Preservation for Naval Operations........... 155
Enhancing Readiness and Supply Chain Awareness for the
Organic Industrial Base.................................. 155
European Prepositioned Stocks.............................. 156
Execute Certain Permit Reviews of Priority Department of
Defense Programs and Projects............................ 156
Fort Polk Modernization.................................... 157
Guam Naval Magazine........................................ 157
Indo-Pacific Force Generation Readiness Assessment......... 158
Integration of Supply Chain Scenario Planning into Joint
and Service-Level Wargames............................... 159
Marine Corps Aviation Improved Asset Availability.......... 160
Modernization of Threat Replication Capabilities at the
Southwest Tactical Training Range........................ 160
Naval Autonomous Data Collection System Support to Navy
Readiness................................................ 161
Naval Information Warfare Center Atlantic.................. 161
Navy Surge Capacity Stress Testing and Indo-Pacific Supply
Chain Resilience......................................... 161
Navy Wartime Sustainment Capacity in the Indo-Pacific...... 162
Next Generation Weapon Systems Propellant Transportation
Review................................................... 163
Readiness Data and System Integration...................... 164
Readiness Report to Host F-15EX............................ 164
Space Electronic Warfare Training and Readiness............ 164
Space Launch On-Base Land and Facilities for Critical Parts
and Subsystems........................................... 165
Study on Emerging Technology to Eliminate Need for Burn
Pits..................................................... 165
Utilization of Class I Hazardous Waste Wells for PFAS
Disposal at Military Installations....................... 166
Wireless Control and Monitoring Capabilities for the
Expeditionary Airfield Lighting System................... 166
Other Matters................................................ 167
Air Force Digital Warfare Innovation Center................ 167
Briefing on Implementation and Effectiveness of the Wicker-
McCain Surface Warfare Enhancement Act................... 168
Coast Guard Fixed-Wing Aviation in Guam................... 169
Counter-Unmanned Systems Protections for Naval
Installations............................................ 169
Depot Use of Artificial Intelligence and Additive
Manufacturing............................................ 170
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships................ 171
F-15EX Homeland Defense Mission Assurance.................. 171
Joint Safety Council Review................................ 172
Modernization and Sustainment of the Navy Department
Library.................................................. 172
National Guard Museum of the United States................. 173
Preservation of World War II-Era Aircraft in Department of
the Navy Historic Collection and/or World War II-era
Aircraft Crash Wreckages................................. 174
Radio Frequency and Electro-Magnetic Field Protective
Clothing for Military Aircrew............................ 175
Resources Available to Servicemembers for Rescue and
Transportation of Animals Encountered During Deployment.. 175
Sun Protection Policy for Military Field Units............. 176
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 177
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 177
Sec. 301--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 177
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment........................... 177
Sec. 311--Inclusion of Nuclear Energy in Energy Policy of
Department of Defense and Related Matters................ 177
Sec. 312--Modification to Pilot Program on Navy
Installation Nuclear Energy.............................. 177
Sec. 313--Standardized Document on Scope of Projects
Carried Out Under Military Munitions Response Program.... 177
Sec. 314--Pilot Program for Secure Recycling of Domestic
Electronic Waste......................................... 177
Sec. 315--Program for Deployment of Transportable Nuclear
Microreactor in Area of Responsibility of the United
States Indo-Pacific Command.............................. 178
Sec. 316--Prohibition on Operation of Connected Vehicles
Designed, Developed, Manufactured, or Supplied by Persons
Owned by, Con-trolled by, or Subject to the Jurisdiction
of a Foreign Entity of Concern on Department of Defense
Property................................................. 178
Sec. 317--Pilot Program on Off-Grid Tactical Power......... 178
Sec. 318--Clarification of Certain Authorities Independent
from Designated Executive Agent for Installation or
Operational Nuclear Energy............................... 178
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment........................ 178
Sec. 321--Requirement for Quarterly Reports on Munitions
Inventory Numbers........................................ 178
Sec. 322--Increase of Capital Investment Program Threshold
for Working-Capital Funds................................ 178
Sec. 323--Establishment of Civil Reserve Industrial Base... 178
Sec. 324--Modification of Minimum Capital Investment for
Certain Depots of Department of Defense.................. 179
Sec. 325--Expansion of Covered Depots to Include Crane Army
Ammunition Activity, Indiana............................. 179
Sec. 326--Expansion of Space-Available Travel Program for
Members of the Armed Forces Stationed at United States
Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba....................... 179
Sec. 327--Authorization of Sustainable Aviation Fuel
Procurement.............................................. 179
Sec. 328--Modification and Extension of Pilot Program on
Optimization of Aerial Refueling and Fuel Management in
Contested Logistics Environments Through Use of
Artificial Intelligence.................................. 179
Sec. 329--Army Expansion of Production of 155mm Artillery
Ammunition............................................... 179
Sec. 330--Requirements Relating to Aerial Refueling
Capability of Air Force Tanker Fleet..................... 179
Sec. 331--Navy Containerized Expeditionary Advanced
Manufacturing Capabilities Pilot Program................. 180
Sec. 332--Expansion of Transportation Services on Navy
Installations............................................ 180
Sec. 333--Requirements Relating to Sustainment of A-10
Aircraft and Related Training............................ 180
Sec. 334--Requirement for Standardized Munitions with
Respect to Certain Unmanned Aircraft..................... 180
Sec. 335--Requirement to Ensure Sufficiency of Naval Mine
Inventory................................................ 180
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 180
Sec. 341--Strategy to Support Joint Strike Fighter
Sustainment and Maintenance in Contested Operating
Environments............................................. 180
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 181
Sec. 351--Establishment of Center for the Study of the
National Guard........................................... 181
Sec. 352--Disposition of Accountable Property in Designated
Theaters of Operation.................................... 181
Sec. 353--Certification Requirement for Motor Carriers
Transporting Department of Defense Freight............... 181
Sec. 354--Establishment of National Security Registry for
Motor Carriers Handling Department of Defense Freight.... 181
Sec. 355--Protection of Property Owned, Possessed, or
Shipped by the Department of Defense from Lien, Arrest,
or Seizure During Shipment............................... 181
Sec. 356--Establishment of United States Marine Corps
Museum System............................................ 181
Sec. 357--Requirement for FireGuard Program................ 181
Sec. 358--Pilot Program for Testing and Evaluation of
Counter-Fire Unmanned Fire Suppression Aircraft Systems
on Military Installations................................ 182
Sec. 359--Pilot Program on Data Collection and Analysis in
Connection with Army Combat Training Center Rotations.... 182
Sec. 360--Minimum Maritime Firefighting Capability
Standards for Naval Installations that Berth Large Naval
Vessels.................................................. 182
Sec. 361--Minimum Staffing Requirements for Fire Apparatus
at Certain Space Force Installations..................... 182
Sec. 362--Activities for Evaluating Integrating and
Interoperability of Technologies for Subterranean
Operations............................................... 182
Sec. 363--Improvements to Osprey Aircraft Safety Efforts... 182
Sec. 364--Army Pilot Program on Electronic Ammunition
Simulation for Small Arms Training....................... 182
Sec. 365--Pilot Program on Hydrophobin-Based
Biomanufactured Treatment as Flame-Resistant and Water-
Repellent Treatments for Military Uniforms............... 183
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 183
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 183
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 183
Sec. 401--End Strengths for Active Forces.................. 183
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 183
Sec. 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............... 183
Sec. 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserves.................................. 184
Sec. 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
Status).................................................. 184
Sec. 414--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized to
be on Active Duty for Operational Support................ 185
Sec. 415--Authorized Strengths: Senior Enlisted Members on
Active Duty or on Full-Time National Guard Duty for
Administration of the Marine Corps Reserve............... 185
Subtitle C--Authorization Of Appropriations.................. 185
Sec. 421--Military Personnel............................... 185
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 185
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 185
Acceptance Of State-Recognized Custody Documentation for
Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System
Enrollment............................................... 185
Access to Student Loan Cancellation for Eligible
Servicemembers........................................... 186
Active Duty Tuition Assistance............................. 186
Active Guard and Reserve Service for Purposes of Veterans
Benefits................................................. 187
Administrative Separations for Shaving Profiles............ 188
Air Force Technical Training Capacity and Support.......... 188
Army Command Matching Program.............................. 189
Army E9 Training Timeline.................................. 189
Authorized End Strength at the U.S. Air Force Academy...... 190
Briefing on Expanding Externships and Emerging Technology
Opportunities for Federal Scientists and Veterans........ 191
Briefing on Leave Policies and Obstacles to Servicemembers
Taking Leave............................................. 191
Bureaucratic and Statutory Barriers for Separating Junior
Enlisted Marines......................................... 192
Chaplain Corps Recruitment Report.......................... 192
Comptroller General Review of DOD's Use of Involuntary
Separations.............................................. 193
Credit for Prior Learning for Service Members and Veterans. 194
Department of Defense Child Care Space Buy Down Assessment. 195
Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) Military-
Connected Academic and Support Program................... 195
Department of Defense Education Activity Phones in Schools
Study.................................................... 196
Department of Defense Inspector General Review of Potential
Insider Trading Activity................................. 196
Department of Defense Review of RAND Duty Status
Consolidation Report..................................... 197
Department of Defense Support for Secure Voting by Deployed
Servicemembers........................................... 197
Establishing an Exceptional Family Member Program
Optimization Demonstration Program....................... 198
Exceptional Family Member Program Respite Care Policy
Review................................................... 199
Funding Requirements for Army National Guard Lodging-in-
Kind and Travel Support.................................. 200
Government Accountability Office Review of Special Trial
Counsel Staffing and Resources........................... 200
Impact of Rising Energy Costs on Servicemembers and the
Department............................................... 201
Impact of State Maritime Academies On Department of Defense
Personnel and Readiness.................................. 202
Impacts of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Criteria,
Metrics, and Quotas on Promotion Selection Board
Recommendations.......................................... 202
Increasing Access to Child Care for Military Families...... 203
Issues with the Reserve Component Duty Status Structure.... 203
Job Placement and Career Success for Transitioning Service
Members.................................................. 203
Manner of Death Determination Standards for Active-Duty
Service Members.......................................... 204
Military Child Care Employee Transferability............... 204
Military OneSource Referral Accountability and Coordination
Feasibility.............................................. 205
Military Recruitment in Guam............................... 205
Modernization of Military Personnel Management Systems to
Enhance Operational Readiness............................ 206
Navy Command Readiness, Endurance, and Watchstanding....... 207
Navy Ombudsman Program and Support to Military Families.... 207
Opt In Option for Applicants to Military Academies......... 207
Participation of Ukrainian Students in United States
Service Academies........................................ 208
Purple Heart Database...................................... 208
Recruitment Workforce Development and Strategic Youth
Engagement............................................... 209
Report on Termination and Reconstitution of the Defense
Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and
Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces (DAC-IPAD). 210
Restoration of Rank for General John D. Lavelle............ 210
School Safety Infrastructure at Department of Defense
Education Activity Schools............................... 211
Space Force Continuous Fitness Assessment.................. 211
Space-Available Travel Priority for Unaccompanied
Dependents............................................... 212
Staffing Shortfalls in the United States Army Corps of
Engineers and the Air Force Civil Engineer Center........ 212
Support for Local Universities............................. 213
Support for Military Spouse Retirement Financial Stability. 213
Support for United Service Organizations................... 214
Tactical Officers at Senior Military Colleges.............. 214
Termination and Reinstatement of the Statutorily Mandated
Military Justice Review Panel............................ 215
The Status and Impact of Conversions to Air National Guard
Contingency Response Groups.............................. 215
Ukrainian Military Instructors at Senior Professional
Military Education Institutions.......................... 216
USAFA 2050................................................. 216
Utilization of Intergovernmental Service Agreements to
Expand Access to Child Care.............................. 217
Utilization of Rapid DNA Capabilities...................... 218
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 218
Subtitle A--Officer Policy and Reserve Component Management.. 218
Sec. 501--Flexibility in Requirements of Selection Boards:
Composition; Convening................................... 218
Sec. 502--Requirements for Removal of Certain General and
Flag Officers............................................ 219
Sec. 503--Ranks of Judge Advocates General................. 219
Sec. 504--Grades of Certain Chiefs of Reserve Components... 219
Sec. 505--Grade of Chief of Veterinary Corps of the Army... 219
Sec. 506--Limitation on the Transfer to the Space Force of
Certain Functions of the Air National Guard.............. 219
Sec. 507--Inclusion of Judge Advocates In Global Force
Management Processes..................................... 219
Sec. 508--Role of Military Chaplains....................... 219
Subtitle B--Recruitment, General Service Authorities and
Prohibitions, and Military Records....................... 219
Sec. 511--Recruitment: Improvements Relating to Secondary
Schools.................................................. 219
Sec. 512--Prohibition on reduction in personnel assigned to
duty with a service review agency; report on reviews of
certain discharges related to PTSD....................... 219
Sec. 513--Selective Service System: Omission of Deceased
Persons from Registration................................ 220
Sec. 514--Requirement of Equal Opportunity, Racial
Neutrality, and Exclusive Use of Merit in Military
Personnel Actions........................................ 220
Sec. 515--Prohibition of Hate Symbols: Regulations;
Guidance; Training....................................... 220
Sec. 516--Timely Resolution of Career-Impacting
Administrative Investigations............................ 220
Sec. 517--Prohibition On Use of Prediction Markets By
Personnel of the Department of Defense................... 220
Sec. 518--Pilot Program on Modernization of Drug Testing
Using Voice-Based Risk Assessment........................ 220
Sec. 519--Soldier Digital Lifecycle Modernization
Initiative............................................... 220
Sec. 519A--Authority to Study the Propensity of Certain
Students to Serve in the Armed Forces.................... 220
Subtitle C--Member Training.................................. 221
Sec. 521--Ineligibility of a National of a Non-Allied
Foreign Nation to Attend a Service Academy............... 221
Sec. 522--Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
Program for Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps...... 221
Sec. 523--Additional Nominees to the Service Academies from
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands......... 221
Sec. 524--Elimination of Cap on the Number of Cadets Or
Midshipmen Who May Receive Alternative Service
Obligations to Become Professional Athletes.............. 221
Sec. 525--Elimination of the Right of Cadets to Automatic
Reexamination............................................ 221
Sec. 526--Congressional Communications Officials of the
Service Academies........................................ 221
Sec. 527--Revision to Decision Timeframe for Expedited
Transfers at the Military Service Academies.............. 221
Sec. 528--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
Instructor Pay........................................... 221
Sec. 529--Establishment of Program to Promote Participation
of Foreign Students in the Senior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps........................................... 222
Sec. 529A--Establishment of the Military Service Academy
Panel On Athletics....................................... 222
Sec. 529B--Limitation on Authority to Eliminate the 70th
Flying Training Squadron of the United States Air Force
Academy.................................................. 222
Subtitle D--Member Education................................. 222
Sec. 531--Establishment of a doctor of psychology program
and a master of social work program at the Uniformed
Services University of the Health Sciences............... 222
Sec. 532--Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship and
Financial Assistance Program: Eligible Institutions;
Continuity of Payments................................... 222
Sec. 533--Inclusion of National Intelligence College as
Part of the National Defense University.................. 222
Sec. 534--Defense Information School: Authority to Grant
Associate's Degree in Communications..................... 222
Sec. 535--Eligibility of an Enlisted Member to Receive a
Degree from the Naval Postgraduate School................ 222
Subtitle E--Military Justice................................. 223
Sec. 541--Clarification of Qualifications for Judge
Advocates................................................ 223
Sec. 542--Authority of Special Trial Counsel to Enter into
Pretrial Agreements with Respect to Certain Offenses..... 223
Sec. 543--Clarifying Amendment to Completion of Appellate
Review Under Article 57 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.................................................. 223
Sec. 544--Review of Courts--Martial Records................ 223
Sec. 545--Uniform Code of Military Justice: Prohibition of
Review of Factual Sufficiency in Certain Appeals Before a
Court of Criminal Appeals................................ 223
Sec. 546--Clarification of Court of Criminal Appeals Review
of Sentencing............................................ 223
Sec. 547--Expansion of Victim Access to Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces..................................... 223
Sec. 548--Modifications to Offense of Wrongful Broadcast or
Distribution of Intimate Visual Images Under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice................................. 223
Sec. 549--Authorization of Death Penalty for Offense of
Rape of a Child under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.................................................. 223
Sec. 549A--Punitive Article on Retaliation for Reporting of
Sexual Harassment under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.................................................. 224
Sec. 549B--Revision of Department of Defense Instruction
Regarding Early Release Eligibility for Offenders
Convicted of Certain Sexual Offenses Under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice................................. 224
Sec. 549C--Notification Required to Implement Changes to
Military Legal System Recommended by Special Review Panel
Activities............................................... 224
Sec. 549D--Analysis of Potential Establishment of Separate
Punitive Article on Hazing Under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice......................................... 224
Subtitle F--Investigations and Other Legal Matters........... 224
Sec. 551--Extension of Special Victims' Counsel Services to
Domestic Violence Victims................................ 224
Sec. 552--Policies Regarding the Reporting of Missing
Members of the Armed Forces.............................. 224
Sec. 553--Authority of Naval Criminal Investigative Service
to Investigate Sexual Harassment......................... 224
Sec. 554--Cross--Service Data Sharing Regarding
Substantiated Allegations of Sexual Misconduct........... 224
Sec. 555--Inclusion of Sexual Harassment in Catch a Serial
Offender Program......................................... 225
Sec. 556--Military Domestic Violence Emergent Housing
Policy................................................... 225
Sec. 557--Requirement for Standardized Policies and
Processes to Ensure the Timely Review, Documentation, and
Resolution of Requests for Military Protective Orders.... 225
Sec. 558--Reestablishment of Defense Advisory Committee for
the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct...................... 225
Sec. 559--Pilot Program On Use of Advanced Monitoring and
Rehabilitative Technologies in Army Correctional
Facilities............................................... 225
Subtitle G--Career Transition................................ 225
Sec. 561--Establishment of Separation Oath for Members of
the Armed Forces......................................... 225
Sec. 562--Designation of Senior Official for Military-to-
Civilian Transition...................................... 225
Sec. 563--Authorization of Pilot Program to Help Members
Separating from Certain Armed Forces Obtain Employment as
Teachers................................................. 226
Sec. 564--Study on Separation of Members of the Armed
Forces Due to the Mandate to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccine
and the Transfer of Education Benefits by Such Members... 226
Subtitle H--Family Programs, Child Care, and Dependent
Education................................................ 226
Sec. 571--Extension of Non-Medical Counseling Services
Program for Military Families............................ 226
Sec. 572--Pilot Program to Increase Payments for Child Care
Services in High-Cost Areas.............................. 226
Sec. 573--Pilot Program to Provide Financial Assistance to
Members of the Armed Forces for In-Home Child Care;
Inclusion of Au Pairs.................................... 226
Sec. 574--Modifications to Pilot Program to Provide
Financial Assistance to Members of the Armed Forces for
In-Home Child Care....................................... 226
Sec. 575--Certain Assistance to Local Educational Agencies
that Benefit Dependents of Military and Civilian
Personnel................................................ 226
Sec. 576--Policies to Support Military Families Subject to
Court-Ordered Child Custody Arrangements................. 227
Sec. 577--Authority for Pilot Program for Certain Military
Spouses to Become Special Education Teachers in DODEA
Schools.................................................. 227
Sec. 578--Pilot Program for Push-Text Notifications to
Members and Dependents................................... 227
Subtitle I--Decorations and Awards........................... 227
Sec. 581--Gold Star Survivor; Definition Prescribed by
Secretary of Defense..................................... 227
Sec. 582--Medal of Honor Recipients; Access to Any Military
Installation; Liaison.................................... 227
Sec. 583--Technical Correction to Authorization to Award
the Distinguished--Service Cross to Isaac `Ike' Camacho.. 227
Sec. 584--Authorization of Service Ribbon for a Member of
the National Guard who Performs Homeland Defense Duty.... 227
Sec. 585--Authorization for Posthumous Award of Medal of
Honor to Rafael Peralta for Acts of Valor................ 227
Sec. 586--Authorization for Posthumous Award of Medal of
Honor to Robert A. Lodge for Acts of Valor............... 228
Sec. 587--Authorization for Award of the Distinguished-
Service Cross for James O. Ratliff for Acts of Valor
during the Vietnam War................................... 228
Sec. 588--Authorization to Award the Distinguished-Service
Cross to Joseph P. Lynch for Acts of Valor as a Member of
the Army During the Vietnam War.......................... 228
Sec. 589--Sense of Congress Regarding Award of Medal of
Honor to Thomas J. Grasso for Acts of Valor During
Operation Freedom's Sentinel............................. 228
Sec. 589A--Sense of Congress Regarding Award of Medal of
Honor to Retired Colonel Philip J. Conran for Acts of
Valor in Laos During the Vietnam War..................... 228
Subtitle J--Other Matters and Miscellaneous Reports.......... 228
Sec. 591--Expansion of Eligibility of Veterans for Certain
Military Adaptive Sports Program......................... 228
Sec. 592--Expanded Goals of Authorized Program Regarding
the National September 11 Memorial and Museum............ 228
Sec. 593--Local Agricultural Procurement in Guam
Commissaries............................................. 229
Sec. 594--Submission of Review of Operational Effectiveness
of Army and Marine Corps Ground Combat Units............. 229
TITLE VI--MILITARY COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..... 229
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 229
Assessment of Ultra-Processed Foods and Artificial
Additives in Military Food Programs...................... 229
Defense Finance and Account Service Payroll Reform Review. 229
Department of Defense Food Program and Nutrition Objectives 230
Food Insecurity Among Members of the Armed Forces.......... 230
Funded Environmental and Morale Leave Eligibility.......... 231
Providing Debt Relief for Our Troops....................... 232
Review of Alaska Remote Assignment Travel Reimbursement
and Potential Expansion.................................. 232
Sailors Living Ashore Briefing............................ 233
Support for Local Produce in Commissaries.................. 233
Updating Military Lending Act Regulations.................. 234
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 234
Subtitle A--Bonus and Incentive Pays......................... 234
Sec. 601--One-Year Extension of Certain Expiring Bonus and
Special Pay Authorities.................................. 234
Sec. 602--Authorizing Board Certification Incentive Pay for
Medical Officers with Doctoral Degrees................... 234
Sec. 603--One-Time Corrective Increase and Annual
Adjustments for Certain Special and Incentive Pays for
Members of the Armed Forces; Clarification of Special and
Incentive Pay Authorities for Members of Reserve
Components............................................... 234
Sec. 604--Payment of Maximum Amount of Aviation Incentive
Pay to Aviation Officers with More than 8 Years of
Aviation Service; Enhancement of Retention Incentives
Available to Aviation Officers........................... 235
Sec. 605--Expansions of Authorities to Contract with
Members of the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps... 235
Sec. 606--Retroactive Granting of Waivers for Aviation
Incentive Pay............................................ 235
Subtitle B--Allowances....................................... 235
Sec. 611--Basic Needs Allowance: Exclusion of Basic
Allowance for Housing from the Calculation of Gross
Household Income of an Eligible Member of the Armed
Forces................................................... 235
Sec. 612--Basic Allowance for housing: Permanent Authority
to Make Certain Temporary Increases...................... 235
Sec. 613--Temporary Adjustment to a Rate of the Basic
Allowance for Housing for Members of the Uniformed
Services: Lower Threshold; Permanent Authority........... 235
Sec. 614--Modifications to cost-of-living allowance in the
continental United States for members of the Army, Navy,
Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Force................. 235
Sec. 615--Payment of Costs to Ship Breast Milk of a Member
Performing Certain Duty.................................. 236
Subtitle C--Leave............................................ 236
Sec. 621--Accrual of Leave for Members of the Armed Forces. 236
Sec. 622--Accumulation of Leave for Members of the Armed
Forces................................................... 236
Sec. 623--Bereavement Leave for a Member of the Armed
Forces in the Case of a Loss of Pregnancy or Stillbirth.. 236
Subtitle D--Family and Survivor Benefits..................... 236
Sec. 631--Payment to Participant in Survivor Benefit Plan
whose Spouse Dies Before the Participant................. 236
Sec. 632--Increase in and Cost-of-Living Adjustment of
Death Gratuity........................................... 236
Subtitle E--Defense Resale Matters........................... 236
Sec. 641--Use of Commissary Stores by Employees of the
Department of Defense Education Activity and Military
Child Development Centers................................ 236
Sec. 642--Single-Use Shopping Bags in Commissary Stores.... 236
Sec. 643--Limitation on Implementation of Supply Chain
Transformation Initiative of the Defense Commissary
Agency................................................... 236
Subtitle F--Other Benefits, Reports, and Briefings........... 237
Sec. 651--Career Flexibility Programs: Eligibility of a
Member Already Subject to a Period of Obligated Service;
Minimum Length of Program................................ 237
Sec. 652--Provision of Information Regarding Food Access
and Child Care for Members Receiving Orders for a Change
of Permanent Station..................................... 237
Sec. 653--Reserves and Retired Members: Acceptance of
Employment, Payments, and Awards From Foreign Governments
Through Private Entities................................. 237
Sec. 654--Program to Provide to Certain Patrons a Discount
on Motor Fuel Sold at Exchange Stores.................... 237
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 237
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 237
Advanced Resuscitation Systems for Combat Casualty Care.... 237
Advancing Non-Opioid Alternatives for Chronic Pain......... 238
AI Ambient Listening Technology............................ 238
Air Force Suicide Prevention Training Programs............. 238
All-Hazards Military Medical Response...................... 239
Ambient Artificial Intelligence Clinical Documentation in
The Military Health System............................... 239
Anonymous Non-Medical Counseling and Peer Support.......... 240
Artificial Intelligence Translation for Military Medical
Missions................................................. 240
Assessment of Emerging Clinical Research for Treatment-
Resistant PTSD........................................... 241
Automated Pharmacy Pickup Lockers and Kiosks at Military
Treatment Facilities..................................... 242
Blast Overpressure Exposure and Traumatic Brain Injury..... 243
Blast Overpressure Mitigation for Small and Medium Caliber
Weapons.................................................. 243
Briefing on Department of Defense Vaccine Research and
Development.............................................. 244
Combating Respiratory Infections........................... 244
Comptroller General Study of Uniformed Services University
Medical School........................................... 245
Direct Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Post-Amputation
Pain Management.......................................... 245
DoD Report on Medically Complex Children................... 246
Domestic Sourcing of Pharmaceuticals and Active
Pharmaceutical Ingredients............................... 247
Electronic Health Records Transition Timeliness............ 247
Endometrial Cancer Research Assessment..................... 248
Enhanced Readiness for Sudden Cardiac Arrest............... 248
Enterprise-wide Revenue Cycle Management Phased-In
Modernization............................................ 249
Evaluation of the Mission 100 Wellness Program............. 249
Feasibility of Hiring Part-Time Nurses in the Military
Health System............................................ 250
Influenza Inoculation Policy Changes....................... 251
Medical Readiness in the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands... 251
Medical Sustainment and Casualty Evacuation in Contested
Unmanned Operational Environments........................ 252
Mental Health and Suicide at Naval Nuclear Power Training
Command.................................................. 253
Military Health System Structure and Health Care Delivery.. 253
Military Surgical Readiness and Combat Casualty Care
Capacity................................................. 255
Military Treatment Facility Readiness, Network Reliance,
and Cyber Resilience..................................... 256
Military-Civilian Medical Surge Planning for Contested
Environments............................................. 256
Military-Civilian Trauma Readiness Partnerships; Southwest
Border Assessment and Prioritization..................... 257
Optometry Services at Military Treatment Facilities........ 259
Patient Safety during Sensitive Medical Exams and
Procedures............................................... 259
Perioperative Care within the Military Healthcare System... 260
Plan for Testing for Helicobacter Pylori for Certain
Members of the Armed Forces.............................. 260
Prostate Cancer Incidence and Emerging Technologies........ 261
Radiological Medical Countermeasures....................... 262
Results of Prohibition of Painful Animal Research.......... 262
Review of Access to Care at Military Medical Treatment
Facilities within the United States...................... 262
Strengthening Industrial Preparedness Through Domestic
Manufacturing of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients....... 263
Suicide Analytic Variable Evaluation System................ 264
Suicide Prevention Training Effectiveness.................. 264
TBI Detection Devices...................................... 265
Total Wound Management in the Military Care Continuum...... 265
TRICARE Coverage for Advanced Molecular Diagnostic Tests... 266
TRICARE Drug Pricing Under the Inflation Reduction Act
Negotiation Program...................................... 266
TRICARE for Life Cost Savings.............................. 267
Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel............... 268
Virtual physical therapy solution pilot program............ 268
Wellness Applications Expansion Report..................... 269
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 269
Subtitle A--TRICARE and Other Health Benefits................ 269
Sec. 701--Dental Readiness for Certain Members of Selected
Reserve.................................................. 269
Sec. 702--Expanded Access to Dental Care for Certain
Dependents............................................... 269
Sec. 703--Fertility Treatment for Certain Members of the
Armed Forces and Dependents.............................. 269
Sec. 704--Limitation on Ability of Secretary of Defense to
Modify Scope of Medical Services......................... 269
Sec. 705--Prohibition on and Reversal of Actions to Modify
Scope of Medical Services Provided at Certain Military
Medical Treatment Facilities............................. 270
Sec. 706--TRICARE Coverage for Increased Supply for
Contraception............................................ 270
Sec. 707--Pilot Program to Help Certain Members of the
Armed Forces Stop Smoking................................ 270
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration....................... 270
Sec. 721--Improvements to Defense Health Agency............ 270
Sec. 722--Improvements to Administration of Military
Medical Treatment Facilities............................. 270
Sec. 723--Designation of Defense Health Agency as Combat
Support Agency........................................... 270
Sec. 724--Accounts for Medical and Health Care Programs of
the Department of Defense................................ 270
Sec. 725--Availability of Combat and Operational Medicine
Program Account and Other Funds for Certain Medical
Countermeasures.......................................... 270
Sec. 726--Inclusion of Defense Health Agency in Reporting
Require-ments Relating to Unfunded Priorities............ 271
Sec. 727--Joint Trauma System.............................. 271
Sec. 728--Clarification of Consistent Evaluations of
Medical Malpractice Claims............................... 271
Sec. 729--Chaperones for Certain Sensitive Examinations at
Military Medical Treatment Facilities.................... 271
Sec. 730--Requirement to Offer Medical Chaperones During
Sensitive Medical Examinations........................... 271
Sec. 731--Uniform Protocols on Screening for Unwanted
Sexual Behavior.......................................... 271
Sec. 732--Requirement to Notify Committees on Armed
Services of Hospitalization of Combat Wounded Members of
the Armed Forces......................................... 271
Sec. 733--Authority to Provide Residencies, Internships,
and Similar Postgraduate Programs for Civilian Health
Care Professionals of the Department of Defense.......... 271
Sec. 734--Notification to TRICARE Beneficiaries of Coverage
Transition Requirements.................................. 271
Sec. 735--Waiver of Referral Requirement Under TRICARE
Prime for Certain Physical Therapy....................... 272
Sec. 736--Rates of Pay for a Provider of Care or Services
Furnished Under TRICARE Program.......................... 272
Sec. 737--Plans on Military Health System.................. 272
Sec. 738--Modification to Qualification Waiver Authority
for Applicants for Nursing or Practical Nurse Positions
in the Department of Defense............................. 272
Sec. 739--Aerial Transport and Department-Wide Capability
for High Consequence Infectious Diseases................. 272
Sec. 740--Availability of Obstetrician-Gynecologists and
Certified Nurse-Midwifes at Military Medical Treatment
Facilities............................................... 272
Sec. 741--Availability of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner
Services at Military Treatment Facilities................ 272
Sec. 742--Improvement of Process for Filing of Complaints
and Reporting of Issues Under TRICARE Program............ 272
Sec. 743--Pilot Program on Filling Primary Care Management
Positions at Remote Military Medical Treatment Facilities 272
Sec. 744--Establishment of Pilot Program on Use of Health
Care Assessments Other Than Periodic Health Assessments.. 273
Subtitle C--Studies, Reports, and Other Matters.............. 273
Sec. 751--Quarterly Briefing on Military Treatment
Facilities............................................... 273
Sec. 752--Enhanced Medical Coverage for Civilian Employees
of the Department of Defense and Dependents in Certain
Locations................................................ 273
Sec. 753--Modifications to Pilot Program to Assist Certain
Members of the Armed Forces and Dependents with
Additional Supplemental Coverage Relating to Cancer...... 273
Sec. 754--Modifications to Evaluation and Report on TRICARE
Program Effectiveness.................................... 273
Sec. 755--Extension of Extramedical Maternal Health
Providers Demonstration Project.......................... 273
Sec. 756--Modification of Traumatic Brain Injury Oversight
Strategy and Action Plan of the Department of Defense.... 273
Sec. 757--Expansion of Prohibition on Painful Research on
Certain Animals.......................................... 273
Sec. 758--Pilot Program to Treat Pregnancy as a Qualifying
Event for Enrollment in Tricare Select................... 274
Sec. 759--Access to Automated External Defibrillators
During Military Physical Training........................ 274
Sec. 760--Pilot Program on Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring
for Certain Pregnant and Postpartum TRICARE Beneficiaries 274
Sec. 761--Pilot Program on Secure, Mobile Personal Health
Record for Members of the Armed Forces................... 274
Sec. 762--Pilot Program to Provide for the Use of Blue-
Light Dissipating Displays to Certain Individuals........ 274
Sec. 763--Extension and Improvement of Pilot Program of the
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences on
Pharmaceutical Supply Chain.............................. 274
Sec. 764--Working Group on Digital Strategy for Traumatic
Brain Injuries........................................... 274
Sec. 765--Study on Long-Term Effects of Military Flight
Operations on Brain Health and Mental Health............. 274
Sec. 766--Study on Feasibility of Establishing Military
Treatment Facility at Homestead Air Reserve Base......... 275
Sec. 767--Study on Feasibility of Establishing Digital
System Relating to Access to Care at Military Medical
Treatment Facilities..................................... 275
Sec. 768--Review by Inspector General of the Department of
Defense on Efforts to Prevent Suicide.................... 275
Sec. 769--Requirements Relating to Wellness Checks for
Health and Welfare of Certain Members of the Armed Forces 275
Sec. 770--Reports on Department of Defense Comprehensive
Autism Care Demonstration Program........................ 275
Sec. 771--Transition of Medics to Civilian Workforce....... 275
Sec. 772--Strategic Plan to Address Mental Health of
Certain Members of the Armed Forces...................... 275
Sec. 773--Briefing on Prostate Cancer Incidence and
Emerging Diagnostic Technologies......................... 275
Sec. 774--Assessment of Access, Fairness, and Transparency
Under TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program.................. 276
Sec. 775--Report on Feasibility of Pilot Program on
Behavioral Neurology Fellowships......................... 276
Sec. 776--Government Accountability Office Study on Reserve
Component Dental Readiness and Benefit Sufficiency....... 276
Sec. 777--Review of the Occupational Health and Safety
Conditions of Operational Facilities Associated with the
LGM-30G Minuteman III Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
System................................................... 276
Sec. 778--Continued Evaluation of the TRICARE Program
through Beneficiary Experience Surveys................... 276
Sec. 779--Removal of Peptides from Prohibited Performance
Enhancing Substances List................................ 276
Sec. 780--Study on Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Toxic
Substances on Reproductive Health and Fertility.......... 276
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 276
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 276
Acquisition Transformation and Innovation Implementation
Report................................................... 276
Acquisition Workflow Modernization......................... 277
Acquisition Workforce Data and Analytics................... 278
AI-Enabled Commercial Lifecycle Management Platforms for
Acquisition and Sustainment Execution.................... 278
Compliance with Commercial Preference Requirements in the
Acquisition of Simulation Capabilities................... 279
Defense Civilian Training Corps Integration into
Acquisition Workforce Planning........................... 280
Demonstrated Proficiency for Critical Acquisition Positions 280
Department of Defense Contractors' Research and Development
Expensing................................................ 281
Enhancing Decision Efficacy Through Scenario-Based
Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Capabilities............. 281
Implementation of the Chief Acquisition Talent Officer..... 282
Importance of Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring Contractor
Business Systems......................................... 283
Leveraging Subscription-Based Procurement Models........... 283
Modernizing Acquisition Processes Through Model-Based
Systems Engineering...................................... 284
Modernizing the Acquisition Education and Training
Ecosystem................................................ 285
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 286
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 286
Sec. 801--Responsibilities and Authorities of Portfolio
Acquisition Executives with Respect to Contractors....... 286
Sec. 802--Ensuring Best Value in Procurement............... 286
Sec. 803--Limitation on Certain Contract Clauses for
Commercial Products or Commercial Services............... 286
Sec. 804--Elimination of Late Cost and Pricing Data
Submission Defense....................................... 286
Sec. 805--Reporting of Price Increases..................... 287
Sec. 806--Limitation on Suspension of Progress Payments.... 287
Sec. 807--Uniform Requirements for Electronic Contract
Writing Systems and Acquisition Management Systems....... 287
Sec. 808--Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring Contractor
Business Systems......................................... 287
Sec. 809--Procurement of Initial Spares.................... 288
Sec. 810--Procurement of Local Produce, Seafood, and Meat
in the Area of Responsibility of the United States Indo-
Pacific Command.......................................... 288
Sec. 811--Review of Defense Audit Agencies................. 288
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations.............................. 288
Sec. 821--Modification to Certain Acquisition Thresholds... 288
Sec. 822--Use of Accrued Interest by Certain Consortium
Managers................................................. 288
Sec. 823--Amendment to Other Transaction Authority......... 288
Sec. 824--Requirement for Modular Open System Approach and
Modifications to Rights in Technical Data................ 289
Sec. 825--Modification to Requirements Relating to Long-
Term Concessions Agreements with Certain Retailers....... 289
Sec. 826--Prohibition on Contracting with Employers of
Convicted Traffickers.................................... 289
Sec. 827--Acquisition Thresholds for Certain Materials..... 289
Sec. 828--Clarification of Certain Elements of Department
of Defense Mentor-Protege Program........................ 289
Sec. 829--Codification of Program for Negotiation of
Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plans........ 289
Sec. 830--Consumption-Based Procurements and Associated
Payments................................................. 290
Sec. 831--Extension of Briefing and Certification
Requirement.............................................. 290
Sec. 832--Preference for Recycled Strategic and Critical
Materials................................................ 290
Sec. 833--Transfer Authority for Rapid Transition of Other
Transaction Authority Prototypes......................... 290
Sec. 834--Portfolio-Based Acquisition of Autonomous
Capabilities............................................. 290
Sec. 835--Establishment of Pathfinder Programs to Inform
Requirements Reform...................................... 290
Sec. 836--Requirements for Certain Unmanned Surface Vessels
to be Manufactured in the United States.................. 291
Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce
Development.............................................. 291
Sec. 851--Acquisition Workforce Data Analytics Capability.. 291
Sec. 852--Chief Acquisition Talent Officer................. 291
Sec. 853--Codification of Acquisition Workforce Key
Performance Objectives................................... 291
Sec. 854--Demonstrated Proficiency Requirements for
Critical Acquisition Positions........................... 291
Sec. 855--Extension and Modification of Acquisition
Workforce Demonstration Project.......................... 292
Subtitle D--Intellectual Property Matters.................... 292
Sec. 861--Reform of Technical Data and Software Rights to
Support Competition, Sustainment, and Readiness.......... 292
Sec. 862--Intellectual Property Ombudsman; Voluntary Expert
Mediation for Certain Intellectual Property Matters...... 292
Sec. 863--Expansion of Reverse Engineering Authority for
Prototype Projects....................................... 293
Sec. 864--Clarifications to Sustainment Planning
Requirements for Covered Systems......................... 293
Sec. 865--Software Accountability Improvements Over
Lifecycles............................................... 293
Sec. 866--Assessment of a Pay-to-Print Program............. 293
Sec. 867--Prioritizing Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul
for Readiness............................................ 293
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 293
Sec. 871--Enhancement to Defense Supply Chain Resilience
and Secondary Source Qualification....................... 293
Sec. 872--Tailored Acquisition Pathways for Non-Traditional
Intermediate-Range Fires Capabilities.................... 294
Sec. 873--Pilot Program for Domestic Antimony and Copper
Production for Defense Applications...................... 294
Sec. 874--Addressing the Backlog of Open Cases Related to
the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement.... 294
Sec. 875--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Purchase
of Photovoltaic Cells, Modules, or Inverters from Foreign
Entities of Concern...................................... 294
Sec. 876--Ensuring Department of Defense Contractor
Compliance with Disability Hiring Goals.................. 294
Sec. 877--Expedited Implementation of Commercial
Acquisition Reforms...................................... 294
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 295
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 295
Army Continuous Transformation Initiative.................. 295
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 295
Sec. 901--Transfer of Responsibility to Supervise
Activities of Department of Defense Relating to Export
Controls................................................. 295
Sec. 902--Membership of Commandant of the Coast Guard on
the Joint Chiefs of Staff................................ 295
Sec. 903--Oversight of Geographic Combatant Commands....... 296
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 296
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 296
Advanced Performance Apparel for Special Operations Forces. 296
Amphibious Seaplane Capability For Special Operations
Forces................................................... 296
Assessment of rotational combat training center
opportunities in Puerto Rico............................. 297
At-Sea Vertical Launch System Rearming..................... 298
Briefing on Naval Architecture Workforce Requirements...... 298
Business Intelligence...................................... 299
Civilian Protection Center of Excellence Implementation.... 299
Combatant Commanders' Civilian Harm Mitigation Response
Responsibilities......................................... 300
Cost Saving Measures for Security Clearance Wait Times for
Small Defense Contractors................................ 300
Counter Small Uncrewed Aerial Systems at the Southern
Border................................................... 301
Countering Adversarial Gray Zone Campaigns................. 301
Countering Cartel Hydrocarbon Smuggling.................... 302
Department of Defense Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Coordination............................................. 303
Department of Defense Support for Recovery of United States
Nationals Abroad......................................... 303
Department of Homeland Security Reimbursement to the
Department of Defense for Border Security Operations..... 304
Development of the Golden Fleet............................ 305
Dismantlement and Disposal of Nuclear-Powered Submarines... 305
Distributed Shipbuilding................................... 306
Electric And Hybrid-Electric Powertrain Options for Special
Operations Light Tactical Vehicles....................... 307
Enhancing American Commercial Remote Sensing Support to
U.S. Border Operations................................... 307
Fiber Optic-Guided and First Person Video Unmanned Aerial
System Threats........................................... 308
GAO Study on Barriers for Industry Entry-Level Workers
Requiring Security Clearances............................ 309
Human Domain Awareness for Civil Affairs, Psychological
Operations, and Special Operations Forces................ 309
Improving Military Working Dog Wellness.................... 310
Information Environment Training and Simulation............ 310
Irregular Warfare Center Activities and Resource Execution. 311
Maritime Action Plan Workforce Development in Guam......... 312
National Background Investigation Services................. 312
National Defense Area Boundary Data........................ 312
Navy Resource Management and Decision-Support Modernization 313
Oversight of Military Working Dogs......................... 313
Pass-Through Budget Transparency........................... 314
Recapitalization of the Oceanographic Research Fleet....... 314
Report on Medals and Commendations for Military Working
Dogs and Handlers........................................ 315
Report on the Department of Defense's Coordination Process
with DHS and the FAA in Relation to the February 2026
Friendly Fire Incident on a U.S. Government Unmanned
Aircraft................................................. 315
Resourcing Requirements to Sustain Special Operations
Forces Tactical Geospatial Intelligence Access........... 316
Security Clearance Reciprocity Implementation.............. 317
Security Cooperation and Partnerships in the Western
Hemisphere............................................... 318
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems for Base Security and
Maintenance.............................................. 318
Special Operations Command Comprehensive Brain Health and
Trauma Program........................................... 318
Support for the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympic Games...... 319
Sustaining Operational Lethality Through Strategic
Stockpiling of One-Way Attack Unmanned Aerial Systems for
Special Operations Forces................................ 319
Technological Capabilities to Improve Financial Management
and Auditability......................................... 319
Technological Innovation in Shipyards...................... 320
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Force Posture Plan............... 321
Unmanned Aircraft Systems for Military Medical Support..... 321
Will to Fight.............................................. 322
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 323
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 323
Sec. 1001--General Transfer Authority...................... 323
Sec. 1002--Annual Report on Unfunded Priorities of Defense
POW/MIA Accounting Agency................................ 323
Sec. 1003--Equivalency Standards for Financial Management
Positions................................................ 323
Sec. 1004--Compliance with Payment Integrity Information
Act Requirements and Strengthening Improper Payments
Detection................................................ 323
Sec. 1005--Authority to Establish Joint Task Force Audit... 324
Sec. 1006--Budget Transparency for Army Multi-Domain Task
Force and Marine Littoral Regiment....................... 324
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 324
Sec. 1011--Modification of Authority to Purchase Used
Vessels with National Defense Sealift Fund............... 324
Sec. 1012--Requirement For Procurement of Components for
Naval Vessels from Manufacturers in National Technology
and Industrial Base...................................... 324
Sec. 1013--Settlement of Admiralty Claims Against the
United States............................................ 324
Sec. 1014--Amphibious Fleet Force Structure................ 324
Sec. 1015--Armament of Naval Auxiliary Vessels............. 325
Sec. 1016--Additional Measures for Navy Strategy for
Investment in and Support for the Maritime Industrial
Base..................................................... 325
Sec. 1017 Inclusion of Navy Surface Combat Ship Maintenance
as a Separate Line Item in Operation and Maintenance
Budget................................................... 325
Sec. 1018--Contracting Reform for Surface Ship Maintenance,
Repair, and Overhaul..................................... 325
Sec. 1019--Realignment of Contract Management for Polar
Security Cutter Program.................................. 325
Sec. 1020--Domestic Sourcing of Bulk Fuel to Support Tanker
Security Program......................................... 325
Sec. 1021--Requirements Relating to Unmanned Surface
Vessels.................................................. 326
Sec. 1022--Enhancement of Navy Submarine Rescue
Capabilities............................................. 326
Sec. 1023--Navy-Coast Guard Maritime Workforce and Capacity
Coordination Plan........................................ 326
Sec. 1024--Pilot Program on Use of Additive and Advanced
Manufacturing to Support Naval Shipbuilding.............. 326
Sec. 1025--Limitation on Use of Funds for Procurement of a
Battle Force Ship........................................ 326
Sec. 1026--Strategy for Distributed Shipbuilding........... 326
Sec. 1027--Strategy of Department of Defense Relating to
Small Uncrewed Surface Vessels........................... 326
Sec. 1028--Arctic-Focused Forecasting, Ice Modeling, and
Naval Readiness Assessment............................... 327
Sec. 1029--Renaming of USNS Cesar Chavez................... 327
Sec. 1030--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of Vessel for
Battle of Dai Do......................................... 327
Sec. 1031--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Vessel
`USS Guadalcanal'........................................ 327
Sec. 1032--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Naval
Vessel for Battle of Midway.............................. 327
Sec. 1033--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Naval
Vessel in Honor of Casimir Pulaski....................... 327
Sec. 1034--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of Vessel for
Rear Admiral Alene Duerk................................. 327
Subtitle C--Counterterrorism................................. 327
Sec. 1041--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................................................... 327
Sec. 1042--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............................ 328
Sec. 1043--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................................................ 328
Sec. 1044--Extension of Prohibition on Use of Funds to
Close or Relinquish Control of United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba............................ 328
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 328
Sec. 1051--Establishment of the Secretaries of Defense
Historical Series and Priority Declassification Authority 328
Sec. 1052--Inclusion of National Guard Relief Foundation as
a Military Welfare Society for Certain Purposes.......... 329
Sec. 1053--Joint Experimentation and Training Range
Innovation Office........................................ 329
Sec. 1054--Establishment of Army Information Operations
Center of Excellence..................................... 329
Sec. 1055--Extension of Limitation on Retirement or
Divestment of EA-1 8G Aircraft........................... 329
Sec. 1056--Authority for Secretary of Defense Waiver
Relating to Certain Training............................. 329
Sec. 1057--Expansion of Prohibition on Destruction or
Scrapping of World War II-Era Aircraft................... 329
Sec. 1058--Prohibition on Department of Defense Contracts
with Certain Foreign-Owned Online Tutoring Services...... 329
Sec. 1059--Prohibition on Display of Unapproved Flags...... 329
Sec. 1060--Prohibition on Lobbying Activities with Respect
to the Department of Defense by Certain Officers of the
Armed Forces and Civilian Employees of the Department
Following Separation from Military Service or Employment
with the Department...................................... 330
Sec. 1061--Integration of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems
and Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training into
Initial, Officer, and Joint Collective Training.......... 330
Sec. 1062--Eastern Regional Range Complex Demonstration
Project.................................................. 330
Sec. 1063--Pilot Program on Total Replacement Value for Air
Force Test Center Ground Test Infrastructure............. 330
Sec. 1064--Pilot Program for Blockchain-Enabled Inventory
Management............................................... 330
Sec. 1065--Extended Deadline to Reassess Necessity of Use
of Immediate Response Authority of Department of Defense. 330
Sec. 1066--Reconstitution of A-10 Demonstration Team....... 330
Sec. 1067--Implementation of Cognitive Performance
Enhancement Program for Special Operations Forces........ 330
Sec. 1068--Senator Robert J. Dole Greatest Generation
Education Program........................................ 331
Sec. 1069--Recognition Program for Working Dogs............ 331
Sec. 1070--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Closure
of Rock Island Arsenal Museum............................ 331
Sec. 1071--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
Deactivation of Expeditionary Combat Aviation Brigades... 331
Sec. 1072--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Travel
Expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense....... 331
Sec. 1073--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Travel
Expenses of Office of the Secretary of Defense Until
Submission Certain Assessment............................ 331
Subtitle E--Studies and Reports.............................. 332
Sec. 1081--Repeal of Obsolete Reporting Requirements....... 332
Sec. 1082--Extension of Briefing Requirement Regarding
Civil Authorities at the Southwest Border................ 332
Sec. 1083--Extension of Requirement for Annual Briefings on
National Biodefense Strategy............................. 332
Sec. 1084--Annual Report and Briefing on Implementation of
Army Transformation Initiative........................... 332
Sec. 1085--Quarterly Reports on Effects of Unplanned Global
Taskings on Operations, Deterrence, and Readiness in the
Area of Operations of United States Indo-Pacific Command. 332
Sec. 1086--Biannual Reports on Operational Adaptation and
Fielding of Defense Autonomous Warfare Group............. 332
Sec. 1087--Service-Wide Enterprise Strategies for Human
Performance.............................................. 332
Sec. 1088--Mobility Capabilities Strategic Plan............ 333
Sec. 1089--Required Doctrine on Use of Unmanned Autonomous
Systems and Autonomous Formations........................ 333
Sec. 1089A--Strategy for Sustainment of Certain Unmanned
Aircraft Systems......................................... 333
Sec. 1089B--Strategy for Use of Low-cost and Attritable
Group 4 and 5 Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Contested
Logistics Operations..................................... 333
Sec. 1089C--Feasibility Study on Tactical Information
Operations Command Authority............................. 333
Sec. 1089D--Public Availability of Findings of Inspector
General Investigation of Certain Targeting Operations.... 333
Sec. 1089E--Report on Cost of United States Military
Operations in Iran....................................... 333
Sec. 1089F--Report on Operation Southern Spear............. 333
Sec. 1089G--Report on Civilian Harm Investigation Relating
to Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School................... 334
Sec. 1089H--Report on Port Shuaiba Investigation........... 334
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 334
Sec. 1091--Deeming References to the Department of Defense
and Secretary of Defense as References to the Department
of War and Secretary of War.............................. 334
Sec. 1092--Definition of Special Operations Activities..... 334
Sec. 1093--Definition of Counter-sUAS System for Purposes
of Joint Interagency Task Force 401...................... 334
Sec. 1094--Increase in Cap for Support of Small Scale
Construction Projects of Foreign Partners in Support of
Counterdrug Activities and Activities to Counter
Transnational Organized Crime............................ 334
Sec. 1095--Modification to Funding Limitation for
Procurement of Equipment for Certain Drug Interdiction
and Counter-Drug Activities.............................. 334
Sec. 1096--National Guard Attorney License Portability..... 334
Sec. 1097--Oversight and Direction of Irregular Warfare
Exercise Laboratory...................................... 335
Sec. 1098--Ubiquitous Technical Surveillance and Digital
Force Protection......................................... 335
Sec. 1099--Potential Designation of Information as a Domain
of Warfare............................................... 335
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 335
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 335
Acknowledgment of the United States Naval Sea Cadets as a
Youth and Charitable Organization........................ 335
Civilian Workforce Recruitment and Retention Challenges at
Remote and Isolated Defense Installations in the Western
United States............................................ 336
Department of Defense Cyber Workforce Framework............ 336
Minimum Firefighter Manning Requirements on Army
Installations............................................ 337
Report on Civilian Test Pilot Support to Military Test
Activities............................................... 337
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 338
Sec. 1101--Limitation on Outside Income for Individuals in
Office of the Secretary of Defense....................... 338
Sec. 1102--Skills-Based Hiring for Department of Defense
Civilian Positions....................................... 338
Sec. 1103--Establishment of a Student Internship Program
for Military Child and Youth Programs.................... 338
Sec. 1104--Expansion of Eligible Educational Programs Under
the Smart Defense Education Program...................... 338
Sec. 1105--Military Technician (Dual Status): Elimination
of Title 32 Authority; Conversions of Existing Positions. 338
Sec. 1106--One-Year Extension of Authority to Waive Annual
Limitation on Premium Pay and Aggregate Limitation on Pay
for Federal Civilian Employees Working Overseas.......... 338
Sec. 1107--One-Year Extension of Temporary Authority to
Grant Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to Civilian
Personnel on Official Duty in a Combat Zone.............. 339
Sec. 1108--Living Quarter Allowance for Department of
Defense Civilian Employees with Permanent Duty Station in
Guam..................................................... 339
Sec. 1109--Pilot Program on Integration of United States
Tech Force with Skills-Based Hiring Authorities.......... 339
Sec. 1110--Enhanced Hiring Authority for Instructor Pilots
and Civilian Simulator Instructors....................... 339
Sec. 1111--Pilot Program on Tech Talent Competitiveness.... 339
Sec. 1112--Civilian Employee and Contractor Financial
Management Workforce Within the Department of Defense.... 339
Sec. 1113--Department of Defense Best Practices Guide for
Family Child Care Homes.................................. 339
Sec. 1114--Delegation of Authority for Corrective Action
for Non-appropriated Fund Employees in Cases of Complaint
of Reprisal.............................................. 339
Sec. 1115--Limitation on Use of Funds to Limit Collective
Bargaining............................................... 339
Sec. 1116--Hiring Freeze Exceptions........................ 340
Sec. 1117--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for
Termination of DODEA, Childcare, and Healthcare Workers.. 340
Sec. 1118--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and
Personnel Policies for Employees at Ground-Based
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Development and
Maintenance Facilities................................... 340
Sec. 1119--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and
Personnel Policies for Employees at Naval Shipyards, Navy
Regional Maintenance Centers, and Navy Trident Refit
Facilities............................................... 340
Sec. 1120--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and
Personnel Policies for Prevailing Rate Employees at
Covered Depots........................................... 340
Sec. 1121--Prohibition on Carrying out Hiring Freeze,
Reduction in Force, or Hiring Delay Without Cause at
Public Shipyards of the Department of Defense............ 340
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 340
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 340
Additional Support for NATO Air Defense Against Unmanned
Aircraft Systems......................................... 340
Assessment of Chinese Communist Party Malign Influence
within the Republic of Korea............................. 341
Australia-United Kingdom-United States Academic
Partnerships............................................. 341
Baltic Integrated Air and Missile Defense.................. 342
Baltic Training Ranges.................................... 343
Briefing on Biosecurity Threats from Iran................. 343
Combating Chinese Communist Party Influence............... 344
Conducting Oversight of the Civil-Military Coordination
Center (CMCC)............................................ 344
Countering Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing.... 345
Countering Iranian Threat Networks in the Eastern
Mediterranean............................................ 346
Counterterrorism Posture and Requirements in West Africa... 346
Department of Defense Authorities Subject to Foreign
Assistance Review........................................ 347
Department of Defense Engagements with the Country of
Georgia.................................................. 347
Feasibility of Foreign Transfer, Security Cooperation, and
Contingency Basing Options for Surplus A-10 Aircraft..... 348
Feasibility of Permanent Basing an F-35 Squadron in Poland. 348
Global Fragility Act Implementation........................ 349
Mozambique Security Conditions............................ 349
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Acquisition Reform
Coordination............................................. 350
Participation of Ukrainian Students in United States
Service Academies........................................ 350
Permanent Stationing of United States Armored Brigade
Combat Teams in Poland................................... 351
Professionalization of Syrian Defense Forces............... 352
Reaffirming the Vital Importance of U.S. Basing in Gulf
States................................................... 352
Recent Force Posture Adjustments within the United States
European Command......................................... 353
Report on the Impact of United States Military Operations
on Iran's Nuclear and Missile Capabilities............... 353
Russian Bases in Syria..................................... 354
Security Cooperation, Counterterrorism, and Countering PRC
and Russian Influence in Africa.......................... 354
Security Partnership with the Kingdom of Jordan............ 355
Strategy for Establishing a Two-Way Transfer Mechanism for
United States-Ukraine Unmanned Aircraft Systems Expertise 356
Strategy to Address Violent Extremism in Nigeria........... 357
Strengthening American Defense Innovation and Commerciality 357
Strengthening United States-Ukrainian Drone Cooperation.... 358
Study on Force Protection Measures in U.S. Central Command. 358
Support for Therapeutic Nutrition and Humanitarian
Logistics................................................ 359
Training for Ukraine's Military and National Security
Forces................................................... 360
U.S. Contribution to the NATO-led Kosovo Force............ 360
United States Africa Command Unmanned Aerial Systems
Training and Development................................. 360
United States Army Force Posture in Europe................. 361
United States-Ukraine Drone Working Groups................. 362
United States-Ukraine Explosive Ordnance Disposal
Partnership.............................................. 363
United States-Ukraine Military Trauma Education, Training,
Research, and Medical Readiness Partnership.............. 363
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 364
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 364
Sec. 1201--Modification of Authority for Support of Special
Operations for Irregular Warfare......................... 364
Sec. 1202--Authority to Build Capacity for Space Domain
Awareness................................................ 365
Sec. 1203--Establishment of Inter-Pacific Air Forces
Academy.................................................. 365
Sec. 1204--Review of Execution of Programs to Build Partner
Capacity................................................. 365
Sec. 1205--Establishment of Partnership Programs on
Military Trauma Care and Research Between the United
States and Foreign Countries............................. 365
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to the Near and Middle East..... 365
Sec. 1211--Extension of Counter-Terrorism Support Authority 365
Sec. 1212--Extension of Authority for Reimbursement of
Certain Coalition Nations for Support Provided to United
States Military Operations............................... 365
Sec. 1213--Deadline for Afghanistan War Commission Final
Report................................................... 365
Sec. 1214--Prohibition on Use of Funds to Support the
Taliban.................................................. 365
Sec. 1215--Extension of Authority to Provide Assistance to
Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.............. 365
Sec. 1216--Extension of Limitation on Availability of Funds
for the Iraqi Security Forces............................ 366
Sec. 1217--Prohibition on Transfers to the Badr
Organization............................................. 366
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Israel....................... 366
Sec. 1221--Extension of War Reserve Stockpile Authority for
Israel................................................... 366
Sec. 1222--United States-Israel Subterranean Cooperation... 366
Sec. 1223--United States-Israel Cooperation to Counter
Unmanned Systems in All Warfighting Domains.............. 366
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe....................... 366
Sec. 1231--Arms Sales and Weapons System Transfers to NATO
Countries................................................ 366
Sec. 1232--Extension and Modification of Oversight of
United States Military Posture in Europe................. 367
Sec. 1233--Modification of Certification with Respect to
Oversight of United States Military Posture in Europe.... 367
Sec. 1234--Poland Defense Industrial Cooperation Program... 367
Sec. 1235--Policy on NATO Standardization and Allied
Production for Next-Generation Small Arms Ammunition..... 367
Sec. 1236--Review of the Analytical Basis for United States
Force Posture Adjustments in Europe...................... 367
Sec. 1237--NATO Defense Planning and Burden Sharing
Activities............................................... 367
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific............. 368
Sec. 1241--Sense of Congress on Defense Alliances and
Partnerships in the Indo-Pacific Region.................. 368
Sec. 1242--Extension of Pacific Deterrence Initiative...... 368
Sec. 1243--Extension of Requirement for Public Reporting of
Chinese Military Companies Operating in the United States 368
Sec. 1244--Modifications to Public Reporting of Chinese
Military Companies in the United States.................. 368
Sec. 1245--Extension and Modification of Annual Report on
Military and Security Developments Involving the People's
Republic of China........................................ 368
Sec. 1246--Modification of Taiwan Security Cooperation
Initiative............................................... 368
Sec. 1247--Oversight of United States Military Posture on
the Korean Peninsula..................................... 368
Subtitle F--Reports.......................................... 369
Sec. 1251--Oversight of Military-to-Military Exchanges and
Contacts Between the United States and the Russian
Federation............................................... 369
Sec. 1252--Report on Russia's Targeting of Religious
Infrastructure in Ukraine................................ 369
Sec. 1253--Study on Effectiveness of United States-Somalia
Policy................................................... 369
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 369
Sec. 1261--Repeal of Temporary Authority to Provide
Training to Military Forces or National Security Forces
of Costa Rica and Panama................................. 369
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 369
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 369
Subtitle A--Military Programs................................ 369
Sec. 1401--Working Capital Funds........................... 369
Sec. 1402--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction,
Defense.................................................. 369
Sec. 1403--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,
Defense-Wide............................................. 369
Sec. 1404--Defense Inspector General....................... 370
Sec. 1405--Defense Health Program.......................... 370
Sec. 1406--Cable Security Fleet Expansion.................. 370
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 370
Sec. 1411--Extension of Authorities for Funding and
Management of Joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund for
Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois..... 370
Sec. 1412--Authorization of Appropriations for Armed Forces
Retirement Home.......................................... 370
Sec. 1413--Critical Minerals Traceability Pilot Program.... 370
TITLE XV--CYBERSPACE-RELATED MATTERS............................. 370
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 370
Accelerating Agentic Artificial Intelligence for Joint
Planning and Decision Advantage.......................... 370
Acceleration and Modernization of Cryptographic
Certification Process.................................... 371
AI Code Assurance and Legacy Software Refactoring.......... 371
AI-Enabled Assistive Technology for Air Crews.............. 372
AI-Enabled Defense Cyber Operations........................ 373
Air Force Infrastructure Cyber Defense Pilot Program....... 373
Artificial Intelligence and Enterprise Data Utilization.... 374
Artificial Intelligence Enabled Efficiency Tools........... 374
Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Advanced Manufacturing for
Missile and Munitions Production......................... 374
Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Systems for Software-
Defined Hardware......................................... 375
Asset Visibility and Discovery in the United States Indo-
Pacific Command Area of Responsibility................... 375
Combatant Command Digital Persona Protection Program....... 376
Commercial Cross Domain Solutions Technology............... 376
Communications Systems Electronic Warfare Resiliency
Standards................................................ 376
Competition of Autonomous Software Capabilities for Weapon
Systems.................................................. 377
Continuity of Commercial Support to Cyber Operations....... 377
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Program Reform.. 378
Cybersecurity Protections in Telecommunications Systems.... 378
Data Strategy to Accelerate Artificial Intelligence and
Analytics Across the Department of Defense............... 379
Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity...................... 380
Defense Travel System Modernization........................ 380
Department of Defense Attack Surface Visibility............ 381
Department of Defense Zero Trust Implementation............ 381
Deployment and Scaling of Quantum Network Infrastructure... 382
Digital Hygiene Training and Cybersecurity Posture of
National Guard and Reserve Personnel..................... 382
Edge-Based Artificial Intelligence and Supporting
Infrastructure in Denied Environments.................... 383
Efforts to Counter Transnational Cyber Fraud............... 383
Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations Review................. 384
Enterprise and Operational Integration of Agentic
Artificial Intelligence.................................. 385
Integrated Operational Planning and Wargaming.............. 385
Internet Operations Management............................. 386
Internet Operations Management Security Automation......... 386
Interoperable Multi-Cloud Solutions Across the Defense
Enterprise............................................... 386
Maven Smart System Update.................................. 387
Memory Safe Programming Languages and Software Security
Roadmap.................................................. 388
Mission Partner Identity Verification...................... 388
Modernization of Commercial Solutions for Classified
Program.................................................. 389
Modernizing Identity, Credential, and Access Management
Activities............................................... 389
Open-Source Software Supply Chain Security................. 389
Open-Weight Artificial Intelligence Models for Military
Applications............................................. 390
Partner Security Forces Operating High-Risk
Telecommunications Equipment............................. 390
Phased Implementation of Operational Technology
Cybersecurity............................................ 391
Post-Quantum Cryptography Transition Readiness Assessment.. 392
Procurement of Enterprise Collaboration and Communication
Systems.................................................. 392
Rapid Classified Software Development Capabilities........ 393
Real-time Audit Capabilities Using Software and Artificial
Intelligence............................................. 393
Resilient and Hardened Telecommunications Networks for
National Defense......................................... 394
Resilient Command, Control, and Communications for Taiwan.. 394
Secure Bring-Your-Own-Device Access for the National Guard
Bureau................................................... 395
Secure Document Generation for the Department of the Air
Force.................................................... 396
Shipboard Cyber-Physical Survivability and Artificial
Intelligence-Enabled Anomaly Detection................... 396
Software-Enabled Sustainment............................... 396
Spectrum Sharing with Adaptive and Reconfigurable
Technology............................................... 397
Weather and Environmental Data Acquisition Improvements.... 398
Worker Feedback in Development of Department of Defense
Artificial Intelligence Systems.......................... 398
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 399
Subtitle A--Cybersecurity.................................... 399
Sec. 1501--Data Recovery Requirements and Strategy......... 399
Sec. 1502--Department of Defense AI Incident and
Vulnerability Reporting Program.......................... 399
Sec. 1503--Review and Realignment of Department of Defense
Cybersecurity Responsibilities........................... 399
Sec. 1504--Inclusion of Critical Infrastructure and
Operational Technology Security in Combatant Command
Planning and Readiness Exercises......................... 399
Sec. 1505--Pilot Program for Autonomous Mission Integration
of Unmanned Surface Vehicles............................. 400
Sec. 1506--Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve Corps Pilot
Program.................................................. 400
Sec. 1507--Federal Contractor Vulnerability Disclosure
Policy................................................... 400
Subtitle B--Information Technology and Artificial
Intelligence............................................. 400
Sec. 1521--Software Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
Execution Reform......................................... 400
Sec. 1522--Requirement for Guidance and Prohibition on Use
of Artificial Intelligence of Certain Artificial
Intelligence Companies................................... 400
Sec. 1523--Artificial Intelligence Model Rapid Deployment
Framework................................................ 401
Sec. 1524--Update of Policy on Autonomous and Artificial
Intelligence Enabled Systems............................. 401
Sec. 1525--Expansion of AI-Enabled Maintenance Intelligence
Platforms Across Air Education and Training Command...... 401
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................ 401
Sec. 1541--Roadmap for Modernization of Top Secret and
Special Access Program Network Architectures............. 401
Sec. 1542--Semiannual Reports on Cyber Operational
Readiness Assessment Program............................. 401
TITLE XVI--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS...................................................... 402
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 402
Intelligence Matters......................................... 402
Ability to Scale Innovations at Services Intelligence
Centers.................................................. 402
Commercial Foreign Identity Intelligence Infrastructure.... 402
Common Intelligence Feed................................... 403
Defense Strategy and Assessments for Biological Threats.... 403
Foreign Languages Program.................................. 404
Intelligence Support at the Tactical Edge.................. 404
Open-Source Intelligence Collector Skill Identifier........ 405
Principal Staff Assistant for Tradecraft................... 405
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Accreditation
Delays................................................... 405
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Pilot Program
Update................................................... 406
Space Activities............................................. 407
AI-Equipped Secure Satellite Communications for Missile
Defense.................................................. 407
Broad Area Search Requirements............................. 407
Cislunar Capabilities...................................... 408
Commercial Imagery Limits.................................. 408
Commercial Satellite Buses in Proliferated Space
Architectures............................................ 409
Commercial Space........................................... 409
Commercial Space-Based Environmental Monitoring............ 410
Continuity of Operations Capability for Space Force Ground
Infrastructure........................................... 411
Ensuring Hybrid Space Architectures Remain Open to Trusted
Allied Vendors........................................... 412
Evaluation of Advanced Non-Volatile Memory and In-Memory
Computing for Space Payloads............................. 412
High Cadence Launch........................................ 413
Hybrid Satellite Communications............................ 414
Improvements to the Firefly Algorithm...................... 415
In-Space Mobility Industrial Base and Supply Chain......... 415
Integrating Commercial Data into the Space Force High
Accuracy Catalog......................................... 416
Narrowband Ultra High Frequency Satellite Communications... 417
National Security Space Launch Lane One.................... 417
Nuclear Fission Power to Enable Dynamic Space Operations... 418
Nuclear Thermal Propulsion................................. 419
Operational Test and Training Infrastructure Use of
Commercial Space Capabilities............................ 419
Operational Transition of Space-Based Visual Intelligence
Capabilities............................................. 420
Proliferated Ground Architectures for Space................ 421
Protected Tactical SATCOM-Global (PTS-G)................... 421
Space Access, Mobility, and Logistics...................... 422
Space Data Network......................................... 422
Spaceport Congestion and Diversification for Small and
Medium Launch Vehicles................................... 423
U.S. Space Force Warfare Center............................ 424
Very Low Earth Orbit Resilience............................ 424
Nuclear Forces............................................... 425
Addressing Strategic System Subsystem and Component Test
Needs with Commercial Reentry Flight Tests............... 425
Department of Defense Efforts for Nuclear Risk Reduction
with China............................................... 426
Material Performance Requirements for Smart Thermal
Protection Systems....................................... 426
Review of Safety, Security, and Reliability of Nuclear
Weapons and Related Systems.............................. 427
Structural Health of Launch Facilities..................... 427
United States Nuclear Deterrence Strategy in Europe........ 428
Missile Defense Programs..................................... 428
Excess Radars for Homeland Defense......................... 428
Homeland Air and Missile Defense Security-By-Design........ 428
Large Tactical Power System (LTPS)......................... 429
Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor.................. 429
Missile Defense Agency Digital Modernization............... 430
Missile Defense Applications for Unmanned Sea-based
Platforms................................................ 430
Patriot Interceptor Procurement............................ 430
Resilient and Cost-Effective Integrated Air and Missile
Defense Architectures.................................... 431
TEAMS Next Transition...................................... 431
Other Matters................................................ 432
Acceleration of Commercial Hypersonic and Air-Launched
Target Capabilities...................................... 432
Biological Threat Detection Capabilities................... 432
Broad Spectrum Host-Directed Antiviral Research............ 433
Chemical Neurotoxic Threat Detection and Countermeasure
Development.............................................. 433
Detection of Chemical and Biological Threats in Operational
Environments............................................. 434
Enhancing Preparedness for Biological Threats to the
Warfighter............................................... 434
Fast Burst Reactor Testing Capacity........................ 435
Fusion for Naval Superiority............................... 435
Hypersonic Program Progression............................. 436
Independent Assessment of Bone Marrow Radiation Shielding
for Nuclear Survivability................................ 437
Proliferated Ground-Based Surveillance Radar............... 437
Solid Rocket Motor Second Source........................... 437
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 438
Subtitle A--Space Activities................................. 438
Sec. 1601--Reorganization of Acquisition Responsibilities
of the Space Force....................................... 438
Sec. 1602--Reorganization of Oversight of the Department of
Defense Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Enterprise... 438
Sec. 1603--Space Launch Support Services and Alternative
Launch Procurement Process............................... 439
Sec. 1604--Spaceport of the Future Initiative.............. 439
Sec. 1605--Procurement of Commercial Space-Based Data and
to Support Wildfire Resilience........................... 439
Sec. 1606--Continuation of Next-Generation Overhead
Persistent Infrared Polar Program of the Department of
the Air Force............................................ 439
Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related
Activities............................................... 439
Sec. 1611--Expenditure of Funds Across Fiscal Years for
Department of Defense Intelligence and
Counterintelligence Activities........................... 439
Sec. 1612--Permanent Authority for Military Intelligence
Collection and Analysis Partnerships..................... 440
Sec. 1613--Repeal of Certain Reporting and Briefing
Requirements............................................. 440
Sec. 1614--Modification of Authority of Army
Counterintelligence Agents to Execute Warrants and Make
Arrests.................................................. 440
Sec. 1615--Periodic Strategy and Assessment of
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
Capabilities to Meet Intelligence Collection Priorities.. 440
Sec. 1616--Integration of Open-Source Intelligence Training
and Tradecraft into All-Source Intelligence Analysis
Curricula................................................ 440
Sec. 1617--Object-Based Generative Artificial Intelligence
for Open-Source Intelligence............................. 440
Sec. 1618--Report on Protection from Disclosure of Members
of the Armed Forces Under Cover.......................... 441
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces................................... 441
Sec. 1631--Matters Relating to Intercontinental Ballistic
Missiles................................................. 441
Sec. 1632--Designation of Air Force Global Strike Command
as National Center for Conventional-Nuclear Integration.. 441
Sec. 1633--Quadrennial Report on the Plan for the Nuclear
Weapons Stockpile, Nuclear Weapons Complex, Nuclear
Weapons Delivery Systems, and Nuclear Weapons Command and
Control System........................................... 441
Sec. 1634--Prohibition on Reduction of Intercontinental
Ballistic Missiles of the United States.................. 441
Sec. 1635--Limitation on Reallocation of Funds for Ronald
Reagan Space and Missile Test Range and United States
Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll............................ 441
Sec. 1636--Feasibility Assessment for Potential Designation
of Joint Global Strike Operations Center as Global
Operations Center-Alternate.............................. 442
Sec. 1637--Space Launch Complex 46......................... 442
Sec. 1638--Modification of Report Requirement for Certain
Decisions Relating to Nuclear Weapons Employment Strategy
of the United States..................................... 442
Sec. 1639--Independent Assessment of Bone Marrow Radiation
Shielding for Nuclear Survivability...................... 442
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs......................... 442
Sec. 1651--Prohibition of Unauthorized Use of Name or Seal
of the Missile Defense Agency............................ 442
Sec. 1652--Removal of Duplicative Missile Defense Agency
Testing Requirement...................................... 442
Sec. 1653--Updated Middle East Integrated Air and Missile
Defense Strategy......................................... 442
Sec. 1654--Next-Generation Integrated Air and Missile
Defense System Munitions Strategy........................ 443
Sec. 1655--Space-Based Interceptors........................ 443
Sec. 1656--Low-Cost Exo-Atmospheric Interceptor Development 443
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 443
Sec. 1661--Briefings and Reports on Cross-Functional Team
for Anomalous Health Incidents........................... 443
Sec. 1662--Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds.............. 443
Sec. 1663--Solid Rocket Motor Industrial Base.............. 443
TITLE XVII--OTHER DEFENSE MATTERS................................ 444
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 444
Comptroller General Review of the Stars and Stripes Media
Organization............................................. 444
Military Pilot Shortage and Aviation Pipeline Development.. 445
Tobacco Products Sold on Military Installations............ 446
Veteran-Led Participation in POW/MIA Recovery Missions..... 446
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 447
Subtitle A--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 447
Sec. 1701--Availability of Funds for Department of Defense
State Partnership Program................................ 447
Sec. 1702--Inclusion of Members of Special Operations
Forces in Preseparation Counseling....................... 447
Sec. 1703--Copyright to a Literary Work Produced by a
Civilian Faculty Member of a Space Force Professional
Military Education Program in the Course of Employment:
Free Use by the Federal Government....................... 447
Sec. 1704--Inapplicability of Defense Base Act to Guam..... 447
Sec. 1705--Extension of Admission for Certain Nonimmigrant
H-2B Workers............................................. 447
Sec. 1706--Reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Act of 2015 447
Sec. 1707--United States-Abraham Accords Defense
Cooperation Initiative................................... 448
Sec. 1708--Establishment of the Atomic Civilians
Commemorative Service Medal.............................. 448
Sec. 1709--Establishment of the Blast Overpressure Task
Force of the Department of Veterans Affairs.............. 448
Sec. 1710--Authorization of Transfer of Certain Land Near
Dayton National Cemetery to Department of Veterans
Affairs.................................................. 448
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 448
Sec. 1721--Technical and Conforming Amendments............. 448
Sec. 1722--Countering China's Control of the Caucasus...... 448
Sec. 1723--Comptroller General Study on Skillbridge
Programs................................................. 448
TITLE XVIII--REVITALIZATION OF THE DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE....... 448
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 448
Advanced Manufacturing of High-Temperature Composites...... 448
An Enduring Acquisition Policy Experimentation Laboratory
to Model, Simulate, and Analyze the Impact of Acquisition
and Industrial Base Policies............................. 449
Berry Amendment and Buy American Requirements for Defense
Textiles................................................. 450
Briefing on the Pilot Program to Analyze and Monitor
Certain Supply Chains.................................... 450
Clarification of Commercial Solicitation Restrictions
During Basic Combat Training............................. 451
Comptroller General Review of Certain Contracts and Awards
to Small Business Concerns............................... 451
Copper-Free Antifouling Coatings Supply Assurance.......... 452
Critical Chemistries in Supporting the Defense Industrial
Base..................................................... 453
Critical Minerals Workforce Development and Mining
Education................................................ 454
Defense Industrial Base AI-Enabled Risk Response and
Manufacturing Readiness.................................. 454
Department of Defense Scrap Feedstock to Private Sector
Process.................................................. 455
Domestic Manufacturing Capability for ISO Containers....... 455
Domestic Network-Enabled Systems and Supply Chain Risk
Assessment............................................... 456
Domestic Preference for Critical Mineral Alloy Powder
Furnace Equipment........................................ 456
Domestic Production of Short-Wave Infrared Quantum Dot
Materials................................................ 457
Domestic Rare-Earth-Free Permanent Magnet Manufacturing
Capability............................................... 457
Ensuring Mature-node Semiconductor Availability............ 458
Expanding the Defense Industrial Base through Balanced
Compliance............................................... 458
Expansion of Domestic Ultra-High Molecular Weight
Polyethylene Production Capacity......................... 459
Flame Resistant Textile Industrial Base.................... 460
Foreign Entity of Concern Evaluation of Processing and
Production Machinery for Critical Technologies........... 460
Foreign-Made Small Arms and Light Weapons.................. 461
Imported Army Uniforms..................................... 461
Industrial Workforce for Composite Materials Manufacturing. 462
Leveraging Regional STEM Ecosystems........................ 462
Manufacturing Analytics for Industrial Surge Readiness..... 463
Military Service Trademark Royalty Waiver Feasibility Study 464
Photovoltaic Modules from Foreign Entities of Concern...... 464
Practical Application of Authorities Related to Certain
Critical Minerals........................................ 465
Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement
Program.................................................. 465
Production-Readiness Option Contracts for sUAS
Manufacturing............................................ 466
Promoting American-made Textiles........................... 466
Reducing Facility Access Barriers for Small and New-Entrant
Defense Manufacturers.................................... 467
Rulemaking Progress for Elimination of Reliance on Chinese-
Made Printed Circuit Boards.............................. 467
Secure Manufacturing and Integration Capability............ 468
Securing Strategic Radioisotope Supply Chains.............. 468
Short-Wave Infrared Quantum Dot Materials for Defense
Applications............................................. 469
Small Turbojet Engine Industrial Base...................... 469
Supply Chain Visibility for Industrial Surge Readiness..... 470
Support for Aircraft Propulsion Industrial Base............ 470
Trusted Microelectronics Supply Chains..................... 471
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 472
Subtitle A--Provisions to Protect and Strengthen Supply
Chains................................................... 472
Sec. 1801--Requirements for Information Relating to Supply
Chain Risk............................................... 472
Sec. 1802--Oversight of Specialty Metals Procurements Under
Exception Relating to Agreements with Foreign Governments 472
Sec. 1803--Critical Materials: Tiered Sourcing Restrictions
and Requirements......................................... 472
Sec. 1804--Changes with Respect to the Federal Acquisition
Security Council......................................... 473
Sec. 1805--Modifications to Strategy to Eliminate Sourcing
of Computer Displays from Certain Nations................ 473
Sec. 1806--Extension of Comptroller General Assessments and
Reports on Compliance with Procurement Requirements
Relating to Rare Earth Elements and Strategic and
Critical Materials....................................... 473
Sec. 1807--Requirements Related to Detection and Avoidance
of Counterfeit Electronic Parts.......................... 473
Sec. 1808--Analysis and Report on Sourcing of Certain Items 473
Sec. 1809--Assessment and Implementation Plan for Sourcing
of Synthetic Diamond and Super Abrasive Materials Used in
Defense Applications..................................... 474
Sec. 1810--Defense Supply Chain Intelligence and Risk
Response Program......................................... 474
Sec. 1811--Identification of Supply Chain Dependencies..... 474
Sec. 1812--Federal Acquisition Security Council Exclusion
Orders for Chinese Military Company Designees............ 474
Sec. 1813--Domestic Preference in the Procurement of
Professional Services.................................... 475
Sec. 1814--Prohibition on the Use of Chinese-Manufactured
Optical Fiber by the Department of Defense............... 475
Sec. 1815--Report on Primary Aluminum Sector Industrial
Base Assessment.......................................... 475
Sec. 1816--Assessment of Risk Related to Adversarial
Capital in the Defense Industrial Base................... 475
Sec. 1817--Integration of Demand for Foreign Military Sales
into Industrial Base Planning............................ 475
Sec. 1818--Report on the Feasibility of Requiring Bills of
Materials for Defense Acquisition........................ 476
Subtitle B--Provisions Relating to Defense Industrial Base
Manufacturing............................................ 476
Sec. 1831--Clarification of Eligible Uses of Defense
Industrial Base Fund..................................... 476
Sec. 1832--Inclusion of Biotechnology in Uses of the
Industrial Base Fund..................................... 476
Sec. 1833--Development and Application of Alternative
Material Sources......................................... 476
Sec. 1834--Report and Implementation of Plan for Advanced
Manufacturing for Certain Critical Readiness Items of
Supply................................................... 476
Sec. 1835--Additional Guidance Related to Advanced
Manufacturing............................................ 477
Sec. 1836--Modifications to Advanced Manufacturing Policy
Review and Guidance...................................... 477
Sec. 1837--Enhanced Domestic Content Requirement for
Shipbuilding Programs.................................... 477
Sec. 1838--Triennial Review of Merger and Acquisition
Activity Associated with Major Defense Suppliers......... 477
Sec. 1839--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Certain
Munitions................................................ 477
Sec. 1840--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Platforms
and Components Systems................................... 477
Sec. 1841--Managing and Mitigating Risks in Major Munitions
Programs................................................. 477
Sec. 1842--Comptroller General Assessment on Improving
Weapon Systems and Technology Procurement................ 478
Subtitle C--Organic Industrial Base.......................... 478
Sec. 1861--Modification to Annual Report on Depot-Level
Maintenance and Repair Workloads by Public and Private
Sectors.................................................. 478
Sec. 1862--Authority to Write Off Capital Expenditures for
Certain Depots of Department of Defense.................. 478
Sec. 1863--Reforms Relating to Army Organic Industrial Base 478
Sec. 1864--Exclusion of Manufacturing Arsenal Workload from
Depot Carryover Calculation.............................. 478
Sec. 1865--Temporary Authority for Use of Operation and
Maintenance Funds to Provide Training for Certain
Employees Performing Services or Work Funded by Working-
Capital Funds............................................ 478
Sec. 1866--Demonstration and Prototyping Program for
Qualification of Organic Industrial Base as Alternate
Source for Manufacture of Casts and Forged Components for
Legacy Aircraft.......................................... 478
Sec. 1867--Briefing and Report on Defense Industrial Base
Chokepoints and Organic Industrial Base Modernization.... 479
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters........................... 479
Sec. 1871--Exception to Contract Price Requirement Relating
to Use of Test and Evaluation Installations by Commercial
Entities................................................. 479
Sec. 1872--Amendments to the Procurement Technical
Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program................. 479
Sec. 1873--Pilot Program on Digital Engineering and
Advanced Manufacturing to Address No-Bid Solicitations... 479
Sec. 1874--Pilot Program to Improve Participation by Small
Business Concerns in Certain Department of Defense
Contracts................................................ 479
Sec. 1875--Guidance to Ensure Protection of Covered
Information During Covered Preaward Engagements.......... 480
Subtitle E--Defense Industrial Base Workforce Matters........ 480
Sec. 1881--Skills-Based Requirements for Department of
Defense Contractor Personnel............................. 480
Sec. 1882--Modification of Working Group on the Advanced
Manufacturing Workforce.................................. 480
Sec. 1883--Workforce Development Initiatives to Support
Mining of Critical Minerals.............................. 480
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 481
Sec. 1891--Exemption from Trademark Licensing Fees for
Certain Military Exchange Contractors.................... 481
Sec. 1892--Major System Cost Growth Oversight.............. 481
Sec. 1893--Inapplicability of Berry Amendment Exceptions to
Certain Seafood Purchases................................ 481
Sec. 1894--Clarification of Commercial Solicitation
Restrictions during Initial Entry Training for
Memorabilia and Photography.............................. 481
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 481
PURPOSE........................................................ 481
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW.............. 482
Sec. 2001--Short Title..................................... 482
Sec. 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required to be Specified by Law.......................... 482
Sec. 2003--Effective Date.................................. 482
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................ 482
SUMMARY........................................................ 482
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 482
Feasibility Study on Establishing Technology Integration
Complex at the United States Military Academy............ 482
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 483
Sec. 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 483
Sec. 2102--Family Housing.................................. 483
Sec. 2103--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........... 483
Sec. 2104--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year
2021 Project at Fort Gillem, Georgia..................... 483
Sec. 2105--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2022 Projects................................ 483
Sec. 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2022 Project at Fort Stewart, Georgia............... 483
Sec. 2107--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2023 Projects................................ 484
Sec. 2108--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2024 Projects................................ 484
Sec. 2109--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2025 Project at Grafenwoehr, Germany................ 484
Sec. 2110--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2026 Project at Joint Region Marianas, Guam......... 484
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION........................... 484
SUMMARY........................................................ 484
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 484
Sec. 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 484
Sec. 2202--Family Housing.................................. 484
Sec. 2203--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........... 485
Sec. 2204--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2023 Projects................................ 485
Sec. 2205--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2024 Projects................................ 485
Sec. 2206--Extension and Modification of Authority to Carry
Out Fiscal Year 2024 Project at Marine Corps Base
Quantico, Virginia....................................... 485
Sec. 2207--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2026 Project at Pacific Missile Range Facility
Barking Sands, Hawaii.................................... 485
Sec. 2208--Transfer of Amounts for Mitigation for Projects
Located at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton,
Washington............................................... 485
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION..................... 485
SUMMARY........................................................ 485
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 486
Sec. 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 486
Sec. 2302--Family Housing.................................. 486
Sec. 2303--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force...... 486
Sec. 2304--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2019 Projects................................ 486
Sec. 2305--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2020 Projects................................ 486
Sec. 2306--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2023 Projects................................ 486
Sec. 2307--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2024 Projects................................ 486
Sec. 2308--Authority to Carry Out Project at Eglin Air
Force Base, Florida...................................... 487
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............... 487
SUMMARY........................................................ 487
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 487
Sec. 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 487
Sec. 2402--Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation
Investment Program Projects.............................. 487
Sec. 2403--Authorization of Appropriations--Defense
Agencies................................................. 487
Sec. 2404--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2023 Projects................................ 487
Sec. 2405--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2024 Projects................................ 487
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................ 488
SUMMARY....................................................... 488
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 488
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program....................................... 488
Sec. 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 488
Sec. 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........... 488
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions............... 488
Sec. 2511--Republic of Korea Funded Construction Projects.. 488
Sec. 2512--Republic of Poland Funded Construction Projects. 488
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 488
SUMMARY........................................................ 488
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 489
Sec. 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 489
Sec. 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 489
Sec. 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
Construction and Land Acquisition Projects............... 489
Sec. 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 489
Sec. 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 489
Sec. 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National Guard
and Reserve.............................................. 489
Sec. 2607--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2023 Projects................................ 489
Sec. 2608--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain
Fiscal Year 2024 Projects................................ 490
Sec. 2609--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2026 Project at Colonie, New York................... 490
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES............. 490
SUMMARY........................................................ 490
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 490
Sec. 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base
Realignment and Closure Activities Funded through
Department of Defense Base Closure Account............... 490
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS........... 490
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 490
Access to Military Installation Fitness Facilities for
Veterans with Service-Connected Disabilities............. 490
Air Force Base Security.................................... 491
Alternative Construction Methods for Indo-Pacific
Infrastructure........................................... 491
Apra Harbor Port Infrastructure in Guam.................... 492
Comptroller General Review of Military Barracks Policies,
Funding, and Conditions.................................. 493
Comptroller General Review of Military Housing
Privatization Initiative Financial Stability............. 493
Construction Project Management Software Utilization and
Cost Transparency........................................ 494
Defense Access Roads Flood Mitigation...................... 494
Department of Defense Identification of and Mitigation for
Critical Housing Areas................................... 495
Digital Twin Modeling for Civilian Infrastructure
Vulnerability at Military Installations.................. 496
Dining Facility Health and Performance Transparency........ 496
Economic Adjustment Committee in Guam...................... 497
Enhancing Speed and Efficiency in Military Construction
Delivery................................................. 497
Evaluation of Standards for Electromagnetic Pulse
Protection............................................... 498
Feasibility of Expanding Army Real Estate Pilot Program.... 498
Feasibility of Expanding Description of Window Fall Devices
in Military Family Housing Units......................... 499
Feasibility of Expanding for Broadband Access at Middle
East Installations....................................... 499
Governance and Integration of AI-Enabled Shipyard
Modernization Tools...................................... 500
Housing Capacity for Junior Enlisted Personnel in High Cost
Areas.................................................... 501
Improvement of Military Unaccompanied Housing.............. 501
Indoor Air Quality in Unaccompanied Housing................ 502
Infrastructure and Security Modernization at Joint-Use
Arizona Military Airfields............................... 503
Installation Access Control Point Traffic Congestion and
Defense Access Roads Review.............................. 503
Installation Tornado Warning Dissemination and Emergency
Notification Readiness................................... 504
Intergovernmental Support Agreements for PFAS Remediation
and Clean-up............................................. 505
Land Procurement in Guam................................... 505
Mapping Foreign Entities of Concern Owned Property Near
Military Installations................................... 506
Military Construction and Facility Maintenance Backlogs at
Fort Bragg............................................... 506
Military Construction in Joint Region Marianas............. 507
Military Housing Office Staffing Assessment................ 507
Naval Surface Warfare Center-Corona Potential Encroachment. 508
Other Transaction Authority for Advanced Technology
Facilities............................................... 508
Pacific Islands Military Construction Capability Threshold
Study.................................................... 509
Pavement Rehabilitation at Yuma Proving Ground............. 510
Quality of Life Assessment at Naval Air Station Joint
Reserve Base New Orleans................................. 510
Repair by Replacement Authority for Unaccompanied Housing
Assessment............................................... 511
Report on Intergovernmental Support Agreements............. 512
Report on Modernization of Major Range and Test Facility
Bases.................................................... 512
Report on Use of Military Family Housing................... 512
Rivanna Station Infrastructure Improvements................ 513
SAOC Transitional Facilities............................... 513
Severe Weather Threats and Early Warning Capabilities at
Military Installations................................... 514
Support for Innovative Water and Power Solutions........... 515
Trainee Barracks Complex at Fort Jackson................... 515
Unexploded Ordnance and Munitions and Explosives of Concern
Remediation on Guam...................................... 516
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 516
Subtitle A--Military Construction Programs................... 516
Sec. 2801--Execution of Projects Under the North Atlantic
Treaty Or-ganization.....................................
Sec.urity Investment Program............................... 516
Sec. 2802--Inclusion of Tribal Governments in Defense
Community Infrastructure Program......................... 516
Sec. 2803--Briefing Required for Certain Basing Actions of
the Department of the Air Force.......................... 516
Sec. 2804--Unspecified Minor Military Construction Dollar
Thresholds............................................... 516
Sec. 2805--Repeal of Limitation on Available Funds for
Research Development Test and Evaluation Military
Construction Projects.................................... 517
Sec. 2806--Modification of Approval and Notification
Thresholds for Repair Projects on Military Facilities.... 517
Sec. 2807 --Department of Defense Military Installation
Stormwater Project Acceleration Program.................. 517
Sec. 2808--Expansion of Annual Report on Unfunded
Requirements for Certain Military Construction Projects.. 517
Subtitle B--Military Housing Reforms......................... 517
Sec. 2811--Congressional Notification of Window Fall
Incidents in Certain Privatized Military Housing......... 517
Sec. 2812--Expansion of Protections Against Reprisal or
Retaliation For Certain Tenants of Privatized Military
Housing.................................................. 517
Sec. 2813--Treatment of Nondisclosure Agreements with
Respect to Privatized Military Housing................... 517
Sec. 2814--Expansion of Pilot Program to Include Authority
to Replace Certain Department of Defense Laboratories.... 517
Sec. 2815--Modification to Pilot Program for Military
Construction Projects to Replace Certain Military
Unaccompanied Housing Facilities......................... 518
Sec. 2816--Establishment of Timeliness Standards With
Respect to Maintenance Work Orders for Covered Military
Unaccompanied Housing; Annual Report..................... 518
Sec. 2817--Expansion of Elements Included in Annual Reports
on the Condition of Covered Military Unaccompanied
Housing.................................................. 518
Sec. 2818--Modification to Required Investments in
Improving Military Unaccompanied Housing................. 518
Subtitle C--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 518
Sec. 2821--Authorization for Certain Planning, Design, and
Construction Contracts in Support of Military Service
Academies................................................ 518
Sec. 2822--Exemption of Certain Military Installations from
Guidance with Respect to Aggregate Square Footage
Requirements............................................. 518
Sec. 2823--Matching Requirement for the Public Schools on
Military Installations................................... 518
Sec. 2824--Improvement to Procedures for Processing
Visitors to Department of Defense Military Installations. 519
Sec. 2825--Restrictions on Data Facility Equipment Placed
on Facilities Leased from the Department of Defense...... 519
Sec. 2826--Name of Department of the Army Military
Installation, Augusta, Georgia........................... 519
Sec. 2827--Name of the Department of the Army Military
Installation Located in Muscogee County and Chattahoochee
County, Georgia.......................................... 519
Sec. 2828--Military Installation Renamings................. 519
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances and Withdrawals................. 519
Sec. 2831--Report on Land Withdrawal at Yuma Proving
Ground, Arizona.......................................... 519
Sec. 2832--Land Conveyance, State Armory Board, Utah
National Guard, Camp Williams State Military Reservation,
Lehi, Utah............................................... 519
Sec. 2833--Land Conveyance, Milan Army Ammunition Plant,
Tennessee................................................ 519
Subtitle E--Pilot Programs................................... 519
Sec. 2841--Digital Twin Models at Certain Military
Installations............................................ 519
Sec. 2842--Pilot Program on Wastewater Monitoring and
Pathogen-Agnostic Monitoring System of Certain Military
Installations............................................ 520
Sec. 2843--Department of Defense Pilot Program for
Development and Use of Online Real Estate Inventory Tool. 520
Sec. 2844--Pilot Program to Provide Integrated Connectivity
Service.................................................. 520
Subtitle F--Miscellaneous Authorities........................ 520
Sec. 2851--Authority for the Secretary of Defense to
Acquire Real Property and Facilities in the National
Capital Region and to Administer Such Property as Part of
the Pentagon Reservation................................. 520
Sec. 2852--Establishment of a Dashboard for Military
Construction Projects for Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation Facilities................................ 520
Sec. 2853--Additional Authority for Defense Site
Reimbursement in the Federated States of Micronesia...... 520
Sec. 2854--Recognition of Certain Aspects of the National
Navy UDT-Seal Museum in Fort Pierce, Florida, as a
National Memorial, National Memorial Garden, and National
K9 Memorial.............................................. 520
Subtitle G--Reports and Other Matters........................ 521
Sec. 2861--Annual Report on Supervision, Inspection, and
Overhead Costs for Military Construction Projects........ 521
Sec. 2862--Requirements Relating to the Multi-Mission Dry
Dock Military Construction Project at Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Washington..................................... 521
Sec. 2863--Comptroller General Review of Shipyard
Infrastructure Optimization Program...................... 521
Sec. 2864--Conditions on Transfer of Department of Defense
Power Grid Infrastructure in Guam........................ 521
Sec. 2865--Annual Report on Military Construction Projects
Supporting Readiness and Public Interest in Guam......... 521
Sec. 2866--Annual Report on Effects of Extreme Weather on
Department of Defense Military Installations and
Combatant Commander Requirements......................... 521
Sec. 2867--Reports to Census Bureau with Respect to
Military and Civilian Personnel on Military Installations 521
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS....................................... 522
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 522
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 522
Cost Growth Notifications for National Nuclear Security
Administration Projects.................................. 522
Material Staging Capability................................ 522
National Nuclear Security Administration Operational Area
at Rick Husband International Airport.................... 522
Next-Generation Pulsed Power Capabilities.................. 523
Procurement of U.S.-Origin Uranium......................... 523
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 524
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations.... 524
Sec. 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration........ 524
Sec. 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup................... 524
Sec. 3103--Other Defense Activities........................ 524
Sec. 3104--Nuclear Energy.................................. 524
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 524
Sec. 3111--Modifications to Requirements for Plutonium Pit
Production Capacity...................................... 524
Sec. 3112--Modification to Implementation of Programs for
Acceleration of Replacement of Cesium Blood Irradiation
Sources.................................................. 524
Sec. 3113--Other Transaction Authority..................... 524
Sec. 3114--Extension of Alternative Personnel System of the
National Nuclear Security Administration................. 524
Sec. 3115--Deadline for Commencement of High Explosive
Synthesis, Formulation, and Production Facility.......... 525
Sec. 3116--Contracting Authority to Acquire Commercial
Testing Services for Effects of Radiation................ 525
Sec. 3117--Prohibition Relating to Reclassification of
High-Level Waste......................................... 525
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................ 525
Sec. 3121--Technical and Conforming Amendments Relating to
Codification of Atomic Energy Defense Provisions......... 525
Sec. 3122--Modification of Submission Deadline for Certain
Selected Acquisition Reports............................. 525
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 525
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 525
Sec. 3201--Authorization................................... 525
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................ 525
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 525
Sec. 3401--Authorization of Appropriations................. 525
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 526
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 526
State Maritime Academy Training Infrastructure............. 526
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 526
Subtitle A--Maritime Administration.......................... 526
Sec. 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime
Administration........................................... 526
Subtitle B--Merchant Marine Academy.......................... 526
Sec. 3511--Transferring the Administration of the United
States Merchant Marine Academy to the Department......... 526
Sec. 3512--Establishment of the United States Merchant
Marine Academy as an Office Within the Office in the
Department............................................... 526
Sec. 3513--Support for Athletic Programs of the United
States Merchant Marine Academy........................... 527
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 527
Sec. 3521--Limitation on Waiver of Navigation and Vessel-
Inspection Laws to Address Foreign Entities of Concern... 527
Sec. 3522--Financing of Fishing Vessels.................... 527
Sec. 3523--Cranes; Shore Power............................. 527
Sec. 3524--Cargoes Procured, Furnished, or Financed by
United States Government................................. 527
Sec. 3525--Assistance for Small Shipyards.................. 527
Sec. 3526--Committee on the Marine Transportation System... 527
Sec. 3527--Assessment of Channel Depths and Placement of
Aids to Navigation....................................... 528
Sec. 3528--Waiver.......................................... 528
Sec. 3529--National Maritime Workforce Advisory Committee.. 528
Sec. 3530--Enhancing United States Maritime Workforce...... 528
Sec. 3531--Enhancing United States Shipyards and
Shipbuilding............................................. 528
TITLE XXXVI--SHIPS FOR AMERICA................................... 528
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 528
Sec. 3601--Report on Privilege............................. 528
Sec. 3602--Fleet Testing and Briefing Requirement.......... 529
Sec. 3603--Assessment of the Use of Commercial Best
Practices for Navy Shipbuilding.......................... 529
Sec. 3604--Military Sealift Command........................ 529
Sec. 3605--Assessment on Maritime Infrastructure Readiness. 529
Sec. 3606--United States Merchant Marine Academy
Infrastructure and Facilities Modernization.............. 529
Sec. 3607--United States Merchant Marine Academy........... 529
Sec. 3608--State Maritime Academies........................ 530
Sec. 3609--Enforcement of Service Obligation Requirements.. 530
Sec. 3610--State Maritime Academy Sea Term Scholarship
Programs................................................. 530
Sec. 3611--Implementation Plan............................. 530
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES....................................... 530
Sec. 4001--Authorization of Amounts in Funding Tables...... 530
Summary of National Defense Authorizations for Fiscal Year
2027..................................................... 531
National Defense Budget Authority Implication.............. 535
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT........................................... 537
Sec. 4101--Procurement..................................... 537
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.......... 576
Sec. 4201--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation..... 576
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 624
Sec. 4301--Operation and Maintenance....................... 624
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................................... 646
Sec. 4401--Military Personnel.............................. 646
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 647
Sec. 4501--Other Authorizations............................ 647
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................ 651
Sec. 4601--Military Construction........................... 651
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS..... 668
Sec. 4701--Department of Energy National Security Programs. 668
Savings Table, FY 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.. 679
Communications from Other Committees............................. 683
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 697
Statement Required by the Congressional Budget Act............... 698
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 698
Disclosure of Earmarks and Congressionally Directed Spending
Items.......................................................... 698
Oversight Findings............................................... 702
General Performance Goals and Objectives......................... 702
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 702
Federal Advisory Committee Statement............................. 702
Applicability to the Legislative Branch.......................... 702
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 702
Committee Votes.................................................. 703
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 750
Additional Views................................................. 751
119th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 119-698
======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027
_______
June 15, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Rogers of Alabama, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 8800]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2027 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, having considered
the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and
recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
reported bill.
PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION
The bill would: (1) authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2027 for procurement and for research, development, test,
and evaluation; (2) authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2027 for operation and maintenance and for working capital
funds; (3) authorize for fiscal year 2027 the personnel
strength for each Active Duty Component of the military
departments, and the personnel strength for the Selected
Reserve for each Reserve Component of the Armed Forces; (4)
modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
actions in the defense establishment; (5) authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military construction
and family housing; (6) authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2027 for the Department of Energy national security
programs; and (7) authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027
for the Maritime Administration.
RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2027, is the primary vehicle through which Congress
fulfills its responsibility as mandated in Article I, Section
8, of the Constitution of the United States, which grants
Congress the power to provide for the common defense, to raise
and support an Army, to provide and maintain a Navy, and to
make rules for the government and regulation of the land and
naval forces. Rule X of the House of Representatives provides
the House Committee on Armed Services with jurisdiction over
the Department of Defense generally and over the military
application of nuclear energy. The committee bill includes
findings and recommendations resulting from its oversight
activities, conducted through hearings and briefings with
Department of Defense and Department of Energy civilian and
military officials, intelligence analysts, outside experts, and
industry representatives, and it is informed by institutional
experience. H.R. 8800 provides the Department of Defense and
the Department of Energy with important policy authorities to
speed decision making and improve agility, while improving
readiness and increasing capabilities and capacities.
Central to H.R. 8800 is the focus on restoring the defense
industrial base. The committee believes that limitations in the
capacity of the defense industrial base have affected readiness
and deterrence. U.S. national security is dependent on our
ability to produce the capabilities needed to defend our
country and deter our adversaries. H.R. 8800 makes the critical
reforms needed to restore defense manufacturing, strengthen
deterrence, and rebuild the industrial base.
H.R. 8800 meets the committee's goal of facilitating a
strong national defense apparatus that is resourced properly,
accountable for its actions, and cognizant of the essential and
direct oversight role of Congress. H.R. 8800 emphasizes
transformational change and leans forward to fortify the
Departments technological advantage to ensure our
servicemembers have the tools required to address growing
threats in this area. H.R. 8800 allows our military to improve
readiness, expand capabilities, and invest in the new
technologies required to secure our country and protect us
against our adversaries.
HEARINGS
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, (1)
the following hearing was used to develop or consider H.R.
8800:
On April 29, 2026, the committee held a hearing,
``Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request.'' (2)
The following related hearings were held:
On March 4, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``Speed to
Scale: Revitalizing the Defense Industrial Base.''
On March 5, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``U.S.
Defense Strategy and Posture.''
On March 17, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``U.S.
Military Posture and National Security Challenges in North and
South America.''
On March 18, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``U.S.
Military Posture and National Security Challenges in Europe.''
On April 15, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``Member
Day.''
On April 22, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``U.S.
Military Posture and National Security Challenges in the Indo-
Pacific Region.''
On May 14, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``Department
of the Navy Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request.''
On May 15, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``Department
of the Army Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request.''
On May 19, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``U.S.
Military Posture and National Security Challenges in the
Greater Middle East and Africa.''
On May 20, 2026, the committee held a hearing, ``Department
of the Air Force Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request.''
In addition, the seven subcommittees of the committee
conducted 18 hearings to develop and consider H.R. 8800.
COMMITTEE POSITION
On June 4, 2026, the Committee on Armed Services held a
markup session to consider H.R. 8800. The committee ordered the
bill H.R. 8800, as amended, favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by a recorded vote of 44-12, a quorum being
present.
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 8800. The remainder
of the report discusses the bill, as amended.
RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS
The bill does not provide budget authority. This bill
authorizes appropriations; subsequent appropriations acts will
provide budget authority.
The bill addresses the following categories in the
Department of Defense budget: procurement; research,
development, test, and evaluation; operation and maintenance;
military personnel; working capital funds; and military
construction and family housing. The bill also addresses the
Armed Forces Retirement Home, Department of Energy National
Security Programs, the Naval Petroleum Reserve, and the
Maritime Administration.
Active Duty and Reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for each military
personnel account.
SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS
IN THE BILL
The President requested a total discretionary budget
authority of $1.15 trillion for national defense budget
function (050) for fiscal year 2027. Of that amount, $1.14
trillion was requested for national defense programs within the
jurisdiction of the committee for fiscal year 2027. Of this
amount, $1.1 trillion was requested for Department of Defense
programs, $41.4 billion was requested for Department of Energy
national security programs and the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board, and $568 million was requested for defense-
related activities associated with the Maritime Administration.
The committee recommends an overall discretionary
authorization for national defense programs of $1.15 trillion
for fiscal year 2027 and authorizes $1.14 trillion for fiscal
year for programs within its jurisdiction. The committee
authorization represents a $251.1 billion increase above the
national defense levels provided for in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
division D of this report summarizes the committee's
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation
account for fiscal year 2027 and compares these amounts to the
President's request.
BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
The President's total request for the national defense
budget function (050) in fiscal year 2027 is $1.18 trillion,
based on assumptions provided by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO). In addition to discretionary funding for defense
programs authorized in this Act, the total 050 amount includes
mandatory programs not authorized in this Act, discretionary
funding for national defense programs not in the committee's
jurisdiction and not authorized in this Act, and discretionary
funding for programs that do not require additional
authorization in fiscal year 2027. The total 050 amount does
not include national defense mandatory resources requested that
are not included in the CBO assumptions.
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
division D of this report details changes to the budget request
for all aspects of the national defense budget function.
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027
Sec. 1--Short Title
This section would cite the short title of this Act as the
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.''
Sec. 2--Organization of Act into Divisions; Table of Contents
This section would organize the Act into divisions and
contain the table of contents.
Sec. 3--Congressional Defense Committees
This section would provide the definition of
``congressional defense committees.''
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Items of Special Interest
Army National Guard Aviation Modernization and Recapitalization
The committee notes that the Army National Guard operates a
significant portion of the Total Army UH-60 Black Hawk fleet
and rely on these aircraft for federal and state missions. Many
of the National Guard's UH-60L models are aging. The committee
directs the Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1,
2027, on the status of the Army National Guard UH-60 Black Hawk
fleet. The briefing should include the following:
(1) the inventory of UH-60L and UH-60M aircraft in the Army
National Guard including average age and readiness rates;
(2) the current plan and timeline to recapitalize legacy
UH-60L models with UH-60M models in both components;
(3) any challenges or delays to this modernization effort,
including funding and industrial base capacity; and
(4) the estimated resources, including any additional
funding required above the current Future Years Defense
Program, needed to replace or modernize legacy UH-60 aircraft
while maintaining or enhancing overall Army National Guard
aviation readiness and operational capability.
Electrostatic Discharge and Electromagnetic Interference on Army
Rotorcraft
The committee is aware that thermal-interface and
electrical-interface materials aboard rotorcraft can become
unstable when subjected to vibration, blast-loading, and
austere operating conditions and that instability in these
materials can lead to electrostatic discharge (ESD),
electromagnetic interference (EMI), and thermally driven
failure. The committee has previously noted that aligned carbon
nanotube technology (ACNT) can enable the predictability and
efficiency of thermal interfaces in national security systems.
The committee remains supportive of ongoing efforts across
the Department of Defense to test and evaluate thermal
interface solutions like ACNT and encourages the Department of
the Army to evaluate this technology's ability to provide
predictable thermal and electrical dissipation pathways aboard
Army rotorcraft and other mission-critical systems to
potentially mitigate ESD, EMI, and heat-driven component
degradation.
Litter Basket Stabilization Technology for MEDEVAC and Hoist Operations
The committee recognizes the critical role of the Army's
utility helicopter fleet in medical evacuation, search and
rescue, and other time-sensitive missions. Modern hoist
stabilization systems have demonstrated clear benefits in
improving safety and mission effectiveness. The committee is
encouraged by the Army's work to advance this technology but is
concerned that there is not a clear approach to acquiring this
capability. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Army to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on plans and associated
funding requirements to equip all medical evacuation
helicopters with commercial off the shelf technology that
eliminates the need for a tagline when conducting hoists.
Non-Kinetic Solutions for Countering Drone Swarms
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
efforts in developing low-cost solutions to meet warfighter
counter unmanned aircraft systems (c-UAS) requirements,
particularly for countering drone swarms at military
installations. The committee encourages additional investment
and fielding of non-kinetic effectors, including, but not
limited to, high power microwave (HPM), high energy laser,
Coyote Block III HPM variant, and radio frequency systems.
Defending people, critical infrastructure, and military
installations from drone incursions requires cost-effective,
non-kinetic technology with multi-target capability and
enhanced lethality against Groups 1-3 UAS for base defense.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the Joint
Interagency Task Force 401, in coordination with the Service
Acquisition Executives, to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1, 2026, on
the Department's plan to complete development and begin
procurement of low-collateral, non-kinetic solutions for c-UAS.
The report shall include:
(1) an overview of the capabilities and limitations of
kinetic vs. non-kinetic effectors against Groups 1-3 UAS, UAS
swarms, and tethered UAS for base defense;
(2) a comparison of available low-collateral non-kinetic
solutions that meet near-term requirements with effective range
and provide cost-per-kill savings; and
(3) recommendations on funding and schedule required to
field tactically meaningful quantities of systems identified in
(2) to augment global forces and defend the homeland.
Vibration Mitigation for Army Rotary Wing Aircraft
The committee notes existing measures taken by the Army to
mitigate vibration aboard its rotary wing aircraft fleet but
remains concerned about the potential impact of insufficiently
mitigated vibration and resulting unplanned maintenance needs
that, on aggregate, reduce operational readiness and aircraft
availability rates. The committee understands that pilots and
crewmembers exposed to dangerous levels of sustained vibration
may suffer from chronic musculoskeletal injury as well as
cognitive fatigue, which can directly affect their ability to
safely operate the aircraft.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1,
2027, to include the following:
(1) an overview of measures currently in place to mitigate
vibration aboard Army rotary wing aircraft;
(2) an assessment of whether certain vibration mitigation
measures such as rotor smoothing may benefit from adoption of a
common operating platform and introduction of fleetwide
standards;
(3) a review of efforts by individual commands and units,
particularly within the Air National Guard, to evaluate
commercially available vibration mitigation technologies; and
(4) plans to continuously improve vibration mitigation
aboard its existing fleet and future platforms including the
Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft.
Missile Procurement, Army
Items of Special Interest
Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb
The committee supports the acquisition of low-cost
precision munitions to supplement existing inventories to
achieve over-match through affordable mass. Wherever
technically feasible, the committee strongly endorses the re-
use and adaptation of existing systems and technologies to
reduce program costs, speed production, and accelerate fielding
to operational units. For this reason, the committee provided
funding last year through the budget reconciliation process to
integrate the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb System
(GLSDB) with the Army's High Mobility Artillery Rocket System
(HIMARS). The committee affirms its expectation that the Army
execute these funds to begin GLSDB integration with HIMARS to
comply with the committee's direction and directs the Secretary
of the Army to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services no later than March 31, 2027, on the status of
GLSDB integration and testing with HIMARS.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Items of Special Interest
M240 and M249 operationally ready inventory
The committee's ongoing concerns regarding the Army's
current efforts to sustain the M240 medium machine gun program
of record and a viable operationally ready inventory continues
to grow given the level of drawdown of the weapon system for
Ukraine. Briefings to the committee to date have provided
little insight into the known (but undefined) concerns with the
operational status of the weapon systems in inventory. The
Ukraine drawdown of the inventory has only further exasperated
the problem. The Army's sustainment plan and industrial base
approach remain unclear, and the Army has programmed little or
no procurement funding for the M240 within the fiscal year 2027
budget. Further, as communicated in past legislation, the
committee remains very concerned that the Army's lack of a
sustainment strategy could result in a decline or elimination
of industrial capacity to manufacture this critical weapons
system. Finally, the committee was recently made aware of
similar issues within the M249 program.
Therefore, given the level of concern communicated through
past National Defense Authorization Acts and the Ukraine
drawdown, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 15, 2026, detailing:
(1) the data and inspections required to identify the
current operational status of the M240 inventory to validate
the quantity that are fully mission capable, or otherwise
unavailable;
(2) how the Army will address the average monthly demand
for sustainment given the drawdowns have depleted the M240
inventory; and
(3) the Army's plan to sustain the M240 into the future and
assure the viability of our industrial base to produce the
weapon system. Similarly, the committee requests the Secretary
of the Army provide the same information pursuant to the M249
weapon system not later than December 15, 2026, to the House
Committee on Armed Services.
Precision Grenadier System Program
The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's
Precision Grenadier System (PGS) as a critical component of
infantry lethality and close-combat overmatch. PGS is intended
to provide grenadiers with advanced fire control capabilities
that improve accuracy and reduce time to engagement. The
committee is concerned, however, by limited transparency
regarding the current status of PGS, including development
progress, performance against operational requirements,
software maturity, and the timeline for fielding across the
force.
Given the increasing development of digital fire control,
modular open systems architectures, and network enabled soldier
systems, the program should remain aligned with operational
needs, acquisition best practices, and cost-effective
sustainment. The committee is concerned regarding the
developmental requirement that a solution must include the
weapon system, potentially novel ammunition and fusing, and
optics as a single package, rather than a solution that allows
for the inclusion of the most capable subsystems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, in
coordination with Portfolio Acquisition Executive Ground, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on the status of PGS, including:
(1) the current development, testing, and fielding status
of PGS and associated fire control optics;
(2) an assessment of ammunition performance relative to
validated operational requirements and soldier feedback;
(3) identified technical, software, integration, or
sustainment risks and mitigation plans;
(4) the planned schedule and resources required to achieve
full-rate fielding; and
(5) justification of a holistic weapons system approach.
Rapidly Deployable Stabilizing Devices on Individual Rifles
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 31, 2026, detailing the impact on the accuracy
for individual rifles equipped with a rapidly deployable
stabilizing device with bipod to increase stability of fire of
the individual service member. The briefing should include:
(1) a comparison of accuracy of both M-4 and M-7 rifles,
that are supported with rapidly deployable stabilizing devices
with bipod verses, a rifle that is only supported by a firer;
and
(2) the Department's recommendation to assist increasing
the rifle's stability to the point that is required to engage a
target at 600m distance, while not reducing the soldier's
ability to engage at close-quarters battle distances.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
Items of Special Interest
Acquisition Strategy for Next Generation Artillery Rounds
The committee recognizes the importance of next generation
artillery rounds, such as the M1128 and Next Generation Rocket
Assisted Projectiles (RAP), to deliver increased range to the
warfighter. The committee also understands the necessity to
expeditiously scale production of these rounds to replenish
depleted artillery war stocks. Additionally, the committee
understands the complexity of the supply chain to deliver
critical rounds to the warfighter.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the acquisition strategy for the M1128
and Next Generation Rocket Assisted Projectiles (RAP) artillery
rounds. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) a plan for the procurement of the M1128 and RAP rounds;
(2) an assessment of the feasibility of direct acquisitions
of critical components, such as base bleed and rocket assist
systems, from sub-tier suppliers; and
(3) an evaluation of providing these systems to prime
contractors as government-furnished equipment.
Ammunition Industrial Base
The committee recognizes an opportunity to allow new
entrants into the ammunition production industrial base that
could foster increased competition and enable long-term
resilience. Accordingly, the committee expects the Army to
implement acquisition strategies that enable new entrants to
participate across ammunition production, rather than through
segmented competition that limits scale and investment. The
committee emphasizes that acquisition strategies should be
executed in a way that preserves the viability of new entrants,
incentivizes private capital investment, increases competition,
reduces supply chain risks, and strengthens surge readiness.
Other Procurement, Army
Items of Special Interest
Accelerated Fielding of Fixed Counter-UAS Capabilities for Soldier
Protection
The committee notes the current threat advanced Group 3
small, unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) pose to the joint
force, exposing a critical vulnerability for the counter-UAS
(c-UAS) mission each service shares to provide drone protection
for fixed sites, Ground and Air Base Air Defense (G/ABAD), and
critical sea vessels. The committee is concerned that the Army
lacks a modernization strategy to improve currently fielded
programs of record for UAS defeat to address this capability
gap.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services,
not later than December 1, 2026, on the plan to address the
modernization strategy for the current c-UAS program of record,
the Low, Slow, Small c-UAS Integrated Defeat System (LIDS) and
c-UAS capability gaps for advanced UAS threats. The report
shall include:
(1) an overview of the acquisition strategy for LIDS across
the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP), including industrial base
readiness for increased production rates and the cost and
timeline required to expand capacity; and
(2) the modernization plan, over calendar years (CYs) 2027
and 2028, for each element of the LIDS program that ensures
increased capability against the urgent UAS threat for both
fixed and mobile launch systems, to include increasing effector
probability-of-kill against hardened threats, improving
performance against low radar cross section threats, and
enhancing the radio range of the datalink in the ground
launcher systems.
Accelerated Fielding of Mobile Counter-UAS Capabilities for Soldier
Protection
The committee notes the current and emerging threat small
unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) pose to military formations,
exposing a critical vulnerability for ground forces that lack
adequate counter-UAS (c-UAS) protection. The committee is aware
of capabilities being fielded to support both fixed sites and
maneuvering forces but remains concerned that capability gaps
remain at the squad and tactical level.
In the committee report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (H. Rept. 118-125), the
committee noted the need for the Army to ensure small-unit
tactical-level formations have combat vehicles with kinetic and
non-kinetic defeat capabilities to protect them from Groups 1-3
sUAS. The committee encouraged the Army to field a single
vehicle c-UAS capability with urgency.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services,
not later than December 1, 2026, on the plan to address c-UAS
capability gaps for tactical-level forces. The report shall
include:
(1) the Army's plan for c-UAS protection of dismounted
units greater than 1 kilometer outside of air and missile
defense assets;
(2) the Army's plan for c-UAS protection of infantry and
armored maneuver vehicles outside of air and missile defense
assets;
(3) the Army's plan for accelerating procurement of
platforms like the Mobile, Low, Slow Integrated Defeat System
(M-LIDS) Stryker variant; and
(4) the Army's plan for integrating the M320 grenade
launcher into future c-UAS capabilities; and
(5) the Army's plan to evolve its Maneuver-Short Range Air
Defense (M-SHORAD) Increment 1 program to a more agile
Increment 4 to protect critical air and missile defense systems
utilizing the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS).
Advanced Combat Tracked Vehicle Transmissions and Drivetrain
Architecture--Reciprocity, Industrial Base Resilience, and EMD
Transparency
The committee notes that the Army's next-generation combat
tracked vehicle programs, including the XM30 Mechanized
Infantry Combat Vehicle, are in Engineering and Manufacturing
Development (EMD) following Milestone B decisions. During EMD,
the Army makes key subsystem architecture and supplier
decisions that shape sustainment, depot integration, and surge
capacity for decades. The committee further notes that sourcing
decisions for transmissions and drivetrain systems, including
cross-drive assemblies, final drives, drivetrain modules, and
hybrid-electric drive modules that transfer power to the
tracks, are typically made well in advance of Milestone C and
low-rate initial production (LRIP). Accordingly, the committee
views transparency and disciplined risk assessment during EMD
as essential to long-term lifecycle readiness. For the
avoidance of doubt, this provision addresses transmissions and
drivetrain architecture only and excludes engines.
The committee is concerned that foreign government
subsidization, and foreign ownership or control through
ultimate parent entities headquartered abroad, can distort
competition in the tracked-vehicle drivetrain supply chain even
when manufacturing occurs in the United States. The committee
believes that absent appropriate guardrails, these dynamics may
embed foreign-controlled suppliers into critical drivetrain
architecture for decades, create sustainment dependencies, and
expose Army modernization programs to long-term geopolitical
and supply chain risk.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, to submit a report to House Armed
Services Committee not later than January 1, 2027 to assess and
report on the health and resilience of the U.S. industrial base
supporting advanced combat tracked vehicle transmissions and
drivetrain systems, excluding engines.
The assessment shall evaluate:
(1) the extent to which foreign government subsidization or
foreign ownership or control affects competitive pricing,
domestic investment incentives, and the ability of U.S. firms
to compete on substantially equal terms;
(2) the extent to which drivetrain-system sourcing
decisions during EMD may create long-term sustainment
dependencies, including depot-level maintenance and repair
risks;
(3) the implications for surge production capacity and
lifecycle readiness if foreign government policy changes,
subsidies are reduced or withdrawn, or foreign-controlled
entities alter or curtail U.S. operations;
(4) mitigation steps the Department can take to address
identified risks while maintaining modernization timelines; and
(5) the degree to which drivetrain sourcing decisions
create exposure to future trade restrictions, export controls,
subsidy withdrawals, industrial policy changes, or other
governmental actions by either the United States or a foreign
government that could disrupt production, sustainment, or surge
capacity over the lifecycle of the platform.
Advanced Load-Carrying Technologies for Dismounted Soldiers
The committee recognizes the need to advance the
warfighter's capabilities through innovative load-carrying
solutions that reduce the physical burden on dismounted
formations while improving mobility, lethality, and
survivability. Additionally, based on continued engagement with
Army stakeholders, operational feedback, and the evolution of
the DUST effort, the committee notes that there is a strong
case for transitioning DUST from Capability Program Executive
(CPE) Mission Autonomy to CPE Ground Maneuver. At its core,
DUST is not an autonomous system. It is a mobility and load
carriage capability designed to enhance dismounted operations,
reduce soldier burden, and increase unit effectiveness.
Aligning it under Mission Autonomy has created disconnects
between the capability and the organizational focus responsible
for its development and fielding.
In the committee report accompanying the Streamlining
Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery and National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (H. Rept. 119-
231), the committee directed the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
December 1, 2025, regarding the assessment, requirements
progression, and transition approach for these load-carrying
technologies. The committee remains concerned that it has not
received the required briefing and continues to view timely
transition and fielding of mature load-carrying capabilities as
important to near-term soldier readiness.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in
coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than December 1,
2026, on the status of the Army's efforts to assess, validate
requirements for, transition, and field advanced load-carrying
technologies. The report shall include the following:
(1) comprehensive feedback from operational units assessing
the efficacy and utility of current load-carrying technologies
under evaluation;
(2) an assessment of operational benefits, challenges
encountered, reliability and maintainability observations, and
the potential for integration and sustainment at scale;
(3) a clear and detailed description of modular mission
payloads and accessories currently being utilized with issued
systems, including quantities fielded, how each accessory
contributes to mission effectiveness, and the Army's plan to
incorporate such payloads into a long-term sustainment
approach;
(4) an update on the progression and validation status of
the Dismounted Unit Soldier Transport Capability Development
Document, including an anticipated timeline for key milestones,
the basis of issue, and how modular mission payloads will be
reflected in validated requirements;
(5) a description of the initiatives being undertaken to
transition these capabilities to Program Executive Office
Soldier, including roles and responsibilities, timelines, and
specific actions taken to accelerate fielding;
(6) an analysis of the Army's plan to establish a program
of record for validated load-carrying capabilities, including
an acquisition strategy, anticipated funding requirements
across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), and an
indicative fielding timeline; and
(7) an explanation for the Army's non-compliance with the
December 1, 2025 briefing requirement directed in H. Rept. 119-
231 and the steps being taken to ensure timely compliance with
future committee reporting directives.
Army Fixed Wing Capability
The committee is concerned that the Army continues to face
a gap in fixed-wing logistics, personnel transport, and medical
evacuation capability in contested environments in the Indo-
Pacific due to the age of existing aircraft and the absence of
a recapitalization program. The committee encourages the
Secretary of the Army to leverage existing authorities to
implement a contractor-owned, contractor-operated fixed-wing
capability using commercially available aircraft to address
these requirements as expeditiously as practicable. The
committee supports this effort to be executed using current
resources, including Pacific Deterrence Initiative funding
where appropriate, to deliver measurable operational capability
in fiscal year 2027, and emphasizes that this activity is
intended to provide near-term readiness while informing, but
not predetermining, future fixed-wing acquisition decisions.
Army Mobile Tactical Cannon Modernization and Soldier Lethality
The committee believes that the Mobile Tactical Cannon
(MTC) program represents a critical opportunity to transition
the Field Artillery to a more survivable, ``shoot-and-scoot''
capable force through the use of automation.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 11, 2027, on the MTC acquisition
strategy. The briefing shall include:
(1) workload analysis: a comparison of the estimated
soldier physical workload (measured in weight-moved-per-hour)
between current M109A7/M777 systems and the automated solutions
proposed for the MTC;
(2) vendor evaluation criteria: an explanation of how the
Army is weighing automation in the ``Self-Propelled Howitzer
Modernization'' competitive evaluations; and
(3) resupply automation: a plan to integrate automated
ammunition resupply vehicles with the MTC to ensure the entire
``logistics-to-lethality'' chain is modernized.
Army Watercraft Recapitalization Strategy
The committee is aware of the Army's development of a long-
awaited watercraft strategy intended to address an aging fleet
through a combination of service-life extension efforts,
limited procurement of new platforms, increased use of
commercial and modified commercial vessels, and accelerated
experimentation with autonomous systems. The committee remains
concerned by the low percentage of mission ready watercraft
hindering the Army's ability to meet mission requirements that
reduces training opportunities for watercraft personnel.
Further, the committee is concerned that the Army may not
provide resourcing consistent with a realistic strategy to
support the watercraft needed for operations in the Indo-
Pacific area of responsibility. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1,
2027, on the Army's watercraft strategy. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) a clear explanation and concept of operations related
to the recapitalization of the Army watercraft fleet that
includes a discussion of the appropriate mix of both modern
crewed vessels and unmanned systems;
(2) the Army's strategy to meet Combatant Commander
watercraft and joint logistics over-the-shore requirements,
with particular emphasis on the Indo-Pacific region;
(3) an estimate of the resources needed to address any
capability shortfalls across the Future Years Defense Program;
(4) a discussion of various acquisition models for the
unmanned portion of the recapitalization plan to include both
traditional procurement, and leasing opportunities including
government owned-contractor operated and contractor owned-
contactor operated models; and
(5) how the Army plans to sustain these Army watercraft and
resource training for Army personnel in the operation of these
watercraft.
Assessment of the Army's Body-Worn Mission-Command Platform Acquisition
Pathways
The committee notes the critical role that battlefield
awareness and integrated systems play in soldiers' decision-
making. As the Army works to deliver a single platform to
improve sensing and situational awareness, the committee
remains supportive of an integrated soldier-borne solution for
the tactical community. The committee remains committed,
however, to oversight of the new acquisition pathway being
pursued by the Army to deliver on the Soldier Borne Mission
Command (SBMC) initiative given the history of the program's
cost, schedule, and user acceptance challenges.
The committee seeks to better understand how the Army's
acquisition approach will support iterative development of a
solution that will out-perform current equipment, be accepted
by soldiers, and accept modular upgrades to keep pace with a
changing battlefield. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to review:
(1) the extent to which the Army is using iterative
development informed by user feedback;
(2) how the Army is addressing challenges with previous
prototypes such as wearability and low-light performance;
(3) how the Army plans to ensure the SBMC system meets user
needs in operationally realistic environments before proceeding
with production;
(4) the extent to which SBMC is being developed using a
modular open systems approach to enable future upgrades;
(5) whether the Army's cost, scope, and schedule estimates
of the SBMC program are reliable and consistent with Government
Accountability Office leading practices; and
(6) whether the Army's contracting approach and risk
reduction steps include the acquisition of data rights needed
to maintain and sustain key capabilities.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 16, 2027, on the question of a single
integrated system, with additional work to address the question
of alternative options to follow, and present final results in
a format and timeframe agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Autonomous Vehicle Retrofits for Installation Logistics
The committee recognizes that future operational
environments will require the Department of Defense to increase
the use of autonomous systems to support logistics,
sustainment, and routine installation operations. The committee
is aware of commercially available autonomous vehicle
technologies that can be integrated onto existing military
vehicle platforms to improve efficiency, reduce operating
costs, and enhance readiness for repetitive logistics missions
conducted at military installations and depots. The committee
believes that autonomous retrofit solutions may provide a cost-
effective means to accelerate adoption of autonomous
capabilities while maximizing the utility of existing military
assets.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the Army's plans to expand the use of
autonomous vehicle retrofit technologies for installation
logistics and sustainment operations.
The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of ongoing and planned autonomous vehicle
demonstration projects utilizing existing military vehicle
platforms;
(2) a description of funding requirements and resource
constraints associated with expanding such demonstration
projects;
(3) an assessment of the potential impact of autonomous
vehicle technologies on force projection and sustainment
capabilities;
(4) an evaluation of anticipated operational cost savings,
efficiencies, and readiness benefits associated with autonomous
retrofit solutions; and
(5) a roadmap for future deployment of autonomous vehicle
retrofit technologies across Army installations, depots, and
logistics operations.
Carbon Nanotubes on Army Mission Critical Systems
The committee recognizes that the instability in thermal
and electrical interface materials under vibration, blast
loading, and austere operating conditions contributes to
electrostatic discharge, electromagnetic interference, and
thermally driven failure in rotorcraft and other mission
critical Army systems. The committee further notes that prior
National Defense Authorization Acts identified vertically
aligned carbon nanotube technologies (VACNT) as critical to
improving the reliability and survivability of mission critical
Department of Defense platforms.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 30, 2027, to integrate such technologies
across rotorcraft and other mission critical systems. The
briefing shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) assess the extent of instability in thermal and
electrical interface materials under operational conditions
which contributes to electrostatic discharge, electromagnetic
interference, thermal degradation, and related system failures
affecting readiness and operational availability;
(2) outline ongoing and planned efforts by the Army
Research Laboratory and Army Transformation and Training
Command to conduct validation, qualification, and field
demonstration of VACNT and similar technologies;
(3) recommendations to accelerate technology transition
within existing resources, including implementation challenges,
integration pathways, and projected timelines for fielding
across the Army force structure.
Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems Software Upgrade for Tactical
Communications
The committee notes that the Armed Forces field thousands
of tactical communications systems that can provide detection
and sensing capabilities to support counter-unmanned aerial
systems missions. The committee believes that software upgrades
to existing fielded dismounted, handheld, and wearable tactical
communication systems could significantly enhance self-
protection against unmanned aerial systems threats. The
committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in coordination
with the Director of Joint Interagency Task Force 401, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on efforts to upgrade tactical
communications systems for counter-unmanned aerial systems
missions. The briefing should include the following:
(1) efforts to upgrade existing fielded dismounted,
handheld, and wearable tactical communication systems to
enhance self-protection against UAS threats;
(2) plans to prioritize software-based counter-unmanned
aerial systems capabilities for tactical communications; and
(3) any identified funding needs or shortfalls required to
accomplish this modernization.
Digital Night Vision Helmet Mounted Display for Rotary Wing Pilots
The committee recognizes the need to improve situational
awareness for Army rotary wing pilots and the potential for
enhanced situational awareness provided by digital night vision
technology. The committee understands that the Army has
initiated the validation of digital night vision performance in
a helmet mounted display system for all pilots through a flying
prototype demonstration. Such a capability offers performance
at, or better than, current night vision goggles, while also
improving pilot situational awareness.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on the incorporation of digital night
vision technology into a helmet mounted display to improve
holistic situational awareness in degraded visual environment
for rotary wing pilots. The report should include:
(1) an overview of current digital night vision
technologies;
(2) a description of how digital night vision technologies
impact mission readiness;
(3) an assessment of improved situational awareness by the
integration of additional sensors and flight data on the
aircraft; and
(4) an assessment of how the Army will integrate Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast technologies into its rotary-
wing fleet of aircraft, including through the use of helmet-
integrated digital night vision technologies.
Domestic Electric and Hybrid Propulsion Motor Systems for Defense
Platforms
The committee continues to be concerned with the reliance
of the Department of Defense on foreign adversary nations for
parts and components critical to national security. The
committee recognizes the importance of efficient, resilient,
and battlefield-ready propulsion motor systems in maintaining
technological superiority across ground vehicles, aviation
platforms, and unmanned systems. The committee supports efforts
by the Department of Defense to transition toward domestically
manufactured propulsion motor systems and reduce reliance on
foreign manufactured systems and components.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than April 1, 2026, regarding the
Department's strategy to transition to domestically
manufactured electric, hybrid-electric, and high-efficiency
propulsion motor systems for use across defense platforms.
The report shall include;
(1) an assessment of current and projected reliance on
foreign-manufactured propulsion motor systems and related
components;
(2) identification of supply chain vulnerabilities and
single-source dependencies affecting propulsion and power
system manufacturing;
(3) an evaluation of domestic industrial capacity to meet
current and future propulsion modernization requirements;
(4) opportunities to leverage defense research
laboratories, test facilities, and innovation hubs to
accelerate transition and qualification of domestically
produced propulsion systems; and
(5) recommendations to mitigate foreign adversary influence
in propulsion and motor system supply chains.
Ground Autonomy Procurement Strategy
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of the Army
for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 15, 2027, on the Army's strategy to procure
commercially available unmanned ground autonomy solutions using
existing rapid acquisition authorities and nontraditional
funding mechanisms. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) an overview of the Army's current and planned
procurement approach for unmanned ground autonomy software and
systems including small, medium, and large unmanned ground
vehicles capable of operating in complex, off-road, contested,
and communications-degraded environments as well as tailored
development pathways for each platform size and mission
application;
(2) a description of how the Army intends to leverage all
available funding and acquisition pathways, including but not
limited to, the Accelerate the Procurement and Fielding of
Innovative Technologies fund, Other Transaction Authority,
Middle Tier of Acquisition authorities, and other rapid or non-
traditional procurement mechanisms;
(3) an assessment of the feasibility of near-term
procurement and fielding of commercially developed autonomy
capabilities in fiscal years 2027 and 2028, to include a
description of any prerequisites, benchmarks, or milestones for
technology transition from experimentation to production;
(4) identification of the Army organizations responsible
for executing procurement decisions for autonomous ground
systems, including relevant portfolio acquisition executives,
capability program executives, or innovation organizations;
(5) a description of any policy, administrative,
legislative, regulatory contracting, budgeting, or
organizational barriers that may delay procurement, along with
specific recommendations to enable a faster transition from
technology demonstrations to fielded capability in the ground
autonomy sector; and
(6) an explanation of how validated autonomous ground
capabilities will be integrated into operational units,
including an overview of the Army's proposed sustainment,
training, and software update models.
Hybrid Soldier Protection Solutions
The committee understands that current soldier protection
solutions address blast debris, fragmentation, and thermal
protection independently, which results in layered systems with
high weight, bulk, heat burdens, and numerous failure points.
When coupled with three-dimensional knitting, Kevlar EXO, a
para-aramid fiber considerably stronger than Kevlar, can
integrate multiple protective functions, such as fire and blast
debris fragment protection, into a single hybrid protection
system with a reduced weight, bulk, and heat burden for the
wearer compared to layered protective assemblies. Being
inherently flame-resistant, this fiber does not melt or drip
under fire conditions and, by eliminating seams, is highly
durable against blast and thermal stress. To maximize the
return on investment in domestic manufacturing of this fiber,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 15, 2026, describing the Army's plans for
evaluating and incorporating Kevlar EXO into its current and
future soldier protection systems.
Infrastructure to Accelerate and Sustain Counter-Small Unmanned
Aircraft Systems Effectiveness
The committee understands that the Joint Interagency Task
Force-401 (JIATF-401) serves as the primary organization for
bridging the gap between emerging drone threats and operational
defense, and that its mission is to rapidly develop, test, and
field counter-unmanned aircraft system (C-UAS) technology to
defend United States service members and critical
infrastructure from drone threats. The committee notes that
prior to the establishment of JIATF-401, the United States
Army, under the Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Fires,
established the Integrated Fires Rapid Capabilities Office
(IFRCO), which developed a robust lifecycle infrastructure with
mature tools for testing capabilities, system-agnostic
technology integration, and training capabilities focused on
counter-small unmanned aircraft systems (C-sUAS). The committee
acknowledges there is some overlap in operational mandates of
JIATF-401 and IFRCO and therefore seeks to assess how IFRCO's
system-agnostic infrastructure enterprise approach may inform
JIATF-401 to increase overall speed, capability delivery,
sustained effectiveness, and affordability for the Department
and the warfighter.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of JIATF-401, to submit a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the following:
(1) the Army IFRCO's system-agnostic approach to C-UAS
technology integration;
(2) the Army IFRCO's lifecycle infrastructure and tools
used for testing C-UAS capabilities;
(3) the Army IFRCO's training capabilities focused on C-
sUAS; and
(4) how the lessons learned from this report can be applied
to JIATF-401's ongoing mission, and a strategy for establishing
a pre-deployment training environment at home station training
sites and Combat Training Centers under congested and contested
electronic warfare conditions.
Integrated Solution for Soldier Borne Mission Command
The committee recognizes the significant progress made
towards delivery of Army Soldier Borne Mission Command (SBMC)
augmented reality, in addition to day and night vision
capabilities. The committee supports the Army's efforts to
ensure body-worn mission command and situational awareness
systems leverage advances in commercial augmented reality,
digital displays, lightweight computing, and ``smart helmet''
ballistic protection technologies with fully integrated
subsystems and a modular open system architecture. Further, the
committee notes that achieving a next-generation solution will
require the Army to coordinate and aggregate disparate
requirements into a single integrated solution, rather than the
legacy acquisition approach that leverages a common combat
helmet with external attachments. The committee believes that
such efforts should prioritize integrated and modular augmented
reality solutions that maximize warfighter situational
awareness and decision-making while maintaining ballistic
protection and emphasizing an ergonomic, warfighter-centered
design.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the status of integrating
smart helmets for body-worn mission-command platforms. The
briefing shall include:
(1) an overview of how the Army is integrating commercially
available digital displays, augmented reality, lightweight
computing, modular sensors, and modular open system
architecture into a unified smart helmet design;
(2) a description of how such integration optimizes
existing soldier system requirements, including protection,
ergonomics, and operational effectiveness; and
(3) an assessment of programmatic, acquisition, and
resourcing considerations associated with fielding an
integrated SBMC smart helmet solution.
Next Generation Command and Control Transport Layer
The committee remains supportive of the Army's initiative
to modernize the Department's command and control, and
appreciates the effort to more widely adopt open, modular
architecture. However, the committee is concerned that the Army
has not prioritized data transport within the Next Generation
Command and Control (NGC2) framework, and that the Army
currently plans to rely on legacy radio systems, private
networks, and satellite communications. The committee is aware
that secure, private, and resilient commercial cellular
networks have been used for other mission sets within the
Department of Defense. The committee believes that commercial
cellular connectivity, when secured, has the potential to lower
costs, increase resiliency, enhance mobility, and increase
lethality as demonstrated in Guam and Taiwan.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
December 1, 2026, on the NGC2 transport layer. The report shall
include:
(1) development and acquisition processes and timelines;
(2) an assessment of available commercial solutions,
including secure cellular connectivity capabilities, to address
transport layer requirements; and
(3) integration strategy of the transport layer into the
larger NGC2 architecture.
Next-Generation Auxiliary Power for Ground Vehicles and Next Generation
Command and Control
The committee recognizes the need to provide auxiliary
power capabilities for the Ground Combat Vehicle fleet to
relieve demand on the primary engine and to support additional
payloads, silent watch, and other consumers of electrical power
on the platform. The committee further recognizes that emerging
command post concepts emphasize mobility, dispersion, and
survivability. These concepts increase the importance of
reliable power for mission command and networked systems
associated with next generation command and control (NGC2) and
command post modernization efforts.
The committee is concerned that the Army lacks a clear home
for this requirement as well as a defined transition path for a
vehicle-mounted auxiliary power unit (APU) that both
supplements vehicle power and, in many use cases, provides the
primary source of power for NGC2-enabled dispersed command post
operations. Given the vehicle-mounted nature of the capability,
the committee expects primary responsibility to reside with
Portfolio Acquisition Executive (PAE) Maneuver Ground, with
close coordination with PAE Command & Control (C2)/Counter-C2.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the Army's plan to validate and
assign requirements ownership and acquisition responsibility
for vehicle-mounted auxiliary power. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) the identification of the Army organization designated
as the requirements proponent for vehicle-mounted auxiliary
power;
(2) the identification of a single lead acquisition
organization and program office responsible for platform
integration, transition to production, and life-cycle
management;
(3) a plan to integrate and field the capability across
applicable vehicle platforms and command post configurations,
including power export and at-the-halt employment; and
(4) a roadmap across the Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP) that identifies key decision points, test and evaluation
needs, and the resourcing approach for transition to production
and fielding at scale.
Report on Army Autonomous Resupply Vessel Investment Strategy
The committee supports the Army's pursuit of autonomous
resupply vessels for maritime logistics and is encouraged by
dedicated funding included in the budget request. The committee
notes the importance of Army watercraft in the Pacific theater,
the rapid pace of commercial innovation in maritime autonomy,
and related investments in autonomous surface vessels across
the military services.
The committee believes Army investments in autonomous
surface vessels can enhance logistics capabilities if such
systems address operational gaps and can be fielded and
sustained on operationally relevant timelines. The committee
encourages the Army to prioritize autonomous resupply vessels
in resourcing decisions and to leverage commercially available
autonomous surface vessels with proven resilient autonomy and
high-payload capacity.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Army's efforts to integrate
commercial autonomous surface vessel technologies into the
fleet for logistics support. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) current and planned Army investments in autonomous
surface vessel programs, including efforts to leverage
commercially available platforms and technologies;
(2) an assessment of how such investments address gaps
identified in operational plans for peacetime and conflict,
including suitability for the Indo-Pacific theater with respect
to sea state survivability, payload capacity, range,
survivability, and resilient communications and navigation;
(3) plans to test and evaluate available platforms in the
Pacific theater, including potential use in peacetime
operations under contractor-owned, contractor-operated
arrangements;
(4) collaboration with the other military services on
autonomous surface vessel development activities; and
(5) a 5-year roadmap for expanding investment in commercial
autonomous surface vessel offerings, including operational
priorities, budgetary planning, and industrial base capacity.
Sustainment of the Army Long-Range Persistent Surveillance System
The committee is aware that the Army began fielding the
long-range persistent surveillance (ALPS) system for use in
several combatant commands in response to a joint urgent
operational need. These sensors enable forces to passively
track cruise missiles, fixed and rotary wing aircraft, and
unmanned aircraft while avoiding radio frequency emissions and
detection by adversary electronic warfare assets. The Army has
continued delivery of ALPS systems to additional military
facilities based on emerging threat requirements, but the
original systems deployed to combatant commands lack a defined
software upgrade and sustainment schedule.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on plans and associated funding in place to
ensure the ALPS systems are sustained for continued operation
until their capabilities are no longer required. The briefing
should include the following:
(1) the current operational status and deployment locations
of ALPS systems, including the number of systems fielded to
each combatant command;
(2) a description of any software or hardware upgrades
planned for currently fielded ALPS systems, including timelines
and funding profiles;
(3) the Army's long-term sustainment strategy for ALPS,
including whether a program-of-record acquisition is planned;
and
(4) estimated resources required to sustain capability
through the end of service life.
Unmanned Surface Vessels for Escort of Army Watercraft
The committee recognizes the increasing operational risk
faced by Army watercraft conducting logistics, maneuver, and
sustainment missions in joint, contested, and distributed
operating environments. The committee notes that many Army
watercraft possess limited organic defensive capabilities,
increasing vulnerability to asymmetric threats, unmanned
systems, and enemy fires.
The committee believes that manned Army watercraft may be
aided by dedicated unmanned surface vessels (USV) providing
enhanced force protection, early warning, sensing, and
defensive effects while reducing risk to personnel. Therefore,
the committee commends the Army's use of competitive
experimentation and prototyping activities, including
initiatives such as xTech Pacific, to evaluate autonomous
watercraft and escort concepts. The committee further applauds
the Army's emphasis on engaging U.S. industry to identify
mature, proven autonomy solutions and encourages continued
consideration of commercially available capabilities where
appropriate.
To better understand the status of Army consideration of
escort USVs, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than February 1, 2027. The report shall assess the
feasibility, operational utility, and acquisition pathways for
an indigenous USV escort capability for Army watercraft. The
report shall include:
(1) a description of operational mission sets and threat
environments in which autonomous or semi-autonomous escort
vessels could enhance the survivability of Army watercraft;
(2) an assessment of existing and emerging autonomy
technologies, including commercially available solutions from
U.S. industry, relevant to escort, sensing, and force
protection missions;
(3) a summary of ongoing experimentation and prototyping
efforts, including lessons learned from competitive events and
demonstrations;
(4) an evaluation of potential acquisition approaches to
transition successful prototypes into operational use and,
where appropriate, programs of record; and
(5) an assessment of projected resource requirements and
considerations for sustaining investment in autonomous escort
capabilities in future budget submissions.
Unmanned, Autonomous, Runway-Agnostic Aerial Cargo Delivery for
Contested Logistics
The committee recognizes that sustained and survivable
logistics maneuver in contested environments is a joint force
imperative for both homeland defense and operations in the Indo
Pacific region. The committee encourages the Department of
Defense to accelerate the development and fielding of unmanned,
autonomous, runway-agnostic aerial cargo delivery capabilities
employable by maneuvering joint units.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in
coordination with the Commander, U.S. Transportation Command
(USTRANSCOM), the Commander, Air Mobility Command (AMC), and
the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on plans to mature, demonstrate, and field
unmanned, autonomous, runway-agnostic aerial cargo delivery
platforms suitable for joint use in contested logistics
operations. The briefing should include the following:
(1) joint requirements alignment and the role of joint user
representatives;
(2) acquisition pathway, including consideration of Other
Transaction, Middle Tier of Acquisition, and Commercial
Solutions Opening authorities;
(3) airworthiness certification approach for autonomous
platforms and airdroppable container subsystems;
(4) integration with existing airdrop, resupply, and
personnel recovery systems;
(5) projected production, sustainment, and fielding
timelines; and
(6) a description of any limitations on operational
employment by maneuvering units below the level of USTRANSCOM
and AMC.
Wireless intercommunication systems for Army ground vehicles
The committee understands there is a capability gap across
the Army Ground Combat Vehicle fleet in wireless
intercommunications, which would provide internal and external
wireless communications to ensure safe freedom of movement and
effective communication of both mounted and dismounted crews.
The committee understands the Army is procuring a Wireless
Intercommunication System (WICS) for the M88A2 Improved
Recovery Vehicle to support crew communication during recovery
operations in high-noise environments and while crewmembers
operate on and around the vehicle, but that so far no WICS have
been procured for other vehicle platforms.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the status of Wireless
Intercommunication System (WICS) procurement, integration, and
fielding for the M88 fleet, and the potential applicability of
wireless intercom capability across the broader ground vehicle
fleet. The briefing shall include, at a minimum:
(1) a status update on WICS procurement, integration,
testing, and fielding for the M88A2 Improved Recovery Vehicle;
(2) results to date from any operational assessments, user
evaluations, or other soldier touchpoints associated with the
M88 WICS system;
(3) an assessment of potential applicability, integration
considerations, and expected operational benefits of wireless
intercom capability across the wider vehicle fleet, including
Abrams, Bradley, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV), and
other ground combat and support vehicles; and
(4) any plans to procure and integrate WICS across the
broader Army ground vehicle fleet.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Items of Special Interest
Scaling Production and Proliferating Capability of the Collaborative
Combat Aircraft
The committee commends the effective collaboration between
the Air Force and industry on Increment 1 of the Collaborative
Combat Aircraft (CCA) program. The committee recognizes the
rapid evolution of the program, in which both CCA variants
progressed from initial contract award to successful flight
demonstrations in 18 months, faster than any other major
tactical fighter-like aircraft program in recent history, while
continuing rigorous testing to mature the collaborative manned-
unmanned teaming concepts defining this capability. To sustain
this accelerated pace and deliver CCA's innovative capabilities
to the warfighter, the committee supports the Air Force's
event-driven, rapid transition of CCA Increment 1 to
production.
The committee further recognizes the Air Forces active
engagement with allies and partners for CCA international
expansion and fully supports the exploration of exporting this
capability whenever possible via foreign military or direct
commercial sales programs to enhance interoperability, share
financial burdens, fund development of unique capabilities, and
strengthen deterrence. The committee encourages the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in
partnership with the Secretary of the Air Force, to facilitate
exploration of providing these capabilities to allies and
partners as expeditiously as possible.
The committee is also encouraged by the Navy and Marine
Corps efforts to establish their own CCA programs with expanded
mission capabilities throughout the Joint Force. The Navy and
Marine Corps should leverage the mature and innovative
technologies and processes developed through USAF Increment 1
and the model of collaboration between the Air Force and
industry to accelerate development, improve capability
delivered, and reduce risks in both cost and schedule.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 15, 2026, on the acquisition strategy
for the Navy and Marine Corps CCA programs. The briefing should
include at a minimum:
(1) development strategies and technology leveraged and
incorporated from the Air Force CCA program;
(2) opportunities to update the tri-service agreement to
align capabilities and resources; and
(3) the potential to field CCA as complementary to, or in
place of, existing capabilities.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Items of Special Interest
Anti-Ship Missile Portfolio Review
The committee remains supportive of the Navy's efforts to
expand its strike capabilities in anti-access/area-denial (A2/
AD) environments, such as the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare
Increment II (OASuW Inc II)/Hypersonic Air Launched OASuW
(HALO) program. HALO is intended to be an aircraft carrier-
suitable, high-speed, long-range air-launched weapon that will
increase the Navy's ability to provide long-range munitions in
A2/AD environments.
The committee understands the Navy intended to accelerate
fielding of HALO to support an early operational fielding
capability in fiscal year 2029. However, in early fiscal year
2025, the Navy notified the committee of its intent to cancel
the solicitation for the HALO engineering, manufacturing, and
development (EMD) effort, citing insufficient funding.
Subsequently, the Navy discontinued work on the HALO transition
to EMD effort and proceeded with a restructuring of the program
to emphasize technology maturation. Although the requirement
for a HALO-like capability remains valid, the committee is
concerned that development is languishing.
Additionally, the committee is also aware of promising
opportunities associated with the Multi-mission Affordable
Capacity Effector. This weapon is intended to complement the
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), which the committee notes
that the Department plans to increase production rates of LRASM
over the upcoming years. Aircraft carrier aviation forces are
expected to generate, for the combatant commander, numerous
sorties at long-range with its onboard stores of munitions.
These expectations make optimizing the Navys air-launched anti-
ship weapons portfolio critical to ensuring mission
effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on the planned portfolio of
air-launched anti-ship weapons in development and procurement
over the next 10 years. This briefing should include, but is
not limited to the:
(1) recommended weapon mix and loadouts for missions,
considering cost per engagement;
(2) current threshold and objective range requirements for
the anti-ship missile portfolio, highlighting any recent
changes to these requirements; and
(3) intended acquisition strategy for each weapon program.
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile Surface and Ground Launch
The committee recognizes the challenges in resourcing
munitions inventories and in developing new missiles to meet
current and future threats. The committee believes that
opportunities to adapt and integrate combat-proven weapons for
additional missions can reduce risk, timelines and cost in
fielding new capabilities. The committee is aware of the urgent
need to deliver coordinated and integrated maritime strike
capability to combatant commanders, and further aware of the
opportunity to leverage the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile
(LRASM) to provide new surface-launched maritime strike
capability. Development and integration of a surface-launched
LRASM would enhance distributed lethality and ensure a
credible, survivable long-range strike option for both surface
combatants and future attack submarines.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
no later than March 31, 2027, on efforts to demonstrate and
develop surface launched LRASM, including:
(1) results of any Navy or industry-funded demonstration
efforts on surface launched LRASM; advantages and limitations
of surface launched LRASM; and
(2) cost comparison between surface launched LRASM and
other maritime strike solutions.
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
Items of Special Interest
Affordable Expeditionary Long-Range Precision Fires
The committee notes that the Marine Corps faces a
persistent gap in expeditionary long-range precision fires for
forces operating from forward and distributed locations in
contested maritime environments.
Additionally, the committee notes that the termination of
the Marine Corps Tomahawk program has created an immediate
shortfall in long-range strike capability for Marine forces
operating beyond the range of existing ground-based systems.
The committee strongly supports Department of the Navy and
Marine Corps efforts to integrate and demonstrate an affordable
long-range cruise missile capability suitable for employment
from manned and unmanned aircraft systems, including the Marine
Corps MQ-9.
The committee directs the Department to prioritize mature
technologies that can be rapidly integrated, produced at scale,
and manufactured domestically to expand the industrial base and
improve surge capacity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Commandant of the Marine Corps, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than April 1, 2027, on progress toward aircraft
integration and operational demonstration of such capability,
including cost, schedule, risk, and industrial base impacts.
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Items of Special Interest
Advanced Manufacturing and Fabrication for the Submarine Industrial
Base
The committee is aware that the submarine industrial base's
efforts to scale up production is hampered by supply chain
fragility. The committee notes that the industry depends on
thousands of highly specialized components produced by limited
networks of suppliers, many of which are single or sole source.
Delays in small-part fabrication and material availability
frequently create bottlenecks that ripple across the entire
production system, resulting in schedule delays and cost
growth.
To better understand efforts to support the industrial base
for small parts and items, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027 on its plan for
addressing this particular challenge. The briefing should
include, at a minimum, the following.
(1) a feasibility assessment on potential organic small
parts manufacturing and fabrication capability;
(2) an update on any findings by the working group created
in response to section 1843 of the fiscal year 2026 NDAA
related to internal barriers to procurement;
(3) analysis regarding opportunities for incentivizing
advanced manufacturing and other novel manufacturing techniques
that still meet all standards and specifications; and
(3) information on potential reforms to the Navy stock
number system that would enhance competition and ensure that
qualified vendors can bid on parts solicitations.
Assessment of the Ford Class Aircraft Carrier Program
The committee notes that the Ford Class Carrier is a
significant investment and national defense asset, averaging
more than $15 billion dollars for each vessel. However, the
committee is concerned that continued construction challenges
and cost increases hinder the ability of the Navy to deliver
this critical capability in a timely manner to meet increasing
operational needs. Further, the committee understands that the
Navy is reviewing the design of the Ford class carrier to
determine if changes need to be made for future ships to meet
the Navy's evolving needs. While design changes could offer
improvements in capability and cost, they could also introduce
new construction challenges. Therefore, the committee directs
the Comptroller General of the United States to provide a brief
to the House Committee on Armed Services no later than January
1, 2027, on how they will assess:
(1) the key challenges impacting cost and schedule
performance on the carrier program.
(2) an assessment of any planned design changes for future
ships and the associated benefits and challenges.
(3) the extent to which the program is using leading ship
design practices and advanced manufacturing capabilities.
BBG(X) Program Impact on the U.S. Maritime Industrial Base
The committee continues to support efforts to expand the
U.S. maritime industrial base and accelerate U.S. shipbuilding
production and recognizes the progress that has been made on
these efforts through coordination between Congress, the
Department of Defense, and industry. However, the committee is
concerned about the possibility of strain on U.S. nuclear
shipyards and maritime industrial base posed by the aggressive
schedule proposed for producing a nuclear-powered BBG(X)
platform.
The committee notes that the United States operates only
two shipyards that are qualified to construct nuclear-powered
vessels and that only one of these two shipyards, located in
Newport News, Virginia, actively constructs surface vessels,
including the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier program.
The committee is aware that the timelines for completion of the
three Ford-class aircraft carriers currently under construction
have experienced significant delays due to a variety of reasons
including supply chain and workforce challenges. The committee
is concerned that these factors, coupled with a lack of
physical shipbuilding capacity, could be further exacerbated by
a new nuclear-powered surface vessel program and without
careful planning could jeopardize Ford-class delivery.
Further, the committee is concerned by the BBG(X)'s
program's impact to the U.S. naval nuclear reactor industrial
base. The United States Navy procures naval nuclear reactors
from a single supplier, which completes essential work for U.S.
Virginia-class, Columbia-class, and Gerald R. Ford-class
programs. The committee notes that the procurement of naval
nuclear reactors typically occurs 2-to-3 years ahead of
procurement of a respective vessel and reactor production
timelines typically range from 6-to-8 years. The committee is
concerned that the accelerated procurement timeline for the
BBG(X) program will result in a negative impact on this supply
chain.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Director of the Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program, to provide a report to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the Navy's
strategy to design and construct BBG(X) without interfering
with existing nuclear-powered shipbuilding plans, including the
scheduled construction of the USS Enterprise (CVN-80), USS
Doris Miller (CVN-81) and USS William J. Clinton (CVN-82). The
report should include, but is not limited to, the following
information:
(1) the Navy's strategy to reduce construction delays for
CVN-80, CVN-81, and CVN-82;
(2) the Navy's projection for construction and delivery
timelines for a nuclear-powered BBG(X) program, to include
procurement of long-lead material such as naval nuclear
reactors;
(3) an assessment of the capacity of existing U.S.
shipyards, certified for nuclear-powered vessel construction,
to support construction of a nuclear-powered BBG(X) without
delaying scheduled construction of projected and under-contract
vessels within the Virginia-class, Columbia-class, and Gerald
R. Ford-class programs;
(4) an assessment of the capacity of the U.S. naval nuclear
reactor industrial base capacity to support the construction of
a nuclear-powered BBG(X) without delaying scheduled
construction of projected and under-contract vessels within the
Virginia-class, Columbia-class, and Gerald R. Ford-class
programs; and (5) a summary of the maritime industrial base
vendors, particularly those with long-lead time items or that
have single source suppliers and their capacity to support the
construction of the BBG(X) without delaying construction of
already scheduled shipbuilding efforts.
Design for T-AH(X)
The committee is aware that the USNS Comfort and USNS Mercy
have been in service for approximately forty years and are
nearing the end of their service lives. The committee is
concerned that without a replacement for these aging vessels,
the Department of Defense may lose the ability to provide
afloat mobile trauma, surgical, diagnostic, and supportive
medical care in a contested environment as well as the ability
to provide humanitarian assistance and disaster response
services. The committee notes that in order to recapitalize the
hospital ships in a timely and cost effective manner to ensure
mobile hospitalization is available in forward locations, the
Navy must consider existing designs and opportunities to reuse
existing hull forms to the extent practicable. The committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2026 on the
availability of viable existing designs or alternative uses of
existing hull forms to provide expeditious and affordable
recapitalization of the hospital ship fleet. The report shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) a description of available designs that could be used
or modified as the basis for the T-AH(X) hospital ship
replacement to avoid a lengthy clean-sheet design process;
(2) information on the size, power, and speed requirements
for such vessels and the extent to which the available designs
in (1) meet this requirements;
(3) information on any existing, or easily modified,
features for available designs that would facilitate operation
in expeditionary environments such as roll-on roll-off
capability; and
(4) an assessment on whether the use of a Vessel Contract
Manager for procurement could further ensure that the T-AH(x)
build schedule remains on budget and schedule.
Domestic Production Capacity and Supply of Military-Specification
Welding Wire in Shipbuilding
The committee understands the critical role that high-
quality military-specification (MIL-Spec) welding wire plays in
the construction of Navy submarines and surface ships, as well
as other critical defense platforms, equipment, and additive
manufacturing, particularly wire arc additive manufacturing,
which is essential for advancing the nation's advance
manufacturing capabilities and resolving supply chain issues
that hamper the defense industrial base.
However, the committee is concerned that growing demand for
these materials (MIL-spec and corresponding welding wire
products) will critically strain the planned expansions in Navy
shipbuilding and other critical defense platforms. To reduce
any dependencies on foreign sources and to build domestic
industrial base resilience, the committee believes the
Department of the Navy must further prioritize sustaining and
expanding domestic MIL-spec welding wire production capacity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 30, 2026. The briefing shall include:
(1) an analysis of the projected volume of MIL-Spec welding
wire needed for new construction, sustainment, and additively
manufactured components, and the projected volume of domestic
capacity to produce and supply it for the Fiscal Year 2027-2031
Future Years Defense Plan;
(2) identification of factors that could limit domestic
capacity to produce and supply MIL-Spec welding wire, such as
commercial sector demands that strain defense production, raw
materials sourcing, near and long-term changes in production
rates of Navy surface ships and submarines, and other relevant
factors;
(3) a review of any current or planned efforts to address
domestic capacity shortfalls or limitations in meeting the
Navy's current or projected needs for welding wire, as well as
any budget resources or authorities needed; and
(4) any other matters the Secretary deems necessary.
Navy Implementation of the Hedge Strategy
The committee understands that one of 5 critical needs in
the Navy's new strategy, called the Hedge Strategy, is to
deliver cost-effective capabilities to enhance fleet lethality
and resilience. The Navy lists several categories for these
critical needs, including: autonomous systems for sea denial
and global seabed control; decision advantage for Maritime
Operations Centers; force resilience (examples include Counter-
Command, Control, Computers, Intelligence Surveillance,
Reconnaissance, and Targeting and directed energy); cost
effective storage, sustainment, and production of munitions;
and advanced manufacturing processes to improve supply chain
resiliency. The Navy has not historically prioritized and
funded these types of non-platform capabilities and enablers
that are critical to enhancing the capabilities of its ships
and submarines. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to provide a brief to
the House Committee on Armed Services no later than January 1,
2027, on how they will assess:
(1) the Navy's efforts to acquire cost-effective systems
and weapons that enhance fleet lethality and resilience within
these categories. This body of work should be addressed at
relevant levels of classification.
(2) the role of the Navy's new Rapid Capabilities Office to
acquire these capabilities, comparing the effectiveness of the
Rapid Capabilities Office processes with other similar
acquisition offices within the Department of Defense.
(3) whether there is an adequate level of coordination,
input, and involvement from the fleet when acquiring these
systems and capabilities.
(4) the Navy's ability to scale solutions and deploy them
beyond prototyping and experimentation.
Power and Propulsion Architecture for Large Surface Combatant
The committee recognizes that investing in a next
generation large surface combatant ship to replace the guided
missile cruiser is essential to the Navy's continued dominance
in the maritime domain. The committee notes that developing the
cruiser's replacement will require a significant long-term
investment in both combatant capability and the power and
propulsion system that will be required to ensure sufficient
and adaptable power generation over the lifecycle of the
vessel. The committee is aware that decisions related to
propulsion system selection and integration early in the
process will greatly impact cost, schedule, sustainment, and
modernization capacity throughout the ship's service life.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
December 30, 2026 on its strategy for developing power and
propulsion architecture for its next large surface combatant.
The briefing shall include the following:
(1) a discussion of the process the Navy is using to assess
the next large surface combatant's power and propulsion
requirements and the current estimate of the vessel's power and
propulsion requirement;
(2) planning assumptions the Navy is using related to the
amount of reserve power required to ensure the vessel remains
relevant and capable of being modernized throughout its service
life;
(3) how the Navy will seek to prioritize domestic design
and manufacturing;
(4) an evaluation of whether the Navy can leverage DDG(X),
or other recent propulsion investments, to reduce cost,
schedule risk, and technical uncertainty; and
(5) an evaluation of domestic industrial-base capacity to
design and manufacture the next large surface combatants power
and propulsion system.
Submarine Construction Wage Enhancements and Impacts to Supply Chain
The committee is aware of the ongoing efforts to enhance
wages for workers within the submarine industrial base and is
pleased by the positive impact they have had on workforce
recruitment and retention. The committee is also aware of the
complex ecosystem of subcontractors and component suppliers
that is essential to the on time delivery of these complicated
platforms. The committee notes that recruitment and retention
issues within this supplier base can exacerbate supply chain
fragility and lead to downstream delays that impact the
delivery schedule. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by January 15, 2027, on its
observations and proposed actions to ensure workforce stability
in the submarine supply bases. The briefing should include, at
a minimum, an assessment of wage competitiveness within the
supply base with an emphasis on critical components and sole-
source suppliers.
Other Procurement, Navy
Items of Special Interest
Acquisition and Sustainment of Large Diameter Unmanned Undersea
Vehicles
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of the
Navy's Large Diameter Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (LDUUV) and
Extra-Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (XLUUV) efforts to
maintaining United States advantage in the undersea domain. The
committee supports innovation and rapid prototyping, including
efforts advanced through the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), but
notes that long-term operational success will depend on whether
these systems can be matured beyond prototyping efforts to be
procured, sustained, and repeatedly deployed in support of
combatant command requirements.
The committee is concerned that as LDUUV and XLUUV efforts
transition from rapid development pathways into programs of
record or sustained procurement, lifecycle readiness and
industrial-base capacity may not be fully assessed as part of
transition decisions. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than June 1, 2027, on
LDUUV and XLUUV procurement and sustainment planning. The
report should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the industrial-base capacity to
operate, maintain, and sustain LDUUV and XLUUV platforms across
their expected lifecycle;
(2) a summary of how lifecycle sustainment, operational
availability, and total ownership cost are incorporated into
acquisition strategies, source-selection criteria, and DIU
transition decisions;
(3) a description of how DIU-led prototype efforts for
LDUUV or XLUUV platforms are evaluated for transition to
sustained procurement, including any relevant key performance
indicators used in such determinations;
(4) an analysis of existing domestic sustainment
infrastructure for subsea systems and companies with experience
operating autonomous systems at a relevant scale to fleet
operations; and
(5) information on proposed actions to strengthen
competition, improve transition pathways, and ensure enduring
readiness outcomes as these systems scale beyond prototype
development.
Extra-Large Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Fielding Acceleration
The Committee commends the Navy and the Defense Innovation
Unit (DIU) for competitively demonstrating commercially
available extra-large unmanned underwater vehicles (XLUUVs)
capable of deploying large payloads across extended ranges in
contested environments. The Committee recognizes that
competitive at-sea demonstrations conducted under the Combat
Autonomous Maritime Platform program have identified scalable,
cost-effective XLUUV platforms capable of addressing
longstanding operational requirements in priority theaters,
including U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
The Committee further encourages the Secretary of the Navy
to accelerate adoption of the XLUUV platforms selected through
the Combat Autonomous Maritime Platform programs 2025
competitive process to transition these systems from
experimentation to operational deployment and to equip priority
commands with the capabilities required to meet Fleet demands.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, outlining plans to accelerate the
adoption and fielding of XLUUVs and associated payloads
utilizing existing production contracts. The briefing shall
include:
(1) a projected timeline for fielding XLUUV platforms
selected by the Navy and DIU to operational commands;
(2) the Navys plan to accelerate integration,
demonstration, and deployment of commercial and government-
furnished payloads deployed from XLUUV platforms;
(3) options to leverage innovative operational models,
including commercially owned, commercially operated models, to
accelerate transition and reduce costs across doctrine,
organization, training, materiel, leadership and education,
personnel, and facilities; and
(4) any other matters the Secretary believes relevant.
Low-Cost Undersea Effectors
The committee recognizes that the Navys existing undersea
weapons programs, including heavyweight and lightweight
torpedoes, are highly capable and optimized for high-end
conflict against peer adversary naval platforms, such as
capital ships, submarines, and larger resupply vessels.
However, these munitions, launched from submarines, surface
ships, and anti-submarine warfare aircraft, are limited in
quantity, and it is essential to preserve these high-cost
capabilities for appropriate high-end threats.
The committee is aware of the Defense Innovation Units Low-
Cost Undersea Effectors Problem Set 1, which is designed to
accelerate the development of affordable small unmanned
underwater vehicles capable of serving as kinetic weapons.
These platforms would leverage the existing lightweight torpedo
form factor while being optimized for a distinct target set and
compatible with a broader range of launch platforms. These
systems are intended to support subsea and seabed warfare,
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and
expeditionary missions while delivering scalable kinetic
effects against lower-end maritime targets.
The committee believes that funding and executing Low-Cost
Undersea Effectors Problem Set 1 to its intended scope, while
rapidly transitioning viable systems into scaled production and
operational use, could provide the mass and capacity required
for distributed maritime operations. The committee further
believes the Department of the Navy should leverage rapid
acquisition authorities, including other transaction
authorities, and related research, development, test, and
evaluation and procurement accounts to accelerate procurement
and fielding of successful Low-Cost Undersea Effectors Problem
Set 1 systems.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 31, 2026, on current development, transition, and
procurement efforts related to Low-Cost Undersea Effectors
Problem Set 1. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of any plans to transition capabilities
and solutions emerging from Low-Cost Undersea Effectors Problem
Set 1 into fleet experimentation, procurement, or programs of
record;
(2) a description of any efforts to begin limited
procurement of successful Low-Cost Undersea Effectors Problem
Set 1 awardees for operational experimentation and fleet
integration; and
(3) a description of any planned funding profiles or
acquisition guidance to accelerate deployment of Low-Cost
Undersea Effectors Problem Set 1 capabilities.
Multi-Mission Reconnaissance Boat
The committee recognizes that the United States Marine
Corps has an unfilled requirement for multi-mission
reconnaissance boats as highlighted by a signed 2021 deliberate
universal needs statement (D-UNS). The document highlights the
Marine Corps' need for a platform to support organic littoral
maneuver from the sea to support surveillance and
reconnaissance as well as other combat functions with a reduced
threat of adversary detection. The multi-mission reconnaissance
boat is needed to extend the operational reach of commanders,
while enabling Marine forces to execute littoral operations in
contested environments and expeditionary advanced base
operations concepts. As of 2026, the Marine Corps has not
established a program of record that would fulfill this
requirement.
To better understand efforts to meet this requirement, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination
with the Commandant of the Marine Corps, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, that details how the Marine Corps will meet the
requirement described in the signed 2021 Multi-Mission
Reconnaissance Boat D-UNS.
Payload Integration for Unmanned Surface Vessels
The committee is pleased with the progress the Navy has
made in robotic and autonomous systems in the past year,
prioritizing the fielding of these capabilities, especially
through the Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel (MUSV) program. The
committee has supported these efforts by ensuring that adequate
foundational funding is available to support the development
and testing of this technology. However, the committee believes
the Navy must ensure minimum operational availability
requirements for all ship systems in order to ensure the
success of these programs. In order to ensure MUSV payload
integration challenges are adequately addressed, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 26, 2027
on recommended standards and qualifications that will be used
to evaluate the performance of payload integration for the MUSV
assets and other similar medium and large unmanned surface
vessels. The report shall include information on the following:
(1) current or planned efforts to conduct sea trials for at
least 720 hours;
(2) current or planned efforts to test at various sea
states to include operational representative sea states and
night/all weather conditions;
(3) utilization of integrated modular payload bay of
standard International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
containers;
(4) current or planned efforts to test a mix of Command,
Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) suites, passive and active sensors,
and containerized effectors on a MUSV hull;
(5) demonstrations of stable power, cooling, and data
interfaces;
(6) demonstrations of USV autonomous launch, recovery,
refuels/recharge, and data-offload;
(7) current or planned efforts to demonstrate launch of
small USVs, Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUV), and Vertical
Take-off and Land (VTOL) or fixed-wing Unmanned Aerial Systems
(UAS) from deck-based or containerized handling systems; and
(8) what the Navy's plan is for procuring, testing, and
integrating mission payloads into USV platforms that require
operational reliability at scale.
Plan to Accelerate Procurement and Integration of Commercially
Available sUSVs
The committee recognizes the potential of small Unmanned
Surface Vessels (sUSVs) to enhance the operational
effectiveness, force projection, and cost efficiency of the
United States Navy, offering scalable and adaptable
capabilities that support distributed maritime operations. The
committee notes the increased demand from multiple geographic
Combatant Commands for additional sUSVs to meet a variety of
urgent mission needs.
The committee further notes the rapid pace of innovation in
the commercial sector, where advances in autonomy, software,
and maritime systems have yielded highly capable and cost-
effective sUSV solutions. The committee emphasizes that greater
adoption of commercial technologies and platforms could enhance
fleet readiness, reduce developmental timelines, and lower
overall costs compared to government designs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than February 23, 2027, on the Navy's efforts to
accelerate procurement of commercially available sUSVs and
integrate them into the fleet. The report shall include, but is
not limited to:
(1) an analysis of current and planned Navy investments in
sUSV programs, including a description of how Navy acquisition
strategy leverages commercially available platforms and
technologies;
(2) a description of plans for additional procurement,
fielding, and sustainment of sUSVs (including plans to
recapitalize the sUSV fleet as platforms reach their service
life), leveraging mandatory funds provided by Public Law 119-21
and FY2026 appropriated funds, as well as funds projected in
future years budget requests;
(3) identification of barriers to acquisition of commercial
sUSV systems and recommendations to streamline procurement
processes; and
(4) an assessment of opportunities for public-private
partnerships to accelerate the adoption and deployment of
commercial sUSVs.
Sonobuoy Procurement
The committee supports buying additional sonobuoys to meet
anti-submarine warfare requirements. The budget request
contained $301.151 million in PE 0204271 for sonobuoys. The
committee recommends $551.151 million, an increase of $250.0
million, for the program.
Torpedo Tube Launch and Recovery Capability for Unmanned Undersea
Vehicles
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
advancing undersea warfare capabilities to maintain strategic
and tactical superiority in maritime operations around the
world. The deployment of Unmanned Undersea Vehicles (UUVs) from
submarines using the autonomous Torpedo Tube Launch and
Recovery (TTL&R) capability that has been repeatably
demonstrated during Project Rattrap in real-world conditions,
is a key capability that enhances the submarine fleets
operational flexibility and effectiveness. Rattrap TTL&R
provides substantial benefits to national security by enabling
submarines to deploy and recover UUVs discreetly thereby
extending their tactical reach well beyond their covert
position. This capability enables our naval forces to conduct
more productive undersea activities with substantially reduced
risk to the submarine, the crew and the United States
government. Further, the technologically advanced capability
substantially increases operational reach without compromising
submarine stealth characteristics.
The committee commends the Navy and the Defense Innovation
Unit for their investments to add this critical capability to
the undersea warfare strategy and directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 31, 2026. The briefing should
include information on the Navy's plans to integrate UUVs with
Rattrap TTL&R functionality across the entire submarine fleet,
including resource requirements for the acquisition and
sustainment of TTL&R capable UUVs through future budget
requests.
Unmanned Surface Vessel Industrial Base
The committee notes the growing operational requirements
for unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) across multiple mission
areas, including maritime security, intelligence, surveillance,
reconnaissance, logistics, and force protection. The committee
is concerned that a lack of consistent requirements signaling
from the Department of the Navy may negatively impact the USV
industrial base, resulting in loss of skilled labor, supplier
fragility, and increased costs to reconstitute production
capacity during periods of crisis or rapid demand growth. The
committee notes that consistency in priorities, communication,
and acquisition strategy can help stabilize the industrial base
and ensure a competitive vendor base. The committee therefore
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1,
2026, that details its plan for communicating demand,
requirements, and acquisition strategy to the USV industrial
base. At a minimum, this briefing should include consideration
of the following:
(1) how the Department's approach can contribute to
sustaining a distributed, competitive production capacity for
USVs;
(2) the relative merits of various procurement models
including contractor ownership or operation of USVs;
(3) the impact of the Department's approach on critical
suppliers, tooling, and workforce skills; and
(4) how lessons learned from submarine and surface
shipbuilding sectors can be applied to maintaining a robust USV
industrial base.
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Detection and Deterrence
The committee notes with concern the continued
proliferation of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) by both
state and non-state adversaries. Recent global events
demonstrate that exquisite defense platforms, including
nuclear-powered submarines, remain highly vulnerable to
stealthy, low-cost, ubiquitous UUVs. The committee emphasizes
that the threat posed by autonomous and semi-autonomous
underwater vehicles requires not only persistent, high-fidelity
detection but also scalable kinetic and non-kinetic mitigation
solutions, which together operate at a cost-exchange ratio
favorable to the United States. The committee further notes
that the report on counter-unmanned maritime vehicle technology
investments, as directed by the House Report accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (H.
Rept. 119-231), is overdue and has not yet been received. The
committee encourages the Department to transmit the required
report as soon as possible.
Use Cases for Autonomous Undersea Platforms
The committee recognizes the growing operational importance
of autonomous or unmanned undersea vehicles (UUVs) as an
important element of future naval operations, particularly in
contested maritime environments. The committee supports ongoing
experimentation and prototyping efforts as well as the test and
evaluation of commercially available platforms, and the
consideration of these platforms in novel configurations and
use cases. The committee recognizes the enormous potential of
UUVs in naval operations. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by January 15, 2027. The briefing
shall include the following:
(1) an evaluation of current gaps in combatant command
requirements including logistics and resupply, payload and
effects delivery, long-range fires, and countermine operations,
for which UUVs could provide a bridging solution or a permanent
capability;
(2) an evaluation of how the Navy is seeking to maximize
the integration of UUVs into joint and combined concepts of
operations in contested maritime environments;
(3) a summary of commercially available platforms in all
size categories that the Navy is considering for use in filling
the capability gaps described in (1);
(4) a review of the size categories of UUVs and a
determination of whether an ``ultra large'' UUV would provide
advantageous characteristics such as increased resilience,
endurance, range, survivability, and operational flexibility;
(5) an evaluation of commercially available endurance
enabling propulsion technologies, including hybrid electric
systems, that could provide benefit in filling the capability
gaps described in (1);
(6) for UUVs with the potential to fill capability gaps
described in (1), an assessment of scalability and
manufacturability, including production and supply chain
considerations; and
(7) an evaluation of deployment flexibility and lifecycle
cost considerations for the above described UUVs, including an
assessment of relative sustainment burden and cost per effect
as compared to other potential methods of filling these
capability gaps.
V-22 Safety Investments
The committee remains committed to the critical role of the
V-22 Osprey fleet in executing joint force missions across the
Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force. The committee notes the
December 2025 reviews conducted by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) and Naval Air Systems Command
(NAVAIR) and recognizes the importance of implementing data-
driven corrective actions to improve reliability,
maintainability, and overall mission capability of the fleet.
As the Department of Defense continues to assess and enhance
the safety, readiness, and sustainment performance of the V-22,
the committee emphasizes that modernization and safety
investments must be aligned with operational demands and
informed by the recommendations outlined in these reviews. The
committee also recognizes the Nacelle Improvement (NI) Program
as a purpose-built upgrade, that reflects the data driven
recommendations of both the GAO and NAVAIR reviews. The
committee further commends broader modernization initiatives
within the V-22 Joint Program Office, including mid-life
upgrade planning, implementation of triple-melt X-53 steel
improvements in proprotor gearboxes, and future avionics
modernization efforts intended to enhance long-term aircraft
safety, performance, survivability, and sustainment. The
committee directs the Chief of Naval Operations, in
coordination with the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the
Commandant of the Marine Corps, to provide a report to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 27,
2027, detailing the investment plan for each variant of V-22
Osprey. The report shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) identification of expected mid-life upgrade plans to
improve overall readiness, safety, and lethality;
(2) funding profiles and resources required to accelerate
NI for Navy and Marine Corps aircraft, Osprey Drive System
Safety and Health Information, and the procurement of triple-
melt X-53 steel for the manufacture of gears used in V-22
proprotor gearboxes;
(3) an assessment of potential upgrades for V-22 avionics
systems;
(4) identification of remaining technical, supply chain, or
industrial base risks affecting V-22 readiness and safety; and
(5) an analysis of increased and improved communication
across the military services with regard to maintenance
procedures.
Procurement, Marine Corps
Items of Special Interest
Common End User Device Plan for the Marine Corps
The proliferation of small unmanned systems across the
Marine Corps has transformed how small units conduct
intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike
operations, delivering capabilities once reserved for higher
echelons of command. The committee understands that the Marine
Corps lacks a common end user device (EUD) capable of utilizing
tools and tactical software that integrate, visualize, and
transmit data across formations and echelons. As a result,
individual units are using discretionary funds to procure
various devices and applications, creating fragmentation and
limiting interoperability across the force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition, in
coordination with the Commandant of the Marine Corps, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 15, 2026, on the Marine Corps plan to field
standardized EUDs and supporting software to its formations.
The briefing shall include:
(1) a summary of ongoing efforts to adopt a common
controller for unmanned systems across Marine Corps formations;
(2) a description of plans to establish or adopt a
centralized program to field EUDs and other tactical software
across the Marine Corps; and
(3) the Marine Corps funding profile for procurement and
fielding of EUDs.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Items of Special Interest
A-10 Combat Legacy, Current Operational Use, and Modernization Outlook
The committee recognizes the combat record of the A-10
aircraft from Operation Desert Storm through current
operations, including recent support to the recovery of downed
aircrew in Operation Epic Fury, and the continued relevance of
lessons derived from close air support, armed overwatch,
airground integration, combat search and rescue support, and
operations to secure key maritime approaches, including the
Strait of Hormuz. The committee notes the importance of
preserving operational knowledge resident in the A-10
enterprise and applying such knowledge to future force design,
doctrine, training, capability development, and incremental
modernization efforts that may improve the operational return
on continued sustainment of the A-10 program.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force, and the
Commander, Air Combat Command, and the Commander, U.S. Central
Command, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than January 15, 2027, on the combat
employment of the A-10 aircraft from Operation Desert Storm
through current operations, including how lessons learned from
such employment should be preserved and applied to the future
of the A-10 mission set, successor force design, doctrine,
training, and capability development. The report should include
the following:
(1) a description of the combat employment of the A-10
aircraft in major operations from Operation Desert Storm
through current operations;
(2) lessons learned for close air support, armed overwatch,
battlefield communications, weapons integration, pilot
training, and air-ground coordination;
(3) lessons learned from the use of the A-10 aircraft in
combat search and rescue support, including the Sandy mission,
and the relevance of such lessons to future personnel recovery
and armed overwatch concepts;
(4) an assessment of the extent to which elements of the A-
10 mission set, command-and-control methods, and air-ground
integration experience may inform future force design;
(5) recommendations for preserving, adapting, or
transferring relevant A10 operational knowledge to future
doctrine, training, and capability development;
(6) an assessment of whether currently programmed or
planned Air Force capabilities are expected to replicate or
improve upon the principal operational effects historically
provided by the A-10 aircraft as rescue mission commander,
close air support, armed overwatch, forward air controller-
airborne, and personnel recovery support missions;
(7) an assessment of the applicability of A-10 operational
lessons to human-machine teaming, autonomous collaborative or
adjunct aircraft, artificial intelligence-enabled mission
planning and targeting support, digital battlefield
communications, distributed air-ground integration, and other
emerging capabilities;
(8) recommendations for operational experimentation or
testing using A10 units, preserved A-10 mission infrastructure,
or relevant training and sustainment organizations to evaluate
emerging capabilities applicable to the A-10 mission set,
including opportunities to integrate private-sector and
nontraditional defense partners; and
(9) an assessment of recent and potential incremental
modernization options for the A-10 aircraft, including
electronic warfare capabilities, decoy or stand-in effects
delivery, aerial refueling enhancements, digital
communications, sensor integration, precision weapons
integration, survivability improvements, open-systems
architecture, and human-machine teaming applications, and
whether such options could improve the operational return on
continued sustainment of the A-10 program.
The report may include a classified annex, as necessary.
Active Protection for Aerial Refueling Tankers
The committee understand air power projection depends on a
limited fleet of aerial refueling tankers to support offensive
operations at extended ranges. The vulnerability of strike
packages during refueling operations is a key operational
consideration as adversaries develop capabilities to counter
air power projection. Successfully targeting a single tanker
effectively defeats four or more tactical aircraft that depend
on refueling and can quickly unwind mission planning
assumptions, as well as follow-on operations. The committee is
aware of nascent efforts by the Air Force to address this
vulnerability with both active and passive self-protect
capabilities but is concerned that development and fielding
timelines are not keeping pace with the risk to the fleet.
Maturation of these capabilities would support organic
integration with Next Generation Air Refueling System designs
and also has broader application to the fleet of High Value
Airborne Assets (HVAA). The committee directs the Secretary of
Air Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 1, 2026, assessing options
to integrate active and passive protection systems on tankers.
This report shall be submitted in an unclassified form but may
include a classified annex. The report shall include:
(1) a threat assessment for current and future refueling
platforms, as well as other HVAA, required to support extended
range offensive operations against near peers;
(2) a summary of relevant operational simulations and the
probability of mission success with the loss of tankers and
other HVAA;
(3) an assessment of current technology readiness levels
and relative effectiveness to address the threats identified in
(1) for active and passive self-protect systems and subsystems;
(4) the current Air Force plan to mature and field such
systems in a common configuration, as proposed in the fiscal
year 2027 budget request; and
(5) funding required, by year, to achieve an initial
operational capability of a passive system and an active system
by December 31, 2031.
Assessment of the Feasibility of Restarting the Production Line of the
C-17
The committee recognizes that the existing C-17 fleet
continues to bear significant operational demands supporting
combatant commander requirements, humanitarian assistance
missions, and global mobility operations. The committee is
concerned that future operational demands may place additional
strain on the existing C-17 fleet.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, assessing the
feasibility of restarting the production line for the C-17
aircraft. At a minimum, the briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of the technical and industrial
feasibility of restarting the C-17 production line, including
the status of tooling, supplier base viability, workforce
availability, and potential reconstitution costs;
(2) an estimate of the timeline required to reestablish
production and deliver the first newly produced aircraft;
(3) a cost estimate for restarting the production line and
procuring additional aircraft, including options for limited
procurement and multi-year procurement; and
(4) an evaluation of alternative approaches to increasing
strategic airlift capacity, including service life extension
programs, modernization of existing aircraft, procurement of
commercial derivative cargo aircraft, and expansion of the
Civil Reserve Air Fleet.
(5) an assessment of potential international partner
interest in participating in or contributing to a restarted
production line.
Attritable Jet-Powered Aircraft for Distributed Operations
The committee recognizes the evolving requirements for
distributed air operations, including the need for cost-
effective, high-speed platforms capable of supporting
operations in contested environments while reducing risk to
personnel. The committee notes that existing aircraft
inventories may not adequately address the need for attritable
jet-powered aircraft capable of operating at extended ranges,
high speeds, and high altitudes while carrying meaningful
payloads. The committee is concerned that the Department of
Defense has not fully evaluated the operational utility of such
platforms for missions including logistics support and
augmentation of manned aircraft operations.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Commander of United States Transportation
Command and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027, on the
feasibility and advisability of developing and fielding
attritable jet powered aircraft. The briefing shall include the
following:
(1) identification of mission sets suitable for such
platforms, including logistics support and mission
augmentation;
(2) an analysis of performance characteristics, including
high subsonic speed, ranges greater than 1,500 nautical miles,
operations above 40,000 feet, and payload capacity of
approximately 3,000 pounds;
(3) an assessment of cost considerations relative to
traditional manned aircraft;
(4) an evaluation of production scalability and ability to
rapidly field such platforms; and
(5) recommendations regarding the feasibility and
advisability of a pilot or proof-of-concept program.
Autonomous Intratheater Airlift
The committee remains supportive of the Air Force's efforts
to integrate commercially available aircraft with capabilities
that enable remotely piloted or autonomous operations in
contested environments. The committee directs the Secretary of
the Air Force, in coordination with the Commander of United
States Transportation Command, to submit a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027.
The briefing shall include at a minimum the following:
(1) information on the Air Force's progress in assessing
the potential for remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft to
meet operational requirements for airlift capabilities in
distributed and austere operational environments;
(2) the anticipated schedule for testing commercially
available aircraft with remotely piloted or autonomous
capabilities for use in air mobility operations;
(3) the manner in which data and operational experience
from applicable demonstrations in the U.S. Indo-Pacific region
shall be used to inform the tactics, techniques, procedures and
associated technology requirements necessary for implementation
of these systems;
(4) identification of available federated systems that
could enable sustainment and modernization of commercially
available aircraft with remotely piloted or autonomous
capabilities and integrate with existing mobility aircraft
operated by the Air Force; and
(5) to the extent to which these technologies hold promise
for supplementing air mobility requirements and a proposed
timeline for development of an acquisition strategy, including,
but not limited, to the use of rapid fielding or a rapid
prototyping acquisition.
B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program
The committee encourages the Department of the Air Force to
continue prioritizing the B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement
Program (CERP) as a critical modernization effort. The
committee recognizes that CERP will improve fuel efficiency,
reduce maintenance costs and ensure the long-term viability of
the platform. The committee urges the Air Force to sustain
adequate funding and maintain schedule.
Blended Wing Body
The committee notes that the Air Force's analysis of
alternatives for the Next-Generation Air Refueling System
(NGAS) has considered a range of airframe configurations,
including conventional tube-and-wing designs, business jet
derivatives, and blended wing body (BWB) aircraft. The
committee believes that BWB technology represents a potentially
transformational capability for the aerial refueling mission,
offering significant improvements in fuel efficiency, range,
payload capacity, and multi-mission flexibility that are
directly aligned with the operational demands of contested U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command operations. The committee is encouraged by
the Air Force's $235 million investment for a full-scale
demonstrator aircraft and notes the strong interest from major
defense industrial partners in applying this technology to
military tanker and transport missions. In his Fiscal Year 2027
testimony to the, Admiral Samuel Paparo, Commander, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command, emphasized that aerial refueling remains a
critical enabling capability for distributed operations across
the Indo-Pacific region. Admiral Paparo noted that current
tanker capacity falls below operational requirements and
highlighted the need for both tanker fleet modernization and
innovative refueling concepts capable of supporting operations
in contested environments, where commercial contract air
services cannot substitute for military aircraft.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) The status of the BWB flight demonstrator program,
including any preliminary findings on aerodynamic performance,
structural integrity, and flight handling qualities relevant to
tanker operations;
(2) a comparative analysis of the projected fuel offload
capability, range, and multi-mission utility of BWB tanker
configurations versus conventional configurations at distances
of 3,500 to 5,000 nautical miles from the continental United
States; and
(3) an analysis of the potential economies of scale and
life-cycle cost savings associated with utilizing a blended
wing body aircraft design as part of the recapitalization of
the Air Force's aging KC-135 and RC-135 fleets, which are
projected to retire over the next two decades.
C-130J Simulator Funding
The C-130J program requires additional weapons system
trainers to meet growing aircrew training demands, reduce
strain on operational aircraft, and ensure simulator capacity
to support readiness. The budget request contained $45.0
million in PE 0401132 for a C-130J weapons system trainer. The
committee recommends $65.0 million, an increase of $20.0
million, for the C-130J program.
Commercial Preference and Sole-Source Awards in the Acquisition of
Aerial Firefighting Capabilities
The committee is concerned that modular airborne
firefighting systems and associated aerial firefighting
capabilities may be acquired, produced, or sustained through
sole-source task orders awarded under authorities provided by
section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (Public Law 85-536)
notwithstanding the availability of commercial and competitive
sources and statutory requirements for the use of commercial
preference in acquisitions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the acquisition of aerial
firefighting capabilities. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of current compliance with commercial
preference requirements under section 3453 of title 10, United
States Code, in the acquisition, production, and sustainment of
modular airborne firefighting systems;
(2) an identification of commercial and other-than-8(a)
sources capable of meeting the requirement and an analysis of
barriers to competition in the aerial firefighting market;
(3) a description of how each such award is consistent with
the Department of Defense's January 16, 2026, policy on sole-
source 8(a) task orders; and
(4) a description of the steps the Department is taking to
ensure future compliance with commercial preference
requirements including any plan to recompete or transition such
requirements to a competitive basis.
Increasing B-21 Program of Record
The committee is concerned that the current program of
record for the B-21 Raider may be insufficient to meet the
requirements of the National Defense Strategy. The committee
notes the B-21 program of record of 100 aircraft remains
unchanged since it was established in 2015, despite significant
changes in the security environment. The committee further
recognizes that a broad range of national security leaders have
called for expanding the B-21 program of record, including the
Chair of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture
of the United States and the Commander of United States
Strategic Command. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services by December 1, 2026, that assesses how many B-21
aircraft are necessary to meet the requirements of the National
Defense Strategy for both nuclear and conventional missions
and, to the extent that there are additional B-21s required,
evaluates the appropriate time frame for the procurement of
these aircraft. The report may be classified.
Looking Glass-Next Procurement
The committee is aware of the continued restructuring of
the airborne Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications
enterprise, shifting responsibilities for the Navy's Take
Charge and Move Out mission supporting Submarines and the Air
Force's Looking Glass mission. The committee is also aware that
the Air Force has started the procurement process for the
Looking Glass mission's replacement. The committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027,
detailing the timing and requirements for selection of Looking
Glass-Next. The briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the feasibility and affordability of a
business jet solution to host associated Looking Glass-Next
aircrew and required hardware and software, including cost,
schedule, and performance parameters;
(2) an assessment of platform dependencies, including
seating and workstation capacity, power, cooling, internal
aircraft space, and offboard line-of-sight and beyond-line-of-
sight communications, information technology, and security
infrastructure; and
(3) a recommended acquisition strategy and multi-year
funding profile for a Looking Glass-Next program of record.
MH-139A Mission Set at Joint Base Andrews
The committee notes that the MH-139A Grey Wolf was
competitively selected to replace the UH-1N for
intercontinental ballistic missile security and National
Capital Region missions, including continuity of government and
transport of United States government officials and security
forces. The committee remains concerned regarding the
justification for transitioning these missions to an alternate
rotary-wing platform and seeks additional details on cost and
operational implications.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, assessing operational, cost,
infrastructure, and readiness impacts of assigning any non-MH-
139A rotary-wing aircraft to continuity of government and
transport of United States government officials and security
forces in the National Capital Region. The report shall include
the following:
(1) a comparison of procurement cost, cost per flight hour,
infrastructure and aircraft modification requirements, and
training and manpower impacts; and
(2) an assessment of the cost, schedule, and operational
disruption associated with required upgrades to Joint Base
Andrews facilities for each aircraft type.
Mobility Connectivity
The committee supports the need for continued investment in
connectivity. The budget requested $12.0 million in PE 0401218
for KC-135 mobility connectivity. The committee recommends
$32.0 million, an increase of $20.0 million, for the mobility
connectivity program. The budget requested $67.0 million in PE
0401130 for C-17 mobility connectivity. The committee
recommends $97.1 million, an increase of $20.0 million, for the
mobility connectivity program.
Retained KC-135 Basing
The committee notes the requirement to maintain the total
aircraft inventory for air refueling tanker aircraft pursuant
to section 141 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) and encourages the
Secretary of the Air Force to prioritize the distribution and
retention of KC-135 aircraft to Air Force and Air National
Guard installations located in strategic proximity to the
Unites States Indo-Pacific Command area of responsibility. The
committee encourages consideration of installations that
support the nuclear alert mission, provide recurring aerial
refueling for trans-pacific fighter movement, and demonstrate
the ability to recruit and retain personnel above authorized
end strength levels to meet the requirements associated with
additional aircraft inventory. The committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
the Air Force's plan to base retained KC-135 aircraft.
Survivable Airborne Operations Center
The Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) is a
critical component of the nation's nuclear modernization. As
the replacement for the aging E-4B Nightwatch fleet, SAOC will
provide a more resilient and survivable airborne command post.
The committee supports ongoing efforts within the Department of
the Air Force to develop this capability.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Items of Special Interest
Scalable Short-Range Air Defense Interceptor Missiles
The committee recognizes the importance of development and
acquisition of highly scalable, affordable, short-range air
defense interceptor missiles to engage deep strike drones,
subsonic cruise missiles, and manned aviation. The committee
further notes that development of such system should be
compatible with the standard M299 missile rail system.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than January 1, 2027, on the efforts to
acquire and scale affordable, combat-tested interceptor
capabilities. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) a full accountability of short-range air defense
missiles in the Department of the Air Force's arsenal and
existing shortfalls;
(2) identification of priority theatres and areas of
operations where the rapid deployment of missile interceptors
is of highest importance for United States national security;
(3) an explanation of the Department of the Air Force's
intended plans and ongoing efforts to develop and acquire off
the shelf missile interceptors at scale from commercial
partners; and
(4) an accounting of the fully burdened costs of these
efforts to date, including development and integration by both
commercial and government entities.
Other Procurement, Air Force
Items of Special Interest
Air Base Air Defense
The committee understands that the U.S. Air Force Europe-
Air Force Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA) Air Base Air Defense (ABAD)
program has demonstrated significant maturity in the
development and operational employment of the Ramstein Air
Defense System Integration Laboratory (RADSIL) and Early
Warning Capability, creating the foundation of a revolutionary
Common Operating Picture for situational awareness of air
threats in Europe.
The committee recommends leveraging the proven successes
and lessons learned from the USAFE-AFAFRICA ABAD program to
enhance air domain awareness and early warning capabilities in
U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM).
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than January 15, 2027, on the feasibility
of operationalizing ABAD capabilities for NORTHCOM, to include:
(1) a stable, sufficient funding profile for USAFE-AFARICA
ABAD through 2028, to enable continued defensive upgrades to
protect U.S. warfighters currently stationed abroad;
(2) a detailed, well-funded plan to transition
operationally proven hardware, software, and tactics,
techniques, and procedures (TTPs) from ABAD into NORTHCOM;
(3) a detailed, well-funded plan to use EUCOM ABAD as a
trial by fire operational testbed for advanced Air and Missile
Defense capabilities;
(4) an establishment of a Homeland Air Defense Systems
Integration Laboratory, modeled after RADSIL, to coordinate
efforts across the U.S. Air Force, Missile Defense Agency, and
U.S. Army Portfolio Acquisition Executive Fires; and
(5) creating and accelerating an operational pilot program
with Air Combat Command, at one or more NORTHCOM air bases, in
support of National Defense Strategy priorities, such as
Langley Air Force Base or Whiteman Air Force Base, to validate
hardware, software, and TTPs from USAFE ABAD into North
American Aerospace Defense Command/NORTHCOM.
Air Force Installation Counter-UAS Acquisition Oversight
The committee recognizes the urgent and growing threat
posed by small unmanned aircraft systems to Air Force
installations and the critical importance of ensuring those
installations are equipped with capable, integrated Counter UAS
(cUAS) solutions without delay. The committee further
recognizes the Department's ongoing efforts to consolidate c-
UAS acquisition decision-making authority and streamline
procurement through Joint Interagency Task Force 401. The
committee is supportive of initiatives to create an efficient
and effective c-UAS acquisition ecosystem and ensure
installations receive capable, integrated solutions in a timely
manner.
The committee is concerned, however, that this
consolidation effort may be resulting in deviations from
established Air Force programs of record--systems that have
undergone competitive evaluation, been fielded at operational
scale, and represent significant prior government investment--
without the technical, cost, and operational analysis that
would typically underpin such decisions. Departing from a
program of record carries programmatic, fiscal, and operational
risk that warrants careful deliberation and documentation prior
to execution.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Director of Joint Interagency
Task Force 401, to provide, not later than December 15, 2026, a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on:
(1) the current Air Force acquisition strategy for
installation-level c-UAS base defense, including planned
procurement quantities and funding sources for established
programs of record and any alternative systems;
(2) the technical, cost, and operational analysis
underpinning any decision to deviate from an existing c-UAS
program of record, including comparative assessments of
production capacity, per-installation lifecycle cost, and
operational testing history; and
(3) the respective roles and decision-making authorities of
the military departments, major commands, and Joint Interagency
Task Force 401 in c-UAS procurement decisions at the
installation level.
Airborne Battle Management and Moving Target Indicator Capability
Continuity
The committee notes continued operational concern regarding
shortfalls in airborne moving target indicator (AMTI) sensing
and battle management command and control (BMC2) capability and
capacity as legacy platforms transition. The committee further
notes ongoing Department of the Air Force activities to field
longer-term approaches for AMTI and airborne BMC2, but remains
concerned that near-term capacity and capability may be
insufficient to meet combatant commander requirements during
the E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System transition period.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 31, 2027, assessing interim
Tactical Operations Center--Airborne (TOC-A) options derived
from existing Department of the Air Force, Joint, and Navy
airborne platform programs of record. The briefing shall
include the following:
(1) an assessment of interim TOC-A solutions using current
programs of record, including RC-135V/W, EA-37B, E-11, KC-135,
KC-46, and E-2D aircraft;
(2) for each platform identified under paragraph (1), an
assessment of feasibility and affordability, including cost,
schedule, and performance considerations; integration
approaches including full, partial, or stand-alone mission
kits; and the ability to host required BMC2 aircrew,
workstations, hardware, and software;
(3) for each platform identified under paragraph (1), an
assessment of platform dependencies, including seating and
workstation capacity, power, cooling, internal space,
communications including line-of-sight and beyond-line-of-
sight, information technology, cybersecurity, and security
accreditation requirements;
(4) an assessment of operational impacts and mission trade-
offs associated with each platform, including effects on each
platform's primary mission and the Department of the Air
Force's ability to re-mission assets within existing force
structure;
(5) an assessment of each platform's organic sensing and
data-fusion capability, and how interim TOC-A integration could
mitigate AMTI-related shortfalls in support of TOC-A-executed
BMC2; and
(6) a summary of historical and planned testing,
demonstrations, experimentation, and exercises relevant to AMTI
and BMC2 missions.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
Items of Special Interest
Affordable, Long-Endurance Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance Platforms
The committee recognizes the increasing operational demand
for affordable, long-endurance unmanned intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms capable of
providing persistent sensing, targeting support, and
situational awareness in contested and austere environments.
The committee supports affordable solutions that can deliver
operational flexibility and effects at significantly lower cost
than traditional manned and unmanned systems, while also
mitigating risk to personnel and enhancing endurance of
forward-deployed units and distributed operations. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on efforts related to affordable, long-
endurance unmanned ISR platforms. The briefing shall include:
(1) a description of low-cost, long-endurance unmanned ISR
capabilities currently awaiting transition to a service sponsor
following maturation through a Department of Defense
experimentation program;
(2) a summary of proposed operational use cases, lessons
learned from exercises or deployments, and feedback from
operational units;
(3) an overview of the acquisition pathways being utilized
to field these capabilities; and
(4) the Department's strategy and timeline for
transitioning successful low-cost, long-endurance unmanned ISR
capabilities into formal programs of record, including
potential program sponsors and associated funding requirements.
Attrition-Ready Low-Cost Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System Interceptors
The committee recognizes the growing operational challenge
posed by low-cost unmanned aircraft systems employed at scale
against military installations, maneuver forces, and other
defended assets. The committee notes that current counter-
Unmanned Aircraft System (c-UAS) architectures remain heavily
reliant on high-cost interceptors that may be poorly suited for
sustained engagements against inexpensive aerial threats.
The committee further recognizes the importance of scalable
c-UAS defeat options, including kinetic and physical defeat
mechanisms, capable of supporting layered defensive
architectures while preserving high-end interceptor inventories
for advanced threats.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct a briefing for the House Committee on Armed Services
no later than December 1, 2026, on the Department-wide
evaluation criteria for relevant c-UAS activities addressing:
(1) unit cost;
(2) production scalability, surge capacity, and
replenishment timelines;
(3) transportability, reloadability, and magazine depth;
(4) integration into layered counter-UAS architectures; and
(5) suitability for kinetic or physical defeat roles, where
appropriate.
Counter Unmanned Aircraft System Interoperability
The committee recognizes the accelerating proliferation of
unmanned aircraft systems and the growing threat posed by
adversary employment of low-cost, networked, and autonomous
aerial platforms. The committee further recognizes that the
rapid fielding of counter-unmanned aircraft systems (c-UAS)
capabilities across the Joint Force, while necessary to meet
urgent operational needs, has resulted in a diverse set of
sensors, effectors, and command-and-control solutions that may
present interoperability, sustainment, and lifecycle cost
challenges. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the integration of c-
UAS capabilities. The report should include:
(1) an assessment of the integration and interoperability
of current and future fielded counter-unmanned aircraft systems
across the Joint Force;
(2) an identification of barriers to enterprise integration
across agencies that are utilizing deployment of counter-
unmanned aircraft systems architecture;
(3) an evaluation of lifecycle sustainment costs associated
with currently fielded systems and an identification of
opportunities for cost avoidance through modular software
enabled upgrades and service-based sustainment approaches; and
(4) recommendations for acquisition strategies or policy
adjustments necessary to accelerate scalable, joint counter-
unmanned aircraft systems integration.
Counter-UAS Guided Rocket Proximity Fuze Production and Modernization
The committee recognizes the threat posed by unmanned
aerial systems (UAS) across multiple theaters of operation,
including U.S. Central Command and ongoing conflicts in Eastern
Europe. The committee is encouraged by the Department of
Defense's operational employment of Hydra-70mm guided rockets
equipped with proximity fuzes, which have demonstrated
effective counter-UAS capability at significantly lower cost
and higher lethality than traditional air-to-air interceptors
equipped with radio frequency (RF) fuzes.
The committee notes successful integration of these systems
on U.S. fighter aircraft, including F-16 and F-15 aircraft, to
counter aerial swarm threats. However, the committee is aware
of constraints in the supply chain and production of legacy
proximity fuzes, which are insufficient to meet current and
projected requirements from Combatant Commands and U.S. allies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's efforts to
certify, procure, and expand production of available, combat-
proven electronic safe and arm optical proximity fuze systems
for counterUAS applications, in accordance with MIL-STD-1316
and MIL-STD-331. The report shall include, but is not limited
to:
(1) an assessment of current and projected requirements for
Hydra-70mm guided rocket proximity fuze systems across
Combatant Commands;
(2) a plan to expand production capacity, including
identification of supply chain constraints and mitigation
strategies;
(3) an overview of efforts to support allied and partner
nation requirements; and
(4) any additional investments or policy changes required
to accelerate fielding and sustainment of these systems across
the joint force.
Electronic Warfare and Modular Payload Integration
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
rapidly deployable, leave-behind electronic warfare and sensing
payload capabilities for United States forces operating in
dynamic battlespaces characterized by contested and denied
environments. The committee notes that as the Department of
Defense modernizes the munitions industrial base and expands
surge capacity, modernization efforts should include rigorous
testing, evaluation, and development activities that integrate
advanced technologies to improve lethality, survivability,
mission effectiveness, adaptability, and situational awareness.
The committee further notes that recent investments in weapons
and munitions product improvement programs could support rapid
prototyping of reconfigurable modular payloads adaptable to
multiple delivery platforms, including in-use weapons and
unmanned platforms, as well as iterative test and evaluation
activities to accelerate transition into operational use.
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize the
evaluation and integration of commercially available and
defense-unique munitions technologies that enhance accuracy,
sensing, signal detection, signal classification,
electromagnetic terrain shaping, and other electronic attack
capabilities across multiple weapons platforms, including
unmanned aerial systems and counter-unmanned aerial systems.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering and the Commander, U.S. Special Operations
Command, to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department-wide
strategy to integrate electronic warfare effects across
suitable munitions form factors. The report should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of current and planned efforts to
integrate electronic warfare and sensing payloads into suitable
munitions and unmanned platforms;
(2) an evaluation of commercially available and defense-
unique technologies that could improve signal detection, signal
classification, electromagnetic attack, and survivability
capabilities;
(3) a description of ongoing rapid prototyping, test, and
evaluation efforts related to modular and reconfigurable
payload systems;
(4) an identification of acquisition authorities, including
rapid acquisition authorities, that could accelerate transition
of validated capabilities into operational use; and
(5) a plan to scale validated capabilities across
conventional and special operations forces.
F-35 Organic Sustainment Transition to Military Services
The committee remains concerned about the Department of
Defense's progress toward meeting the requirements of section
142 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2022 (Public Law 117-81), which directs the Secretary of the
Air Force, in coordination with the Secretary of the Navy and
the F-35 Joint Program Office, to transition management of
sustainment efforts to the military services not later than
October 1, 2027.
The committee notes that the Department has invested
significant resources, including $280.0 million, to transition
from the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) to the
Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN). However, ODIN and
legacy Air Force and Navy logistics information technology
systems continue to lack a common engagement layer enabling
efficient, real-time data exchange between the F-35 digital
thread and military service logistics environments. Without
such integration, the military services are unlikely to achieve
the unified sustainment data environment required to assume
management of F-35 sustainment operations on the required
timeline.
The committee further notes ongoing efforts to integrate
sustainment data across systems but remains concerned that
current approaches may result in a fragmented operating model
in which flightline and back-office logistics functions rely on
separate systems, potentially introducing inefficiencies, data
integrity risks, and challenges for auditability and financial
accountability.
The committee is concerned that the current integration
approach of routing transactional data from original equipment
manufacturer systems through the Defense Logistics Agency's
Automatic Addressing System for conversion into National Stock
Number-based transactions before integration into military
service logistics systems does not enable a unified
environment. This architecture requires flightline personnel to
operate within ODIN while back-office logistics remain in
legacy systems, forcing maintenance and supply personnel to
navigate multiple disconnected workflows and creating a
fragmented, dual-system operating model that introduces
operational risk and data integrity vulnerabilities.
The committee is aware that commercially available data
integration platforms have shown the capability to provide a
unified engagement layer that supports interoperability,
reduces reliance on dual-system workflows, and facilitates
compliance with financial improvement and audit readiness
requirements. The committee is concerned that the Department
has not articulated a clear plan for evaluating or
incorporating such capabilities into the transition
architecture.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Navy and the Program
Executive Officer and Director of the F-35 Joint Program
Office, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the transition of F-
35 sustainment management to the military services. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) the current status of the transition of F-35
sustainment management to the Department of the Air Force and
the Department of the Navy, including an assessment of whether
the October 1, 2027, deadline will be met and what risks
remain;
(2) the status of data integration efforts between ODIN and
Air Force and Navy legacy logistics information technology
systems, and an explanation of how the current integration
approach mitigates interoperability gaps;
(3) an assessment of whether the current architecture
results in a fragmented or dual-system operating model, and the
associated impacts on operational efficiency, data integrity,
and readiness;
(4) the Department's evaluation of commercially available
data integration platforms capable of enabling a unified
engagement layer across F-35 sustainment systems;
(5) a comparative analysis of the cost, schedule,
performance, and auditability of existing integration
approaches, government-developed alternatives, and commercially
available platform solutions;
(6) identification of any institutional, contractual, or
organizational barriers to achieving a unified sustainment data
environment, including the delegation of statutory
responsibility to the F-35 Joint Program Office; and
(7) a detailed timeline and milestones for achieving a
unified sustainment data environment that enables the military
services to manage F-35 sustainment operations, control costs,
maintain fleet readiness, and meet statutory and financial
management requirements.
F-35 Technical Data Required to Support Sustainment Strategy Activities
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is used by the Department of
Defense to perform a wide range of missions and is vital to the
success of U.S. combat and homeland defense operations. The
committee recognizes efforts by the Department to improve F-35
sustainment performance, which is not meeting service
requirements and often heavily relies on contractors. The
committee is concerned about the lack of access to necessary
technical data that would enhance the Department's ability to
sustain the F-35 and improve sustainment performance outcomes.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) has issued a series of reports focused on F-35
sustainment and included recommendations related to identifying
technical data needs for sustainment. Specifically, in
September 2014, GAO recommended in report GAO-14-778 that the
Department develop a long-term intellectual property strategy
to include, but not be limited to, the identification of 1)
current levels of technical data rights ownership by the
federal government and 2) all critical technical data needs and
their associated costs. In September 2023, GAO found that
insufficient access to technical data hindered both depot-level
and organizational-level maintenance (GAO-23-105341). That
report made seven recommendations to the Department to reassess
elements of its sustainment strategy, including, for each
element, to determine critical technical data needs, their
associated costs, and milestones to acquire the data. In March
2025, GAO recommended in report GAO-25-107101C that the
Department assess whether F-35 maintenance personnel are
granted appropriate authorities and access to technical data
and information when deployed to make any changes necessary to
ensure the success of the F-35 in future uncontested and
contested environments. That report also recommended that the
Department establish implementation timelines and fully
implement current initiatives to improve the visibility and the
quality of supply chain data, as appropriate, for operational
squadrons. The committee believes it will be important for the
Department to implement GAO's recommendations in an expeditious
manner to strengthen sustainment capabilities for the F-35
program, including for deployed, depot-level, and
organizational-level maintenance personnel.
Therefore, the committee includes a provision elsewhere in
this title that would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a plan and implementation report regarding the relevant
GAO recommendations and the Secretary's plan to procure the
necessary technical data to implement the F-35 sustainment
strategy.
Ground and Maritime Tactical Network Resilience
The committee supports the Department of Defense's rapid
procurement and integration of commercial information
technology solutions to bring enhanced connectivity to ground
and maritime formations. The committee is encouraged by the
Department's adaptation of commercially available high, medium,
and low-earth orbit satellite constellations, terrestrial radio
waveforms, 5G, and Wi-Fi capabilities. Proper integration of
these capabilities will provide formations with options for
transportation of data across operational formations. Due to
the ever-evolving threat environment, the committee remains
concerned that efforts must meet resiliency requirements
specified in Section 168 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), and Section 114
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026
(Public Law 119-60).
To ensure proper network resiliency standards are being
implemented and tested across ground and maritime forces, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees not later than December
1, 2026, on the testing and fielding plans for any new
procurements for such network, including:
(1) how any new efforts meet the resiliency requirements
specified in Section 168 of Public Law 116-92 and Section 114
of Public Law 119-60;
(2) how any new programs will utilize National Security
Agency-mandated high assurance certified encryption or
obfuscation techniques;
(3) how new efforts will utilize multi-band or multi-orbit
satellite terminal technology; and
(4) plans to complete threat-informed developmental and
operational test and evaluation prior to fielding new
capabilities to the operational Navy and Army forces for use
other than for experimentation.
Health and Usage Monitoring Systems Modernization
The committee is concerned that legacy Health and Usage
Monitoring Systems (HUMS) on Army and Marine Corps rotary-wing
and tiltrotor aircraft face enterprise-wide obsolescence and
lack the predictive maintenance capabilities required for
modern readiness and sustainment.
The committee supports the acquisition, integration,
testing, and evaluation of HUMS modernization efforts that also
demonstrate predictive maintenance capabilities. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of the Army and Secretary of the Navy, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 15, 2027, that includes the following:
(1) integration, test, and evaluation results of HUMS
modernization efforts;
(2) measurable effects on platform readiness, availability,
and sustainment cost;
(3) lessons learned, including challenges to obligation and
execution; and
(4) recommendations for scaling modernized HUMS across the
Army and Marine Corps rotary-wing and tiltrotor fleet,
including necessary funding and acquisition pathways.
High-Performance Group 3 Unmanned Aircraft Systems
The committee recognizes that advances in hybrid-electric
propulsion, autonomy, modular open systems architecture, and
onboard power generation now enable certain Group 3 unmanned
aircraft system (UAS) platforms to deliver effects
traditionally associated with Group 4 systems, such as
extended-range intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
(ISR), contested and distributed logistics, and persistent
overwatch in denied or infrastructure-limited environments.
The committee further acknowledges that the assessment and
adoption of these capabilities by the Department of Defense is
often burdened by the time required to define requirements,
establish acquisition pathways, and initiate programs of
record. The committee notes that geographic combatant commands,
such as U.S. Africa Command, face immediate capability gaps in
persistent ISR, distributed logistics, and wide-area coverage,
which increases reliance on scarce manned aircraft, limits
operational persistence, and constrains commanders' ability to
operate in austere and contested environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air
Force, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 27, 2027, on the Department's
assessment and interim employment of contractor-owned,
contractor-operated or contractor-owned, government-operated
service models to support near-term evaluation, operational
testing, and performance assessment of high-performance Group 3
UAS. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of how contractor-owned, contractor-
operated or similar service-based constructs may support
combatant command experimentation, demonstrations, and limited
operational employment of Group 3 UAS capable of performing
Group 4 mission sets, including an evaluation of operational
risk, force protection considerations, and command-and-control
arrangements;
(2) identification of mission areas and geographic
combatant commands where interim service-based approaches could
most effectively mitigate near-term capability gaps, including
contested logistics, persistent ISR, and communications relay
across geographically expansive areas of responsibility;
(3) options and timelines for transitioning from interim
service-based employment to organic service ownership,
including notional decision criteria, acquisition pathways, and
associated cost and schedule implications;
(4) an assessment by the relevant ISR task forces of
emerging technologies and operational concepts enabling lower-
cost Group 3 platforms to perform mission sets traditionally
associated with Group 4 or Group 5 systems, including an
estimate of potential operational and cost savings; and
(5) a description of how operational data, lessons learned,
and performance metrics generated through these service-based
efforts have informed requirements development, acquisition
decisions, and any recommendations for transition into a
program of record.
Industrial Base for Unmanned and Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems
The committee recognizes efforts undertaken by the
Department of Defense and the military services to obtain and
deploy unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and counter-UAS (c-UAS)
capabilities across the joint force while supporting growth of
the domestic defense industrial base for these systems in order
to achieve large-scale production and reduce per-unit
production costs. The committee supports the Department's
objectives under the Drone Dominance initiative of acquiring
UAS in large quantities and at lower price points to make UAS
and c-UAS pervasive across the joint force. The committee
acknowledges that existing challenges to achieving high-rate
domestic production of key UAS and c-UAS components such as
small turbine engines that meet established size, weight, and
power requirements. The committee supports continued efforts by
the Department and the military services to use all available
means to increase domestic UAS and c-UAS production capacity
including through Title III of the Defense Production Act of
1950 (Public Law 81-774) and as part of the Drone Dominance
initiative.
Low-Cost Cross Domain Fixed-Wing Aerial-Underwater Vehicles
The committee notes the increasing operational relevance of
low-cost, cross-domain systems capable of operating in both
aerial and underwater environments, including fixed-wing
vehicles that can transition from subsea operation to flight in
air, and all weather environments, to support intelligence,
surveillance, reconnaissance, logistics, search and rescue,
strike, and other mission sets in contested environments. The
committee further notes that potential adversaries are
investing in and demonstrating cross-domain and unmanned
capabilities designed to operate across multiple domains,
including air and maritime environments.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
no later than December 1, 2026, on the availability and
development of low-cost, cross-domain fixed-wing aerial-
underwater vehicles. The briefing should include, at a minimum
the following:
(1) a summary of the Department's investments to date in
the research, development, test and evaluation of cross-domain
fixed-wing aerial underwater vehicles that can transition from
subsea operation to flight in air;
(2) an assessment of known or assessed adversary
capabilities related to cross-domain or fixed-wing aerial-
underwater unmanned systems, including implications for United
States operational concepts and force posture;
(3) an assessment of United States industrial base efforts
to develop and mass produce combat relevant fixed-wing aerial-
underwater unmanned systems;
(4) a description of technical, acquisition, or policy
challenges that may limit the Department's ability to rapidly
prototype, field, or scale such capabilities, along with any
recommendations to address those challenges; and
(5) to the extent that the Department is pursuing such
systems, a description of the Department's strategy for
research and development, including acquisition approaches and
incentive mechanisms that prioritize affordability, rapid
prototyping and scalability, tan the use of commercial
innovation where practicable, to accelerate the development and
potential fielding of cross-domain fixed wing capabilities.
Report on Digital Airworthiness Certification
The committee recognizes that digital airworthiness
certification has the potential to streamline the typical
paper-based process to certify aircrafts. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by December 31, 2026, on the
following:
(1) suitable unmanned aircrafts to test or implement
digital airworthiness certification;
(2) an assessment of outcomes of maintaining safety
standards via the digital airworthiness certification process;
(3) an evaluation from the Department of the Air Force on
the feasibility of implementation; and
(4) descriptions of impact on readiness if the service were
to operationalize this airworthiness certification method.
Scalable Cost-Effective Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems Interception
Capacity
The committee recognizes that recent combat operations and
adversary employment of massed unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in
Europe and the Middle East have fundamentally altered the cost
and scale dynamics of air defense. The widespread use of long-
range one-way attack UAS, attritable loitering munitions, and
coordinated swarm tactics by the Russian Federation and
Iranian-backed proxy groups present an operational challenge to
U.S. and allied forces. The committee has concerns that current
interceptor inventories and cost-per-engagement models are not
structured to defeat these threats at scale. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to explore diversified and
economically sustainable defeat mechanisms in light of changing
strategic, operational, and tactical environments.
Scale Production-Ready Low-Cost Munitions
The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts
to increase production capacity for critical munitions.
However, the committee is concerned that the Department's
proposals largely focus on expanding output along existing,
traditional production lines and do not sufficiently broaden
the industrial base or diversify the inventory with new, low-
cost munitions. The committee recognizes the need for
additional low-cost munitions to complement exquisite
capabilities and mitigate risks associated with insufficient
capacity to effectively sustain long-range fires in a
protracted conflict.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the service secretaries, to submit a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on scaling low-cost munitions. The
briefing should including the following information:
(1) the total munitions requirement (TMR) over the Future
Years Defense Program (FYDP) for all munitions, including the
quantities needed to meet urgent, high-volume surge capacity in
the event of conflict;
(2) the planned total inventory over the fiscal year 2027
budget request and FYDP for all programmed munitions and
subsequent capacity shortfalls;
(3) a listing of production-ready, low-cost munitions
capabilities having been evaluated for affordability,
utilization of modern manufacturing approaches, capability of
scaling production quantities, and projected outputs over the
FYDP, and identified by the Department as capable of fulfilling
identified inventory gaps between demand and anticipated
inventory;
(4) a detailed strategy for implementing a mixture of
exquisite and affordable munitions capabilities;
(5) an assessment of how low-cost munitions are being
factored into the traditional TMR process;
(6) identification of any changes required to the TMR
process to more accurately account for novel threat targets as
well as low-cost munitions; and
(7) an assessment of cost per kill as a factor in TMR
analysis.
Transitioning Items of the F-35 Parts and Supply Chain to Advanced
Manufacturing Technologies
The committee notes continued readiness challenges across
the F-35 fleet and observes that supply chain constraints for
certain critical components, including cockpit canopy
transparencies, have negatively affected mission-capable rates.
The committee further notes that section 1842 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) requires major weapon systems, to the maximum extent
practicable, to transition critical readiness items that could
be produced using advanced manufacturing within 24 months after
enactment. Therefore, the committee expects the F-35 Joint
Program Office to consider opportunities to leverage advanced
manufacturing capabilities that may enhance supply chain
resiliency and competition consistent with section 1842.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 101--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize appropriations for procurement
at the levels identified in section 4101 of division D of this
Act.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Sec. 111--Standards for Networked, Autonomous, Kinetic Capabilities to
Protect Against Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
establish standards for networked, autonomous, kinetic
capabilities that could be used to counter small unmanned
aircraft systems.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Sec. 121--Temporary Unavailability of Amphibious Warfare Ships
This section would amend section 8062 of title 10, United
States Code, to define a temporary unavailable amphibious
warfare ship based on whether the ship has surpassed the
nominal duration of its planned maintenance availability by
specified margins for certain fiscal years.
Sec. 122--Authority to Use Incremental Funding for Long Lead-Time
Components for Virginia Class Submarines
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
incrementally fund contracts for the advance procurement of
long lead-time components for Virginia-class submarines.
Sec. 123--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Arleigh Burke Class
Destroyers
This section would provide multi-year procurement authority
for up to fifteen Arleigh Burke class destroyers.
Sec. 124--Multiyear Procurement Authority for John Lewis Class Oilers
This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to enter
into one or more multiyear contracts for the procurement of
John Lewis Class Oilers and the systems, components, and long-
lead time materials associated with such vessels.
Sec. 125--Procurement Authorities for Certain Amphibious Shipbuilding
Programs
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into one or more contracts for amphibious ships. The
Secretary of the Navy would also be authorized to enter into
contracts for advance procurement or advance construction of
systems and parts ahead of ship procurement when cost savings
are achievable. To fund these contracts, the Secretary of the
Navy would be authorized to incrementally fund multi-ship and
advance procurement contracts.
Sec. 126--Contract Authority for Submarine Tender Program
This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to enter
into one or more contracts for the procurement of not more than
two AS(X) submarine tenders. The Secretary would also be
allowed to incrementally fund those contracts.
Sec. 127--Multiyear Procurement Authority For E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
Aircraft
This section would authorize the Navy to enter into a
multiyear procurement for the E-2D aircraft.
Sec. 128--Authority to Use Incremental Funding for the Construction of
a Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG)
This section would provide the authority to use incremental
funding to enter into a contract for the construction of a
Guided Missile Destroyer.
Sec. 129--Authority for Advance Procurement of Components for Ship-to-
Shore Connector Class Craft
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into one or more contracts for advance procurement of
components for the Ship to Shore Connector prior to ship
authorization.
Sec. 130--Torpedo Modernization, Testing, and Inventory Sufficiency for
Two Simultaneous Regional Conflicts
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for torpedo
modernization, testing, production, and inventory sufficiency.
Additionally, the Secretary of the Navy would be required to
develop a plan to expand the undersea weapons industrial base.
Not later than 120 days after enactment of the Act, the
Secretary of the Navy would be required to submit a report on
the required strategy; a report on the required industrial base
expansion plan; and a briefing relevant testing capacity,
testing methodology, projected wartime inventory depletion, and
investments require in the period covered by the future-years
defense program.
Sec. 131--Limitation On Construction of Battleship Pending
Certification On Technology Readiness Levels
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
certify that the systems planned for inclusion on the BBG(X)
program are at a sufficiently mature technology readiness level
before award of a construction contract for the first of class
vessel.
Sec. 132--Strategy for Iterative Development and Flight Modifications
for FF(X) Class Frigates
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
develop a strategy for iterative flight development of the new
FF(X) vessel class. The Secretary of the Navy would be required
to provide a briefing on the development of the strategy to
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 133--Report on Continuity of Mission and Readiness During
Transition of F-5 to F/A-18E/F Aircraft for the Navy Reserve
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
provide an annual report for 5 consecutive years on the
Secretary's plan, and execution of that plan, for transitioning
Navy Reserve F-5 tactical fighter aircraft flying units to the
F/A-18E/F tactical fighter aircraft.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
Sec. 141--Inventory Requirements for Certain Fighter Aircraft
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to maintain a total aircraft inventory of fighter aircraft of
not less than 1,800 aircraft from October 1, 2026 through
October 1, 2035.
This section would also authorize the Secretary to increase
the total planned procurement of F-15EX aircraft above 267
aircraft.
Sec. 142--Extension of Prohibition on Retirement of F-22 Aircraft
This section would extend the prohibition on F-22 aircraft
retirement until September 30, 2032.
Sec. 143--Limitation on Retirement of E-3 Airborne Warning and Control
System Aircraft and Requirements Relating to E-7 Aircraft
This section would extend the minimum inventory requirement
for E-3 and requires the Air Force to submit to Congress its
plan for procuring E-7 Wedgetail aircraft.
Sec. 144--Evaluation for Potential Transfer of Certain A-10 Aircraft
Among Military Departments
The section would require the Secretary of Defense to
evaluate the potential transfer of retired A-10 aircraft to
other military departments of the Department of Defense.
Sec. 145--Extension of Requirements Relating to C-130 Aircraft
This section would keep the C-130 total aircraft inventory
at 271 with a sunset date of October 1, 2028.
Sec. 146--Limitation On Availability of Funds for C-37 Aircraft
Recapitalization Program
This section would direct that not more than 50 percent of
the funds authorized to be appropriated for C-37 aircraft
procurement may be expended until 30 days after the Secretary
of the Air Force submits to the congressional defense
committees an acquisition strategy and a justification for
using other than competitive procedures.
Sec. 147--Limitation on Retirement of MQ-9 Reaper Aircraft
This section would prohibit the retirement, divestment,
placement in storage, transfer to nonoperational status, or
preparation for retirement of the MQ-9 Reaper.
Sec. 148--Analysis of Alternatives for Next Generation Airlift
Capabilities
This section would direct an analysis of alternatives for
the next generation airlift aircraft.
Sec. 149--Authorization of Transitional Activities to Improve Airlift
Operations
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to carry out activities, prior to fielding the next generation
airlift aircraft, to improve the readiness, reliability,
capacity, and capabilities with respect to airlift operations.
Sec. 150--Conveyance of Certain F-14 Aircraft to U.S. Space and Rocket
Center Commission in Huntsville, Alabama
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
convey, without consideration, three F-14 aircraft to the U.S.
Space and Rocket Center Commission in Huntsville, Alabama.
Sec. 151--Report On the Feasibility of Restoring Nuclear Capability to
the B-1B Lancer Bomber Aircraft
This section would direct a report on feasibility of
modernizing the B-1B aircraft to carry nuclear weapons.
Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters
Sec. 161--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-15EX Aircraft
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a multi-year procurement contract for the
procurement of F-15EX aircraft after certifying to the
congressional defense committees that each aircraft will be
procured with a full complement of initial spares, alternate
mission equipment, and conformal fuel tanks.
Sec. 162--Multiyear Procurement Authority for F-35 Aircraft
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a multi-year procurement (MYP) contract for the
procurement of F-35 aircraft after certifying to the
congressional defense committees that: each aircraft will be
procured with a full complement of initial spares and alternate
mission equipment; the MYP contract will achieve at least 5
percent savings over an annual contract mechanism; the
Director, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation has validated
the estimated contract savings; the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment provides a report describing
the funding resources required over the Future Years Defense
Plan to support the readiness rates as defined by the Air Force
and the Department of the Navy; and, the required funding that
sufficiently supports the F-35 Global Support Solution Reset
program in fiscal year 2026 and 2027 has been obligated or
budgeted, respectively.
Sec. 163--Prohibition on Procurement and Use of Humanoid Robotic
Systems Produced, Developed, or Controlled by Foreign Adversaries
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
procuring, leasing, or otherwise obtaining a covered humanoid
robotic system that is produced or developed by a foreign
adversary or foreign adversary entity.
This section would require the Secretary to issue any
rules, regulations, policies, or guidance necessary for the
implementation of this section not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 164--Limitation On Availability of Funds to Retire or Decommission
Certain Radar Systems
This section would prohibit any funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act from being used to retire,
decommission, or divest of specified tactical and naval radar
systems unless determined to be beyond economical repair.
Sec. 165--Standards for Common Operating System for Small Unmanned
Aircraft Systems
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to establish standards for a common operating systems for small
unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 166--Minimum Annual Procurement Goal for AbilityOne Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a goal that the total amount of funds obligated for
the procurement of products and services from nonprofit
concerns pursuant to chapter 85 of title 41, United States
Code, in a fiscal year is equal to not less than one percent of
the total amount of funds obligated for all procurement
contracts entered into by the Department of Defense in such
fiscal year.
Sec. 167--Implementation of Comptroller General Recommendations on F-35
Joint Strike Fighter Technical Data Needs for Sustainment
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a plan and implementation report regarding the relevant
Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommendations
contained in numerous, prior GAO reports regarding F-35
technical data, and the Secretarys plan to procure the
necessary technical data to implement the F-35 sustainment
strategy.
Sec. 168--Implementation of GAO Recommendation on F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter Use of Contract Incentive Fees
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop and implement a plan to address recommendation number
three of the Government Accountability Office titled ``F-35
Joint Strike Fighter: Actions Needed to Address Late Deliveries
and Improve Future Development (GAO-25-107632)'' and
subsequently submit a report on the Secretary's implementation
plan to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 169--Study on Fuel Procurement Practices of the Department of
Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Commander of the United States
Transportation Command and the Director of the Defense
Logistics Agency, to conduct a study on the fuel procurement
practices of the Department for fiscal year 2026 and report the
results of the study to the congressional defense committees.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army
Items of Special Interest
Advanced LIDAR Integration for Defense Systems
The committee notes the important research conducted by
Army Research Lab (ARL) and Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) as it
relates to light detection and ranging (LiDAR) technology. The
committee is aware of the importance of LiDAR technology for
autonomous navigation, perception in low-visibility areas, and
three-dimensional mapping and reconnaissance. The committee is
also aware that further integration of LiDAR technologies onto
both ground and airborne platforms could provide warfighters
with essential navigation and visibility capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Secretary of the Army, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services,
not later than December 1, 2026, on the integration of advanced
LiDAR technologies into ground and airborne systems. The
briefing should include:
(1) an overview of ongoing and planned LiDAR research,
development, test, and evaluation activities;
(2) an assessment of integration into current and future
ground and airborne platforms;
(3) a description of transition pathways to operational
capability;
(4) an assessment of domestic industrial base capacity and
supply chain vulnerabilities; and
(5) a detailed assessment of the role of the AFRL,
including AFRL Rome, in supporting research, prototyping,
testing, validation, and integration of advanced LiDAR
technologies.
AI-Enabled Autopilot Systems for Unmanned Aerial Systems
The committee recognizes the rapid advancement of
commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) enabled
autopilot systems for unmanned aerial systems (UASs), including
capabilities that enhance navigation, resilience in contested
environments, autonomous decision-making, and reduced operator
burden. The committee further notes the potential for such
systems to accelerate the development and fielding of scalable,
low-cost unmanned systems under the Army's small UAS
initiatives.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of the
Army, in coordination with the Director of the Drone Dominance
Program, to conduct a comprehensive market survey of
commercially available AI-enabled autopilot systems for small
UASs. This survey should assess existing capabilities,
maturity, cost, modularity, supply chain considerations, and
the extent to which such systems can be integrated into current
and future Army unmanned aerial platforms.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army, in coordination with the Director of the Drone Dominance
Program, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than January 15, 2027 that includes:
(1) a summary of commercially available AI-enabled
autopilot systems evaluated, including key vendors and
technologies;
(2) an assessment of the performance, survivability, and
scalability of such systems in contested and degraded
operational environments;
(3) an analysis of integration pathways for incorporating
AI-enabled autopilot systems into the Army's small UAS
initiatives, including open architecture considerations and
interoperability with existing Army systems;
(4) identification of any barriers to adoption, including
regulatory, cybersecurity, supply chain, or intellectual
property challenges;
(5) a plan including timelines and resourcing requirements,
for how the Army intends to incorporate AI-enabled autopilot
capabilities into small UAS initiatives;
(6) an evaluation of whether the AI-enabled autopilot
systems are compatible with other unmanned systems to include
unmanned ground and maritime systems in addition to aerial
systems; and
(7) recommendations for any legislative or policy changes
needed to accelerate the adoption and fielding of such
technologies.
Anti-Tamper and Incursion Response Technologies
The committee is aware of the Army Research Laboratory's
ongoing efforts to research and explore hardware protection and
anti-tamper technologies through multimodal sensing, secure
radio frequency communications, and edge computing. The
committee notes the growing threat to the security of critical
technologies, devices, and information and recognizes the need
for rapid development and implementation of anti-tamper and
intrusion response technologies for supply chain assurance.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees,
not later than December 1, 2026, on the Army's current and
planned efforts to support the development and deployment of
advanced hardware protection and anti-tamper technologies. At a
minimum, the report should include:
(1) the timeline to resource a sustained research and
development program that addresses current and future anti-
tamper and protection technology gaps;
(2) the Army's operational needs relevant to such current
and future threats; and
(3) a prioritization of current shortfalls in protection
and anti-tamper technologies.
Artillery Production Scalability and Manufacturing Modernization
The committee recognizes that U.S. large-caliber artillery
munition production, including 155mm shell-body manufacturing
and associated inspection processes, continues to rely on
legacy production methods and infrastructure that constrain
production throughput, limit surge capacity, and concentrate
risk within a narrow supplier base. The committee is concerned
that current production processes may limit the Army's ability
to rapidly scale artillery munition production during a
prolonged high-intensity conflict.
The committee notes that commercially mature automation,
precision machining, digital inspection, and in-process quality
assurance technologies may offer opportunities to improve
production scalability, reduce manufacturing bottlenecks, and
increase production resilience without requiring significant
changes to existing munition designs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Capability Program Executive
Ammunition & Energetics, to submit a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
opportunities to improve the scalability and resiliency of
large-caliber artillery munition production. The report shall
include:
(1) an identification of current production bottlenecks
affecting 155mm and other large-caliber artillery munition
production, including machining, forming, inspection, tooling,
and supplier qualification constraints;
(2) an assessment of opportunities to integrate
commercially mature automation, precision manufacturing, and
digital inspection technologies into existing Army ammunition
production facilities and artillery production lines;
(3) an assessment of barriers to scaling artillery munition
production using existing manufacturing methods and
infrastructure;
(4) a description of ongoing or planned demonstration,
prototyping, or integration activities related to artillery
production modernization; and
(5) recommendations to improve production throughput,
quality assurance, supplier diversification, and wartime surge
production capacity for artillery munitions.
The report should be submitted in an unclassified format,
but may also contain a classified annex, if required.
Design for Manufacturing in Munitions and Energetics
The committee is concerned that the current munitions
industrial base lacks the surge capacity required for modern
conflict. The committee believes that using Design for
Manufacturing (DFM) as a standard requirement for munitions and
energetics programs to ensure such systems can be produced at
the speed and scale required by the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to House Committee on Armed Services, not
later than June 1, 2027, on the feasibility of implementing DFM
as a requirement in the development of munitions. The briefing
should include:
(1) A summary of key manufacturing improvements possible
through DFM, including benefits such as reductions in safety
incidents, production time, part counts, or manufacturing
costs;
(2) A description of training or guidance that has been
provided to Systems Engineering teams and Independent Technical
Assessment organizations to evaluate DFM implementation;
(3) An assessment of the potential impact of DFM on
munitions industrial base surge capacity; and
(4) Identification of barriers to implementation and
recommended legislative or regulatory changes.
Expanding the Innovation Ecosystem at the United States Military
Academies
The committee supports the ongoing research, development,
test, and evaluation (RDT&E) efforts being undertaken by the
United States Military Academies. For example, the committee is
aware of the launch of the West Point Innovation Hub (WP Werx),
an initiative that connects cadets from diverse disciplines
with partners across the Department of Defense, industry, and
academia to drive innovation and address complex challenges in
a collaborative setting.
The committee notes the potential of such partnerships like
WP Werx to help expand the role of the Military Academies in
the Department of Defense's innovation ecosystem. Therefore,
the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, in coordination with the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and
Technology, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2026, on the RDT&E and
innovation efforts at the Military Academies. The report shall
include:
(1) an assessment of current innovation-driven project-
based learning and scholarly research efforts at the Military
Academies;
(2) an assessment of the feasibility, viability, and
potential impacts of expansion of such efforts across academia,
industry, and the Department of Defense; and
(3) such other information as the Under Secretary deems
appropriate.
Improved Energetics Manufacturing
The committee is aware of the Army's ammunition enterprise
modernization efforts and supports the Army's emphasis on the
research, development, and maturation of novel materials and
manufacturing processes oriented toward next generation
propellants and energetics. The committee recognizes the
importance of quickly transitioning simulants to pilot-scale
manufacturing for live energetic systems. Therefore, the
committee encourages U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development
Command to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a research
and development facility for the integration of novel energetic
components.
Mobile Unmanned Aircraft System Launch Capability
The committee recognizes the increasing operational demand
for distributed unmanned aircraft system operations in
contested and austere environments. The committee notes that
current unmanned aircraft system launch capabilities are often
dependent on fixed infrastructure or platform-specific systems,
which may limit operational flexibility and survivability.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
has not fully assessed the operational utility of mobile launch
systems capable of enabling rapid, repeated deployment of
unmanned aircraft systems across dispersed locations.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 15, 2027, on the feasibility and advisability of
developing and fielding mobile unmanned aircraft system launch
capabilities. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of operational requirements for mobile
launch systems capable of operating in austere and distributed
environments with minimal personnel and infrastructure;
(2) an evaluation of systems capable of supporting multiple
Group 2 and Group 3 unmanned aircraft systems through modular
or platform agnostic interfaces;
(3) an analysis of sortie generation rates, including the
ability to conduct repeated launches at high operational tempo
and rapidly reposition between launch sites;
(4) an assessment of mobility and survivability advantages
compared to fixed or infrastructure-dependent launch systems;
(5) an evaluation of cost per launch and scalability of
production; and
(6) recommendations regarding the feasibility and
advisability of a pilot or demonstration program.
Next Generation Ballistic Plate
The committee believes that next-generation ballistic
plates and vests are critical to ensuring soldier survivability
on the future battlefield. These next-generation soldier
protection systems should incorporate advanced materials and
next-generation ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, to
include the class I and class II vital torso protection (VTP).
The committee further urges the Secretary of Defense to achieve
the target objective weight requirements and evaluate conformal
and flexible geometries for VTP Class I systems.
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy
Items of Special Interest
Academic Partnerships for Submarine and Undersea Vehicle Research and
Manufacturing
In recent years, as part of multiple efforts to address the
need to increase the size of the fleet, the committee
authorizes appropriations in partnerships between industry,
academia, and Navy laboratories, and Congress appropriates
additional funding for this line of effort. Most recently, the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Public Law 119-75)
appropriated $20 million for partnerships for submarine and
undersea vehicle programs.
The committee notes that these partnerships continue to
focus on both near-term manufacturing improvements for the
Virginia and Columbia-class submarine programs, as well as
longer-term basic and applied research needed to improve the
combat performance of future designs, and now also focus on
helping to address regional supply chain issues which
negatively impact production schedules.
The committee is interested in further understanding the
milestones achieved by the partnerships between industry,
academia, and in coordination with Naval Undersea Warfare
Center, Undersea Warfighting Development Center, Office of
Naval Research, and other Navy entities. Additionally, the
committee notes the benefit of developing a long-term funding
approach for these programs to leverage the growing
capabilities of such partners.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 31, 2026, on takeaways by the Navy from
academic partnerships for submarine and undersea vehicle
programs, as well as potential plans for future funding. The
briefing should include, but is not limited, the following:
(1) milestones achieved by these partnerships;
(2) barriers faced in executing these partnerships and
recommendations to reduce potential barriers;
(3) any potential plans to explore long-term or sustained
funding for these partnerships; and
(4) any other items of interest that the Secretary deems
important to highlight for or recommend to the committee
related to these partnerships.
Advanced Warhead Effects
The committee notes that while the commercial sector and
academic institutions are developing novel energetics, the
Department of Defense has lagged in its adoption and is still
primarily relying on legacy energetic materials. The committee
is concerned that current development efforts may overemphasize
delivery vehicles, launch, and propulsion while underinvesting
in modern warhead lethality and advanced reactive materials.
The committee believes the Department should adequately
prioritize advanced effects and lethality solutions to maintain
technological superiority and improve production scalability.
The committee notes that the Blackbeard-Ground Launched Missile
and Multi-Mission Affordable Capacity Effector programs, among
others, could provide opportunities adopt advanced reactive
materials, with the potential to improve operational
characteristics, affordability, and lethality.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Army and the Director of
the Joint Energetics Transition Office, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 1, 2026, on the Department's plan to evaluate and
integrate advanced warhead energetics into the Blackbeard-
Ground Launched Missile and Multi-Mission Affordable Capacity
Effector programs.
The briefing should include the following:
(1) an analysis of how funding provided in the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act (Public Law 119-21) will support research
and testing of advanced reactive materials;
(2) a description of how such materials can be integrated
into system architectures early enough in the development cycle
to enable scalable production and avoid costly recertification
requirements;
(3) a description of any additional investments required to
incorporate advanced energetics, including the use of advanced
modeling approaches to accelerate development cycles; and
(4) an analysis of the feasibility and advisability of
proposed actions to enable the adoption of advanced reactive
materials while maintaining munition affordability.
Airborne Augmented Reality Capability for Department of the Navy
The committee is aware of United States Navy pilot training
challenges and notes that airborne augmented reality systems
can increase fleet readiness by improving advanced aerial
combat training against realistic threats. The committee
expects the Secretary of the Navy to take a more aggressive
approach developing a plan for fielding an airborne augmented
reality capability to augment fleet readiness training.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than October 1, 2026, describing the plan for
fielding an airborne augmented reality capability to augment
fleet readiness training in the Department of the Navy.
Close-In Weapon System Technology Refresh
The committee supports the Navy's Close-In Weapon Systems
(CIWS) programs of record, such as the Mk-15 Phalanx and SeaRAM
systems. However, the committee notes that certain components
of these systems are aging, with systems having gone 20 years
since last modernization while relying on electronics that are
more than 50 years old. Events in the Red Sea have demonstrated
the relevance of CIWS, and the Navy requires modern and
reliable systems capable of protecting the fleet against new
threats, such as Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS).
The committee encourages the Navy to consider a technology
refresh plan focusing on the Mk-15 Phalanx and SeaRAM systems.
A technology refresh plan utilizing fielded products could
improve performance, resolve reliability issues, and support
counter UAS systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
no later than December 1, 2026 on its plans to modernize the
Mk-15 Phalanx and SeaRAM systems. This briefing shall include,
but is not limited to:
(1) the potential to integrate modernized sensors such as
KuRFs radars and multi-spectral targeting systems
(2) plans to modernize the mount servo design for both
systems
(3) potential cost savings created as a result of decreased
maintenance needs
Concepts to Scale a Commercial Logistics Fleet
The committee supports the continued development and
transition of unmanned surface vessels to meet fleet
requirements. As the commercial industry makes advances in the
technology and builds their own unmanned logistics fleet, the
committee believes that autonomous unmanned surface vessels can
provide logistics support to meet combatant command operational
requirements. However, this effort would require further
standardization of maritime logistics networks and methods to
manage intra-theater surface vessels. To better understand
efforts to develop enabling technologies that support intra-
theater unmanned surface vessel logistics operations, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027. The briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of current unmanned surface vessel
enabling technologies and their ability to manage logistics
focused operations; and
(2) a summary of intra-theater maritime logistics
requirements and how they could be met by commercial logistics
fleets of unmanned surface vessels.
Continuity in Communications Degraded Environments
The committee recognizes the increasing requirement for
secure, mobile-enabled command and control platforms for
distributed maritime operations. Particularly for continuity of
operations in environments where traditional communications may
be denied, degraded, or intermittently available. The committee
notes that recent operations across the Indo-Pacific and Middle
East have demonstrated how adversarial use of electronic
warfare, cyber disruption, global positioning system
interference, and physical infrastructure targeting can
significantly impair centralized decision-making, situational
awareness, and force coordination.
The committee is concerned that the Navy lacks a
consistent, accredited framework for rapidly fielding
commercially developed mobile command and control tools that
are engineered for tactical resiliency, including offline
operation, peer-to-peer synchronization, and reconstitution of
command coherence when connectivity is restored. To better
understand the effort to field secure, mobile-enabled command
and control software for communications denied or degraded
environments, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) a description of commercially developed mobile command
and control platforms currently demonstrated or fielded aboard
carriers, surface vessels, and shore commands, including an
assessment of each platform's demonstrated performance in
communications denied or degraded environments and
compatibility with Zero Trust architecture requirements;
(2) an assessment of the operational benefits of mobile-
first platforms accessible on Government and personal mobile
devices, including any reductions in administrative burden and
improvements in small-unit readiness observed during
demonstration efforts; and
(3) information on any efforts to accredit, procure, and
scale commercially developed mobile command and control
solutions with demonstrated performance in communications
denied or degraded environments.
Digital Combat Console for Aegis Baseline Integration
The committee is concerned about critical capability gaps
in low altitude air defense identified in multiple combatant
command areas of responsibility. The committee notes that Group
1 through 3 unmanned aircraft systems present asymmetric
threats that challenge legacy air defense systems optimized for
high altitude aircraft and ballistic missiles. Traditional
naval sensors and combat systems were not designed to detect,
track, and engage small unmanned systems that operate beneath
conventional radar coverage and move in coordinated formations.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to evaluate
and incorporate digital combat console capabilities that
address low altitude air defense gaps within Aegis Combat
System baseline configurations. To better understand current
efforts to incorporate digital combat console capabilities, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 30, 2026. The briefing shall include information
on:
(1) integration of digital combat console capabilities with
existing Aegis architecture to provide predictive threat
awareness for low altitude unmanned aircraft systems without
requiring dry dock hardware modifications;
(2) efforts to fuse sensor data from electro optical,
infrared, acoustic, and radio frequency sources delivered
through a unified operator display;
(3) efforts to track data for Group 1 through 3 unmanned
aircraft systems at ranges exceeding 5 kilometers with update
rates of 1 Hz or better and accuracy above 99 percent;
(4) development of capability to provide over the air
software update capability to deployed fleet units;
(5) capability enhancements to expand the defensive
engagement envelope; and
(6) associated deployment timelines.
Evaluation of Systems for the Management of Seabed Data From Unmanned
Underwater Vehicle Operations
The committee recognizes the need for high-resolution
seabed data to support Department of Defense intelligence
requirements, particularly to track and counter emerging
threats in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Area of
Responsibility. The committee notes that traditional methods of
seabed data collection using Naval vessels are insufficient for
the demands of contested environments, and that, accordingly,
unmanned underwater vehicles offer a lower-impact alternative
to inform mine warfare, facilitate contested resupply, conduct
targeting, create baselines for change detection, and enable
safe navigation. The committee further notes that existing
commercial capabilities provide seabed data collection
management solutions for this mission set, which can aggregate
and analyze data from distributed sensors and platforms into a
unified operational picture.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on available systems for managing
seabed data collected during unmanned underwater vehicle
operations, including non-developmental solutions from
commercial providers. The briefing shall include, but is not
limited to:
(1) identification of candidate systems to support the
upload, download, visualization, sharing, and storage of
applicable sensor data;
(2) an analysis of the capability of such systems with
regard to the transportation of data between locations globally
through cloud-based or network implementation;
(3) an assessment of the ability of such systems to support
all sensor data types relevant to hydrographic, seabed warfare,
and mine countermeasure missions;
(4) an evaluation of current gaps between existing systems
and identified candidate systems;
(5) identification of the technical maturity and
sustainability of such systems; and
(6) any applicable information from Navy users with regard
to potential seabed data collection solutions.
Navy Digital Engineering Interoperability
The committee recognizes that engineering, modeling and
simulation, testing, certification, and sustainment activities
across the Department of the Navy continue to face challenges
associated with fragmented digital environments, proprietary
software ecosystems, disconnected data architectures, and
limited interoperability across organizations, programs, and
security domains. The committee further recognizes the
importance of secure collaboration and authoritative data
exchange between Naval Air Systems Command, Naval Sea Systems
Command, and other naval acquisition and sustainment
organizations as maritime and aviation platforms become
increasingly software-defined and interconnected.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on the Navy's strategy to establish
decentralized, interoperable digital engineering infrastructure
capable of supporting secure cross-network collaboration,
authoritative data exchange, vendor-neutral modeling and
simulation data, and continuous engineering and certification
workflows without requiring replacement of existing engineering
tools or centralization of authoritative data. The briefing
should include the following:
(1) barriers to interoperability and data portability
across Navy engineering, modeling, simulation, test, and
sustainment environments;
(2) opportunities to support secure collaboration between
Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Air Systems Command, and other
Department of Defense organizations through interoperable
digital engineering environments;
(3) opportunities to improve interoperability,
authoritative data exchange, and secure collaboration across
engineering, modeling, simulation, testing, and sustainment
environments while preserving organizational control,
cybersecurity requirements, and data sovereignty protections;
and
(4) opportunities to reduce recertification burdens,
accelerate modernization timelines, improve software
integration activities, and enhance mission readiness through
continuous engineering and digital certification approaches.
Next Generation Shipboard Data Centers
The committee understands shipboard data centers and
computing infrastructure are aging and based on outdated
hardware designs. The fleet's computing demand has increased,
while legacy equipment cannot keep pace making upgrades slow
and expensive. The Navy has reached a computing power
inflection point. The need to field modern, data and AI enabled
capabilities with a shipboard cabinet infrastructure that
better supports these new designs and cooling approaches is
imperative to keep pace with adversaries.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, outlining shipboard data center
computing modernization plans, including fielding open, modular
architectures able to deliver AI-enabled capabilities for
warships. The report should include the following information:
(1) Progress modernizing the Fleet's legacy shipboard
computing hardware to meet increased computing demands given
the proliferation of advanced sensors, unmanned systems, and AI
enabled warfare;
(2) The future modularity and commonality needs of the
Navy, including efforts to achieve a common enclosure, power,
and cooling based on commercial-off-the-shelf Open Modular
Cabinet solutions providing a capability able to meet evolving
computing payloads of the future; and
(3) Plans to adopt Open Compute Project-based technologies,
including planned pilot efforts and measurable outcomes related
to integration time, upgrade cadence, and lifecycle cost;
(4) An unclassified threat assessment detailing the growing
computing capabilities of our adversaries and how the Navy will
modernize to scale computing to counter these malign
activities.
(5) The report shall identify any policy, certification, or
acquisition barriers that impede adoption of open, modular,
commercially supported shipboard data center architectures and
should provide recommended actions and timelines to address
such barriers.
Rapid Unmanned Surface Vessel On-Demand Manufacturing
The committee recognizes the growing operational need for
autonomous small unmanned surface vessels to support maritime
domain awareness, surveillance of critical undersea
infrastructure, and other urgent national security
requirements. The committee is concerned that gaps in domestic
production capacity, supply chain resiliency, and surge
manufacturing may limit the Department of Defense's ability to
rapidly field such systems at operationally relevant scale.
The committee believes the Department should evaluate
scalable and on-demand manufacturing approaches that could
reduce reliance on fragile supply chains, strengthen the
domestic industrial base, and improve the Department's ability
to surge production in response to adversary action, extended
conflict, infrastructure threats, or urgent mobilization
requirements.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the feasibility and advisability of establishing a pilot
project to demonstrate rapid, scalable, and on-demand
manufacturing of autonomous small unmanned surface vessels. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) gaps in the domestic industrial base related to
production capacity and supply chain resiliency for autonomous
small unmanned surface vessels;
(2) potential manufacturing methodologies to rapidly
increase production of such vessels to meet urgent national
security requirements;
(3) opportunities to qualify new or enhanced United States-
based suppliers to support on-demand scaling and manufacturing;
(4) actions the Department is taking to identify and
mitigate critical domestic supply chain risks affecting
autonomous systems manufacturing;
(5) metrics the Department could use to assess industrial
capability before and after implementation of such a pilot
project; and
(6) any legislative or administrative action needed to
improve rapid scaling and on-demand manufacturing capabilities
for autonomous systems.
Report on the Adoption of Autonomous Vertical Takeoff and Landing
Platforms
The committee supports efforts by the Navy and Marine Corps
to pursue the Distributed Maritime Operations and Expeditionary
Advanced Base Operations operational doctrines, supported by
the Next Generation Air Dominance and Collaborative Combat
Aircraft programs, to preserve combat power while increasing
survivability and operational tempo in the Indo-Pacific. The
committee understands that, in support of these operational
doctrines, the Navy is developing autonomous vertical takeoff
and landing (VTOL) platforms capable of operating in the Indo-
Pacific. However, the committee is concerned that the absence
of validated tactics, concepts of employment, and integration
pathways may limit the operational utility and delay fielding
of these systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on options for integration,
operationalization, and sustainment of autonomous VTOL
platforms. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of the force structure, logistics,
training, operational concept, and sustainment trade space for
autonomous VTOL platforms;
(2) a description of roles suitable for autonomous VTOL
platforms, and for which such platforms would provide
additional capability or efficiency;
(3) projected resource requirements and transition
timelines; and
(4) an evaluation of the feasibility and advisability of
the integration of such systems into Naval and Marine aviation
units.
Unmanned Surface Vessel Operability in the Arctic Ocean
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of the
Arctic Ocean and the challenges that weather and conditions
pose for military and civilian operations. With increased
investment in unmanned enabling capabilities, the committee
believes that unmanned surface vessels (USV) could augment
manned Arctic operations. The committee directs the Secretary
of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the operability
of unmanned surface vessels in the Arctic Ocean. The briefing
should include:
(1) an assessment of any current cold weather limitations
of USV ability to maneuver, seakeeping ability, ability to
navigate, maritime domain awareness capability, and
communications capability needed to support survey, monitoring,
rescue, and maritime patrol missions;
(2) analysis of possible technological or design solutions
for aspects such as hull, topside structure (including the
mast), sensor suites, communications equipment, material
choices, and changes in naval architecture for manned ships,
and how they can be applied to USVs with no personnel
accommodations or requirements;
(3) information on any ongoing efforts to develop technical
solutions through analysis, modeling and simulation, and rapid
prototyping to advance novel design concepts and component
hardening solutions; and
(4) information on potential controlled experiments with
component technologies that would be needed to support USV
operations in cold weather conditions.
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force
Items of Special Interest
Advanced High Mach Turbine Engines Using Additive Manufacturing
The committee understands that high-speed airbreathing
propulsion systems, such as high Mach turbojets, ramjets, and
rotating detonation engines, are critical for time sensitive
kinetic strikes on modern battlefields. These propulsion
systems operate under extreme thermal and structural conditions
that demand complex internal geometries and advanced cooling
solutions. The committee recognizes that additive manufacturing
could serve as a critical enabler for next-generation high Mach
capabilities. The committee urges the continued advancement of
secure, domestically resilient additive manufacturing capacity
to strengthen the Department of Defense's technological
superiority, shorten development timelines, and enhance surge
production readiness.
Anti-Jam Capability Assessment
The committee is aware of supply constraints with regard to
the Common Architecture for Assured Positioning, Navigation and
Timing (CAAP) Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC)
inventory due to the planned shutdown of the 45 nanometer ASIC
process line. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, not later
than December 31, 2026, on the current and projected status of
its CAAP ASIC inventory. The report should include:
(1) the anticipated rate of consumption of the chips, by
system, over the next decade in support of United States and
allied requirements;
(2) any emerging additional demand, including from new
systems, for the existing stock of ASICs;
(3) the available capacity and necessary timelines needed
for the industrial base to manufacture a new configuration; and
(4) potential opportunities for an updated architecture,
including with regard to emergent demand for affordable mass
munitions.
Atmospheric Dominance Research and Monitoring
The committee recognizes the importance of the atmosphere
and near-space environment to joint operations worldwide, as
well as the complex environments that United States assets are
likely to encounter.
The committee believes that additional research on
atmospheric signatures and dynamics in the atmosphere and the
development of predictive techniques to ensure observational
and operational superiority would be beneficial for Air Force
missions. The committee encourages the Air Force to conduct
additional research in atmospheric phenomenology in order to
develop monitoring systems that detect and analyze threats.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force,
in coordination with the Director of the Defense Intelligence
Agency, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than January 1, 2027, on the path to
establish a program that:
(1) expands global in-situ atmospheric monitoring and
assimilation with satellite data across the troposphere and
stratosphere to detect and attribute active modification of
natural atmospheric processes;
(2) ensures sufficient atmospheric observation, modeling,
and analytical capability to differentiate benign activities
from those that could impact the national security of the
United States; and
(3) leverages public-private partnerships, as appropriate,
to efficiently scale in-situ atmospheric monitoring and
analytic capabilities.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft Testing and Tactics Development
The committee recognizes the rapid pace of innovation in
commercial software development, including data software test
and evaluation tools relevant to the Collaborative Combat
Aircraft (CCA) program. Given the operational and tactical
importance of the CCA program, including its role in enabling
human-machine teaming and autonomous operations at scale, the
committee emphasizes that rapid, iterative test and evaluation
is essential to validating autonomy, tactics, and concepts of
employment. Moreover, effective and efficient testing can
further enable these capabilities to be fielded at the speed
required to maintain operational advantage over peer
competitors. The committee believes that leveraging mature
commercial software solutions can reduce cost, accelerate
operational testing, promote expedient development of CCA
concepts of employment, and effectively validate tactics,
techniques and procedures. Accordingly, the committee
encourages the Secretary of Air Force to leverage commercially
available modern software for operational testing, tactics
development, and validation for the CCA program.
Defense Quantum Networking Research
The committee supports the Air Force Research Laboratory's
research and development work on deployable quantum networking
solutions. With the integration of artificial intelligence
across systems, quantum computing improves the effectiveness of
those systems. To transition this technology, major
developments in hardware and software are required. The
committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force to continue
developing quantum networking capabilities to support power and
space requirements in the field.
Electro-Optical and Infrared Signature Modeling for
Collaborative Combat Aircraft
The Committee recognizes the importance of accurate
modeling and simulation capabilities to support the
development, survivability, and operational effectiveness of
next-generation autonomous air systems, including the
Collaborative Combat Aircraft program.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft are expected to operate in
contested environments alongside crewed platforms and will rely
on low observability, sensor awareness, and autonomous
perception to successfully perform missions including strike,
electronic warfare, and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance. The Committee recognizes that electro-optical
and infrared (EO/IR) signatures, including aircraft surface
heating, propulsion exhaust plumes, atmospheric propagation
effects, and background environmental conditions can play a
critical role in determining the detectability and
survivability of such systems against advanced adversary
sensors.
The Committee notes that advances in physics-based modeling
and synthetic scene generation tools enable improved prediction
of EO/IR signatures, support digital engineering efforts, and
can provide synthetic datasets to train and validate machine
learning and computer vision algorithms used in autonomous
systems.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force
and the Secretary of the Navy, to submit a report to the
Congressional Defense Committees not later than May 31, 2027 on
the feasibility and benefits of incorporating advanced EO/IR
modeling, simulation, and synthetic data generation tools into
the development, testing, and evaluation of Collaborative
Combat Aircraft and related autonomous air systems. The report
shall include:
(1) An assessment of existing Department of Defense
capabilities to model electro-optical and infrared signatures
of unmanned and autonomous aircraft, including exhaust plume
modeling and atmospheric propagation effects.
(2) An evaluation of commercially available physics-based
modeling tools capable of generating synthetic EO/IR datasets
for sensor development, algorithm training, and mission
simulation.
(3) A description of how such tools could support digital
engineering efforts for Collaborative Combat Aircraft,
including aircraft design, signature management, survivability
analysis, and sensor development.
(4) An assessment of the potential role of synthetic EO/IR
environments in supporting autonomous perception, automatic
target recognition, and machine learning algorithm training for
Collaborative Combat Aircraft.
(5) Recommendations for integrating EO/IR modeling and
synthetic scene generation capabilities into the research,
development, test, and evaluation pipeline supporting
Collaborative Combat Aircraft.
Magnetic Gearing for Advanced Manufacturing
and Space Applications
The committee is aware of ongoing research and development
efforts regarding magnetically geared drive systems and
actuators for both terrestrial and space applications. The
committee notes the potential for these technologies to improve
precision and compliance for safer human-robot and robot-robot
interaction, enhance controllability for delicate assembly and
servicing tasks, reduce contamination risk in vacuum and
cleanroom operations, expand operability across wide thermal
extremes, and increase mean time between failures.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to
support research and development efforts related to magnetic
gearing. The committee further encourages the Secretary to
examine the potential for such technology to reduce maintenance
costs, improve mean time between failures, and other
performance characteristics, and, if the technology is at an
appropriate level of maturity, to pursue further prototyping
and flight demonstrations.
Modular Air-to-Air Capability Integration for Collaborative
Combat Aircraft
The committee notes the Air Force's rapid advancement of
the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program and emphasizes
that the operational value of CCAs will depend on the
availability of affordable, scalable air-to-air munitions
capable of being integrated and fielded in sufficient quantity
to support sustained combat operations.
The committee remains supportive of Air Force initiatives
to leverage high Technology Readiness Level components, modular
design, and open system architecture to increase magazine depth
of future combat air forces. The committee is concerned,
however, that certain current affordable-mass munitions
initiatives emphasize form factors and employment concepts that
are not well suited for high-density internal carriage on low-
observable tactical aircraft, including Collaborative Combat
Aircraft.
The committee recognizes that the Department has
appropriately focused its initial Modular Series weapons
efforts on palletized, air-to-surface munitions due to their
lower technical complexity and broad industrial-base
participation. The committee encourages the Air Force to build
upon these efforts by expanding Modular Series weapons
development to include affordable, internally carried air-to-
air capabilities necessary to fully enable CCAs in counter-air
and air superiority missions.
The committee further emphasizes that the development of
affordable, modular air-to-air munitions for Collaborative
Combat Aircraft must be supported by a resilient and
geographically distributed industrial base and finds that
modular design and open system architectures should be
leveraged to expand the number of qualified suppliers, reduce
single-point manufacturing risk, and enable scalable production
across multiple facilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, describing the
Department's acquisition strategy for affordable, modular air-
to-air munitions intended for employment by Collaborative
Combat Aircraft. The briefing shall include, but is not limited
to:
(1) unit cost and production objectives necessary to
support sustained employment at operationally relevant scale;
(2) an assessment of the underlying industrial base,
including potential approaches to expand the number of
qualified producers, increase production resilience, and reduce
reliance on single-point manufacturing or integration
locations;
(3) planned timelines and technical considerations for
internal carriage integration on CCAs; and
(4) an assessment of how such munitions will complement and
preserve inventories of higher-end air-to-air weapons intended
for employment by manned fighter aircraft.
Nationwide Integration of Time Resiliency for Operations (NITRO)
The committee is encouraged by ongoing efforts of the Air
Force Research Laboratory in developing position, navigating
and timing (PNT) capabilities. The committee notes the joint
program with the National Guard, the Nationwide Integration of
Time Resiliency for Operations (NITRO), provides an alternative
to the global positioning system for operations of critical
infrastructure supporting military operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Mission Capabilities to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1,
2026, on the applicability of NITRO as well as costs to fund
ongoing operations, maintenance, and sustainment of the system.
Next Generation Escape System for United States Air Force
F-16 Aircraft
The committee understands that the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (ASAF/
ATL) reviewed the original sole-source Justification and
Analysis (J&A) document dated September 26, 2019, and made a
new conclusion for the F-16 Next Generation Escape System
(NGES) program in that more than one industry participant could
potentially meet Air Force requirements. As a result, on
January 9, 2025, ASAF/ATL directed via an Acquisition Decision
Memorandum (ADM) that a competitive acquisition strategy be
implemented for the F-16 NGES program.
Subsequently, Air Force leadership and program officials
have briefed committee staff on numerous occasions that the Air
Force would issue a competitive acquisition Request for
Proposal (RFP) for F-16 NGES to replace the existing
manufacturer's ejection seat. The Air Force has failed to
follow through on that action. The committee remains concerned
that the Air Force continues to delay issuing an RFP for F-16
NGES and instead has chosen to be myopically focused on issues
with the existing F-15 NGES program of record. The committee
also notes that the Air Force has sufficient funding and
acquisition personnel resources necessary to execute
concurrent, but separate NGES programs: the sole-source F-15
NGES program, and a competitive acquisition strategy for the F-
16 NGES program.
Lastly, the committee notes the Air Force has unresolved
safety concerns with the ACES II ejection seat given that the
Air Force, since 1978 when ACES II originally fielded, has
expanded the allowable aircrew weight range, reduced the
minimum seating height, and introduced Helmet-Mounted Devices
(HMD), resulting in multiple Air Force Safety Investigation
Board recommendations for safety enhancements. The Air Force
has conveyed that until the ACES II escape system is upgraded,
aircrew will continue to fly at unnecessary risk of major
injury or fatality during a high-speed ejection. Without ACES
II escape system upgrades the HMDs will continue to cause
excessively high neck loads; leave aircrew susceptible to
``slam-back'' injury or fatality; interfere with airflow to
environmental sensors resulting in possible seat malfunction,
and; leave lighter weight aircrew susceptible to injury or
fatality during drogue parachute opening shock. Finally,
aircrew will also continue to be susceptible to limb flailing
injuries at high speeds and to a higher risk of parachute
landing fall injuries.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Air Force
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on NGES for its fleet of tactical
fighter and bomber aircraft. The report should include, at a
minimum:
(1) A listing and description of existing programs of
record for ejection seats currently fielded on fighter and
bomber aircraft;
(2) A listing and description of developmental programs for
fighter and bomber aircraft ejection seats, as well as a
historical review of cost, schedule, and performance of each
program;
(3) An description of resources necessary to simultaneously
execute separate F-15 and F-16 NGES programs of record;
(4) An acquisition timeline with appropriate milestones to
develop, test, certify, and field an F-16 NGES;
(5) A detailed analysis of whether the ACES II ejection
seat can be modernized to fully implement Air Force Safety
Center Investigation recommendations #107903, #108743, #108744,
and #108745;
(6) A safety-to-aircrew survivability comparative analysis
comparing modernizing and upgrading existing ejection seats, as
compared to installing different and modern ejection seats with
improved design and functionality that improve aircraft safety;
and,
(7) Any other information as determined by the Secretary.
Report on Assessment of Turbine Based Combine Cycle Facilities at
Arnold Air Force Base
The committee recognizes the importance of ensuring
adequate testing facilities are available for the development
and evaluation of Turbine Based Combine Cycle (TBCC)
technologies as part of hypersonic air vehicle development
activities. The committee recognizes the importance of
dedicated facilities and personnel, such as those at Arnold Air
Force Base, to ensuring the success of such activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees no
later than December 1, 2026, describing the hosting plan for
TBCC test and evaluation capabilities. The report shall
include:
(1) a description of infrastructure and testing constraints
and efficiencies, human capital resources and limitations, and
other risks and/or optimizations to the program;
(2) an assessment of the ability of Arnold Air Force Base
and other testing centers to modernize facilities to meet the
needs of a full-scale TBCC operational capability;
(3) estimates for required power and industrial utility
usage, as well as risks associated with development of secured
access, networks, and grids; and
(4) such other information as the Secretary deems
appropriate.
Reusable Hypersonics Development and Transition
The committee supports the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA)'s development of reusable hypersonic
aircraft, including efforts to produce a Next Generation
Responsive Strike (NextRS) prototype aircraft and transition
the platform to the Air Force for flight test and fielding.
However, the committee is concerned with delays to the planned
transition schedule. The committee notes that initiation of
novel development activities, rather than the use of propulsion
and other technologies already developed under previous and
ongoing development activities, can significantly increase
schedule risk.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Director of DARPA, to submit a report to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than December
1, 2026, on efforts to leverage ongoing and past Air Force
Research Lab activities, including those associated with or
managed by DARPA, into the fielding of NextRS. The report shall
include:
(1) expected timelines for NextRS transition;
(2) expected funding required to maintain the current
roadmap;
(3) any funding, administrative, or technology development
obstacles anticipated to cause delay or that pose significant
schedule or cost risk; and
(4) such other information as the Secretary deems
appropriate.
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
Items of Special Interest
Advanced Military Prosthetic Technologies
The committee recognizes the importance of advanced
prosthetic technologies in supporting wounded servicemembers,
improving rehabilitation outcomes, and enhancing military
medical readiness. The committee further notes the growing
importance of domestic manufacturing capabilities for emerging
technologies, including microprocessor-controlled prosthetics,
neural-interface systems, advanced prosthetic manufacturing,
and modular prosthetic systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Director of the Defense Health Agency, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1,
2027, on the Department's efforts to advance and field next-
generation military prosthetic technologies. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) an assessment of current and future requirements for
advanced military prosthetic technologies;
(2) an assessment of domestic industrial base capacity and
supply chain risks associated with such technologies;
(3) opportunities to accelerate research, development,
testing, and fielding of advanced prosthetic systems;
(4) the status of emerging technologies, including neural-
interface and human-machine interface capabilities; and
(5) any recommendations for legislative action to
strengthen domestic production and innovation in advanced
military prosthetic technologies.
Analog In-Memory Compute Architectures for Defense Applications
The committee recognizes that size, weight, and power
(SWaP) constraints remain critical drivers across ground,
airborne, and space-based defense platforms; current
operational platforms must divide limited power budgets across
multiple processing stacks, leaving insufficient margin for
future AI capability growth, particularly in contested or
disconnected environments.
The committee is aware that recent advances in switch
capacitor-analog in memory compute (SC-AIMC) architectures have
demonstrated the potential to deliver greater than 20-fold
improvements in energy efficiency relative to conventional
digital solutions, enabling real-time AI inference, autonomous
decision-making, and adaptive signal processing within
fractional power and thermal envelopes.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense, acting through the service laboratories and relevant
science and technology executive offices, to evaluate and
mature next-generation analog in-memory compute architectures
for defense-relevant applications including multi-domain
mission autonomy and autonomous system collaboration, counter-
unmanned aircraft systems and distributed sensing, on-board
reasoning and decision-making in denied or degraded
environments, real-time electronic warfare and spectrum
awareness, and secure edge AI execution without reliance on
external data or power infrastructure.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on the Department's strategy to evaluate
and transition analog in-memory compute technologies into
defense-relevant programs, to include the following:
(1) current and planned investments in SC-AIMC and related
analog compute architectures across the Departments science and
technology portfolio;
(2) identified operational platforms and mission areas best
suited for near-term integration, including transition-relevant
prototypes and hardware-software co-design activities;
(3) coordination with service laboratories and joint and
interagency partners on experimentation and fielding pathways;
and
(4) the Department's assessment of domestic manufacturing
capacity and supply chain considerations for CMOS-compatible
analog compute components.
Analytical Tools to Improve Department of Defense
Research Security
The committee remains concerned that research conducted or
sponsored by the Department of Defense is the target of ongoing
efforts by multiple foreign influence groups to access
sensitive research processes, data, and results. Given this
concern, the committee has included several provisions in
previous National Defense Authorization Acts to better secure
Department-sponsored research at universities and the defense
industrial base.
The committee also recognizes that existing disclosure and
compliance standards in place by the Department and academia
may not consistently identify the full scope of foreign
influence risks associated with Department of Defense-funded
research and that modern analytical tools could assist in
improving these processes. Therefore, the committee directs the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security, to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services, not later than March 15, 2027, on
how the Department could adopt a risk-based approach to
strengthening research security screening and oversight across
Department of Defense research activities, including
consideration of appropriate analytical capabilities to improve
visibility into existing and future high-risk foreign
affiliations and evolving foreign influence threats over time.
Biochemical Sensing Technologies for Warfighter Readiness
The committee recognizes the importance of real-time
biochemical sensing technologies to support warfighter
readiness, force protection, and operational decision-making.
The committee is aware of ongoing U.S. Army Combat Capabilities
Development Command efforts to develop forward deployable,
wearable biochemical sensors.
The committee further notes that expanding sensing
capabilities to additional biomarkers could improve the
Department's ability to assess readiness, performance, brain
health, and exposure to toxic industrial chemicals or chemical
agents.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees, not later than
March 1, 2027, on Department efforts to develop, evaluate, and
transition biochemical sensing technologies, including:
(1) an overview of relevant Department research and
development activities;
(2) a description of potential applications for
physiological monitoring and environmental threat detection;
(3) an identification of transition pathways;
(4) a description of relevant supply chain and
manufacturing considerations, including foreign-sourced
components and potential for transition to domestic production;
and
(5) a summary of major milestones, testing, or
demonstration activities.
Biodefense Research and Development Activities
The committee recognizes the importance of further
developing effective countermeasures to address the threat that
biological agents pose to the warfighter, and it understands
that public-private partnerships are underway to further such
research. Further, the committee is concerned that the
Department of Defense lacks an established process to share
biodefense research and integrate biodefense technology across
Department of Defense organizations and offices and does not
adequately coordinate its activities to fully leverage
investments in this area.
To that end, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 31, 2026, which includes the following:
(1) an assessment of current and planned efforts to
integrate and coordinate existing biodefense research and
development in support of the goals of the National Security
Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and National Biodefense
Strategy;
(2) an assessment of existing biodefense research and
development activities, identification of existing gaps in
biodefense research, proposed realignments to research funding;
and
(3) an evaluation of, and recommendations for improvements
to, current processes affecting the intradepartmental sharing
and integration of biodefense research.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft Cost and Capability Assessment
The committee is familiar with Air Force and Navy programs
for Collaborative Combat Aircraft that plan for the fielding of
large quantities of aircraft at the lowest possible unit cost.
While the committee supports minimization of cost through
effective use of existing technologies, efficient acquisition
processes, and rapid testing, it remains supportive of ensuring
critical capabilities are still effectively fielded. As the Air
Force proceeds into Collaborative Combat Aircraft Increment 2
and the Navy develops its initial concepts, the committee
anticipates a possible need for aircraft with sufficient range,
speed, and electrical power to potentially self-deploy from the
continental United States and conduct varied missions for
geographic combatant commanders. This is particularly valid
given the risks of operating from the Pacific theater's ``first
island chain,'' which is held at risk by Chinese long-range
weapons. Sufficiently bolstering forward deployed combat
airpower, while keeping fleet life-cycle costs low, will
require aircraft capable of reliably carrying out an array of
missions over extended ranges, all while minimizing attrition.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force and the Secretary of the Navy to each provide a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than January 15,
2027, about the impact of cost while determining requirements
for Collaborative Combat Aircraft programs. The report should
determine the impact of unit cost minimization on aircraft
attributes and overall fleet-wide operational costs. The report
should also identify specific technology integration, including
any proposed commercial off-the-shelf and modified off-the-
shelf options, that could minimize fleet-wide costs while
reducing attrition and expanding operational flexibility.
Commercial Radar for Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems
The committee notes the increased risk that low-cost drones
pose to high value sensing nodes and radars, which not only
creates a severe cost asymmetry, but also exposes critical
operational vulnerabilities. Traditional active mono-static
radars are particularly vulnerable to electronic and kinetic
attack--they are relatively easy to locate when transmitting,
and not easily defended from massed, asymmetric attack. The
committee is concerned that such an asymmetry could result in
theater-wide degradation of integrated air defense systems.
Alternatively, the committee is aware that commercial sensing
capabilities exist that are active, passive or hybrid; multi-
static; software defined; and networked to support the
detection, classification, identification, or tracking of small
unmanned aircraft systems.
The committee is aware that the Joint Interagency Task
Force 401 (JIATF-401), in coordination with the military
services, is conducting competitive demonstration efforts to
develop new counter unmanned aircraft system (c-UAS)
capabilities. The committee believes these efforts are critical
to augment existing service programs of record, create more
robust distributed radar solutions for integrated air defense,
and support a burgeoning commercial sector. The committee
believes that commercial radar and sensing capabilities should
be explored in these demonstration efforts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of JIATF-401,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Army, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 15, 2027 detailing JIATF-401 and the Army's
efforts to demonstrate new commercial radar solutions to
augment existing c-UAS programs of record. The briefing shall
include, but not be limited to:
(1) An overview of the commercial radar or sensing
capabilities, including active, passive, hybrid, distributed,
multi-static, software-defined, or networked architectures
being evaluated to augment existing Army c-UAS programs of
record;
(2) An assessment of commercial platforms' ability to
easily hand off tracks to Ku Band radars integrated into modern
Army command and control systems to cue kinetic and/or non-
kinetic interceptors;
(3) The technical maturity, reliability, maintainability,
cybersecurity, and operational suitability of commercial radar
solutions;
(4) Feedback from military operators on ease of use,
deployability, mobility, survivability, user interface, and
operational utility of commercial systems;
(5) The affordability of commercial systems, including
procurement cost, operating and sustainment cost, manpower
requirements, and cost-exchange ratio when compared to existing
programs of record; and
(6) The ability of the commercial system to be integrated
through government-owned or licensed interfaces.
Commercialization Potential of Shelf-Stable Blood
The committee supports the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency's (DARPA) research and prototyping of shelf-
stable blood through the Fieldable Solutions for Hemorrhage
with bio-Artificial Resuscitation Products (FSHARP) program.
Utilizing biotechnology, this technology has the potential to
save warfighters' lives by enabling rapid access to blood at
the front lines. Therefore, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later
than March 1, 2027, on the status of the shelf-stable blood
program. The briefing should include:
(1) the current status of the research and prototyping
efforts;
(2) efforts to commercialize the research, including
identification of transition partners within the Department of
Defense and broader Federal Government and industry;
(3) challenges to commercialization and a plan to address
those challenges;
(4) the known and anticipated benefits of fielding shelf-
stable blood, including cost savings and a quantitative
assessment of warfighter lives saved; and
(5) a plan for deployment and operational fielding of the
shelf-stable blood product.
Countering Biotechnology Threats From Foreign Adversaries
The committee notes the rapid advancements in biotechnology
made by potential foreign adversaries, and believes that such
advancements could threaten national security. The committee
remains concerned that the United States may face gaps both in
its ability to keep pace with its biotechnology capability
development and its ability to defend against biotechnology
threats from adversaries.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on current biotechnology threats.
The briefing should include, at a minimum:
(1) an examination of existing gaps in biotechnology threat
defense;
(2) an analysis of foreign adversaries' likely use of
biotechnology capabilities against the United States; and
(3) a proposed strategy to counter biotechnology threats
from foreign adversaries, including recommended interagency
actions.
Defense Innovation Unit Collaboration With Service Portfolio
Acquisition Executives
The committee supports the efforts of the Defense
Innovation Unit (DIU) to bring commercial, dual-use
technologies to the Department of Defense. The committee
remains concerned, however, that gaps still exist between DIU
and the military services, which inhibits the timely transition
of technologies into service programs. Accordingly, the
committee includes a provision elsewhere in this Act that would
modify DIU's statutory authorities to enable more robust
collaboration with the military service Portfolio Acquisition
Executives (PAEs). The committee also directs the Director of
DIU, in coordination with the service PAEs, to provide a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than
December 1, 2026, on efforts to formalize collaboration
mechanisms between DIU and the services. The report shall
include:
(1) a plan for how the services and DIU plan to formalize
and standardize collaboration and transition efforts between
each service and DIU, to include enabling budgetary resourcing
in current and future fiscal years;
(2) a plan for service allocation of appropriate billets to
DIU positions and for a standardized and consistent process for
the services to assign personnel with appropriate military
occupational specialties, skillsets, and technical expertise;
and
(3) a description of current and planned co-funding and co-
development mechanisms, including any additional required
authorities.
Design for Robotic Assembly in Weapon System Development
The committee recognizes that many current weapon systems
were designed for low-rate, manual production by skilled
workers using bespoke tooling. Additionally, the committee is
aware that advances in artificial intelligence, robotics, and
autonomous manufacturing could enable robotic assembly at rates
and levels of consistency not achievable through predominantly
manual production methods. The committee believes that
incorporating Design for Robotic Assembly (DFRA) principles
during the engineering and development phase of new weapon
systems could help improve manufacturability, scalability, and
surge production capacity in the event of a high-intensity
conflict.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, on how DFRA principles are being
incorporated into the engineering, development, and
manufacturing of new weapon systems. The report shall also
include an overview of how the Department will reduce reliance
on robotics and automation systems manufactured or assembled by
entities domiciled in or subject to the control of China,
Russia, Iran, or North Korea.
Digital Engineering Integration and Governance Across the Department of
Defense
The committee recognizes digital engineering as a
foundational capability essential to improving acquisition
outcomes, reducing lifecycle costs, and modernizing military
systems across the Department of Defense. The committee
believes digital engineering accelerates the delivery of
mission-effective systems to the warfighter and, when combined
with disciplined product lifecycle management, improves
requirements development, enables earlier and better-informed
programmatic decisions, and supports long-term sustainment and
modernization.
The committee supports the scaling of digital engineering
scaled across all Department programs and platforms and
believes it must be resourced accordingly, including through
the establishment of dedicated budget lines. The committee
notes that the Department of the Air Force has demonstrated
progress in integrating digital engineering and product
lifecycle management into program execution and acquisition
decision-making and strongly supports the continued maturation
of lifecycle management across its programs. The committee
further recognizes the Department's progress with the
publication of Department of Defense Instruction 5000.97, which
established department-wide direction for digital engineering.
The committee encourages the Department to continue
implementing the broad and deliberate training outlined in the
Instruction, as well as organizing, equipping, and integrating
efforts across development, acquisition and sustainment
commands and organizations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027 on the Department's plan to institutionalize digital
engineering across all current and future weapon system and
platform programs. The report shall include the following
information:
(1) an assessment of the Department's progress implementing
Department of Defense Instruction 5000.97 throughout the
design, acquisition, sustainment, and modernization lifecycle;
(2) an outline of digital engineering and product lifecycle
management best practices for naval shipbuilding, aviation,
unmanned aerial vehicles, and undersea warfare programs;
(3) a recommendation for the designation of an executive
agent or office responsible for Department-wide digital
engineering strategy, implementation, and oversight; and
(4) an assessment of currently available commercial digital
engineering ecosystems and product lifecycle management
capabilities that could serve as department-wide solutions,
including their ability to meet the Department's requirements
for governance structures, data standards, cybersecurity,
access controls, and interoperability with existing service-
and program-level digital environments.
Dual-Use Small Unmanned Aircraft System
Component Manufacturing
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense's
small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) requirements cannot be
met at scale without a robust domestic industrial base for
critical sUAS components, including batteries, brushless
motors, and other critical components. The committee recognizes
that the viability of such a domestic industrial base is
increasingly dependent on the strength of the broader
commercial sUAS sector, which generates sustained and growing
demand for the same dual-use components required by the
Department.
The committee is concerned that manufacturers of these
components are challenged in establishing production capacity
in the United States absent demand commitments that
significantly exceed current defense procurement volumes. The
committee notes that civil applications for sUAS, including
commercial applications, generate consistent year-over-year
demand for the same dual-use components required by the
Department. The committee believes that aligning defense
procurement strategies with commercial demand signals can
create the aggregate volume necessary to incentivize domestic
manufacturing investments and enable a more resilient,
integrated civil-military sUAS industrial base, thereby
strengthening supply chain resiliency for both the warfighter
and the broader U.S. sUAS ecosystem.
The committee directs the Director of the Defense
Innovation Unit, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Industrial Base Policy and the Director of the
Joint Production Accelerator Cell, to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than February 1,
2027, on domestic manufacturing capacity for dual-use small
unmanned aircraft system components and opportunities to
advance civil-military integration in support of domestic
production. The report shall be submitted in unclassified form
but may include a classified annex. The report should include:
(1) an assessment of the current domestic manufacturing
capacity for critical sUAS components, including batteries,
motors, and other critical components and items deemed
appropriate, particularly civil-military applications;
(2) documentation of stakeholder consultation with
commercial sUAS operators, component suppliers, and other
relevant stakeholders in both the defense and commercial
sectors;
(3) an analysis of the demand thresholds required by
component manufacturers to justify establishing or expanding
domestic production capacity;
(4) an identification of opportunities to aggregate defense
and civil demand for dual-use sUAS components to meet such
thresholds;
(5) recommendations for Department of Defense investments,
procurement commitments, or other actions that would
incentivize domestic production of critical sUAS components by
leveraging commercial market growth and enabling a more
integrated civil-military industrial base; and
(6) an assessment of whether existing Defense Innovation
Unit authorities and funding are sufficient to advance dual-use
sUAS component manufacturing and civil-military integration at
scale.
Establishment of National Security and Defense Artificial Intelligence
Institute
The committee continues to support the authority provided
in section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (P.L. 119-60) for the Secretary of Defense to
establish one or more National Security and Defense Artificial
Intelligence (AI) Institutes at eligible host institutions,
including Senior Military Colleges. The Committee further
supports the current Administration's AI Action Plan
recommendations to grow Senior Military Colleges into hubs of
artificial intelligence research, development, and talent
building, including through AI-specific curriculum for AI use,
development, and infrastructure management. However, the
committee remains concerned that the Department has not
articulated a clear implementation plan, timeline, governance
structure, or resource requirement for carrying out this
authority.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer and any other
official deemed relevant by the Secretary, to submit a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
February 1, 2027, on the Department's plan to establish a
National Security and Defense Artificial Intelligence Institute
consistent with Section 224 of P.L. 119-60. The report shall
include:
(1) the Department's proposed timeline for establishment,
responsible office or official, governance structure, and
coordination plan with the military departments, defense
agencies, combatant commands, Federal laboratories, industry,
and institutions of higher education;
(2) identification of specific AI mission areas the
Department anticipates such an Institute to prioritize,
including secure data, AI testbeds, access to computing
resources, AI assurance, workforce development, and transition
of research into operational capability;
(3) the proposed criteria for selecting eligible host
institutions, including how the Department will evaluate Senior
Military College status, DoD-sponsored research experience,
secure research infrastructure, talent pipelines, partnerships
with the defense industrial base and startup companies, and
demonstrated ability to transition research into defense
applications;
(4) the estimated funding required across the Future-Years
Defense Program for establishment, including any program
element, solicitation vehicle, or schedule for a competitive
award; and
(5) any legal, budgetary, acquisition, data access, compute
access, classification, security, or personnel barriers to
implementation, along with proposed congressional actions to
address such barriers.
F-35 Power Thermal Management System Modernization
The committee understands that as part of the F-35
modernization program, an engineering analysis is underway by
the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) and the F-35 original
equipment manufacturer to define the F-35's Block 4 and future
Block ``X'' power generation, cooling, and thermal management
architectures and systems to support a required minimum and
maximum capacity of 62kW and 80kW, respectively, provided by
the Power Thermal Management System (PTMS). The committee notes
that the analysis is estimated to be completed by the end of
calendar year 2026. In September 2025, the Government
Accountability Office noted in its report titled ``F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter: More Actions Needed to Address Late Deliveries
and Improve Future Development'', that the F-35 program ``plans
to begin production of the [Power Thermal Management Unit] PTMU
in 2033, the same year that post-Block 4 capabilities will
require the increased power and cooling, providing limited, if
any, time for schedule delays should they occur.''
To date, the Block 4 aircraft modernization program has
been underfunded and has delayed timely completion of the
aforementioned analysis and implementation of its
recommendations. The committee is concerned that any further
delays could interfere with modernizing the architecture of the
aircraft to meet installation and usage of more advanced and
effective combat mission systems. The F-35 JPO must
appropriately manage its responsibilities to develop and field
Block 4 capabilities, inclusive of the critical supporting
subsystems for which both Block 4, and future capabilities
beyond Block 4, are dependent. The Department expects the F-35
to have a service-life into the 2070s, therefore, maximizing
capability growth margin for future cooling demands is
critical.
Therefore, the committee directs the Program Executive
Officer, F-35 JPO, in coordination with the Secretary of the
Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy, to provide a report to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and House Committee on
Armed Services not later than December 15, 2026, on the status
of the PTMS modernization program. The report should be
unclassified but may include a classified annex, and at a
minimum, include the following information:
(1) the current status of the PTMS trade study, including
total cooling requirements, an assessment of the defense
industrial base to support PTMS design, development, and
fielding timelines, and the expected schedule for choosing a
PTMS solution following completion of the trade study analysis;
(2) how the F-35 JPO plans to ensure sufficient growth
margin is designed into the upgraded PTMS to support any future
combat capabilities through the planned service-life of the F-
35;
(3) key performance parameters for each subsystem of the
PTMS to support Block 4 and beyond Block 4 mission systems and
weapons capabilities;
(4) the acquisition strategy and schedule of significant
events and milestones for the PTMS major acquisition subprogram
established by section 226(c) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (P.L. 118-31); and
(5) the fiscal resources required, by military service and
fiscal year, to ensure successful aircraft integration of an
upgraded PTMS to meet the timelines required for each military
service.
Fiber-Optic Drone Production
The committee believes fiber optic drones could provide
great value to warfighters on current and future battlefields.
These drones are more resilient to jamming, spoofing, and
electronic attack; provide higher throughput data processing;
and provide secure communication between operators and the
platform they are operating. The committee is concerned,
however, that given the predominantly military use cases for
these systems, there might not be a robust commercial market
for fiber-optic drone production in the United States.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of the
Drone Dominance Program to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027,
assessing the commercial market for fiber optic drones. The
report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the commercial market for fiber optic
drones, in the United States and elsewhere;
(2) a determination on whether a viable fiber-optic drone
market exists;
(3) a plan for how the Department of Defense plans to
remediate the lack of production capacity for fiber optic
drones if the determination is made that a viable commercial
market does not exist; and
(4) a plan for integrating fiber optic drones across the
joint force.
Foreign Weather Modification Capabilities
The committee notes increasing international investment in
weather modification capabilities, particularly by the People's
Republic of China, which has publicly described largescale
programs dedicated to precipitation enhancement and other forms
of atmospheric intervention. The committee further notes that
several other nations, including Japan, Russia, the United Arab
Emirates, India, Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia,
maintain active research, development, and operational programs
related to weather modification technologies. The committee is
concerned that the United States may lack a comprehensive
understanding of the scope, objectives, and potential military
implications of these activities, particularly by adversaries,
including possible applications for operational weather
shaping, civil disaster mitigation, and broader economic or
geopolitical influence.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
March 1, 2027, assessing foreign weather modification
activities and their implications for United States national
security. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of foreign objectives, programs,
institutional sponsors, and estimated funding levels;
(2) relevant research and development activities, including
atmospheric targeting methods, advanced modeling capabilities
such as the Pangu-Weather system;
(3) machine-learning applications;
(4) operational capabilities including dispersion
platforms, mechanisms, materials, and supporting sensing
systems;
(5) potential benefits and risks associated with such
activities;
(6) the strategic implications should foreign nations
achieve technological or operational dominance in weather
modification capabilities;
(7) any resources, including any staff funding, required
for the Department to combat the threat and study or develop
similar capabilities, as well which Department office is
already tasked with this and the state of agency coordination;
and
(8) recommendations, including an analysis of existing and
dormant authorities, for actions the Department of Defense
could take to improve understanding of foreign weather
modification activities and re-establish American weather
modification leadership to deter risk, bolster civil and
defense capabilities, and maintain economic and national
security.
Group 1 and Group 2 Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems
The committee notes the emergence of reusable counter-
unmanned aircraft systems (c-UAS) capable of conducting kinetic
air-to-air c-UAS missions targeting Group 1 and Group 2
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) at potentially lower cost-per-
target than single-use or exquisite interceptors, particularly
in expeditionary and austere environments with contested
logistics. The committee is concerned that responsibility for
development and employment of such systems remains
insufficiently defined between the Department of the Air Force
and the Department of the Army.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, regarding reusable drone systems for
Group 1 and Group 2 c-UAS missions. The briefing shall include
an assessment of these capabilities' operational implications,
technological maturity, technical gaps, cost-per-target,
logistics advantages and disadvantages, and a clear delineation
of the roles and responsibilities of the Department of the Air
Force and the Department of the Army with regard to capability
development, and, any required actions to begin developing
requirements.
Hypersonic Test and Evaluation Workforce Development Partnerships
The committee notes the increasing importance of hypersonic
systems to the national security of the United States, and
understands the rapid pace at which it must develop such
capabilities. The committee remains concerned that the speed of
Department of Defense test and evaluation (T&E) of hypersonic
systems is not keeping pace with adversary development programs
and believes that coordinated, systemic effort is required. In
particular, the committee believes that sustained funding for
university-based T&E workforce development is critical to
building and maintaining technology advantage in hypersonics.
The committee is aware of various efforts across academic
research institutions, such as the joint Hypersonics T&E
Workforce Development Partnership, that leverage advanced
facilities at multiple institutes of higher education to more
effectively provide and coordinate testing for hypersonic
systems. The committee also notes that collaboration between
these institutions could accelerate U.S. capabilities in high-
temperature materials, advanced manufacturing, and system-level
testing.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Army and the
Secretary of the Air Force, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services, not later than March 1, 2027, on
the Department's plan for hypersonic T&E workforce development
and investment. The briefing should include the following:
(1) the current funding level and scope of the Hypersonics
T&E Workforce Development Partnership and other relevant
partnerships across academia, including funding and other
support provided by the Department of Defense;
(2) a description of current and projected gaps in the
national hypersonic T&E workforce and infrastructure relative
to current and projected program requirements;
(3) the Department's plan to sustain and expand university-
based hypersonic T&E partnerships in fiscal year 2028 and
beyond; and
(4) such other information as the Secretary deems
appropriate and relevant.
Integrating Lethality Metrics and Industrial Base Agility for Small
Unmanned Aircraft Systems
The committee notes the important role that small unmanned
aircraft systems (sUAS) will play on current and future
battlefields. The committee commends the Department of
Defense's Drone Dominance Program for its efforts to drive
demand for sUAS and help spur a domestic sUAS industrial base.
The committee believes the Drone Dominance effort could
incorporate artificial intelligence and other tools to measure
the lethality and system performance of sUAS in a standard,
data driven, and consistent manner. Therefore, the committee
directs the Director of the Defense Innovation Unit to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, outlining how the Drone Dominance Program
is objectively measuring sUAS lethality and market performance
in a data driven way and how these measurements will inform
requirements, budget prioritization, and force design.
Medium Class Multi-Mission Optionally Piloted Vessel (M3OPV)
The committee recognizes that unmanned or optionally manned
surface vessels are being considered by the military services
for a variety of requirements. To better understand efforts to
demonstrate optionally manned ocean-capable surface vessels,
the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services no later than March 1, 2027. The
briefing should include:
(1) information on efforts to prototype and demonstrate the
capabilities of long-range multi-mission ocean-capable vessels
for the Medium Class Multi-Mission Optionally Piloted Vessel
(M3OPV) effort;
(2) an assessment of the associated benefits and
limitations of utilizing vendors with proven production and
operational capabilities; and
(3) any relevant information on the potential transition of
a successful prototype from the M3OPV effort to a service
sponsor for procurement and associated timelines.
Multi-Service Advanced Capability Hypersonic Test Bed Funding
Transparency
The committee supports the efforts underway by the
Department of Defense to increase the cadence of hypersonic
flight tests under the Multi-Service Advanced Capability
Hypersonic Test Bed (MACH-TB) program. Congress has supported
this effort through substantial funding to rapidly scale this
national security imperative. However, the committee notes that
the budget justification materials provided with the
President's budget request for fiscal year 2027 regarding the
MACH-TB program do not provide sufficient granularity to
differentiate between MACH-TB and other hypersonics efforts.
The committee therefore believes that in future budget
submissions, the Department should either separate funding
requests for such activities in different program elements or
provide sufficient level of detail in the budget documentation
to allow for the accurate determination of level of effort for
such activities.
National Security Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
Talent Development
The committee is concerned that, at a time when
technological superiority is increasingly central to national
security, the United States appears to be underinvesting in the
early identification and acceleration of high-potential
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
talent, including among gifted students in rural, underserved,
military-connected, and economically disadvantaged communities.
The committee is aware that many exceptionally capable students
with strong aptitude in mathematics and science, including
military dependents and students from Gold Star families, lack
consistent access to advanced coursework, research
opportunities, mentorship, competitions, and specialized
enrichment programs due to geographic isolation, frequent
relocations, limited school resources, or socioeconomic
barriers, and as a result, the country risks excluding a
significant portion of its domestic STEM talent base. The
committee notes that a relatively small cohort of highly
capable individuals disproportionately drives innovation in
critical fields such as artificial intelligence, autonomy,
advanced computing, biotechnology, and other emerging
technologies relevant to the Department of Defense. The
committee is concerned that the lack of a systematic approach
to identifying and accelerating these students through advanced
academic pathways beginning at the K-12 level could create a
long-term talent gap and increase reliance on foreign-born
expertise in critical technology areas.
The committee recognizes and supports the Department's
recently established Joint K-12 STEM Education Initiative,
which is intended to unify and coordinate the Department's STEM
education and talent development efforts across the military
departments and defense agencies. The committee believes this
effort can strengthen the national security STEM talent
pipeline, improve efficiency and performance tracking, and
better align existing programs, including STARBASE, the
Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART)
Scholarship-for-Service Program, the Defense STEM Education
Consortium (DSEC), and Department of Defense Education Activity
(DoDEA) schools, to identify and accelerate high ability
students. However, the committee notes that no existing
Department program is currently designed with the primary
mission of systematically identifying and accelerating the
country's top K-12 STEM talent into elite STEM pathways. The
committee emphasizes that expanded Department investment should
focus not only on broad STEM outreach, but also on identifying
and accelerating students performing at the highest levels in
mathematics and science through rigorous coursework,
enrichment, mentorship, and direct pathways into the national
security workforce.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than December 1,
2026, on opportunities to expand or adapt existing Department
STEM initiatives to better identify and accelerate top-tier K-
12 STEM talent. The report should include the following:
(1) an evaluation of existing Department STEM education
programs, including STARBASE, the SMART Scholarship-for-Service
Program, DSEC, DoDEA schools, and the Joint K12 STEM Education
Initiative, with specific attention to their effectiveness in
identifying and accelerating the highest-potential students,
and an assessment of gaps in current programming for students
in the top 1 percent of mathematical and scientific ability;
(2) a plan to refresh or expand Department programs to
support early identification, acceleration, and enrichment of
high-ability STEM students, including adoption of existing
scalable models for nationwide implementation;
(3) an estimate of the funding, personnel, infrastructure,
and partnership resources required to support expanded
programming, including potential public-private partnerships
with proven providers of K-12 advanced coursework, industry,
national laboratories, and higher education institutions;
(4) recommendations to ensure that expanded programs
effectively reach high-potential students from all backgrounds
and communities through systematic universal identification and
screening mechanisms designed to reduce barriers to
participation;
(5) an analysis of how Department investment in early STEM
talent development programs for top K-12 STEM students would
strengthen the defense industrial base, reduce reliance on
foreign talent in critical technology areas, and support long-
term United States competitiveness in emerging technologies;
and (6) an assessment of the feasibility of the Department co-
sponsoring and co-funding, in coordination with the National
Science Foundation and other relevant agencies, initiatives
beyond existing Department programs, including nationwide
scholarship programs for top K-12 STEM students and accelerated
high school-to-bachelor-to-STEM doctorate pathways and
fellowships.
Physics-Based Location Modeling
The committee remains concerned about the Department of
Defense's ability to maintain reliable location services in
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS)- denied
environments. The committee notes that modern navigation and
security systems often depend on broadcast signals and network
connectivity, which can lead to systems operating with false
confidence when these references degrade or are manipulated.
The committee believes that utilizing advanced location
assurance technologies could help mitigate this problem.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 1, 2027, describing the Department's
assessment of location assurance technologies, including those
leveraging independent local physical evidence and
environmental sensors to verify and authenticate a device's
claimed location. The briefing shall include but not be limited
to:
(1) An evaluation of technologies capable of operating
independently from GNSS and capable of functioning effectively
in GNSS denied, degraded, or contested environments, including
indoor and subterranean terrain and contested electromagnetic
spectrum environments;
(2) The feasibility and utility of utilizing non-
proprietary, commercially available sensors, including magnetic
and gravimetric sensors, inertial measurement units, pressure
transducers, and other measurable physical characteristics of
the environment, combined with physics- based modeling, to
detect and mitigate GNSS/GPS spoofing and jamming, identify
radio frequency manipulation and falsified location data, and
authenticate location claims using independently derived
physical signatures of the environment;
(3) An assessment of whether such capabilities can achieve
location accuracy comparable to or exceeding GNSS; and (4) An
evaluation of the scalability, interoperability, cybersecurity,
and other operational factors related to the use of such
technologies across a representative selection of Department of
Defense mission sets.
Privately Funded Dual-Use Innovation Exchanges
The committee recognizes that the transition of
commercially developed technologies into defense applications
remains a persistent challenge for the Department of Defense.
The committee is also aware that several privately funded dual-
use innovation exchange organizations have been established to
help facilitate collaboration between the Department of Defense
and nontraditional defense contractors, manufacturing and
infrastructure partners, and private capital providers. The
committee encourages the Department to continue to leverage
these relationships to help enable and accelerate technology
transition.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on the Department's current and planned engagement with
privately funded dual-use innovation exchange organizations.
The briefing shall include the following:
(1) a description of existing Department relationships with
privately funded dual-use innovation exchange organizations and
the supported technology areas or programs;
(2) an assessment of statutory, regulatory, or policy
barriers to increased or more consistent Department engagement
with these organizations; and
(3) recommendations for policy changes that would allow the
Department to more effectively leverage privately funded dual-
use innovation infrastructure without duplicating existing
Department manufacturing, acquisition, or industrial base
activities.
Protecting Defense Innovation from Adversaries
The committee remains concerned about ongoing efforts by
foreign adversaries to exploit defense-relevant innovation,
critical technologies, and trusted supplier networks in the
United States. The committee believes that safeguarding both
academia and the defense industrial base are essential to
maintaining the technological advantage of the Department of
Defense.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 15, 2027, that assesses vulnerabilities in
defense supply chains, outbound investment, and development
activities that could enable adversarial exploitation. The
report shall include, but not be limited to:
(1) an assessment of risks associated with foreign
ownership, control, or influence within the defense industrial
base and programs supporting major defense acquisition efforts;
(2) an evaluation of standards applicable to Department-
funded contractors, subcontractors, and research and
development institutions with foreign partnerships or
investment exposure that may present national security risk;
and (3) recommendations for legislative or policy changes
necessary to strengthen protections for Department-funded
development activities and critical supply chains.
Quantum-Enabled Radar Synchronization
The committee recognizes the importance of resilient
positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) and radar
capabilities to military operations. The committee notes that
advances in quantum technologies may enable improvements in
timing precision, radar synchronization, and operational
resilience for PNT-dependent capabilities in degraded GPS
environments. The committee therefore directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the potential applications of quantum-
enabled radar synchronization technologies. The briefing shall
include:
(1) an assessment of the technical maturity, feasibility,
and operational relevance of such technologies in degraded GPS
environments;
(2) an identification of research, development, testing,
evaluation, and prototyping activities relevant to the
maturation of such technologies; and
(3) recommendations for further development or integration
of quantum-enabled radar synchronization technologies into
applicable Department of Defense programs.
Ultra Short Reach Interconnect and Advanced Packaging for Defense
Systems
The committee recognizes that size, weight, and power
(SWaP) constraints remain critical drivers for ground,
airborne, and space-based defense systems. The committee
further notes that heterogeneous integration and chiplet-based
architectures could offer a path to increased performance,
resilience, and manufacturability without sole reliance on
lower technical readiness level (TRL) semiconductor process
technology nodes.
The committee is aware that Ultra Short Reach (USR)
interconnect technologies may enable the Department of Defense
to leverage mature-node semiconductor technologies in
combination with advanced packaging to accelerate deployment
timelines and reduce program cost and technical risk. The
committee encourages the Department to explore investment in
USR-enabled heterogeneous integration technologies, including
chiplet-based architectures, as part of broader
microelectronics modernization efforts. Such investments could
support applications across ground, airborne, and space
missions where SWaP constraints are paramount.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 31, 2027, on the Department's strategy
to mature USR interconnect technologies and integrate them into
defense-relevant advanced packaging programs, including
activities conducted under the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency's Next-Generation Microelectronics
Manufacturing program.
Workflow Automation and Synchronization for Operational Planning
The committee supports the evaluation and integration of
workflow automation and synchronization capabilities designed
to improve operational staff workflows supporting planning,
wargaming, and deployment coordination. The committee believes
such capabilities may improve the speed and effectiveness of
these activities by reducing manual and sequential staff
processes and enabling more timely collaboration. However, the
committee understands that challenges may remain regarding
integration with existing operational planning systems,
interoperability across commands, and the rapid deployment of
commercial capabilities into operational environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, on:
(1) lessons learned from operational exercises or pilot
efforts involving commercially available automation,
synchronization, and planning capabilities;
(2) challenges associated with integrating such
capabilities into existing operational planning processes,
command-and-control systems, and collaborative staff workflows;
(3) barriers to the rapid procurement, deployment, and
iterative improvement of commercially available capabilities
for operational use; and
(4) recommendations to accelerate the operational adoption
and integration of such capabilities across the Department of
Defense.
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Items of Special Interest
Modern Software for Test and Evaluation Data
The committee commends the Department of Defense and the
Test Resource Management Center in their efforts to integrate
commercial innovation and non-traditional acquisition models
into critical test and evaluation (T&E) activities. The
committee notes that augmenting organic government
infrastructure with advanced commercial technology is essential
to accelerating high-priority national security programs such
as hypersonic weapons development.
Furthermore, the committee recognizes the Department's
progress in modernizing T&E infrastructure through the Cloud
Hybrid Edge-to-Enterprise Evaluation and Test Analysis Suite
framework. The committee encourages the Department to expand
this framework as a premier marketplace for both Government-
off-the-Shelf and Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) solutions. To
further accelerate learning cycles in advanced testing, the
committee urges the Department to prioritize continued
integration of industry-leading COTS technologies capable of
managing and analyzing the large-scale, multi-modal data sets
generated by priority programs.
Support for Multi-Service Advanced Capability Hypersonic Test Bed
The committee supports ongoing Department of Defense
efforts to create a capable and versatile Multi-Service
Advanced Capability Hypersonic Test Bed (MACH-TB), and notes
the growing demand for MACH-TB flights from Department
stakeholders. The committee is aware that such demand extends
to strategic nuclear programs, as such systems may operate in
similar flight regimes due to their extreme speeds, demanding
trajectories, and aerodynamic heating challenges. The committee
recognizes that MACH-TB can therefore be a cost-effective test
platform capable of serving both the hypersonic and strategic
weapons communities. The committee applauds the Department's
efforts to merge these common testing priorities and execute
them within the MACH-TB program. The committee believes these
activities are vital to programs with essential national
security implications and notes the importance of robust
funding to meet the growing demand for testing. The committee
is encouraged that the President's budget request for fiscal
year 2027 included over $1.00 billion for the MACH-TB program.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
containing the current flight test plan manifest for MACH-TB,
including the programs and activities being supported and an
assessment of how MACH-TB could be best leveraged to advance
strategic nuclear programs and homeland defense capabilities.
Weapon System Survivability in Combined Environments
The committee notes the importance of comprehensive weapon
system survivability testing, including testing of both single
event and combined event radiation effects, and believes that
such testing is and will be essential to maintaining
operational relevance and deterring peer adversaries. However,
the committee is concerned that current infrastructure and
capabilities for combined event radiation testing may be
insufficient to maintain the required confidence in system
survivability characteristics. Therefore, the committee directs
the Director of the Test Resource Management Center to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, describing the Department's efforts to
ensure adequate test capabilities for combined event radiation
effects. The briefing should describe the current coordination
and communication structures among relevant stakeholders,
identify current and planned testing requirements for combined
events, describe current and planned infrastructure
requirements in support of such testing, and identify
investments required across the Future Years Defense Program to
enable such testing.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 201--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize appropriations for research,
development, test, and evaluation at the levels identified in
section 4201 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Sec. 211--Budget Review and Certification for Certain Categories of
Research and Development
This section would provide the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) budget certification
authority and require the USD(R&E) to promulgate standards on
adequate levels of science and technology spending by elements
of the Department of Defense.
Sec. 212--Deputy Directors of Operational Test and Evaluation
This section would require the Director to have a
sufficient number of Deputy Directors to carry out statutory
requirements.
Sec. 213--Repeal of Pilot Authority for Use of Other Transactions for
Installation or Facility Prototyping
This section would eliminate the redundant pilot program,
created in the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization
Act (Public Law 117-263), that allows the Department of Defense
(or a military department) to use Other Transaction authority
for prototype projects focused on new construction techniques
or technologies on installations.
Sec. 214--Modifications to Responsibilities of the Defense Innovation
Unit
This section would amend section 4127 of title 10 United
States Code to require the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) to
coordinate with the military service Portfolio Acquisition
Executives (PAE) to: identify priority acquisition problems and
capability gaps; identify platforms, capabilities, and
solutions that could fill those gaps; and facilitate transition
of technologies developed by DIU to the military service PAEs.
Sec. 215--Test and Evaluation Repository and Regional Test Hubs of the
Test Resource Management Center
This section would require the Test Resource Management
Center to establish and maintain a central repository of test
and evaluation assets throughout the United States, to include:
state, local, and Federal facilities; academic facilities; non-
profit facilities; and for-profit facilities that could be used
by the military services, the Department of Defense, and other
partners to test and evaluate weapon systems and innovative
technologies more efficiently. This section would also
authorize the Director of the Test Resource Management Center
to establish regional test and evaluation hubs in various
geographic regions in the United States.
Sec. 216--Weapon System Platform Modernization and Cyber Hardening
This section would amend section 228 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) to expand the demonstration of near real-time monitoring
capabilities by requiring at least three additional weapon
platforms for participation in the demonstration. This section
would also extend reporting requirements, and authorize the
demonstration through September 2028. It would also direct the
Secretary of Defense to evaluate and pilot the integration of
these monitoring capabilities into command and control,
logistics, sustainment, and maintenance systems to improve
operational value.
Sec. 217--Repeal of Requirement for Secretary of Defense to Act Through
a Specified Official for NATO Innovation Program
This section would remove the requirement for the Secretary
of Defense to act through the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering in carrying out section 222 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public
Law 118-31), which authorizes the Secretary of Defense to
provide funding support to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization's Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North
Atlantic initiative.
Sec. 218--Modification to Test Program for Engineering Plant of Certain
Vessels
This section would apply previous requirements for DDG(X)
land based testing and reserve power to subsequent classes of
large surface combatants.
Sec. 219--United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation
Initiative
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
designate an executive agent responsible for synchronizing
cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel,
including bilateral defense technology research, development,
testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation.
Sec. 220--Establishment of Synthetic Training Environment to Support
Indo-Pacific Operations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a persistent, secure, all-domain, live-virtual-
constructive synthetic training environment to support training
and mission rehearsal for operations in the Indo-Pacific.
Sec. 221--Requirement to Establish Test and Training Corridors for
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Associated Capabilities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish or designate one or more test and training corridors
for small unmanned aircraft systems, counter-small unmanned
aircraft systems, and associated capabilities, within the
national airspace system.
Sec. 222--Operational Autonomy Requirements for Unmanned Surface
Vessels
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
take such actions as may be necessary to ensure that unmanned
surface vessels are capable of autonomous operation during
periods where communications, positioning, navigation, and
timing capabilities are degraded or unavailable.
Sec. 223--Realignment of the National Strategic Research Institute to
the Department of the Air Force
This section would realign the National Strategic Research
Institute University Affiliated Research Center, currently
sponsored by U.S. Strategic Command, to the Department of the
Air Force.
Sec. 224--Reimbursement of National Guard for Research, Development,
Test, and Evaluation Expenses
This section would allow National Guard Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation activities to be reimbursable
to the National Guard.
Sec. 225--Use of Innovative and Emerging Food Production Technologies
for Components of Military Rations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into one or more contracts for the procurement of rations
produced using emerging food technologies such as sonic
agglomeration and vacuum microwave drying.
Sec. 226--Support for Advanced Technologies that Strengthen United
States Agricultural Production, Agrifood Systems, and Associated
Bioindustrial Manufacturing Capacity
This section would authorize the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Secretary of Agriculture, to carry out activities to support
the development, testing, validation, demonstration, and
transition of advanced technologies that strengthen the
resilience, security, and operational continuity of United
States agricultural production, agrifood systems, and
associated bioindustrial manufacturing capacity against
biological threats, supply chain disruptions, natural
disasters, and other risks to national security.
Sec. 227--Prize Competitions to Support the Research and Development of
Biotechnology for the Department of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a program, pursuant to section 4025 title 10, United
States Code, to award prizes to support research, development,
and commercialization of biotechnology capabilities. Those
prize competitions would address priority areas identified by
the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 228--Pilot Program to Recognize Outstanding Achievements in
Technology and Prototype Development
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Innovation Unit to carry out a pilot program to award cash
prizes and other types of prizes to solve operational problems
leveraging co-investment from the military service portfolio
acquisition executives.
Sec. 229--Pilot Program on Forward Deployable Biomanufacturing
Capabilities
This section would authorize the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Secretary of the Army, to carry out a pilot program on forward
deployable biomanufacturing.
Sec. 230--Pilot Program on the Use of Automated Data Security Posture
Management Technologies for Artificial Intelligence Systems
This section would require the Secretary of the Army, not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
establish a pilot program to evaluate the use of data security
posture management technologies to enhance the cybersecurity,
effectiveness, and reliability of artificial intelligence
systems.
Sec. 231--Pilot Program on Technologies to Strengthen Authentication
and Attribution of Human Authorization for Consequential Actions
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a pilot program to evaluate commercially available
technologies that strengthen authentication and attribution of
human authorization for consequential actions, thereby
improving cybersecurity and physical security.
Sec. 232--Cloud Laboratory Pilot Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a pilot program to establish cloud laboratories.
Sec. 233--Pilot Program to Test and Evaluate Muzzle Blast Overpressure
Mitigation Devices
This section would establish a pilot program to evaluate,
test, and implement muzzle blast overpressure mitigation
devises for small and medium caliber weapons.
Sec. 234--Space Technology Demonstration of Advanced Nuclear Propulsion
Technologies
This section would allow the Air Force to establish a pilot
program to conduct in-space technology demonstrations for both
nuclear fission and nuclear fusion propulsion systems.
Sec. 235--Prohibition on Pilot Trainees Operating T-7 Aircraft Pending
Testing and Corrective Actions
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to certify to the congressional defense committees that
developmental testing and evaluation of safety critical items
have been accomplished, and corrected if necessary, prior to
any non-rated Air Force officer student pilot operating the
aircraft.
Sec. 236--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Gain of Function
Research
This section would prohibit Department of Defense fiscal
year 2027 funds from being obligated or expended to conduct
gain-of-function research on any potential pandemic pathogen.
Sec. 237--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Animal Research in
Collaboration with Foreign Countries of Concern
This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2027 to carry out
research, development, test, evaluation, or training activities
involving animals with a foreign country of concern.
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters
Sec. 251--Policy to Guide the Development and Acquisition of Quantum
Computing Systems for the Department of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a policy to use the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency Quantum Benchmarking Initiative to inform the
development or acquisition of future Department of Defense
quantum computing systems.
Sec. 252--Plan for Competitive Experimentation Relating to Autonomous
and Nontraditional Capabilities Relevant to the A-10 Mission Set
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to develop a plan, and provide a report on that plan to the
congressional defense committees, to carry out competitive
experimentation, prototyping, and operational assessment of
autonomous, semi-autonomous, artificial intelligence-enabled,
and adjunct aircraft capabilities relevant to the A-10 mission
set.
Sec. 253--Plan for Establishment and Evaluation of Experimental, Drone-
Centric Reconnaissance and Security Formations
This section would direct the Secretary of the Army to
develop a plan for establishing and evaluating one or more
experimental, battalion-sized formations that integrate
unmanned aircraft systems for ISR and precision strike
operations at scale.
Sec. 254--Plan for Use of Certain Aircraft for Research and Development
Purposes
This section would direct the Air Force to develop a plan
to use aircraft from recoverable storage for RDTE of autonomy,
uncrewed conversion, human-machine teaming, mission systems
integration, and other defense innovation activities, and such
potential in aircraft retirement decision planning.
Sec. 255--Sonobuoy Modernization, Testing, and Inventory Sufficiency
for Two Simultaneous Regional Conflicts
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for sonobuoy
modernization, testing, production and inventory sufficiency.
Sec. 256--Review and Implementation of Strategies to Accelerate the
Qualification Process for Domestically Produced Advanced Energetic
Materials
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, acting
through the head of the Joint Energetics Transition Office, to
conduct a review on the qualification process for the
integration of novel advanced energetic materials into military
systems to identify opportunities to accelerate the process.
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
implement acceleration measures found in the review.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Energy Issues
Advanced Medium Mobile Power Sources (AMMPS)
The committee recognizes the Army's successful fielding and
modernization of the Advanced Medium Mobile Power Sources
(AMMPS), including incorporation of microgrid capabilities that
reduce fuel consumption and logistical burden. The committee
further notes that the United States Marine Corps has conducted
prototyping of energy storage solutions designed for
integration with existing AMMPS microgrids and is pursuing a
production contract in fiscal year 2027.
The committee encourages coordination between the Army and
Marine Corps to evaluate opportunities to leverage Marine Corps
prototyping efforts to accelerate adoption of energy storage
technologies within the Army's AMMPS portfolio. Such
collaboration may reduce duplicative development costs and
promote joint efficiencies.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 1, 2027, outlining the Army's plans to integrate
energy storage technologies into AMMPS, taking into
consideration relevant Marine Corps activities in this area.
Advanced Nuclear Energy Resilience and Critical Infrastructure Hubs
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than October 1, 2027, on
the requirements, costs, and benefits of deploying advanced
nuclear power generation at a minimum of three potential
critical infrastructure hubs. These critical infrastructure
hubs should be geographic areas containing at least one
military installation collocated with civilian infrastructure
essential to the regional economy or national security. The
briefing should use the results of the analysis and planning
efforts completed as part of sections 318 and 319 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public
Law 119-60) for all components of the Department of Defense and
section 321 of Public Law 119-60 for the Department of the
Navy. The briefing should include identify at least one such
hub for each military department. The briefing should include:
(1) an evaluation of the feasibility of advanced nuclear
demonstration projects that provide power to critical
infrastructure hubs to ensure the resilience of military
installations and surrounding civilian infrastructure,
including airports and data centers;
(2) an assessment of the current state of Department of
Defense utility infrastructure at each identified hub and the
estimated costs of recapitalization required to support a
cyber-secure microgrid;
(3) an evaluation of how advance purchase commitments,
contingent on Nuclear Regulatory Commission milestones, could
mitigate investment risk for innovative nuclear technology
suppliers;
(4) an analysis of the technical requirements for a
microgrid to encompass both military installations and
collocated civilian infrastructure, such as airports, to
withstand kinetic, cyber, and extreme weather disruptions;
(5) a review of the potential for more than one advanced
nuclear technology to achieve commercialization through
Department support;
(6) an estimate of the total authorization of
appropriations and loan guarantees, including those through the
Strategic Capital Office, necessary to move from the study
phase to project construction; and
(7) any recommendations for legislative or administrative
action.
Army Lithium Battery Systems Research and Transition
The committee notes the Army's increasing reliance on
lithium battery systems to power and recharge mission
equipment, and the need for these systems to safely operate
during high-rate charge and discharge and under elevated
temperature conditions. The committee encourages the Secretary
of the Army to prioritize research, development, test,
evaluation, and transition efforts that improve battery
performance and safety, including intrinsic fault containment.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
December 15, 2026, on Army efforts to research, develop, test,
and transition lithium battery systems that provide high-rate
charge and discharge performance, elevated temperature
endurance, and intrinsic fault containment. The report shall
include the following:
(1) identification of ongoing and planned efforts to
evaluate advanced separator technologies and other
subcomponents intended to improve performance and safety,
including relevant Cooperative Research and Development
Agreements (CRADAs) and other cooperative agreements supporting
such efforts;
(2) a description of testing conducted to validate
performance under high-rate cycling, cold-start pulse demand,
and elevated temperature conditions, including relevant test
standards and representative mission profiles;
(3) results of safety and abuse testing, including
overcharge, crush, puncture, internal short-circuit, and
thermal exposure testing, and an assessment of intrinsic fault
containment and propagation resistance;
(4) the Army's plan and timeline to transition validated
battery architectures to fielded systems and programs of
record, including how the Army will prioritize transition
across mission needs such as power, energy, safe, and long-
storage applications; and
(5) actions taken and planned to ensure domestic sourcing
of lithium battery subcomponents, including separator
materials, electrodes, electrolytes, and associated
manufacturing capabilities, and any barriers to doing so.
Comptroller General Review of Advanced Nuclear Reactors at Military
Installations
The committee recognizes the importance of developing
resilient energy sources for military installations in support
of national security objectives and the potential of advanced
nuclear reactor technologies to provide resilient energy. The
committee notes that multiple ongoing nuclear energy pilot
programs are being conducted across the Department, including
the Advanced Nuclear Power for Installations (ANPI) program,
the Department of the Army's Janus Program, the Department of
the Air Force's pilot program at Eielson Air Force Base (AFB),
and the Department of the Navy's pilot program as required by
section 321 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60). While each of the
reactors in these programs are intended to be commercially
owned and operated, the technical oversight, contracting
mechanisms, nuclear technologies, and megawattage may differ.
The committee therefore directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the plans and programs across the
Department of Defense for developing and implementing advanced
nuclear reactors for use on military installations. The
assessment should consider:
(1) the capacity of the Office of the Secretary of Defense
to balance the funding and resources of the Janus Program,
ANPI, Eielson AFB, the Navy's pilot program, and other nuclear
energy programs employed by the Department of Defense;
(2) the plans and programs for development across the
Department of Defense, including timeframes and needed and
available funding;
(3) expected benefits in terms of energy availability and
resilience, and any potential costs or limitations;
(4) an assessment of the Janus Program's regulatory
pathway, as opposed to the other regulatory pathways pursued by
the other services to obtain a nuclear reactor;
(5) how the services and/or contractor will sustain the
reactor and the end-of-life plans for the reactor;
(6) the different contracting mechanisms for the reactors,
including the use of power purchase agreements and enhanced use
leases; and
(7) any other information the Comptroller General deems
relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 31, 2027, on the preliminary findings of the review and
present final results in a format and timeframe agreed to at
the time of the briefing.
Definition of Hybrid Power Systems Employed by the Armed Forces
The committee recognizes the progress made by the
Department of Defense to increase use of hybrid power systems
employed by the Armed Forces for expeditionary and installation
operations to extend operational endurance, reduce operations
and maintenance, and shorten supply lines. However, the
committee is concerned with the lack of standardization from
the Department of Defense regarding the technological
parameters defining these systems at varying levels of power
delivery to be employed by the Armed Forces, impeding the
commercial development of solutions.
The committee directs the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Energy Resilience & Optimization, in coordination
with the Secretary of the Army, to submit a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 30,
2027, on a Department-wide definition of hybrid power systems
as it applies to Armed Forces applications and the steps taken
to standardize that definition across the military services.
The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) The technological parameters associated with the
definition of a hybrid power system for the 0-2kW, 2-5kW, 5-
30kW, 30-100kW, 100-250kW, and 500kW to multi-megawatt power
range;
(2) the current inventory of hybrid power systems for each
power delivery range;
(3) the current and anticipated future theater applications
of hybrid solutions developed for each power delivery range;
(4) the estimated operational endurance gains with a fully
hybridized inventory at each power delivery range, if any; and
(5) whether commercially available technologies for each
power delivery range could be utilized and an estimated
timeline for procurement and deployment.
Department of Defense Planning for Used Nuclear Fuel Management,
Recycling, and Reuse
The committee recognizes and encourages the Department of
Defense's increasing interest in deploying small modular
reactors and other advanced nuclear power systems to enhance
energy resilience at domestic installations and, where
appropriate, at forward or remote locations in support of
national security missions. While the committee supports
efforts to integrate nuclear power into Department of Defense
energy planning, it notes that the long-term management,
disposition, and potential reuse of used nuclear fuel generated
by such systems has not yet been fully addressed in planning or
coordinated with the Department of Energy or the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
The committee is concerned that an approach focused solely
on storage of used nuclear fuel may create future operational,
logistical, and policy challenges as nuclear power deployments
expand. Therefore, the committee believes it is prudent for the
Department to assess not only storage and disposition pathways,
but also pursuit of a closed fuel cycle and opportunities to
reduce waste volumes, improve material utilization, and
evaluate potential future uses of used nuclear fuel consistent
with safety, security, and applicable laws.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy and, as
appropriate, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to submit a
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than October 1, 2027,
that outlines the Department's implementable framework and
decision plan for managing used nuclear fuel associated with
the deployment of small modular reactors and other advanced
nuclear power systems. The report shall be unclassified to the
greatest extent possible with limited classified annexes
included only after prior committee consultation. The report
shall include, at a minimum:
(1) an assessment of the expected quantities,
characteristics, and lifecycle profiles of used nuclear fuel
and associated high-level waste streams, including advanced
fuel forms, generated by projected Department of Defense
deployments of small modular reactors or other advanced nuclear
systems at installations and potential forward or remote
locations;
(2) a description of current Department of Defense and
Department of Energy authorities, policies, and infrastructure
applicable to the handling, transportation, storage, recycling,
reuse, or disposition of used nuclear fuel generated by such
systems;
(3) an evaluation of logistical, sustainment, and security
considerations associated with used nuclear fuel management,
including challenges unique to forward or austere environments;
(4) an assessment of options to recycle, reuse, or
otherwise extract value from used nuclear fuel, including
pathways such as material recovery, fuel recycling, and waste
minimization approaches to reduce long-term waste volumes,
recover usable materials, or enable future energy, industrial,
or national security applications, consistent with applicable
law and safety requirements;
(5) identification of potential future uses of used nuclear
fuel that could support Department of Defense missions, energy
resilience, or broader national security objectives, including
a discussion of technical, regulatory, and policy barriers to
such uses;
(6) identification of opportunities to align Department of
Defense initiatives, as appropriate and consistent with
applicable law, with Department of Energy Nuclear Lifecycle
Innovation Campus efforts to strengthen domestic fuel-cycle,
advanced manufacturing, and waste-management capabilities
supporting defense requirements; and
(7) identification of gaps in policy, planning, interagency
coordination, or statutory authority that could impede
responsible deployment of nuclear power systems or the
effective management, recycling, or reuse of used nuclear fuel
by the Department of Defense.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide an interim briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, describing
governance, lead office, interagency coordination mechanisms,
and an initial concept for transportation and disposition
pathways.
The committee emphasizes that this directive is intended to
inform future planning, decision-making, and public education,
and does not authorize or require the deployment of any
specific technology, facility, or recycling approach. The
committee expects the Department to use this assessment to
develop a coherent, forward-looking strategy that integrates
nuclear power deployment with responsible fuel cycle
management, waste reduction, and consideration of future reuse
opportunities. The committee expects the Department to pursue
used fuel management planning in parallel with continued
execution of its nuclear deployment objectives.
Deployable Advanced Nuclear Power for Operational Energy
The committee recognizes that future military operations in
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM), U.S. Central Command
(USCENTCOM), and other combatant command areas of
responsibility will be characterized by contested logistics,
extended distances, limited infrastructure, and persistent
threats to fuel supply chains. Forward operating locations,
expeditionary bases, and maneuver forces operating in these
environments require resilient, independent power sources
capable of sustaining operations while reducing reliance on
vulnerable resupply convoys and extensive logistics
infrastructures. The committee notes that deployable and
transportable advanced nuclear microreactor systems could
provide a critical operational energy capability to enhance
power projection, survivability, and freedom of maneuver in
contested environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, on the potential of including advanced
nuclear microreactor power solutions for operational energy
requirements in the scope of the Janus Program. The briefing
should include:
(1) an assessment of commercially available, self-contained
advanced systems being considered for the Janus Program that
could be utilized for rapid deployment, relocation, and
sustained operations in austere and contested environments to
support forward operating locations, expeditionary basing, and
distributed maneuver forces within the USINDOPACOM and
USCENTCOM geographic regions;
(2) an evaluation of the application of deployable advanced
nuclear microreactor systems in support of emergency response
efforts, including natural disasters, grid outages, or attacks
on critical infrastructure, particularly in remote or limited
infrastructure regions;
(3) an assessment of weather patterns on the safety of
nuclear technology in USINDOPACOM and USCENTCOM;
(4) an assessment of the ability of advanced nuclear
microreactor systems to mitigate contested logistics
operational risk;
(5) an assessment of signatures created by microreactors
and any corresponding safety concerns in an austere or
contested environment;
(6) any potential alignment with warfighting concepts of
operations; and
(7) any costs or benefits to current operational energy
plans.
Domestic Production of Synthetic Aviation Fuel
The committee understands the supply chain risks associated
with conventional jet fuel and encourages the Department of
Defense to seek remedies to mitigate that threat. Synthetic
Aviation Fuel (SAF) has the potential to assist and enhance
Department of Defense operational readiness while minimizing
modifications to aircraft. The committee commends efforts like
Air Force Research Laboratory's Project FIERCE, which is
developing novel fuel synthesis technologies that enable SAF
production at airports or airbases that house or service
military aircraft.
To better understand how continued SAF development,
production, and use can benefit the armed services, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Navy and the Director of
the Defense Logistics Agency, to provide a report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services, not later than May 1, 2027, that includes:
(1) an assessment of the benefits of utilizing SAF
production in locations where both the Air Force Reserve and
Air National Guard are housed on civilian airport properties.
(2) a roadmap for partnering with local airport authorities
to enable the production, storage, and use of SAF to include in
an offtake arrangement.
(3) a comprehensive list of platforms either certified or
considered for certification to use SAF.
(4) any concerns with the use of SAF as an alternative fuel
source for military aircraft and any recommendations to
alleviate those concerns.
Domestic Supplied Installation Resilience
The committee supports Department of Defense Directives
5135.02 and 4715.21 to ensure installation resilience as an
essential component of readiness. The committee understands
that lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery cells provide
installations with essential energy resilience. The committee
is aware that a foreign entity of concern currently supplies a
significant portion of LFP battery cells used for installation
energy resilience and notes that section 842 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 addressed risks
associated with such entities.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
March 31, 2027, on the transition to domestic LFP battery
production. The report should include the following
information:
(1) current and pending domestic suppliers of LFP battery
cells;
(2) a timetable for the transition from foreign entities of
concern to domestic production;
(3) an assessment of any remaining supply chain
vulnerabilities, including any reports of covert hardware/
undocumented wireless modules in inverters and batteries; and
(4) any other matters the Secretary determines relevant.
Enhancing Warfighter Readiness Through Energy Resiliency at Defense
Installations
The committee recognizes that reliable, domestically
produced energy sources such as propane are essential to
warfighter readiness and installation energy resilience.
Installation energy planning should prioritize dependable
bridge power for training, logistics, and command and control
at predictable long-term costs. The committee notes that
propane's commercial availability, reliability, and ability to
support backup generation, microgrids, and on-site energy
storage, along with its lower emissions profile, could make it
well-suited to advance installation resilience and broader
energy security objectives.
Grid Resilience to Severe Weather Conditions
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, assessing the Department's grid resilience
to severe weather conditions including heat waves, wildfires,
ice, snow, and high winds to ensure military readiness is not
impacted, especially at installations that currently face
extreme weather conditions. The briefing may use domestic
Department installations or facilities as examples of grid
resilience when compared to theaters with similar adverse
weather conditions.
Guam Energy Infrastructure
Guam is the westernmost U.S. sovereign territory and hosts
critical basing, logistics, and missile defense capabilities
for the Western Pacific. The committee is concerned by
significant vulnerabilities in the island's fuel and power
infrastructure, including storm-damaged commercial fuel piers
at the Port of Guam, aging military fuel piers requiring over
$185 million in near-term repairs, and limited capacity to
surge electricity generation to meet military requirements. The
committee is further concerned about intra-island fuel
logistics, including the importance of Won Pat International
Airport to military operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Director of the Defense Logistics
Agency, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2027, establishing long-
term fuel and electricity requirements for the island and
outlining an investment plan, funding sources, and a timeline
to ensure infrastructure that provides:
(1) reliability sufficient to support life-essential
services and national security requirements;
(2) persistent, automated fuel delivery regardless of
weather or workforce conditions;
(3) resilience against natural disasters, cyber and
physical attacks, and labor instability;
(4) flexibility to meet variations in operational demand;
and
(5) real-time situational awareness of infrastructure
status for both military planners and operators.
The report shall also assess the feasibility of upgrading
and extending fuel pipelines on Guam to Won Pat International
Airport in support of military activities.
Hybrid Tactical Microgrid Control Node
The committee recognizes that troop lethality and
survivability in modern combat operations is increasingly
dependent on reliable, resilient power for critical
communication systems, sensors, drones, and weapons at the
tactical edge. The committee also recognizes that current power
generation, storage, and distribution solutions in the field
are often uncoordinated, lack interoperability, and are not
optimized as an integrated system, which could result in
unnecessary logistics burdens, fuel waste, and degraded
operational effectiveness. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by October 1, 2027, on the
following:
(1) any plans to demonstrate, operationally assess, and
transition a hybrid tactical microgrid control node capability;
(2) a description of priority operational use cases for
hybrid tactical microgrids and associated control nodes to
support energy-enabled lethality and survivability and how they
could be integrated with current and planned programs of
record, including directed-energy counter UAS systems, sensor
networks, command-and-control nodes, and unmanned systems
requiring extended-range, resilient power at the edge;
(3) a roadmap for laboratory, field, and operational
demonstrations, including planned integration events with
existing Army generators, tactical vehicles, batteries, and
power electronics systems in representative combat formations
and how power requirements and performance metrics will be
incorporated into requirements, testing, and evaluation
processes to assess any quantifiable improvements in lethality,
survivability, fuel efficiency, logistics burden, and system
reliability;
(4) plans for how the Army could employ modular open
systems architectures to ensure interoperable integration of
government and commercial power-generation, storage, and
distribution technologies, including a description of cyber and
electromagnetic resilience requirements for the control node;
(5) a notional timeline for transitioning successful
prototypes into programs of record or existing platforms,
including identification of candidate units and echelons for
initial fielding and plans to leverage commercially proven
battery and power electronics technologies; and
(6) a lifecycle cost comparison of hybrid tactical
microgrid solutions versus current power solutions, including
projected fuel, maintenance, and logistics savings.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Power Systems
The committee appreciates the value of uninterrupted,
resilient access to energy, both to provide a decisive
advantage and to reduce operating costs. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, on hydrogen fuel cell power systems. The
briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of current commercial hydrogen fuel cell
power systems manufactured in the United States that do not
include critical operating components, subcomponents,
electronic components, software, or control systems that
originate in whole or in part from a foreign entity of concern,
as defined under section 4872(f) of title 10, United States
Code;
(2) an evaluation of the performance of hydrogen fuel cell
power relative to conventional diesel generator and battery-
based architectures in both the stationary and mobile contexts;
(3) applications of hydrogen fuel cell power with regard to
black start and transfer capability following total loss of
power, including repeatable restart sequencing and
synchronization without reliance on external electrical
sources;
(4) potential capabilities for repeated rapid, dynamic, and
high-magnitude load transients representative of demanding
mission equipment, as well as sustained continuous operation
and dormancy performance over extended periods of over 6
months;
(5) an evaluation of these power systems with regard to
safety and survivability, including response to fault
conditions and kinetic impacts;
(6) an assessment of their ability to maximize water
production, recovery, and management characteristics during
operation;
(7) the feasibility and advisability of conducting an
assurance, proof, and validation program to assess the
performance of hydrogen fuel cell power systems for military
use by conducting comparative operational testing; and
(8) an assessment of current and planned experimentation,
field demonstrations, and operational evaluations involving
hydrogen generated at the point of need from widely available
materials for expeditionary power, unmanned systems,
communications nodes, and contested logistics applications in
austere or denied environments.
Hydrogen-Powered Aviation for Operational Energy
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 1, 2027, on the feasibility, operational utility, and
readiness impacts of hydrogen-powered aircraft for military
missions, including logistics, personnel transport,
intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and contested
mobility operations. The briefing should include an evaluation
of:
(1) hydrogen-electric and hydrogen combustion aircraft;
(2) potential infrastructure requirements at domestic and
forward installations;
(3) lifecycle and operational energy costs and savings;
(4) comparative investments by China; and
(5) any other information the Secretary deems relevant.
Large Power Transformer Security and Resilience
The committee is concerned that large power transformers
supplying electricity to military installations may be
vulnerable to physical and digital threats, including
electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects, cyber threats to
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems and
control interfaces including Distributed Network Protocol 3
(DNP3), and radio frequency (RF) and side-channel
vulnerabilities. The committee notes that the feasibility and
cost of protecting large power transformers from such threats
has not been systematically assessed across the military
departments, and that vulnerabilities in foreign power grids
supporting United States installations outside the continental
United States present additional risk.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on the feasibility and advisability of
requiring protections for large power transformers that supply
electricity to military installations. The briefing shall
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the effectiveness, cost, and
scalability of available protections against EMP effects, cyber
threats to SCADA systems and DNP3 interfaces, and RF and side-
channel vulnerabilities, including consideration of risks to
United States Government installations connected to potentially
compromised or vulnerable foreign power grids;
(2) recommendations for nationwide and international
implementation of large power transformer protections,
including potential regulatory standards for utilities and
critical infrastructure operators, strategies for diplomatic
engagement and technical assistance to mitigate risks in
foreign grids supporting United States interests, and updates
to military standards and guidance for outside the continental
United States assets regarding connectivity to foreign grids
and power generation infrastructure; and
(3) any recommended amendments to existing laws or
regulations to require such protections across the power grid,
including provisions for addressing vulnerabilities in
international contexts.
Mobile Substations for Critical Defense Facilities
The committee notes the growing threat posed by natural
disasters, cyberattacks, physical attacks, and grid instability
to the reliable supply of electricity supporting critical
defense facilities (as defined in section 215A(c) of the
Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824o-1(e))). The committee further
notes that many such facilities essential to strategic
deterrence, homeland defense, continuity of government, and
military operations remain vulnerable to prolonged outages
resulting from disruptions to the bulk-power system or local
electricity distribution infrastructure. The committee believes
that rapidly deployable mobile substations capable of restoring
or supplementing electrical service are critical to improving
the resilience, redundancy, and operational continuity of
defense-critical infrastructure.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense
should prioritize the development of operational concepts,
deployment timelines, and integration plans for mobile
substations supporting critical defense facilities. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of Energy, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on efforts to deploy mobile substations in support of critical
defense facilities. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) an overview of the current and projected risks to
critical defense facilities associated with prolonged
electrical outages;
(2) an assessment of the extent to which mobile substations
could improve mission assurance, installation resilience,
continuity of operations, and the reliable operation of
defense-critical infrastructure;
(3) a description of the Department's current and planned
efforts to deploy mobile substations to support critical
defense facilities; and
(4) recommendations for a pilot effort to establish a
program to rapidly deploy mobile substations to support
critical defense facilities during prolonged electrical
outages.
National Energy Storage Systems (NESS) Program
In the report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60), the
committee expressed concern that United States dependence on
advanced battery technologies controlled by adversary nations
poses a growing risk to military readiness, operational
resilience, and the defense industrial base. Accordingly, the
committee directed the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to consider establishing a National
Energy Storage Systems Program and to provide a briefing
detailing how such a program could mature, qualify,
standardize, and domestically scale next-generation energy
storage systems to military specifications, including the
functional elements, governance structure, and resources
necessary to carry it out.
The committee understands that the briefing directed in
fiscal year 2026 will be submitted in 2026. Given the urgency
of the supply-chain and readiness risks the committee
identified, which span uncrewed systems, munitions and
missiles, thermal batteries, installations, expeditionary
operations, and power-intensive computing, the committee
eagerly anticipates the Department's findings and recommended
path to address these risks.
The committee further encourages the Department to
demonstrate measurable progress toward standing up a solution
as soon as possible, and advocates for dedicating resources to
the functional elements the program is intended to address,
including critical materials resilience, defense-grade cell and
pack innovation, safety and cyber-physical assurance, and the
development of interoperable defense-grade standards.
The committee intends to monitor the Department's progress
and its resourcing of these activities in its consideration of
the budget request for fiscal year 2028.
Nondestructive Inspection of Advanced Batteries Procured Under a
Section 154 Waiver
The committee notes that securing a reliable, domestic
supply of batteries, cells, and functional cell components is
essential to the electrification of Department of Defense
systems. The committee further notes that, beginning October 1,
2027, section 154 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) prohibits the Department
from procuring batteries produced by certain covered entities,
or their successors, subject to a waiver where the prohibition
would impede the Department's ability to meet operational
requirements.
The committee recognizes that, until the domestic battery
supply chain matures, the Department may have no practical
alternative to procuring certain batteries under a section 154
waiver to sustain critical warfighting and support systems. The
committee is concerned that, where waivers are exercised,
batteries and cells embedded within, or expended as a non-
recoverable element of, an operational system create a
heightened reliability risk, as a single latent manufacturing
defect may disable the system with no opportunity for
inspection, repair, or replacement once the system is fielded
or expended. The committee notes that, if such batteries are to
be deployed operationally under waiver, it is in the national
security interest of the United States to verify their
reliability before deployment. The evaluation methods,
including ultrasonic nondestructive testing, industrial
computed tomography inspection, and other available
technologies, should be assessed in terms of mission readiness,
system performance, the extent to which safety would be
improved, and not solely in terms of the acquisition cost.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the feasibility of establishing a pilot program to
test mission critical batteries and cells procured under a
section 154 waiver. The briefing should include:
(1) a list of not fewer than three procurement programs for
warfighting or support systems that would require batteries or
cells procured under a section 154 waiver, with priority given
to programs in which such batteries or cells are embedded
within, or expended as part of, the system and cannot be
inspected or replaced once fielded or expended;
(2) an assessment of the rate at which batteries or cells
procured under such a waiver exhibit latent manufacturing
defects, and the capability of commercially available
ultrasonic nondestructive testing, computed tomography, or
other technology to detect such defects prior to integration;
(3) for each selected program, an assessment of the
operational consequences of integrating an undetected defective
battery or cell, including the effect on mission readiness,
system availability, and mission abort and failure rates, and
the cost of in-service or in-mission failure where the affected
battery, cell, or system cannot be recovered or replaced;
(4) an estimate of the cost to inspect up to 100 percent of
such batteries or cells using commercially available ultrasonic
nondestructive testing or industrial computed tomography
methods;
(5) a cost-benefit analysis that weighs the cost of such
testing against the full operational and life-cycle value of
removing defective cells before integration, expressed in terms
of avoided system failures, improved mission readiness, and
avoided downstream replacement and recovery costs, and that is
not limited to the unit cost of the battery or the cost of
inspection;
(6) an assessment of the feasibility of establishing a
pilot program beginning in fiscal year 2028 to test applicable
batteries and cells using commercially available nondestructive
methods; and
(7) any other factors deemed relevant by the Under
Secretary of Defense.
Nuclear Power System for Strategic Command
The committee supports the ongoing efforts of the
Department to provide resilient advanced nuclear power systems
for military installations.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, on the feasibility and advisability of
establishing a pilot program to deploy an advanced nuclear
microreactor or small modular reactor to provide primary and
redundant power to mission-critical facilities of the United
States Strategic Command.
Physical Security Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear Reactor Programs
The committee recognizes the Department's growing interest
in deploying advanced nuclear energy capabilities, including
microreactors and other small modular reactor (SMR) approaches,
to strengthen installation resilience and mission assurance.
The committee supports these efforts and encourages rapid
transition from concept to fielded capability.
The committee notes that any nuclear site presents unique
physical security considerations. The committee is concerned
that compressed schedules and novel deployment constructs could
inadvertently deprioritize integrated security design and
sustainment planning. The committee recognizes the need to
avoid unnecessary or duplicative regulatory burden that could
delay deployment without commensurate improvements in
protection; however, the committee emphasizes that security
requirements must remain sufficiently robust given the nature
of nuclear reactors. The committee understands that commercial
nuclear facilities increasingly use modeling and simulation
with advanced analytics and integrated command-and-control
concepts to optimize security operations and requirements,
improving effectiveness while reducing manpower and resource
requirements. The committee further understands that comparable
capabilities have been utilized and validated within the
Department, including through the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency's work on critical weapons stockpile protection. The
committee encourages the Department to leverage these
capabilities to the maximum extent practicable for emerging
nuclear programs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2026, on the Department's use of
modeling and simulation to design, assess, and validate
physical security for nuclear microreactor and other emerging
nuclear energy programs. The briefing shall include, at a
minimum:
(1) an overview of physical security requirements for
emerging nuclear programs and how such requirements were
developed and validated;
(2) an assessment of potential capability improvements and
cost savings from applying modeling and simulation tools
already used elsewhere in the Department; and
(3) the Department's plan, including timelines and
resourcing, to apply these tools to inform security
requirements, design decisions, and sustainment planning.
Small Modular Reactor Pilot Program Implementation
The committee recognizes the importance of developing and
deploying small modular reactors (SMRs) and microreactors to
improve installation energy resilience, support military
operations, and inform long term energy security strategies for
Department of Defense installations. The committee notes there
has been significant progress across the Department to field
these capabilities to meet operational and installation
demands, including Project Pele, the Janus Program, and the
Advanced Nuclear Power for Installations Program.
Furthermore, section 321 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60)
established a pilot program to determine how SMRs can be used
on Navy and Marine Corps installations to meet energy needs and
inform the development of concepts for nuclear power to support
installation use of nuclear power. The committee seeks to
ensure that the pilot program progresses in a timely manner and
that the Department of the Navy can rapidly adopt, scale, and
deploy SMRs in an effective manner.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Energy, Installations, and Environment, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
February 1, 2027, on the implementation of the pilot program
established by section 321 of Public Law 119-60. The briefing
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) a breakdown of major milestones, to include planning,
site selection, and contractor identification and selection;
(2) a timeline for program initiation, including
chartering, identification of an initial program manager,
funding receipts, and initial consultations with relevant
regulatory bodies, including, but not limited to, the United
States Army Corps of Engineers and Naval Reactors;
(3) identification of any initial agreements or memoranda
of understanding (MOA) already established with private power
providers or reactor technology vendors pursuant to the
statutory considerations in section 321 of Public Law 119-60;
(4) actions taken since the enactment of Public Law 119-60,
including preliminary feasibility assessments, interagency or
industry engagement, site evaluations or early-stage planning,
and any initial work with installations that may already meet
prerequisites such as existing MOAs;
(5) considerations and identified barriers, including
regulatory, legislative, and funding restrictions, that may
prevent or prohibit co-location with data centers;
(6) a list of all naval installations identified for
potential inclusion in the pilot program; and
(7) current and anticipated technological barriers,
including fuel type requirements, passive cooling needs, and
power capacity considerations.
Synthetic Aviation Fuel Certification Process
Concurrent with ASTM
The committee recognizes that synthetic aviation fuels
could improve readiness by increasing fuel options and reducing
supply chain risk for the joint force. However, timely fielding
requires the Department of Defense to maintain enough
government-owned capability to test, evaluate, and certify
fuels for DoD-specific operating needs and urgent
contingencies. The committee notes that ASTM specifications and
evaluation processes--such as ASTM D7566 (aviation turbine fuel
with synthesized hydrocarbons) and ASTM D4054 (evaluation of
new aviation turbine fuels and additives)--are primarily
designed for civil use and are driven by industry and aircraft/
engine manufacturers. The committee further notes that DoD
Manual 4140.25, Volume 1, Section 6 already directs the Tri-
Service Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants (Tri-POL) Users Group
to maintain a harmonized certification and qualification plan
for alternative fuels, including recommendations on initiating
new certification activities for alternative fuel sources and
production pathways. The committee is concerned that this
authority has not been fully operationalized for synthetic
aviation fuels, and that without a DoD-led process that can run
in parallel with ASTM, DoD certification decisions could lag
operational timelines. This could delay adoption even when the
Department is willing to manage risk through limits on use,
monitoring, and platform-specific controls.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Energy, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's implementation of
its existing Tri-Service Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants (Tri-
POL) authority to establish a DoD-led synthetic aviation fuel
evaluation and certification process operating alongside ASTM,
as directed by DoD Manual 4140.25, Volume 1, Section 6. The
briefing shall include, at a minimum:
(1) the current status of Tri-POL's implementation of its
alternative fuel certification and qualification mandate,
including governance structure, decision authority, and what
formal decision documents DoD issues or plans to issue for
certification of synthetic aviation fuels, blendstocks, and
additives;
(2) how DoD will use relevant ASTM standards and supporting
data while ensuring DoD decisions are not dependent on external
committee schedules, including when DoD may issue earlier,
risk-managed decisions while ASTM work is still underway;
(3) an assessment of DoD and DLA testing capacity, and a
plan to achieve certification-quality, auditable testing that
supports timely and defensible certification decisions
concurrently with or in advance of the corresponding ASTM
determinations; and
(4) how DoD certification decisions will be converted into
procurement requirements, contract language, and operational
distribution processes through DLA Energy and joint fuel
governance to enable fielding at scale.
Technically Acceptable Source Selection Criteria for Bulk Fuel
Contracts
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense's
use of lowest price technically acceptable source selection
criteria for bulk fuel contracts may not adequately ensure that
offerors possess the necessary qualifications to safely and
effectively manage fuel storage, fuel management, fuel
distribution, fuel maintenance, and related operational support
services. Without minimum technical standards, this approach
may expose the Department to risk of contractor performance
failures that could compromise fuel operations and mission
readiness.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the minimum technical criteria applied
to offerors in procurements using lowest price technically
acceptable source selection procedures for bulk fuel contracts.
The briefing should include the following:
(1) whether offerors are required to maintain a Chief Fuels
Officer, or equivalent senior corporate official, with
authority over all fuel operations of the contractor;
(2) the standards used to evaluate offeror experience
managing and operating bulk fuel infrastructure;
(3) the standards used to evaluate offeror expertise in
fuel distribution operations for both aircraft and ground
vehicles;
(4) the standards used to evaluate offeror experience
conducting hot pit refueling operations;
(5) whether offerors are required to maintain fuel quality
surveillance and laboratory testing capabilities;
(6) the standards used to evaluate offeror technical
capacity to perform fuel system maintenance and corrosion
prevention and protection activities;
(7) the standards used to evaluate offeror expertise in
environmental compliance and spill prevention and response
operations; and
(8) whether offerors are required to maintain a corporate
training program aligned with applicable Department of Defense
manuals, National Fire Protection Association standards, and
Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations.
West Coast Refinery Impact on Bulk Fuel
The committee recognizes the critical role that West Coast
commercial refineries play in supplying bulk fuel to the
Department of Defense, particularly in supporting logistical
requirements for operations in the Indo-Pacific area of
responsibility. Recent shifts in the commercial energy sector,
including facility closures, conversions, and overall capacity
reductions along the West Coast, present potential
vulnerabilities to military fuel supply chains. The committee
understands the Department relies heavily on these regional
commercial hubs to execute rapid, large-scale fuel
distribution. Ensuring uninterrupted access to adequate bulk
fuel reserves is paramount to maintaining the operational
readiness and global mobility of the Joint Force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander of U.S.
Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), in coordination with the
Director of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Energy, to
provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2027, evaluating the impact of West
Coast refinery capacity and operations on the Department's
ability to meet logistical fuel requirements. Specifically, the
report shall include:
(1) an assessment of current West Coast commercial refinery
capacity and the direct impact of recent and projected facility
closures on bulk fuel procurement and availability;
(2) the logistical impacts and potential vulnerabilities
these capacity changes impose on USTRANSCOM and DLA Energy's
ability to effectively support Pacific operations and broader
mission readiness;
(3) an evaluation of alternative fuel supply chains,
distribution methods, and infrastructure required to mitigate
the risks identified in (1) and (2);
(4) an analysis of any anticipated cost increases, funding
constraints, or transportation bottlenecks associated with
securing and distributing adequate fuel supplies from
alternative or more distant sources;
(5) a discussion of any additional considerations on the
impact from reductions in refining capability; and
(6) recommendations for any statutory authorities,
interagency coordination, or funding required to ensure long-
term fuel security and mitigate supply chain disruptions in the
region.
Logistics and Sustainment Issues
Advanced Aircraft Engine Wash Technology
The committee recognizes that military aircraft routinely
operate in austere and corrosive environments in which abrasive
contaminants--including saltwater, sand, oils, and airborne
pollutants--adhere to engine components. These conditions
accelerate corrosion and degrade engine performance in ways
that cannot be adequately mitigated by traditional water- and
detergent-based engine wash protocols. The committee notes that
reduced engine efficiency and corrosion-related degradation can
contribute to diminished aircraft availability, increased
maintenance manhours and high lifecycle sustainment costs.
The committee is aware that commercially available
nucleated foam engine wash technology has been employed by the
Marine Corps and Air Force Special Operations Command across
multiple platforms, including the MV-22 and CV-22 aircraft, and
has demonstrated significant performance and sustainment
benefits compared to legacy engine wash methods. Reported
benefits include restoration of engine entitlement, corrosion
inhibition, increased engine thrust, extended time on wing, and
the delay of costly, premature engine replacement, while
substantially reducing engine maintenance requirements, fuel
costs, and maintainer manhours. The committee commends the Air
Force and Marine Corps for leveraging commercial best practices
and investing in innovative solutions that are enhancing
warfighter safety and aircraft readiness and operational
availability across their fleets.
Given the demonstrated effectiveness of nucleated foam
engine wash technology across multiple engine types and
operational environments, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Army to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services by December 1, 2026, on the feasibility and
potential benefits of testing and evaluating nucleated foam
engine wash technology on its rotary-wing aircraft fleets. The
brief should include:
(1) a consideration of potential applications to the Army's
Future Vertical Lift MV-75 program, informed by the operational
experience of the MV-22 and CV-22 platforms;
(2) an assessment of the operational and sustainment
impacts of nucleated foam engine wash technology compared to
current Army engine wash practices;
(3) an analysis of potential lifecycle cost savings,
maintenance reductions, and impacts on aircraft readiness; and
(4) identification of any barriers to integration within
existing sustainment strategies and recommendations to address
such barriers.
Aerial Contested Logistics Cross-Functional Team Capability Transition
The committee supports the Department of Defense's
inclusion of contested logistics (CL) technologies as one of
its six critical technology areas and focus on transitioning
key CL capabilities to the military services. The committee
further supports the Army's establishment of the Contested
Logistics Cross-Functional Team (CL-CFT) to address critical
sustainment gaps.
While the Army has rightfully identified a gap in the
ability to move large external loads like long-range precision
fires munitions, the committee is concerned that a significant
capability gap persists in the middle-weight category (1,500-
2,500-pound payload) that lies between ground-based truck
logistics and traditional rotary-wing aircraft. The committee
encourages the Army to identify enduring, fielded solutions and
establish clear pathways in order to scale operationally
relevant capacity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a brief to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, on the capabilities identified and
developed by the Army's Contested Logistics Cross Functional
Team. The brief shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) identification of CL-related capabilities the Army
intends to transition to programs of record or other
established acquisition pathways;
(2) the anticipated Portfolio Acquisition Executive and
office that will manage transitioned programs, and the expected
funding mechanism, acquisition pathways, and budget and
lifecycle sustainment for each transition; and
(3) an analysis of how the Army intends to scale these
capabilities to support operationally relevant force elements,
including sustainment units and maneuver formations.
Amphibious Fleet Sustainment Through Additive Manufacturing
The committee remains concerned regarding the low
operational availability and prolonged maintenance cycles of
the Navy's amphibious warfare ships. Specifically, the scarcity
of long lead time components and obsolete parts frequently
delays the return of these vessels to the Fleet. The committee
recognizes that additive manufacturing (AM), when properly
certified and integrated into naval maintenance processes,
offers a viable path to mitigate these disruptions by enabling
the on-demand production of critical components.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, detailing a strategy to integrate
AM into the sustainment of the amphibious fleet. The Secretary
shall coordinate briefing with the Navy's Additive
Manufacturing Center of Excellence (AM CoE) to ensure alignment
with existing technical data standards. This briefing shall
include:
(1) identification and prioritization of high-demand or
obsolete components that significantly contribute to
maintenance delays for LHA, LHD, LPD, and LSD class ships;
(2) a plan for the AM CoE to develop, validate, and qualify
Technical Data Packages (TDPs) for prioritized components to
enable serial production within the Maritime Industrial Base;
(3) a plan to expand certified additive manufacturing
capability at Regional Maintenance Centers and other
sustainment facilities, as appropriate; and
(4) an assessment of the Naval Sea Systems Command
technical review and approval processes for additive
manufacturing parts, including opportunities to reduce approval
timelines while maintaining safety and performance standards.
Apitong Hardwood for Military Applications
The committee is aware of recent changes to procurement
guidance by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and General
Services Administration (GSA) that have resulted in the
elimination of trailer decking which uses imported Apitong
(Keruing) as a substrate to only allowing domestically sourced
Northern Red Oak under Commercial Item Description (CID) A-A-
60057. The committee further understands that these changes
were implemented due to Trade Agreements Act compliance and
domestic sourcing preferences rather than issues related to
performance.
The committee notes that Apitong hardwood has historically
been used extensively in tactical trailer and military
transportation applications. The committee is monitoring
reports that the transition in specification requirements has
contributed to supply disruptions, unfulfilled orders,
increased maintenance demands, and reduced availability of
mission-capable trailer assets. The committee states that
procurement decisions affecting critical military
transportation capability should also consider operational
readiness, affordability, lifecycle performance, and impacts to
the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Administrator of the General Services
Administration and the Director of the Defense Logistics
Agency, to provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, that includes:
(1) a detailed explanation of the legal, regulatory, and
policy rationale supporting the restriction or discontinuation
of Apitong hardwood products for military trailer and
transportation decking applications;
(2) an assessment of the comparative operational
performance, durability, lifecycle cost, maintenance
requirements, mission readiness impacts, and any other factors
deemed necessary that impact the operations of DLA, regarding
Apitong hardwood versus Northern Red Oak as specified in (CID)
A-A-60057, and other approved alternatives;
(3) an evaluation of current fulfillment rates, backorders,
delivery delays, and supply chain impacts associated with
implementation of CID A-A-60057 and related procurement
guidance changes;
(4) an assessment of whether current procurement policies
have reduced military capability, increased sustainment costs,
or otherwise negatively affected readiness or warfighter
effectiveness;
(5) an assessment of the availability of Red Oak
manufacturing that utilizes the specific types of glue and
treatments available in the United States;
(6) a review of the environmental, sustainability, and
sourcing determinations relied upon in restricting procurement,
including the conservation status of commercially sourced
Apitong species and the legality of existing import supply
chains;
(7) recommendations, if any, to ensure the Department of
Defense maintains access to the most effective, affordable, and
mission-capable materials for tactical transportation systems;
and
(8) any other concerns as determined by the Secretary of
Defense.
The committee further directs that the report include input
from the military departments, program executive offices
responsible for tactical wheeled vehicles and trailers,
logistics readiness stakeholders, and private-sector suppliers
with relevant technical expertise regarding hardwood decking
materials used in military applications.
Army Depot Workforce Reductions and Statutory Workload Obligations
The Army's depots are crucial to maintaining military
readiness by regularly repairing vehicles, aircraft,
electronics, artillery, and air and missile defense systems and
returning them to the warfighter for training and operations.
However, the committee has long-standing concerns over the
Army's depot workforce. More than 7 years after GAO last
reported on this issue, the Army has not fully implemented a
GAO recommendation to assess the effectiveness of its depot
hiring, training, and retention programs. More recently, rather
than invest in the workforce, the Army has instead reduced it
through incentivized retirements, hiring freezes, reductions in
permanent positions, and ceilings on key positions. The
committee is concerned these reductions have eroded the depots'
capacity to perform at least half of the Army's annual funding
for depot-level maintenance and repairs, and have affected the
depots' ability to support Army operations with ready and
mission-capable equipment.
To assist in congressional oversight of the Army's depot
workforce and depot capacity, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees by April 1, 2027, as to
the Army's depot workforce and workforce plans. This review
should include:
(1) an examination of the Army depots' track record since
2021 of performing work covering at least 50 percent of the
Army's funding for depot-level maintenance and repair in
accordance with section 2466 of title 10 United States Code;
and
(2) an assessment as to how changes to the Army's depot
workforce have affected its capacity for depot-level
maintenance and repair since 2021, and evaluation of the Army's
depot workforce plans for the future.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
February 1, 2027, as to their preliminary observations.
Army Sustainment Planning for New Systems
The Army's efforts to modernize rotary-wing aircraft and
armored vehicles have increasingly focused on putting system
prototypes into the hands of soldiers during system design and
development. The Army has used acquisition pathways to
accelerate development and delivery of new technology such as
the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) and XM-30
armored fighting vehicle. The committee believes that providing
meaningful user input to inform system design and performance
also gives the Army an opportunity to enhance sustainment
planning for these weapon systems.
The committee has long been concerned that the Army pays
insufficient attention to planning for the maintenance, repair,
logistics, and supply-chain functions that are needed to
effectively sustain complex weapon systems across their
lifecycle. To assist in congressional oversight of the Army's
sustainment planning, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees by May 1, 2027, that reviews
how the Army is planning for sustainment of the FLRAA and XM-
30. For these systems, this report shall:
(1) review how the Army is planning during acquisition for
maintenance, repair, logistics, supply chain, and other
sustainment functions;
(2) assess the extent to which the Army is developing and
investing in the personnel, infrastructure, and facilities
needed to sustain these new systems; and
(3) identify and assess how the Army is ensuring it has
access to the data rights necessary to enable additive
manufacturing and the ability of soldiers to repair and
maintain the new systems.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services no
later than April 1, 2027 on the Comptroller General's
preliminary findings and present final results in a format and
timeframe agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Assessment of In-Theater Water Logistics and Alternative Sustainment
Technologies
The committee notes that both airlift and sealift
availability and capacity are finite resources in any conflict
and will be even more challenging to manage in a contested
logistics environment. Certain consumable resources, like
water, are both essential to our warfighter but also heavy and
cumbersome, potentially resulting in difficult tradeoffs mid-
conflict. The committee is concerned about the availability of
potable water for our servicemembers during conflict and the
planning that has taken place to mitigate any intra-theater
transportation issues that may arise. The committee is also
concerned about the availability of water for operational needs
at installations, such as adequate water supplies to ensure
readiness of space launches. Mobile reverse osmosis units,
desalination equipment, sub-sea desalination technologies, and
ultrafiltration systems are all options to be explored and
could ease the logistical burden of transporting water. It is
also imperative that they be capable of operating in austere
environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander of U.S.
Transportation Command, in coordination with the Director of
the Defense Logistics Agency, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than June 1, 2027,
evaluating the logistical footprint of intra-theater water
sustainment in the Indo-Pacific and to what extent other water
technologies have been considered that could fulfill the
hydration, and potable, and operational water needs of the
force in austere and remote environments.
Assessment of Logistics Management Tools and Connectivity in Department
of Defense Facilities
The committee recognizes that the Defense Logistics Agency
(DLA) and U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) logistics
facilities are critical to maintaining the rapid global
mobility and sustainment of the Joint Force. As the Department
of Defense modernizes its logistics enterprise to support
operations in contested environments, it is vital that DLA's
logistics yards and facilities supporting USTRANSCOM's
distribution network have modern infrastructure, as well as the
ability to communicate efficiently, securely, and in real time.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of DLA, in
coordination with the Commander of USTRANSCOM, to provide a
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1, 2027, on
the status of modernization of DLA logistics yards and
USTRANSCOM. Specifically, the report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the current system architecture,
network connectivity status, and data interoperability between
DLA logistics yards and USTRANSCOM distribution nodes;
(2) an identification of existing network vulnerabilities,
legacy system incompatibilities, or bandwidth limitations that
impede real-time supply chain visibility, cargo tracking, and
efficient hand-offs between the agencies;
(3) a detailed overview of ongoing software upgrades,
infrastructure improvements, and modernization efforts designed
to enhance system integration and correct the deficiencies
identified in (1) and (2);
(4) an assessment of the operational processes of aerial
and maritime ports or other distribution facilities within
USTRANSCOM (AMC/ARTRANS) and the infrastructure of Department
of Defense installations supporting those movements, with a
focus on current manual processes and to design a strategy to
incorporate artificial intelligence, automation, and modern
methods utilized by high-tech, high efficiency commercial
logistics yards;
(5) an evaluation of the cybersecurity posture of these
shared networks and the measures being implemented to protect
critical logistics and transit data from adversarial
exploitation; and
(6) recommendations for any additional funding, statutory
authorities, or interagency policy adjustments required to
fully integrate and modernize the logistics and transportation
networks of DLA and USTRANSCOM.
Assessment of Navy Private Sector Ship Repair Utilization
The committee notes the findings of the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled ``Shipbuilding and
Repair: Navy Needs a Strategic Approach for Private Sector
Industrial Base Investments'' (GAO-25-106286). The report
highlights that despite significant investments, the Navy has
failed to establish a consolidated strategy or clear
performance metrics to effectively manage and incentivize the
private sector ship repair industrial base. This lack of a
strategic approach hinders the Navy's ability to provide stable
workload projections, resulting in underutilized private
capacity and persistent maintenance delays that degrade fleet
readiness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on the Navy's progress in
addressing the recommendations contained in GAO-25-106286.
Following the briefing, the Secretary shall submit a report to
the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2027, which
shall include:
(1) a detailed plan and timeline for the development and
implementation of a formal Ship Industrial Base Strategy that
aligns with the National Defense Industrial Strategy;
(2) the establishment of specific performance metrics and
``return on investment'' targets for investments in private
sector infrastructure and workforce by the Navy and Office of
the Secretary of Defense;
(3) an assessment of private sector repair infrastructure
needs, including dry dock capacity, specifically tailored to
support surge requirements beyond peacetime operations;
(4) an evaluation of current leadership structures and
coordination efforts between the Navy and the Office of the
Secretary of Defense to prevent duplication in industrial base
support; and
(5) a strategy to provide industry partners with more
stable and predictable long-term maintenance and repair
workload projections.
Assessment of West Coast Port Facility Operational Needs and
Capabilities
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of West
Coast military port facilities, including Military Ocean
Terminal Concord (MOTCO), in supporting the Department of
Defense's logistics, ammunition throughput, and strategic
sealift requirements for the Indo-Pacific area of
responsibility. As strategic competition in the Pacific
increases, the readiness, security, and throughput capacity of
these critical out-loading nodes are paramount to the Joint
Force's ability to project and sustain power. The committee
notes that maximizing the operational utility of these
facilities requires robust force protection, modernized
infrastructure, and unencumbered access.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Commander of U.S. Transportation
Command, to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2027, on the readiness,
force protection, and resource requirements of MOTCO and
associated West Coast port facilities. Specifically, the report
shall include:
(1) an assessment of the overall facility readiness,
infrastructure condition, and logistical throughput capacity at
MOTCO;
(2) an evaluation of available force protection resources,
security protocols, and personnel required to adequately secure
the terminal and surrounding waters during both steady-state
and surge operations;
(3) an identification of current resource constraints,
infrastructure bottlenecks, or policy limitations that may be
impacting access, efficiency, and safety at MOTCO and other
critical West Coast port facilities; and
(4) recommendations for resources, and interagency
coordination necessary to mitigate the vulnerabilities and
constraints identified in (1), (2), and (3).
Autonomous External Cargo Handling for Contested Logistics
The committee recognizes that future contested operations,
particularly in the Indo-Pacific and other denied environments,
will increasingly limit logistics concepts that rely on fixed
infrastructure, secure airfields and ports, and manpower-
intensive cargo handling.
The committee notes that current external sling-load
operations require personnel to pre-rig, latch, and manage
hook-ups at the point of need, increasing exposure of ground
crews and extending aircraft ground time. The committee finds
that a near-term capability that reduces or eliminates ground
personnel requirements for external cargo hook-up, while
remaining compatible with existing aircraft inventories, could
strengthen distributed, infrastructure-independent logistics
and improve freedom of maneuver for aviation units.
The committee specifically highlights the ability of the
U.S. Army to pursue and resource rapid prototyping,
experimentation, and transition pathways for aircraft-
integrated autonomous external cargo handling systems capable
of autonomously docking, latching, lifting, and transporting
external cargo without fixed ground infrastructure or personnel
at the point of pickup.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 27, 2027, on the Army's plan to accelerate
development, experimentation, and transition of autonomous
external cargo handling capabilities for contested and austere
environments. The briefing shall include, but is not limited
to:
(1) operational requirements and concepts of employment,
including an assessment of the degree to which autonomous
capabilities decrease the exposure of ground crews and aircraft
time on the ground during pickup and delivery;
(2) an experimentation plan and performance criteria,
including planned demonstrations and measurable outcomes;
(3) a list of current or planned aircraft platforms
targeted for integration, including rotary-wing and unmanned
helicopter systems;
(4) a description of an acquisition and transition
strategy, including milestones, responsible organizations, and
resourcing required to support prototyping, flight testing, and
integration activities; and
(5) an assessment of compatibility with existing Department
of Defense aircraft inventories to enable scalable adoption
across the Joint Force.
Commercial Software for Contested Logistics
The committee recognizes the growing importance of
commercial software, data fusion, artificial intelligence-
enabled decision support tools, and other commercially
developed technologies in addressing the Department of
Defense's contested logistics challenges. The committee
believes that commercially developed software and digital
capabilities can provide significant advantages in speed of
development, operational adaptability, data fusion, and cost
efficiency compared to traditional acquisition approaches,
particularly in support of logistics planning, sustainment
decision making, supply chain visibility, and operations in
degraded environments.
The committee commends ongoing efforts by the Department to
leverage commercial technologies for contested logistics
missions, including the Joint Sustainment Decision Tool
program, which demonstrates the potential value of commercially
developed software to improve operational decision-making,
logistics synchronization, and joint sustainment planning
across the combatant commands and military departments.
The committee further notes that investments in commercial
contested logistics technologies are distributed across
multiple organizations and budget activities, limiting
visibility into the Department's overall approach to fielding
such capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, and the officials designated under
section 2229b(a) of title 10, United States Code, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on the Department's use of commercial
technologies in support of contested logistics operations. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) an overview of current and planned programs,
activities, and initiatives using commercial software,
artificial intelligence-enabled tools, and other commercially
developed technologies to support contested logistics
operations;
(2) identification of the military departments, defense
agencies, combatant commands, and other organizations
responsible for such programs and activities;
(3) a consolidated display of funding for current and
planned commercial contested logistics technology efforts
across the Future Years Defense Program, including
identification of research, development, procurement, and
operations and maintenance funding associated with such
efforts;
(4) an assessment of how the Department evaluates
commercial technologies for contested logistics applications,
including the use of experimentation, pilot programs,
operational exercises, and prototyping activities; and
(5) the Department's plans and mechanisms for transitioning
successful commercial technologies from pilot programs,
experimentation, or prototyping efforts into production,
fielding, and enduring acquisition programs.
Commercial Software for Production and Sustainment Supply Chain
Orchestration
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize
commercial-off-the shelf, cloud-based supply chain software
solutions delivered as software-as-a-service for production and
sustainment, and related logistics and maintenance, repair, and
operations (MRO) use cases, to the maximum extent practicable.
The committee further encourages the Department to minimize the
use of time-and-materials and cost-reimbursable contracts for
such software capabilities and to avoid developing new
government-unique systems when commercial solutions meet
mission requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to brief the House
Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2026, on current
contracting approaches used for production, sustainment,
logistics, and MRO supply chain software, obstacles to
commercial adoption, and recommended actions to accelerate
implementation of commercial solutions.
Comprehensive Air Force Maintenance Enterprise Modernization
The committee underscores the foundational role of aircraft
sustainment in executing the mission of the United States Air
Force. As the Air Force undertakes a generational modernization
of its fighter, bomber, mobility, and special mission aircraft
fleets, the committee emphasizes that aircraft maintenance,
logistics readiness, and munitions and missile maintenance must
be modernized commensurately to effectively enable, support,
and sustain advanced airpower capabilities. The committee
recognizes sustainment as a core element of the Air Forces
Agile Combat Employment (ACE) operational concept and notes
that effective ACE sustainment depends upon modern, resilient,
and adaptable training and infrastructure. The committee
further emphasizes that modernization of the sustainment
enterprise must be grounded in strong foundational technical
training that equips Airmen with the depth of knowledge, hands-
on proficiency, and adaptability required to operate and
maintain increasingly advanced and digitally enabled aircraft
systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 27, 2027, detailing a comprehensive strategy
and implementation plan to modernize the training of aircraft
maintenance, logistics readiness, and munitions and missile
maintenance career fields. The briefing shall include, but is
not limited to:
(1) an assessment of gaps in current Air Force aircraft
maintenance, logistics readiness, and munitions and missile
maintenance manpower organizational constructs, equipment,
infrastructure, and technologies relative to global mission
requirements and ACE;
(2) a description of the services plan to incorporate
lessons learned from identified capability gaps into technical
training curriculum, including enhancements that increase depth
of instruction, hands-on training opportunities, and the
integration of advanced simulation and commercially available
digital technologies;
(3) identification of the physical and technical
infrastructure required to support comprehensive training
modernization, including military construction needs and the
acquisition of leading commercially available technologies at
Air Education and Training Command installations; and
(4) a detailed description of policy, technology, manpower,
and infrastructure requirements, including cost estimates and
investment strategy, necessary to address identified capability
gaps.
Comptroller General Review of Air and Army National Guard Sustainment
The committee notes that the role of the National Guard is
to provide trained, ready, and interoperable units in the event
of conflict and in support of communities in the homeland in
times of crisis. To remain ready, Army National Guard and Air
National Guard unit equipment, including vehicles, aircraft,
and other weapon systems, undergoes extensive maintenance at
both the depot-level and unit-level. However, the Reserve
Forces Policy Board has previously raised concerns regarding
the adequacy of resources to maintain and repair Guard
equipment. Against this backdrop, the committee is concerned
about the sustainment of Army National Guard and Air National
Guard equipment to meet the Departments strategic priorities.
Given the important roles Air and Army National Guard units
play in meeting critical mission needs, the committee directs
the Comptroller General of the United States to examine the
following:
(1) the extent to which equipment maintenance and repair
challenges are affecting the readiness of National Guard units;
(2) the extent to which maintenance facilities provide the
needed capacity to effectively maintain and repair National
Guard equipment;
(3) the extent to which National Guard units receive timely
training and resources to perform unit-level maintenance of
essential equipment; and
(4) any other matters the Comptroller General determines to
be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 1, 2027, on preliminary observations and
present final results in a format and timeframe agreed to at
the time of the briefing.
Dedicated Intermediate Aircraft Maintenance Facility Utilizing Public-
Private Partnership Opportunities at Barksdale Air Force Base,
Louisiana
The committee recognizes that sustaining aircraft
availability across the B-52 fleet is increasingly dependent on
resilient maintenance capabilities and sufficient throughput,
particularly as operational demand increases through Bomber
Task Force deployments and as the Air Force prepares to
modernize the B-52H fleet to the B-52J configuration. The
committee further notes that this major modernization effort,
including new radar and propulsion upgrades, will place added
stress on organic depot capacity and fleet availability during
a critical period as the Air Force transitions to a two-bomber
force.
The committee recognizes that the Department of the Air
Force has existing public-private partnership authorities,
including Enhanced Use Lease authorities under section 2667 of
title 10, United States Code, that may allow private sector
capital, innovation, and commercial best practices to
complement organic capabilities, modernize maintenance
infrastructure, and expand intermediate-level maintenance
capacity, such as phase and isochronal inspections. Such
approaches could materially improve aircraft availability and
readiness. In addition, the committee notes that parts
obsolescence and supply chain constraints continue to
contribute to extended maintenance downtime for aging aircraft.
The committee believes that integrating advanced manufacturing
capabilities, including additive manufacturing and modern
digital logistics approaches, could help mitigate obsolescence
risk, accelerate parts production where appropriate, and reduce
non-mission-capable time attributable to supply delays.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than April 1, 2027, assessing the
feasibility and potential benefits of establishing a dedicated
intermediate aircraft maintenance facility at Barksdale Air
Force Base, Louisiana, or in the surrounding community, using
existing public-private partnership authorities or other
appropriate agreements. The report shall include:
(1) how private-sector investment and innovation could
expand intermediate-level large aircraft maintenance capacity,
including phase and isochronal inspections, to increase B-52
aircraft availability and improve fleet readiness, including
any implications for organic depot throughput and modernization
induction schedules;
(2) an evaluation of the feasibility of supporting
commercial, for-profit maintenance activity where such activity
enhances facility viability without degrading military
readiness, and assess opportunities to incorporate advanced and
additive manufacturing capabilities to mitigate parts
obsolescence and reduce supply-driven downtime; and
(3) a notional concept of operations; estimated capacity
and workforce requirements; integration with wing-level
maintenance and supply networks; and appropriate oversight,
cybersecurity, safety, and airworthiness controls for any mixed
military-commercial maintenance enterprise.
Equipment Modernization of Critical Reserve Component Forces
The Reserve Component of the military services play
critical roles in combat operations, including potential
conflicts with near-peer adversaries. In a March 2023
memorandum, the Department of Defense (DOD) Reserve Forces
Policy Board cited analysis and reports to Congress that
indicated that the National Guard and Reserves were not
sufficiently equipped to meet DOD requirements. Additionally,
there are some unique capabilities and related equipment that
reside predominantly in the Reserve Component that will need to
be employed in the event of a large-scale combat operation
against a near-peer adversary. The committee is concerned about
the equipment modernization status of Reserve Component forces
that will provide critical capabilities necessary to conduct
combat operations against near-peer adversaries.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees by May 1, 2027 as to matters related to
Reserve Component equipment modernization and status, including
the following:
(1) to what extent have force structure decisions made by
the military services placed critical capabilities that will be
needed in the event of a large-scale conflict with a near-peer
adversary primarily in their Reserve Component;
(2) to what extent have the military services taken action
or developed plans to ensure that these critical Reserve
Component units are equipped for such a conflict; and
(3) any other matters the Comptroller General determines to
be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the House Committee on Armed Services no later than April
1, 2027 on preliminary observations from the ongoing review and
on planned reporting formats and schedules.
Evaluation of Side Folding Intermodal Container Systems
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
relies extensively on standard 20-foot and 40-foot
International Organization of Standardization (ISO) for
intermodal containers. The committee is aware that, in
peacetime and steady-state operations, a significant percentage
of container movements consist of repositioning empty
containers and that storage of unused containers occupies
valuable installation space and leased commercial yard
capacity. The committee notes that commercially available side
folding intermodal container systems identified as ISO-W1
standard, may reduce the cubic footprint of empty containers
during storage and repositioning, potentially reducing
transportation costs, port congestion, and installation real
property burdens.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Commander of United States
Transportation Command and the Secretaries of the military
departments to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than February 1, 2027, evaluating the
feasibility, cost, operational risk, and potential return on
investment of incorporating side folding ISO-W1 container
systems into the Departments intermodal container inventory.
The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the total number of standard ISO
containers owned, leased, or managed by the Department of
Defense and the annual cost associated with storage,
maintenance, and repositioning of empty containers;
(2) an estimate of the proportion of container movements
during the previous five fiscal years that involved empty
container repositioning;
(3) a comparison of lifecycle costs between standard ISO
containers and ISO-W1 side folding container systems, including
acquisition cost, durability, maintenance requirements, and
compatibility with existing military and commercial handling
equipment;
(4) an evaluation of potential impacts on sealift, airlift,
and prepositioned stocks, including effects on lift density,
yard capacity, and contingency surge operations;
(5) an evaluation of the feasibility to use existing
container moving equipment with foldable containers;
(6) an assessment of cybersecurity, tamper resistance, and
structural integrity considerations unique to foldable designs;
and
(7) an analysis of which pilot programs, a limited
procurement, or operational experimentation would be the best
next step to validate cost savings and operational
efficiencies.
F-35 Global Sustainment Spares Reset
The committee notes the Department of Defenses efforts to
address the F-35 spare parts backlog through the F-35 Global
Sustainment Spares Reset. The committee further notes that this
effort will require sustained investment by the Department, the
military services, and international partners to improve spare
parts availability, reduce readiness degraders, and increase
mission capable and fully mission capable rates across the F-35
fleet.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment and the Program Executive Officer
for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Program Office, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the F-35 Global Sustainment Spares
Reset. The briefing should include the following:
(1) the Departments plan to fund F-35 spare parts through
fiscal year 2031, including what portion of planned funding
constitutes catch-up investment to address the existing spare
parts backlog and what portion constitutes keep-up investment
to meet recurring spare parts demand;
(2) an assessment of how fiscal years 2026 and 2027
appropriations and amounts made available under Public Law 119-
21 have addressed the F-35 spare parts funding backlog;
(3) a projected annual parts-level breakdown through fiscal
year 2031 of catch-up and keep-up spare parts requirements;
(4) the amount of funding international partners are
expected to contribute toward the spare parts backlog on an
annual basis, and the extent to which international partners
will have access to spare parts procured with United States
funds;
(5) mission capable and fully mission capable rate goals
through fiscal year 2031, progress toward those goals, and a
breakdown of those goals and progress by Force Activity
Designator levels I through IV;
(6) any deviations from mission capable or fully mission
capable rate goals attributable to ongoing operations,
including Operation Epic Fury, by Force Activity Designator
levels I through IV, and the projected timeline for recovery;
(7) any changes to business rules governing spare parts
allocation, distribution, or prioritization, and corresponding
investment decisions by the military services or international
partners;
(8) the status of any prospective F-35 sustainment
contract, including an estimated timeline to realize associated
cost savings;
(9) how the Department is incorporating, revising, or
reassessing deployment spare packages as part of the Global
Sustainment Spares Reset;
(10) any plans to leverage venture capital investment in
support of F-35 sustainment goals, including an assessment of
the feasibility, merits, and risks of such investment;
(11) key degraders of F-35 readiness in Operation Epic
Fury, including a comparison of actual component service life
against expected component service life;
(12) the total number of F-35 aircraft committed to or
utilized in support of Operation Epic Fury, the mission capable
rates of such aircraft, and the impact of such operations on
the mission capable rates of aircraft assigned to other Force
Activity Designator levels;
(13) the status of depot lay-in and its relationship to
mission capable rates; and
(14) contractor investment commitments necessary to achieve
the sustainment goals described in the briefing.
F139 Engine Maintenance Contract
The committee acknowledges the existing F139 maintenance
contracts for repair and overhaul of the F139 engine for
tankers, particularly the KC-46A. The committee notes previous
challenges in making timely repairs and replacements, which
threaten readiness and operational security. The committee
stresses the value of timeliness, efficiency, and consistent
contracts with original equipment manufacturers to prevent
delays, backlogs, and ensuing risks to aircraft and airmen
resulting from contractual gaps.
Guam Ship Repair
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of ship
repair infrastructure in Guam as the only American shipyard
west of the International Date Line. The committee also notes
the Military Sealift Command plays an important role in
providing demand to Guam's local maritime services industry.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
January 31, 2027, on options to expand ship repair
opportunities in Guam to include the repair of Military Sealift
Command vessels.
Implementation of Section 341 of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense
Authorization Act
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 1, 2027, on the progress made to implement the
requirements of section 341 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026. The briefing should
include:
(1) an inventory and description, for each military
department, of the technical data requirements and commercially
available diagnostic tools currently available and in use for
the maintenance of aviation critical safety items and mission
critical parts, including an identification of items or systems
that lack the technical data or diagnostic tools required under
section 341(a), an assessment of the operational impact of such
gaps, and actions underway to acquire the necessary technical
data and diagnostic tools;
(2) an assessment of maintenance practices;
(3) an evaluation of the extent to which maintenance of
aviation critical safety items and mission critical parts
relies solely on visual inspection, including a determination
of whether such reliance is due to the unavailability of
required technical data or diagnostic tools or because visual
inspection is the only method required under applicable
technical data, and a review of instances, if any, in which
maintenance practices do not comply with the requirements of
section 341(a);
(4) a description of how the Department is incorporating
the acquisition of technical data requirements and diagnostic
tools into the sustainment planning process for weapon systems
containing aviation critical safety items and mission critical
parts, including updates to program sustainment strategies and
life-cycle management plans, coordination between acquisition,
logistics, engineering, and sustainment communities, and any
additional resources, authorities, or policy changes needed to
ensure compliance with section 341(b);
(5) an overview of how the Department is leveraging
advanced diagnostic tools, including those non-destructive
inspection tools capable of detecting corrosion, cracks,
component damage, adhesion failure, and standard wear, and the
extent to which artificial intelligence and machine-learning
capabilities are being used to build predictive maintenance
databases; and
(6) an identification of any barriers to full
implementation of section 341 and recommendations for any
additional legislative authorities required to improve
maintenance safety, diagnostic tool fielding, or technical data
acquisition.
Leveraging Investments to Support Contested Logistics
The committee commends the Secretary of Defense for its
investments in commercial technology and in its efforts to
advance capabilities to support operating in a contested
logistics environment. The Department of Defense and the
military services have made significant investments aimed at
retiring technical debt and transitioning to modern,
commercial-based, finance, logistics, and other business
systems. The committee believes that continuing these efforts
are critical to improving the Department's ability to operate
in contested logistics environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to submit a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than February 2, 2027, that
analyzes:
(1) the Department's use of commercial technology, business
systems, and business practices to operate contested logistics
environments;
(2) the extent to which the Department considers the use of
resilient logistics technology and business systems to support
contested logistics capability instead of acquiring bespoke
solutions;
(3) opportunities to engage original equipment and software
manufacturers to maximize the investment of the Department and
Military Services in commercial technology and business
systems; and
(4) options to hold prime contractors accountable to
maximize the use of commercial original equipment and software
business system manufactures.
Navy Wartime Sustainment and Surge Capacity in the Indo-Pacific
The committee recognizes the importance of contested
logistics, sustainment, and industrial mobilization to the
success of naval operations in the Indo-Pacific region. The
committee remains concerned that the Department of the Navy's
ability to maintain, repair, rearm, and sustain naval forces
during a prolonged conflict may be constrained by limitations
in maintenance capacity, logistics infrastructure, workforce
availability, supply chain resilience, and defense industrial
base surge capability. The committee further notes the
importance of validating wartime sustainment assumptions
through realistic exercises, demonstrations, and assessments
involving both the Department and industry partners.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Chief of Naval Operations, the
Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Commander of United States
Indo-Pacific Command, and the Navy Wartime Acquisition
Sustainment Support Plan Capacity Expansion--Lethality Link
(WASSP-CELL), to provide a report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's readiness to
sustain naval combat operations during a prolonged Indo-Pacific
contingency.
The report should include the assessment and
recommendations of the WASSPCELL regarding:
(1) the capacity of Navy shipyards, regional maintenance
centers, aviation deports, logistics facilities, private
industry partners, and supporting supply chains to maintain,
repair, rearm, and sustain naval and aviation forces during a
major Indo-Pacific contingency;
(2) the Department's ability to surge maintenance, repair,
logistics, munitions replenishment, contracting, and workforce
capacity to meet wartime requirements;
(3) whether the Department has conducted realistic
exercises, demonstrations, pilot efforts, or other activities
to validate wartime sustainment assumptions, including the
responsiveness of industry partners, supply chains, contracting
authorities, and workforce availability under surge conditions;
(4) identifying key bottlenecks, single points of failure,
and other risks within the naval sustainment enterprise,
including maintenance, logistics, transportation networks,
workforce availability, and critical supply chains;
(5) vulnerabilities associated with disruptions to critical
maritime routes and chokepoints in the Indo-Pacific region;
(6) the opinion of the WASSP-CELL regarding the
Department's ability to sustain combat operations during a
prolonged Indo-Pacific conflict, including any significant
capability gaps, risks, or recommendations to improve wartime
readiness and sustainment capacity.
Rapid Logistics Using Cargo Delivery from Air, High Altitude Balloon
and Space
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
resilient, rapid, and precise cargo delivery from aircraft,
high-altitude balloon and space to overcome contested logistics
in support of joint and combined operations, particularly in
GPS-denied or austere environments. The committee directs the
Commander, U.S. Transportation Command to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than February
1, 2027, on the benefits of rapid logistics delivery using
rapid and precise cargo delivery from aircraft, high-altitude
balloon and space. The briefing should include:
(1) an evaluation of the potential military utility and
benefits of rapid and precise cargo delivery from aircraft,
high-altitude balloon and space, including responsiveness,
global reach, integration with joint logistics command and
control, and implications for deterrence;
(2) an assessment of current and projected operational
requirements for rapid logistics and precision delivery in
contested, remote, or infrastructure-denied environments;
(3) market research of commercial capabilities for cargo
delivery from aircraft, high-altitude balloon and space;
(4) a description of ongoing testing and demonstration
efforts across the Department related to these capabilities;
and
(5) potential concept of operations that integrate these
capabilities into existing logistics plans.
Review of Corrosion Control and Prevention Implementation and Sustained
Cost Impacts
The committee notes that the fiscal year 2026 President's
budget justification materials continue to reflect an estimated
corrosion-related cost to the Department of approximately $22.0
billion annually--a statistic almost a decade old. The
committee is concerned that the overall annual cost of
corrosion has not substantively changed. The committee further
recognizes that while the Department of Defense has made
incremental improvements in corrosion planning for acquisition
and sustainment programs, corrosion prevention and mitigation
technologies have not been fielded at scale across tactical
formations, depots, prepositioned stocks, or forward operating
environments. The committee is concerned that avoidable
corrosion-related degradation continues to reduce readiness,
accelerate component failure, and increase lifecycle
sustainment costs of both air and ground platforms.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than January 1, 2027, evaluating
the Department's progress since fiscal year 2018 in reducing
the cost and readiness impacts associated with corrosion. At a
minimum, the report shall address:
(1) the extent to which the Department has reduced,
stabilized, or otherwise affected the annual cost of corrosion
since fiscal year 2018, including an explanation for why the
reported annual cost remains approximately $22.0 billion;
(2) the resourcing, staffing, and organizational placement
of corrosion executives and offices within each military
department and whether such officials possess sufficient
authority to influence acquisition and sustainment decisions;
(3) the degree to which corrosion prevention and control
planning is incorporated into acquisition program baselines,
life-cycle sustainment plans, depot maintenance strategies, and
readiness reporting;
(4) the extent to which corrosion prevention and mitigation
capabilities have been implemented across operational units,
depots, and prepositioned equipment sets, and the principal
barriers to broader fielding;
(5) an assessment of corrosion impacts on maritime and
littoral aircraft operating in high-salinity and high-humidity
environments; and
(6) an evaluation of current corrosion mitigation and
prevention capabilities in use across the Department and the
extent to which such capabilities could be more broadly adopted
to reduce corrosion-related costs and readiness impacts.
Sea-Based Petroleum Distribution System
The committee notes the importance of survivable fuel
delivery platforms and capabilities in a contested environment.
The Sea-Based Petroleum Distribution System (SPDS), initiated
through the Joint Petroleum Over the Shore program, aims to
address this need by constructing large-capacity, rapidly
deployable submersible barges that can provide over-the-horizon
fuel delivery in contested environments.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026 that provides an overview of:
(1) the SPDS system, current requirements for the
capability, current funding and acquisition plans for the
system in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP); and
(2) options to accelerate and increase production rates
over the FYDP to meet established warfighting requirements.
Streamlining Low-Dollar Reserve Component Sustainment
The committee is concerned about recurring difficulties
across all echelons of the Reserve Components in executing
routine, low-dollar sustainment and administrative procurement
actions, including Subsistence-in-Kind (SIK), Lodging in-Kind
(LIK), transportation, medical readiness services, training
support services, and time sensitive non-programmatic
requirements. These routine readiness enablers continue to face
administrative delays disproportionate to their fiscal and
operational risk.
The committee is further concerned that while the standard
Micro-Purchase Threshold (MPT) has been adjusted for inflation,
certain statutory and regulatory limitations may prevent
broader acquisition reforms from benefiting routine unit level
training sustainment. As a result, layered approval processes
and risk-averse contracting practices for routine, low-risk
requirements often exceed those applied to higher-dollar or
higher-risk acquisition activities, resulting in preventable
readiness shortfalls, degraded training execution, avoidable
out-of-pocket burdens on Reserve Component personnel, and
unnecessary reliance on less suitable sustainment alternatives.
The committee believes that oversight of routine low-dollar
sustainment should enable timely execution at the lowest
appropriate echelon, rather than further centralizing low-
dollar procurement authority at higher levels. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretaries of the military departments and the Chiefs
of the Reserve Components, to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 15, 2026,
assessing the systemic barriers to decentralized execution of
low-dollar sustainment. The report should include:
(1) any administrative, regulatory, or statutory thresholds
and limitations that may degrade readiness for the Reserve
Components and an analysis of the impact on the execution of
routine Reserve Component training sustainment, including SIK,
LIK, facilities support, transportation, and other recurring
training enablers;
(2) an assessment of the administrative lead-time added by
navigating such thresholds and related approval requirements,
including the extent to which such requirements delay execution
despite the availability of funding;
(3) an evaluation of the frequency and operational impact
of sustainment contracts or procurement actions that are
awarded, modified, canceled, or substituted within 14 days of a
scheduled training event;
(4) an assessment of instances in which units planned or
were resourced for SIK, LIK, transportation, facilities
support, medical readiness support, or other sustainment
requirements but executed alternative methods due to
administrative delay, contracting delay, funding lapse, vendor
failure, or other execution breakdown;
(5) an assessment of the administrative layered approval
chains required for routine sustainment, specifically
identifying redundant reviews that do not materially reduce
fiscal, compliance, or operational risk;
(6) an analysis of how current procurement bottlenecks
impact the retention, morale, and out-of-pocket expenses of
Reserve Component personnel;
(7) an assessment of whether existing automated oversight
and data analytics can replace manual, pre-purchase approval
layers to ensure compliance without degrading operational
speed;
(8) specific consideration of whether existing incentive
structures appropriately recognize and reward timely execution,
administrative effectiveness, and responsible use of delegated
authority in sustainment-related decision-making; and,
(9) recommendations for policy, regulatory, or statutory
changes that enable timely execution while remaining consistent
with applicable worker protections and labor standards for low-
dollar sustainment at the lowest appropriate echelon,
explicitly prioritizing solutions that increase unit-level
authority and autonomy rather than centralizing procurement
functions at higher headquarters.
Readiness Issues
Advanced Airlift Tactics Training Center, Joint Maritime Over-Water
Training, and Mobility Air Force Operations
The committee notes that reliable mobility connectivity and
tactical data sharing are increasingly critical to the success
of joint force operations in contested and degraded
environments. As the Air Force shifts toward distributed
operations and resilient logistics networks, mobility aircraft
must be capable of operating as connected nodes while
maintaining interoperability across networks.
In support of these objectives, the Advanced Airlift
Tactics Training Center (AATTC) plays an important role by
advancing Air Force tactical training, interoperability, and
mobility connectivity capabilities across the joint force.
AATTC improves mobility aircrew proficiency in contested and
degraded operational environments through advanced instruction
in tactical communications, data link integration, mobility
coordination, and networked operations that enable airlift and
refueling aircraft to operate more effectively alongside joint
and coalition forces. AATTC also provides formal connectivity
and electronic combat training supporting Air Mobility Command
(AMC) qualification requirements, including instruction through
the Mobility Data Link Managers Course and Combat Aircrew
Tactics Studies/Mobility Electronic Combat Officer Course.
Mobility Air Force aircraft routinely support counter-
narcotics operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster
response, theater security cooperation, and contingency airlift
missions across the Western Hemisphere, particularly in
maritime and island-based environments such as the Caribbean.
Expanding AATTC-led over-water and island-hopping training in
the Caribbean could improve proficiency in maritime navigation,
degraded communications, fuel and divert planning, civilian
airspace deconfliction, and coordination with maritime forces,
while providing transferable capabilities applicable to future
Indo-Pacific contingencies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 1, 2027, on opportunities to expand AATTC
training to include joint over-water and island-based mobility
mission sets. The briefing shall also include the number of
students who attended AATTC mobility connectivity, data link
integration, and electronic combat training courses during
fiscal years 2025 and 2026, and the number of waivers AMC
approved for wings to operate tactical data link systems
without a trained wing-level manager of tactical data links.
Advanced Mobility Tactics and Survivability Center (AMTSC)
The committee recognizes that contested logistics will
define operational tempo in large-scale combat operations,
particularly in the Indo-Pacific theater. Mobility aircraft
will be required to operate in contested and high-threat
environments where survivability and integration across the
mobility enterprise are critical to mission success. The
committee notes that the Advanced Airlift Tactics Training
Center (AATTC) has historically focused on advanced C-130
tactics dissemination. However, evolving operational
requirements may necessitate expanding the AATTC's mission
beyond tactics instruction to include integrated C-130 and KC-
135 survivability training and contested logistics execution.
The committee further notes that the Department,
USTRANSCOM, and Air Mobility Command (AMC) have increasingly
emphasized the vulnerability of the tanker fleet and the
central role of air refueling in enabling power projection in
contested environments. As tanker survivability and distributed
mobility operations become core elements of contested logistics
planning, these developments may necessitate corresponding
evolution in institutional mobility training.
The committee therefore seeks to understand the feasibility
of expanding AATTC's mission to incorporate integrated mobility
survivability training and if redesignation of AATTC would be
beneficial.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by February 1, 2027, on the feasibility, requirements,
and operational implications associated with redesignating
AATTC as the Advanced Mobility Tactics and Survivability Center
and expanding its mission. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
redesignation;
(2) potential of expanding AATTC's curriculum to include
integrated C-130 and KC-135 tactics, survivability training,
and contested logistics operations in degraded and high-threat
environments;
(3) resource requirements necessary to support such
expansion, including instructor billets, modeling and
simulation capabilities, infrastructure investments, and any
associated force structure adjustments;
(4) an evaluation of how a redesigned AATTC could support
combatant command contested logistics training requirements,
including those associated with operations in the Indo-Pacific
theater; and
(5) if any legislative authorities or policy changes are
required to implement a mission expansion.
Amphibious Warship Operational Availability, Maintenance Capacity, and
Sustaining a Continuous Three Marine Expeditionary Unit Presence
The committee notes that section 8062 of title 10, United
States Code, requires the Navy to maintain not fewer than 31
operational amphibious warfare ships. The committee further
recognizes that sustaining a continuous rotational presence of
three forward-deployed Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs)
requires not only sufficient total inventory, but adequate
operational availability across deployment, training, and
maintenance cycles.
The committee is concerned that the definition of
``operational'' for purposes of statutory compliance may not
fully reflect the number of amphibious warships that are
mission-capable and available to deploy in support of sustained
forward presence. Ships undergoing extended depot maintenance,
modernization, delayed availabilities, or experiencing
significant parts shortages may be counted toward inventory yet
may not contribute to a continuous 3.0 MEU presence.
The committee is also concerned about persistent challenges
in depot maintenance throughput, workforce capacity, spare
parts availability, and proportional readiness across
amphibious ship classes. At the same time, the committee
recognizes the progress made through the Amphibious Warship
Readiness Board and ongoing efforts to improve planning
discipline, availability execution, and cross-enterprise
coordination.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, that includes:
(1) the criteria and definitions used to designate an
amphibious warfare ship as ``operational'' and ``available''
for purposes of section 8062 of title 10, United States Code;
(2) the current number of amphibious warfare ships that are
mission-capable and available for deployment;
(3) an assessment of whether current operational
availability levels are sufficient to sustain a continuous
three-MEU rotational presence; the primary drivers of extended
depot maintenance, delayed availabilities, and parts shortages;
an assessment of proportional readiness across amphibious ship
classes;
(4) a description of the role, authorities, and performance
outcomes of the Amphibious Warship Readiness Board;
(5) any policy, resourcing, or legislative actions required
to ensure amphibious fleet readiness aligns with statutory
force structure requirements and sustained 3.0 MEU presence;
and,
(6) an assessment of the minimum amphibious warfare ship
inventory required to sustain a continuous 3.0 MEU rotational
presence, support crisis-response requirements, and maintain
acceptable deployment-to-dwell ratios, including a comparison
of the operational risk associated with inventories of 31, 35,
40, and 44 amphibious warfare ships.
Army European Prepositioned Stocks
The committee notes that Army Prepositioned Stocks in
Europe (APS-2) provide a critical and cost-effective means to
enable rapid force projection, enhance deterrence against
Russia, and ensure that U.S. and allied defense requirements
are met. The committee further notes that maintaining
prepositioned equipment to a combat-ready standard is essential
to ensuring that U.S. forces can quickly and seamlessly employ
such equipment to execute national or allied war plans if
required. The committee also stresses the importance of
ensuring APS-2 readiness remains sufficient to support the
deterrence and warfighting requirements of U.S. and allied
forces in Europe.
The committee further notes that maintenance of such
equipment is currently performed within the area of
responsibility of U.S. European Command, an approach that
reduces transportation costs and reinforcement timelines in the
event of a conflict. The committee additionally notes that
opportunities exist to further reduce the long-term cost of
maintaining APS-2 equipment, including through the construction
of modern, efficient, climate-controlled facilities in-theater
to house such equipment and by leveraging host nation
contributions for maintenance and sustainment costs.
The committee notes its intent that funding authorized by
this Act for APS-2 be used to maintain its equipment in the
European theater at all times, including during required
maintenance, in order to meet the deterrence and defense
requirements of the Commander, U.S. European Command.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in consultation with the Commander, U.S. European Command, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, detailing plans for conducting all
necessary maintenance on APS-2 equipment in the European
theater. The report should include:
(1) the specific location or locations in the U.S. European
Command's area of responsibility where APS-2 equipment would
most effectively be maintained;
(2) current APS-2 readiness levels;
(3) estimated timelines and cost for bringing APS-2
equipment to a combat-ready standard at the European
location(s) identified as ideal for performing such
maintenance;
(4) the existence of any agreements or ongoing
consultations with any allied countries regarding the sharing
of costs related to maintaining or sustaining APS-2 equipment
and related infrastructure;
(5) any gaps in equipment, infrastructure, or funding
necessary to meet requirements in the area of responsibility of
U.S. European Command; and
(6) the effect of readiness levels of APS-2 equipment on
the ability of U.S. forces in the area of responsibility of
U.S. European Command to deter and, if necessary, defeat
Russian threats to U.S. defense, interests, and allies.
Army Soldier Virtual Trainer
The committee understands the Army Soldier Virtual Trainer
(SVT) was established in 2017 as a program of record to
integrate capabilities within the Synthetic Training
Environment. The committee notes however that SVT full
operational capability is now delayed to Fiscal Year 2028.
The committee understands that while SVT has been under
development, other military departments have fielded advanced
small arms synthetic training systems that meet SVT stated
requirements, to include proven integration of human
performance optimization, biometric monitoring, and automated
shooter analytics to produce measurable live-fire qualification
improvements. The committee is concerned that continued Army
SVT development expenditures do not consider proven, currently
available advanced synthetic training capabilities solutions.
The committee is also aware that the Army's legacy small
arms simulation training systems are no longer sustainably
resourced, and that as a result, the Army is now considering
alternatives to address near-term training gaps. The committee
believes that such an approach risks diffusing oversight,
fragmenting standards, and diminishing accountability of prior
federal investment. Therefore, the Committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by December 31, 2026, that
includes:
(1) a fiscal year-by-fiscal year accounting since fiscal
year 2017 of SVT funding, including identifiable Government-
owned deliverables, technical baselines, and a description as
to why delivery has not been achieved, and resulting impact on
soldier lethality and survivability;
(2) an explanation of whether the Army is exploring
existing, validated lethality training small arms synthetic
training solutions that have been validated by other services
to expedite the implementation and to reduce duplicative
resource expenditures;
(3) a validation framework specifying how measurable live-
fire transfer, cognitive performance improvement, and lethality
outcomes will be independently verified prior to large-scale
SVT procurement;
(4) a detailed interim plan to ensure uninterrupted basic
through advanced small arms synthetic training proficiency,
including Guard and Reserve Components, prior to SVT full
fielding; and
(5) a comparative acquisition analysis outlining lifecycle
costs and oversight implications of centralized program-of-
record fielding versus decentralized operational procurement.
Availability of Milk at Dining Facilities on Military Installations
The committee continues to support the proper nutrition and
dietary requirements of our servicemembers and believes that
adequate provisioning of our servicemembers is essential to
combat readiness.
The committee notes that Department of Defense manual
1338.10 requires milk to be served at dining facilities. The
committee further notes that unless servicemember are
performing combat or contingency operations in an overseas
location, such milk is required by section 4862 of Title 10,
United States Code to be produced in the United States.
Therefore, the committee requests the Secretary of Defense
provide a brief to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 1, 2027 as to policy and provision of milk to United
States servicemembers. Such brief shall include:
(1) an assessment of the nutritional value of milk products
to service members;
(2) doctrinal guidance as to the provisioning of milk to
servicemembers in military dining facilities; and
(3) a listing of any regulatory deviations to the
procurement of milk policy, pursuant to section 4862 of title
10, United States Code.
Briefing on Servicemember Exposure to Non-DoD
Open-Air Burn Pits
The committee remains concerned with servicemembers abroad
and exposure to open-air burn pits. Toxic exposure from open-
air burn pits continue to pose serious health risks to
servicemembers deployed in contingency operations abroad. The
committee believes that service members operating in or near
active and legacy burn pit sites are entitled to the most
current, evidence-based guidance to protect their health and
safety.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 31, 2027, on delays implementing policy changes
directed by the Under Secretary of Defense dated October 13,
2022, to DoD Instruction (DoDI) 4715.19, Use of Open-Air Burn
Pits in Contingency Operations. The briefing should include the
following information:
(1) the actions taken to update DoDI 4715.19 and a timeline
for full implementation;
(2) an assessment of known non-DoD operated burn pits at or
near locations where United States service members are
stationed or conducting operations, including burn pits
operated by host nations, coalition partners, and contractors,
including the number and location of such burn pits and any
recommendations for enhanced monitoring and exposure tracking;
and
(3) recommendations for updating DoD guidance on tracking
servicemember exposure to burn pits.
Comptroller General Review of Aircraft Readiness Metrics
The committee notes that the military services continue to
revise their methodology for calculating and tracking how many
aircraft are available for operations and set related goals.
Various metrics, from mission capable aircraft to available
aircraft, determine the number of ready aircraft differently.
For example, the Air Force continues to refine the force
packages it will deploy under its new force generation model
(now referred to as AFFORGEN 2.0) and has recently introduced
the Aircraft Readiness Machine to establish and track aircraft
availability goals by fleet type. The Government Accountability
Office (GAO) regularly examines trends in mission capable
aircraft in its sustainment quick looks, but the committee is
concerned that different service methodologies for calculating
ready aircraft will make historical comparisons within service
inventories and comparisons across the services difficult, if
at all possible.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review and assess the military services'
methodologies for determining the number of aircraft available
for operations. The Comptroller General's review should assess:
(1) the extent to which the services have consistent
methodologies for calculating and tracking how many aircraft
are available for operations and why any differences exist;
(2) the extent to which services have mitigated potential
tradeoffs in their methods for determining the number of
available aircraft; and
(3) any other matters the Comptroller General determines to
be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
April 1, 2027, on preliminary observations and present final
results in a format and timeframe agreed to at the time of the
briefing.
Comptroller General Review of Department of Defense Prioritization and
Funding of PFAS Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies
The committee is concerned with how the Department of
Defense is managing the process for investigating PFAS
contamination on and near its installations. The Government
Accountability Office (GAO) reported in 2025 that the
Department had completed preliminary assessments of nearly all
718 installations where PFAS were used. As a result of those
preliminary assessments, the Department identified more than
500 installations that need detailed remedial investigations/
feasibility studies (RI/FS) to more fully identify the location
of PFAS contamination and possible remedial actions. However,
each RI/FS is a multi-million dollar undertaking that can take
5-10 years, depending on complexity. In 2025, GAO reported that
the Department's estimated future PFAS investigation and
cleanup costs would total more than $9.3 billion but were
expected to continue to increase as the Department learns more
about PFAS contamination with each RI/FS. Therefore, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to assess:
(1) Department of Defense efforts to prioritize their PFAS-
related RI/FS studies to ensure they are continuing to make
rapid progress while reducing risk as quickly as possible; and
(2) Department of Defense's distribution of funding for the
PFAS-related RI/FS studies to ensure the Department can address
the most contaminated sites as expeditiously as possible.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 31, 2027, with the results of the review to follow in a
mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General Review of the Military Munitions Response Funding
and Contracts
The committee is concerned with how the Department of
Defense manages its Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP)
to clean up environmental contaminants from munitions at
formerly used defense sites. The Government Accountability
Office (GAO) reported in 2022 that contaminants from munitions
make up most of the environmental liability for formerly used
defense sites. Additionally, GAO reported that the full cost of
cleanup was not known, as the Department had not completed
investigations of sites to identify remedies needed for
cleanup. In response to GAO's recommendations, the Department
issued guidance in December 2024 to prioritize the sites that
pose the greatest risk to human health, safety, and the
environment and set a goal to achieve the cleanup objective
(response complete) for 20 percent of the highest risk sites by
the end of fiscal year 2030 and 30 percent by the end of fiscal
year 2035. As of 2024, the Department had increased the number
of MMRP sites in the cleanup phase but more than 1,000 sites
have still not completed investigations. In addition, the
environmental liability for MMRP formerly used defense sites
has increased from $9.8 billion in fiscal year 2022 to $12.8
billion in fiscal year 2025. Furthermore, there have been
delays and other challenges in contracting with small
businesses to complete clean up actions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the following:
(1) how the Department of Defense has managed the funding
and staffing needed to execute the MMRP for formerly used
defense sites;
(2) the progress the Department has made in cleaning up
military munitions at formerly used defense sites and met the
MMRP goals for cleanup;
(3) how the Department's management of the MMRP at formerly
used defense sites has affected how it has contracted and
overseen contracts with small businesses to conduct clean up
actions, including the extent to which contractors are
receiving equitable adjustments for any work changes or delays;
and
(4) how the Department's actual execution of appropriated
funds compares to the President's Budget Request for Munitions
Response by year for Fiscal Years 2016-2026.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 31, 2027, on the Comptroller General's preliminary
findings and present final results in a format and timeframe
agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Contested Logistics
The committee recognizes the value that military exercises
provide to the Department of Defense and the contributions to
readiness of the armed forces. Preparing for conflicts in which
logistics themselves may become contested, particularly when
distance to the battlefront poses additional complexities to a
conflict, is necessary to project deterrence and maintain
superiority against near-peers. In like manner, the role of
defense contractors is essential in providing for and
supporting weapons systems required by the military services,
and will be just as significant in a contested logistics
scenario. Congress has previously required the inclusion of
contested logistics events as part of Navy and Air Force
exercises and has also encouraged the Department to solicit
additional involvement by trusted logistical contractors to
source concepts addressing contested logistics vulnerabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 1, 2027 on the efforts to collaborate with defense
contractors in planning for contested logistics operations and
the framework necessary by the department to incorporate
contractors into contested logistics exercises. This briefing
shall include:
(1) a description of interactions with contractors and a
summary of input received;
(2) an evaluation of the current design of exercises and
the construct required to include contractors, including
identification of organizational barriers to implementation;
and
(3) options and timelines descriptive of policy changes to
include contractors in exercises.
Cost Recovery of Major Range and Test Facility Bases
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
continue to use excess-capacity and marginal-cost billing
methodologies for Department of Defense ranges where commercial
space or aerospace activities do not materially drive fixed
costs, staffing levels, infrastructure investments, or
operational tempo. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 1, 2026 on:
(1) total indirect costs charged to non-DoD users by Major
Range and Test Facility Bases;
(2) the methodology; and
(3) whether the Department can define a ``coordination-
only/de minimis utilization'' category with marginal-cost
billing.
Data and Digitization for Construction and Sustainment
The committee commends the Navy for its efforts, consistent
with congressional direction, to field inspection and digital
twin technology to reduce inspection durations and workforce
strain while enhancing readiness. The committee urges the
Department and the military services to expand these efforts to
accelerate testing and qualification of technology that can
improve speed and efficiency across air and naval platforms.
These efforts should prioritize technology that relies on
decision-quality data, delivers rich digital asset models, and
leverages multiple sensor modalities like phased array scanning
and photogrammetry. The committee understands that these
attributes improve precision and facilitate auditability
throughout the lifecycle of an asset. The committee emphasizes
that integrated digital manufacturing histories should begin as
early as practicable in construction to improve nondestructive
testing workflows, and the resulting aircraft, ships, and
submarines should benefit from robust digital history as they
are operated and maintained.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary for
Acquisition & Sustainment, in coordination with the senior
acquisition executives of the Navy and Air Force, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by December
1, 2026, on plans to expand the use of such technologies to
support congressionally directed expansion of digital
engineering, including digital twins and digital threads. The
briefing shall include the following elements:
(1) plans to leverage commercial technology for digital
engineering;
(2) recommendations for attributes of an automated
inspection process, including any impediments that may require
legislation to remove and an explanation of proposed statutory
changes;
(3) estimates of time savings associated with expanded
deployment of semi-automated robotic inspections;
(4) value of integrated hardware and software technologies
that facilitate persistent, cloud-based digital records of
acceptance, end-to-end part provenance, and digital history;
and
(5) other relevant material the Under Secretary and
executives deem appropriate.
The briefing shall be unclassified and without
dissemination control markings but may contain a restricted
annex.
Department of Defense Training in the Arctic Region
In its 2024 Arctic Strategy, the Department of Defense
identified the Arctic as a strategically important region for
the U.S. and emphasized the intent to preserve stability,
deepen engagement with allies and partners, enhance
capabilities, and build readiness for operations at high
latitudes. The strategy stated that insufficient Arctic
readiness will cast doubt on the credibility of the Joint Force
to effectively operate in the region. It further outlines a
series of steps for the Department to improve its ability to
respond to national security threats, including the need to
train Arctic capable forces in cold weather skills and exercise
tailored presence in the region, among other actions.
Given recent global events, the committee is concerned that
the military services are not fully prepared to operate in the
Arctic region. Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to prepare a report for the
congressional defense committees by May 1, 2027 and assess the
military services' training to operate in the Arctic region.
This report should address the following:
(1) to what extent have the Department and the military
services implemented changes in training and exercises to
reflect priorities outlined in the latest Arctic strategy, and
how have they measured any progress of these efforts;
(2) to what extent have the military services identified
key lessons from training and exercises in the Arctic region,
and how have these lessons informed capability requirements,
resourcing, concept development, or other changes; and
(3) any other matters the Comptroller General determines to
be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the House Committee on Armed Services no later than April
1, 2027 on preliminary observations from the ongoing review and
on planned reporting formats and schedules.
Dieldrin in Guam
The committee is concerned about the presence of dieldrin
in water wells serving communities in Guam and the potential
exposure of servicemembers, their families, and local residents
to dieldrin, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and
other hazardous chemicals associated with historical Department
of Defense activities on the island. The committee notes that
Guam hosts a significant and growing military presence, and
that the long-term health and environmental consequences of
legacy contamination demand systematic attention. The committee
believes greater transparency into the Department of Defense's
historical use of these chemicals, the scope of contamination,
and the status of remediation efforts is necessary to protect
public health and support installation readiness.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 31, 2027, on the use of dieldrin, PFAS, and other
hazardous chemicals by the Department of Defense on Guam. The
briefing shall include:
(1) a summary of known historical use of dieldrin, PFAS,
and other hazardous chemicals by the Department of Defense on
Guam;
(2) an assessment of the current scope and severity of
contamination in water wells, soil, and other environmental
media attributable to Department of Defense activities;
(3) a description of remediation actions completed,
underway, or planned to address contamination; and
(4) an assessment of coordination between the Department of
Defense, the Government of Guam, the Environmental Protection
Agency, and other relevant Federal agencies on monitoring,
remediation, and public health response efforts.
Effects of Decommissioning Army Prepositioned Stocks--Afloat and
Alternatives
The committee is concerned that in time of global upheaval,
the Department of the Army has elected to decommission the Army
Prepositioned Stocks--Afloat (APS-3) program and land-base the
stocks on the vessels. APS-3 has been a cornerstone of the
United States' readiness and ability to respond to crisis
globally by ensuring that the Army has pre-loaded munitions and
ready to deploy at a moment's notice should a conflict arise,
including across multiple theaters. The committee is concerned
that the loss of this capability may diminish the Army's
ability to sustain combat operations globally.
Furthermore, the committee is concerned the loss of this
maritime capacity and hundreds of mariner, marine
manufacturing, and maintenance jobs due to the decommissioning
of APS-3 will put the United States further from its goal of
achieving maritime dominance.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services and
the Senate Committee on Armed Service not later than December
1, 2026, on the APS-3 program and the effects of
decommissioning APS-3 and land-basing the stocks will have on
army readiness and sustainment. The report shall include:
(1) Reasoning and justification for decommissioning of APS-
3;
(2) Any capability deficit generated by decommissioning
APS-3 and plans to make up for any capability deficit;
(3) Information on the time it would take to reactivate
floating stock, reload, and deploy to a theater of concern;
(4) The ability of other means of transport, such as Air
Force airlifters, to make up the capability and capacity
deficit generated by the decommissioning of APS-3;
(5) Risks generated by prepositioning stocks in theater
that previously were held afloat;
(6) Future plans for Army Field Support Battalion
Charleston and associated personnel tasked with maintaining
APS-3;
(7) An assessment of the Army's ability to accurately
project the needs for land-based prepositioned stocks across
multiple theaters without the backstop of agile afloat stocks;
(8) Effects on the maritime readiness of the United States
of placing ships previously allocated for floating stocks into
minimally crewed reduced operating status;
(9) Whether any vessels which were leased as part of the
APS-3 program have been reflagged out of the United States
after being returned to the leaseholder; and
(10) Any information the secretary deems necessary to
include.
Enhancing Food Preservation for Naval Operations
The committee recognizes that advancements in food
preservation technology, including ozone-based technology,
present an opportunity to create a more resilient and
nutritious food supply that is critical to the health, morale,
and readiness of Navy personnel during long-duration naval
deployments, particularly across the submarine fleet.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on the integration of advancements
in food preservation and sanitization technologies within the
Navy.
Enhancing Readiness and Supply Chain Awareness for the Organic
Industrial Base
The committee commends the military departments for ongoing
efforts to modernize the Organic Industrial Base in
collaboration with the nation's digital manufacturing
institute. The committee believes that sustained progress
toward a digitally enabled organic industrial base is essential
to improving readiness, expediting production and maintenance
timelines, and ensuring the Department's ability to meet
wartime munition demands.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense and the
service secretaries to continue working with the Nation's
digital manufacturing institute to pilot scalable approaches
that improve supply chain awareness and support transition from
peacetime operations to sustained wartime production.
European Prepositioned Stocks
The committee notes that rapid reinforcement of Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania and Romania remains constrained by equipment
availability and deployment timelines. The committee is
concerned that reliance on prepositioned stocks located outside
the European Command may not provide sufficient response time
in the early phase of a contingency. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 2027,
on the feasibility of establishing dedicated Army Prepositioned
Stocks in each Baltic state and Romania. The report shall
include:
(1) equipment sets required to support a brigade combat
team in each country;
(2) ammunition stockage objectives;
(3) rail and transport compatibility considerations,
including gauge differences;
(4) time-to-combat deployment analysis;
(5) infrastructure requirements and costs;
(6) host-nation support considerations; and
(7) how an expansion of prepositioned stocks would
accelerate United States operational plans and North Atlantic
Treaty Organization regional plans.
Execute Certain Permit Reviews of Priority Department of Defense
Programs and Projects
The committee recognizes that executing permitting reviews
of priority programs and projects for the Department is
essential for the readiness of our Armed Services. The
committee is aware that the Department does not currently have
the authority to provide National Marine Fisheries Service or
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with the funds to
hire personnel to execute the review of these permits for
programs or projects of national defense interests. The
committee recognizes the importance and need for these
authorities to the Department.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the Military Departments,
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees no
later than December 1, 2026, on the authorities needed to
sufficiently execute the permitting review process. The report
should include the following:
(1) The outstanding number of permits, broken down by each
service, that needs to go through the review process at
National Marine Fisheries Service or the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service;
(2) The average time it takes for review completion at the
agencies;
(3) Identified barriers to completion; and
(4) Recommendations for helping to expedite the review
process, including for interagency coordination.
Fort Polk Modernization
The committee recognizes that modernizing Combat Training
Centers (CTCs), including Fort Polk, are a critical enabler of
the Army transformation initiative and supports the Secretary's
objective of ensuring formations are prepared to operate in
complex, contested environments. The committee further
recognizes that the evolving character of warfare--including
contested communications, cyber and electronic warfare,
unmanned systems threats, and degraded sustainment
environments--underscores the strategic importance of CTCs in
generating readiness for large-scale combat operations.
Consistent with Army Transformation Initiative objectives
and Army manning guidance, the committee supports a
prioritization of CTCs for senior-grade and high-experience
personnel fills, ensuring the most qualified leaders are
assigned to Observer/Controller-Trainer, opposing force, and
enabling roles essential to high-fidelity training. The
committee further supports a prioritization of available end-
strength growth to maximize adversary force, sustainment, and
enabling unit manning at Combat Training Centers and the Army's
highest-tempo and deploying brigade combat teams.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by December 1, 2026 as to options to modernize Fort Polk to
optimally support multi-domain combat training installation for
large-scale combat operations against near-peer adversaries.
This briefing shall specifically include the Secretary's plan
to optimally expand Fort Polk including:
(1) transition of training from legacy counterinsurgency-
focused scenarios to persistent peer-threat conditions,
including contested communications, cyber and electronic
warfare, degraded logistics, long-range fires, and denied space
and GPS environments;
(2) optimizing opposing force capacity, to include growth
of the 509th Infantry Regiment to support peer-threat
replication;
(3) establishment of a counter-unmanned aerial systems
training center; and
(4) reformation of Observer/Controller-Trainer assignment
policies to emphasize experienced former commanders and senior
leaders.
Additionally, this briefing shall additionally describe
force structure adjustments, adversary force and sustainment
manning improvements, and required resources to support the
Secretary's plan to optimally align Fort Polk in best
supporting the Secretary's multi-domain combat training vision.
Guam Naval Magazine
The committee is concerned about land management practices
at Guam Naval Magazine, potentially leading to poor stewardship
of Guam's natural resources. The committee notes that the south
of Guam is prone to brushfires, and that brushfires originating
at Guam Naval Magazine can pose a threat to adjoining
properties. The committee further notes that debris on the
property can pose a threat to public safety and environmental
management.
The committee directs the Commander of Joint Region
Marianas to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2026, on land management at
Guam Naval Magazine. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of appropriate wildfire management
practices to implement, including cutting firebreaks in the
foliage on the property;
(2) any necessary removal of debris from the property;
(3) methods of outreach and collaboration with local
stakeholders, including the Guam Department of Agriculture, the
Guam Fire Department, and owners of adjoining properties;
(4) activities at Guam Naval Magazine related to the
establishment of Habitat Enhancement Sites supporting the Guam
Enhanced Integrated Air and Missile Defense system; and
(5) other matters deemed relevant by the Commander.
Indo-Pacific Force Generation Readiness Assessment
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
conducts multiple assessments related to readiness,
infrastructure, installation capacity, and Indo-Pacific
posture. However, the committee is concerned that these efforts
do not provide an integrated view of how installation-level
conditions within the continental United States affect force
generation, deployment timelines, efforts to expand capacity,
and sustained operations for United States Indo-Pacific
Command. The committee further recognizes that the ability to
rapidly generate and deploy combat power is central to
deterrence and operational readiness in the Indo-Pacific
theater. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 5, 2027, using existing data and
assessments to the maximum extent practicable, evaluating
installations that are critical to force generation,
deployment, and sustainment for United States Indo-Pacific
Command. The brief shall include the following elements:
(1) identification of not more than six installations
critical to Indo-Pacific force generation, including Joint Base
Lewis-McChord and Naval Station Everett;
(2) identification and prioritization of the most
significant readiness degraders affecting force generation and
deployment timelines at those installations;
(3) identification of installations where identified
readiness degraders are assessed to present the greatest risk
to force availability or deployment timelines;
(4) identification of efforts to expand capacity at west
coast installations, including Joint Base Lewis-McChord and
Naval Station Everett, the timelines for such actions, and any
infrastructure recapitalization requirements that might be
needed to accommodate said expansions;
(5) identification of the Department of Defense component
responsible for addressing each high-priority readiness
degrader;
(6) an assessment of whether current budget submissions and
resource allocations adequately address the highest-priority
readiness risks identified in the brief; and
(7) recommended actions to mitigate identified readiness
risks, including: (A) actions that can be taken using existing
authorities; and (B) actions that may require additional
resources or authorities.
Integration of Supply Chain Scenario Planning into Joint and Service-
Level Wargames
The committee recognizes that operational readiness depends
not only on force structure and logistics planning, but also on
the ability of the defense industrial base to sustain
operations under contested conditions. The committee notes that
while joint and service-level wargames rigorously examine
operational concepts and adversary actions, they often do not
fully account for dynamic supply chain disruptions, industrial
capacity constraints, or cascading effects across the global
industrial base.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, to integrate supply chain scenario planning into
joint and service-level wargames and campaign analyses,
beginning not later than fiscal year 2027.
The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit an initial report to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 31, 2026, describing the
Department's approach to integrating supply chain scenario
planning into joint wargames. The report shall include the
following:
(1) a description of how supply chain disruption scenarios
are incorporated into joint wargames, including the types of
disruptions modeled, such as single source, foreign dependency,
geopolitical risk, supplier capacity constraints, and the
quantitative analysis and prioritization of how to address such
risk with increased operational readiness as the driving
metric;
(2) an explanation of how supply chain scenarios influence
operational decisions during wargames, including impacts on
force employment, sustainment prioritization, surge
assumptions, acquisition trade-offs, use of commercial surge
capacity, or assessments of campaign risk;
(3) a summary of key insights generated through scenario-
based analysis, including examples where industrial base
constraints materially affected operational feasibility,
timelines, or outcomes;
(4) an assessment of analytical gaps or limitations
encountered when modeling supply chain impacts during wargames,
including challenges related to access to supplier data, data
integration, modeling fidelity, or decision support; and
(5) a plan to institutionalize supply chain scenario
planning across joint and service-level wargames, including any
requirements for analytical tools, integration with existing
wargaming infrastructure, or designation of organizational
responsibility.
Marine Corps Aviation Improved Asset Availability
The committee is aware of an artificial intelligence pilot
program initiated in the Marine Corps through the 2nd Marine
Aircraft Wing (MAW) to address perennial challenges in asset
availability starting with the MV-22B Osprey platform. This
program will capture and analyze siloed data, providing the
Marine Corps with actionable insight on predictive asset
component failure, optimal maintenance operations and resource
availability, and efficient maintenance scheduling and
inventory assessments.
The committee recognizes the significant challenges
affecting the air wings and supports efforts to utilize
commercial artificial intelligence to increase readiness and
free up critical man hours to devote to the mission. The
committee is also aware that there are unique distinctions
between Naval Air structure and Marine Corps aviation
structure, often warranting differences in data standards.
Further, the committee believes that there is additional value
to be gained from a holistic view of the integration of
disparate data sources and onboard sensors.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commandant of the
Marine Corps to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than December 1, 2026, on the
following:
(1) any plans to standardize the processes and data
established through the commercial artificial intelligence
program and explore adding sensor data sources to streamline
adoption and realize greater value; and
(2) any plans to expand this capability across the marine
aviation enterprise and identify required resources necessary
in advance of the Fiscal Year 2028 budget request.
Modernization of Threat Replication Capabilities at the Southwest
Tactical Training Range
The committee recognizes the importance of the Southwest
Tactical Training Range in supporting Marine Corps aviation
training, test and evaluation, and Fleet Marine Force
readiness, including the Weapons and Tactics Instructor course
conducted by Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One
and operational test activities conducted by Marine Operational
Test and Evaluation Squadron One. The committee is concerned
that existing threat emitter and replication systems at the
range may not adequately replicate modern peer and near-peer
integrated air defense systems, limiting the ability of Marine
aviation units to train against realistic, frequency-agile,
multi-domain threat environments.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 15, 2027, on requirements and plans to modernize
threat replication capabilities at the Southwest Tactical
Training Range. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of current threat emitter, visual
modification, and integrated air defense replication
capabilities at the range, including system age, operability,
reprogrammability, mobility, integration, and training realism;
(2) an assessment of gaps between current range
capabilities and the training, test, and evaluation
requirements of Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron
One, Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron One, and
Fleet Marine Force units;
(3) an evaluation of options to field modern,
reprogrammable, mobile, and integrated threat replication
systems, including radar signal emulator capabilities, visual
replicas, digital integrated air defense system architecture,
and live, virtual, and constructive integration;
(4) an assessment of whether an initial training capability
could be fielded to complement existing range systems while
supporting a phased modernization approach;
(5) a cost, schedule, and acquisition strategy for fielding
initial and objective threat replication capabilities,
including opportunities to leverage systems already deployed or
being procured for other major tactical training ranges; and
(6) recommendations for prioritizing range modernization
investments needed to improve realistic training against peer
and near-peer integrated air defense threats.
Naval Autonomous Data Collection System Support to Navy Readiness
The committee notes that Naval Autonomous Data Collection
System (NADACS) provides a critical digital link between
physical logistics processes and enterprise business systems,
enabling more accurate and timely data for commanders, sailors,
and civilian personnel. NADACS has demonstrated significant
reductions in manual material management workloads and improved
asset visibility, contributing to cost savings, streamlined
maintenance operations, and enhanced naval readiness.
The committee supports the use of NADACS across the Navy,
including at the public shipyards, including at Norfolk Naval
Shipyard. Given Norfolk's size and the historic challenges
associated with material tracking at the yard, the committee
believes that accelerating implementation will generate
immediate readiness benefits and inform expansion across
additional locations. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the disposition of NADACS. The brief shall include:
(1) a status update on the expansion of NADACS at Norfolk
Naval Shipyard and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard;
(2) projected benchmarks for fiscal year 2027; and
(3) any impediments or risks that may impact timely
execution of program objectives.
Naval Information Warfare Center Atlantic
The committee strongly supports the mission of the Naval
Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic and affirms the
critical role of its New Orleans operations in delivering
advanced expeditionary tactical capabilities and enterprise IT
and business systems. The committee appreciates the interim
response from the Navy regarding its long-term plans for NIWC
Atlantic and encourages the Navy to follow through on the
directive to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services
Committee pursuant to House Report 119-231.
The committee remains committed to ensuring that NIWC
Atlantic has the facilities and resources required to fulfill
its vital mission and urges the Department to keep the
congressional defense committees informed of any future
developments that could materially affect the Navy's presence
in New Orleans.
Navy Surge Capacity Stress Testing and Indo-Pacific Supply Chain
Resilience
The committee notes the importance of identifying specific
problems, Navy actions, and unresolved shortfalls in the Navy's
ability to surge wartime sustainment capacity, including
vulnerabilities to disruption of the flow of goods through the
South China Sea, Taiwan Strait, Straits of Malacca, and
Singapore Gateway.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Wartime Acquisition Sustainment Support
Plan Naval Advisory Board (WASSP-NAB), to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than September
1, 2027, on the Navy's efforts to stress test surge capacity
and improve Indo-Pacific supply chain resilience. The report
shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of whether the Navy has conducted
realistic, live exercises with industry to stress test surge
capacity, supply chains, contracting tools, and workforce
responsiveness;
(2) an assessment of near-term demonstration projects
conducted or planned under existing contracting authorities to
measure speed, productivity, resource competition, and
workforce stability when wartime demand in the USINDOPACOM area
of responsibility pressurizes the system;
(3) an identification of chokepoints and single points of
failure in the system for both goods and labor, and steps taken
or planned to create redundancies and improve resilience; and
(4) an assessment of delays, chokepoints, and single points
of failure that could result from a disruption to the flow of
goods through the South China Sea, Taiwan Strait, Straits of
Malacca, and Singapore Gateway.
Navy Wartime Sustainment Capacity in the Indo-Pacific
The committee notes the importance of Navy readiness to
support sustained combat operations in the U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command (USINDOPACOM) area of responsibility, including the
capacity of naval shipyards, regional maintenance centers,
depots, aircraft maintenance facilities, and civilian
industrial capacity to maintain, repair, and rearm ships and
aircraft during a conflict.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Wartime Acquisition Sustainment Support
Plan Naval Advisory Board (WASSP-NAB), to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than March 1,
2027, on Navy readiness to support sustained combat operations
in the USINDOPACOM area of responsibility. The report shall
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the capacity of the United States Navy
and the defense industrial base, including naval shipyards,
regional maintenance centers, depots, aircraft maintenance
facilities, and civilian capacity, to maintain, repair, and
rearm ships and aircraft in the event of a war in the
USINDOPACOM area of responsibility;
(2) an assessment of whether the Navy has a credible plan
to adequately surge wartime sustainment capabilities to support
the force structure required for sustained combat operations in
the Indo-Pacific region; and
(3) an assessment of the Navy's capacity to project a
credible deterrent, including whether ships would sustain
operational capability throughout a conflict or experience
degraded capability due to gaps and bottlenecks in sustainment
and supply within the USINDOPACOM area of responsibility.
Next Generation Weapon Systems Propellant Transportation Review
The committee recognizes that there are critical
propellants, such as hydrazine and high-test hydrogen peroxide
(HTP), that are necessary for critical technologies such as
hypersonic weapons, responsive space capabilities, reaction
control systems, and in-space propulsion architectures. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment and the Undersecretary for Personnel and Readiness,
to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2027, which may contain a classified
annex, on the Department of Defense policies, guidance, and
interagency coordination mechanisms governing the
transportation, storage, and handling of hydrazine and high-
test hydrogen peroxide in support of planning and operational
requirements. The briefing shall:
(1) assess the extent to which existing transportation
regulations and implementing guidance constrain rapid
mobilization, surge production, and forward deployment of
systems reliant on hydrazine and HTP, including hypersonic
weapons and national security space platforms;
(2) evaluate current domestic and international
transportation pathways (air, land, and sea), including
reliance on commercial carriers authorized under hazardous
materials regulations, and identify single points of failure or
chokepoints that could impede operations in a contested
logistics environment;
(3) examine advances in certified packaging, vented
containment systems, non-reactive materials, leak detection,
and other risk-mitigation technologies that may enable expanded
or expedited transport consistent with safety standards;
(4) identify statutory, regulatory, or policy changes--
whether within the Department's authority or requiring
interagency or legislative action--that would improve
flexibility while maintaining appropriate safety and
environmental protections;
(5) assess coordination with the Department of
Transportation and relevant international regulatory bodies to
determine whether updated risk models, threat assessments, or
national security waivers are warranted for defense-unique
applications; and
(6) provide recommendations to ensure that logistics
planning for hydrazine and HTP is integrated into operational
plans, industrial base assessments, and munitions and space
resilience strategies.
Readiness Data and System Integration
The committee recognizes that readiness-related information
is generated across training, operational, personnel,
maintenance, and logistics systems. The committee is concerned
that fragmentation among these systems may limit the
Department's ability to assess readiness and support force
generation.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a brief to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on options to integrate readiness-relevant data and systems,
including:
(1) an assessment of existing systems and processes used to
collect, manage, and analyze readiness-related data, and
whether these adequately incorporate data from training,
operational, personnel, maintenance, and logistics systems;
(2) identification of barriers to integrating training,
operational, personnel, maintenance, and logistics data and
systems;
(3) recommendations to improve integration of readiness-
related data and systems, including through the use of new
technologies or approaches; and
(4) any governance, technical, or resource challenges
associated with integrating readiness-related data and systems.
Readiness Report to Host F-15EX
The committee recognizes that the Department of the Air
Force has identified several bases as candidates to receive F-
15EX aircraft. As such, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Air Force in coordination with the Assistant Secretary for
Energy, Installations, and Environment to commission a report
to the House Armed Services Committee and Senate Armed Services
Committee not later than January 31, 2027, on the readiness of
each of these bases for which the Administration has not
affirmed additional F-15EX aircraft. This report should include
the following, and shall encapsulate information from the
moment of the initial identification of the Air Force:
(1) An assessment of runways and corresponding
infrastructure;
(2) An assessment of hangar availability and capacity;
(3) An assessment of training capabilities and
infrastructure specifically for F-15EX aircraft;
(4) An assessment of operational, maintenance, and other
support infrastructure for these aircraft and associated
weapons; and,
(5) An assessment of how the Department of the Air Force is
going to ensure that bases identified to receive F-15EXs are
able to maintain readiness rates and pipeline training prior to
the delivery of the aircraft.
Space Electronic Warfare Training and Readiness
The committee remains concerned that the United States
Space Force Electronic Warfare (EW) training and readiness
capability is not providing warfighters with a realistic
training platform. Additionally, the strategy for SATCOM EW
simulators and trainer development remains unclear. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Commander, United States Space Command,
to provide an unclassified briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than July 1, 2027, that articulates
the strategy to evaluate and advance a classified, integrated,
over-the-air space electronic warfare and cyber training
capability to train warfighters utilizing classified waveforms,
tactics, techniques, and procedures, and operational scenarios
in a live environment.
Space Launch On-Base Land and Facilities for Critical Parts and
Subsystems
The committee is aware that pursuant to 2667 of title 10,
United States Code, the Secretary of the Air Force, is
authorized to designate and make available on base land or
existing or facilities at Space Force Station launch sites, for
the establishment and operation of manufacturing activities
related to the production, testing, qualification, and
sustainment of thermal protection materials for Department of
Defense systems.
The committee supports exploring whether the development,
scaling, and domestic production of advanced and smart thermal
protection materials required for defense platforms operating
in extreme thermal environments is feasible at onbase space
launch facilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services no later than February 28, 2027, on the feasibility of
production of advanced and smart thermal protection materials
at on-site space launch sites. This briefing shall include, but
is not limited to:
(1) a list of facilities that could be designated to be
made available for pilot scale and production-representative
manufacturing; materials processing, inspection, and quality
assurance; testing and qualification activities; offsite
installation or subsystem preparation activities; Inspection,
refurbishment, and repair of reusable components; and workforce
training and technology transition efforts related to thermal
protection materials; and,
(2) options to partner with private industry, federally
funded research and development centers, or academic
institutions, including through lease agreements, cooperative
research and development agreements, or other authorities
available to the Department could support implementation.
Study on Emerging Technology to Eliminate Need for Burn Pits
The committee recognizes that servicemembers stationed at
contingency locations where open-air burn pits remain in use
face significantly elevated exposure risks from toxic
emissions, particularly in environments where no viable waste
disposal alternatives exist. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31, 2027, on
the Department's current use of alternative waste disposal
methods in locations utilizing burn pits, including:
(1) locations of alternative solid waste disposal systems
and its effectiveness; and
(2) locations with the greatest health and operational need
for an alternative to a burn pit.
Utilization of Class I Hazardous Waste Wells for PFAS Disposal at
Military Installations
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
confirmed per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
contamination at hundreds of current and former military
installations and that the pace of remediation remains a
significant concern. The committee recognizes that Class I
hazardous waste disposal wells may represent an underutilized
disposal pathway for PFAS-contaminated liquids and other
eligible waste streams.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on the
Department's use of Class I hazardous waste disposal wells as a
PFAS disposal pathway. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of how Class I hazardous waste disposal
wells are currently being utilized by the Department for PFAS
disposal, including the number of installations using such
wells and the volume and types of waste streams being disposed
of through this pathway;
(2) the feasibility and advisability of expanding
utilization of Class I hazardous waste disposal wells as part
of a comprehensive Department-wide PFAS remediation effort,
including any advantages relative to other available disposal
pathways; and
(3) an assessment of the costs associated with Class I
hazardous waste disposal well utilization.
Wireless Control and Monitoring Capabilities for the Expeditionary
Airfield Lighting System
The committee recognizes the importance of the
Expeditionary Airfield Lighting System (EALS) in supporting
Agile Combat Employment (ACE) and operations from austere and
dispersed airfields by providing energy-efficient lighting
capable of battery and solar operation. However, the committee
is concerned that, even when configured for standalone self-
power battery and solar operation, it continues to rely on
wired command and control cabling and lacks remote health and
status monitoring capability. This continued reliance on wired
systems could reduce deployment agility, increase logistics
burden, and constrain rapid reconfiguration of expeditionary
airfields. Similarly, the lack of remote health and status
monitoring could increase the risk of degradation and reduced
readiness when deployed.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than February 1, 2027, that includes:
(1) an overview of any plans to develop and/or procure
wireless control and monitoring capability into the EALS
program;
(2) any transition and acquisition strategies for
incorporating said wireless control and monitoring capability
into future EALS procurements, including key decision points
and a contracting approach; and
(3) an assessment of the feasibility, cost, and schedule
for upgrade kits or other retrofit approaches to enable
incorporation of wireless capability into previously fielded
systems.
Other Matters
Air Force Digital Warfare Innovation Center
The committee is aware of the resource challenges facing
the Department of the Air Force as it continues to balance
operational power projection requirements, modernize the
nuclear enterprise, and deter adversaries in the future.
Meeting these challenges requires the ability to conduct
advanced operational analytics, modeling and simulation, and
digitally enabled wargaming in support of Department-wide force
design, posture, and capability development decisions.
The committee recognizes and commends the Department's
efforts to develop these capabilities, noting the success of
Air Force Global Strike Command's (AFGSC) Highly Integrated
Visual Environment (HIVE) project. The committee is also aware
that AFGSC has access to existing, purpose-built facilities
designed to support operational analysis and wargaming efforts
at the highest levels of classification, like those which
currently host HIVE, and information-technology infrastructure
and collaborative workspaces that could support additional
operations.
The committee believes that accelerating the Department's
digital-analysis capacity, advanced wargaming capability, and
mission-engineering integration will better inform
congressional budget justifications as well as enable
analytically-grounded, operationally-relevant force design for
the 2027-2035 strategic environment.
In recognition of HIVE and these other analytic and
wargaming capabilities, the committee believes the Secretary of
the Air Force should consider establishing an Air Force Digital
Warfare Innovation Center (ADWIC) within the AFGSC whose roles
and responsibilities could include:
(1) conducting advanced operational analytics, modeling and
simulation, and digitally-enabled wargaming in support of
Department-wide force design, posture, and capability
development decisions;
(2) serving as the focal point for integrating operational
data, campaign analysis, and mission-engineering approaches to
inform senior leader decision-making;
(3) providing analytic support to cross-functional teams,
operational imperatives, and Air Force and joint force design
efforts as designated by AF/A5/7; and
(4) coordinating with AFGSC, Air Force Materiel Command,
MAJCOMs, and the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force to
accelerate decision advantage, digital integration, and
synergize artificial intelligence implementation across Air
Force analysis efforts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than January 1, 2027, on options to leverage
existing personnel, capabilities, and facilities within the
AFGSC to establish an ADWIC to serve as the Department of the
Air Force's primary analytic and wargaming organization in
direct support of force design and future capability
development efforts. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of the manning, funding, and
infrastructure requirements required to stand-up and operate
the ADWIC;
(2) an identification of necessary resourcing to support
analytic tool development, data accessibility, wargaming
capabilities, and mission-engineering integration;
(3) an identification of the military, civilian,
contractor, and technical-expertise requirements necessary to
achieve initial operational capability and full operational
capability;
(4) any necessary multi-year lease agreements needed to
establish and operate the ADWIC; and
(5) any recommendations for additional authorities or
resources that would be required to fully realize the mission
of the ADWIC.
Briefing on Implementation and Effectiveness of the Wicker-McCain
Surface Warfare Enhancement Act
The committee notes that the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232) incorporated provisions of the Wicker-McCain Surface
Warfare Enhancement Act, enacted in response to the Navy's
Comprehensive Review and Strategic Readiness Review following
the 2017 collisions involving the USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) and
the USS John S. McCain (DDG 56) that resulted in the deaths of
17 Sailors. Those provisions directed reforms to surface
warfare officer training and qualification, established minimum
at-sea and simulator-based training requirements for critical
watchstanding positions, required individual records of
watchstanding and training completion, equalized manning
between forward-deployed and CONUS-based surface combatants,
and strengthened oversight of surface ship maintenance and
readiness.
More than seven years have elapsed since enactment, and the
committee has not received a comprehensive assessment of
whether these reforms have achieved their intended outcomes.
The committee is concerned that high operational tempo,
persistent gaps in mariner-equivalent proficiency, and
continuing reliance on ad hoc at-sea training aboard
operationally tasked warships may be eroding the gains
contemplated by the Act. The committee further notes that
allied navies and U.S. maritime academies employ dedicated
training platforms to deliver structured at sea instruction
outside the operational deployment cycle.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in coordination with the Chief of Naval Operations, to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on the implementation, effectiveness,
and status of the provisions of the Wicker-McCain Surface
Warfare Enhancement Act. The briefing shall include, at a
minimum:
(1) a section-by-section status update on each provision,
including those fully implemented, partially implemented, or
deferred, with rationales;
(2) measurable outcomes attributable to the Act since
fiscal year 2019, including trends in surface warfare officer
qualification timelines, watchstander proficiency, mishap and
near-miss rates, and surface combatant readiness ratings;
(3) the Navy's methodology for tracking compliance with the
at-sea and simulator-based training minimums, average and
median at-sea training hours completed prior to qualification
as Officer of the Deck (Underway) and Surface Warfare Officer,
and any identified shortfalls;
(4) whether current at-sea training opportunities aboard
deployed and nondeployed surface combatants are sufficient in
volume, frequency, and quality to meet the proficiency
standards contemplated by the Act, and any structural
impediments;
(5) the impact of surface fleet operational tempo on the
execution and quality of surface warfare training, including
the frequency with which scheduled training events are
deferred, shortened, or cancelled due to operational tasking,
and the cumulative effect on watchstander proficiency and
qualification timelines;
(6) the use, availability, and adequacy of dedicated
training assets within the surface warfare training pipeline,
including comparison with dedicated training vessels used by
allied navies and U.S. and State maritime academies, and the
Navy's view on the feasibility, costs, benefits, and trade-offs
of expanded use of dedicated training ships;
(7) the status of efforts to equalize manning between
forward-deployed and CONUS-based surface combatants, including
current fit and fill rates by ship class and homeport; and
(8) the Secretary's recommendations for legislative,
programmatic, or resourcing changes to strengthen surface
warfare training, qualification, and readiness, including any
relating to the establishment, acquisition, or expanded use of
dedicated training platforms.
Coast Guard Fixed-Wing Aviation in Guam
The committee notes that United States Coast Guard Sector
Guam is responsible for an expansive area of operations across
the Western Pacific, including some of the Nation's most
strategically significant maritime approaches and exclusive
economic zones. The committee further recognizes the
operational importance of Coast Guard long-range fixed-wing
aviation assets, including the C130 Hercules, for maritime
domain awareness, search and rescue, logistics support,
fisheries enforcement, disaster response, and deterrence
activities throughout the Indo-Pacific region.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Commandant of the United States
Coast Guard, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Commander of
Anderson Air Force Base, to provide a briefing to the House
Armed Services Committee not later than July 1, 2027, on the
feasibility and advisability of permanently basing Coast Guard
fixed-wing aviation assets at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam.
The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of existing infrastructure and facility
requirements necessary to support Coast Guard fixed-wing
aviation operations at Andersen Air Force Base;
(2) an evaluation of any operational benefits associated
with basing aircraft such as the C-130 Hercules in Guam;
(3) an assessment of maintenance, logistics, personnel, and
hangar requirements; and
(4) any other matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Counter-Unmanned Systems Protections for Naval Installations
The committee remains concerned by the demonstrated
effectiveness of unmanned surface and aerial systems in recent
international conflicts and the implications of these tactics
for the security of United States naval infrastructure. The
committee notes that the increasing availability and lethality
of unmanned systems heightens the vulnerability of naval ports
and other critical shore installations to disruptive or
destructive attacks. The committee is aware that emerging
counter-unmanned systems technologies, including high-power
microwave systems, may offer scalable and cost-effective
defensive options to protect naval installations against
unmanned surface and aerial threats.
The committee directs the Chief of Naval Operations, in
coordination with the Commander, Navy Installations Command, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on efforts to protect naval
installations from unmanned systems threats. The briefing
should include:
(1) a review of current requirements governing the
protection of naval ports and shore installations against
unmanned systems threats;
(2) an analysis of counter-unmanned systems capabilities
currently deployed at Navy installations, including any
identified requirements shortfalls; and
(3) a plan to accelerate the evaluation and potential
deployment of emerging technologies, such as high-power
microwave systems, to enhance installation survivability
against unmanned systems threats.
Depot Use of Artificial Intelligence and Additive Manufacturing
Additive manufacturing technology has the promise for
military depots to manufacture for themselves hard-to-obtain
military spare parts, especially those where commercial sources
of supply are unable to meet Department of Defense needs.
Additionally, the Department increasingly has new opportunities
to use artificial intelligence (AI) to help predict when weapon
systems need to be sent to a depot for preventative maintenance
and repairs. However, it is unclear whether the Department is
prepared to adopt these technologies at scale.
To assist in congressional oversight as to the use of
additive manufacturing and artificial intelligence in depot
maintenance planning and operations, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees by May 1, 2027 as to the
Department's use of additive manufacturing and AI technologies
at the military depots. This report shall:
(1) describe Department of Defense's current use of
additive manufacturing and AI technologies for depot planning
and operations;
(2) assess the extent to which adopting these technologies
have affected planning and operations;
(3) evaluate Department of Defense's plans to scale up the
use of these technologies at its depots; and
(4) include any other matters the Comptroller General
determines to be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services no
later than April 1, 2027 on preliminary observations from the
ongoing review and on planned reporting formats and schedules.
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships
The committee recognizes the importance of naval history to
sailors and their families alike. The Dictionary of American
Naval Fighting Ships is the official reference work on the
basic facts about ships commissioned by the United States Navy
since October 13, 1775. The committee is concerned that the
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships is severely out of
date.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1,
2027, on efforts to update the Dictionary of American Naval
Fighting Ships. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) timeline;
(2) scope of project; and
(3) existing and proposed budget needed to update the
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships within five years.
F-15EX Homeland Defense Mission Assurance
The committee acknowledges the critical national security
importance of the National Guard's Aerospace Control Alert
mission as a cost-effective, highly versatile force capable of
performing air superiority, homeland defense and deterring
foreign aggression. However, as the committee noted in National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31): ``Given the rising challenges posed by near-peer
competitors such as Russia and China, and operational
deployment commitments that may occur in other, less than
highly contested threat environments, the committee is
concerned that the shrinking of the fighter fleet, and
particularly the loss of force structure and manpower resources
in the Air National Guard, poses a serious national security
challenge.'' The committee acknowledges that current F-15C and
other fighters are aging and must be replaced as soon as
possible with a contemporary fighter aircraft in all Air Force
Wings.
As such, the committee remains concerned that F-15C/D
aircraft assigned to Air National Guard units with aerospace
control and sovereignty responsibilities are well past their
planned lifespan and urgently need to be replaced. While each
of these units has been selected by the Air Force to receive
either the newer F-15EX or the F-35A, timelines to replace the
current aircraft are strained and could result in the units
losing some or all of their aircraft due to obsolescence before
the new aircraft arrive, placing the defense of the homeland at
an unacceptable risk.
The committee realizes the significant demand for the new
F-15EX aircraft, including the active-duty aircraft requirement
at Kadena Air Base, Japan, requirements for Air National Guard
operational units, and requirements for the Fleet Training
Unit. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services
Committee by January 31, 2027, on the plan for fielding the F-
15EX and F-35A to Air National Guard installations. This
briefing should include:
(1) an overall assessment of the advisability of fielding
F-15EX and F-35A to Air National Guard installations, and the
timeline of such Air National Guard installations to receive
such aircraft;
(2) an assessment of the risk to the homeland associated
with delaying or diverting F-15EX and F-35A from such Air
National Guard installations;
(3) the Air Force's plan to prevent identified units from
losing some or all of their aircraft due to obsolescence before
the new aircraft arrive; and
(4) the Air Force's plan to maintain funding for
operations, maintenance, unit personnel, and weapons system
sustainment of current aircraft until the arrival of the new
aircraft.
Joint Safety Council Review
In response to findings from the National Commission on
Military Aviation Safety, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) established the
Joint Safety Council (``Council'') in the Office of the
Secretary of Defense. According to its charter, the Council
focuses on mitigating safety risks and reducing mishaps,
including aviation, afloat, ground maneuver, tactical weapons
and equipment systems, and infrastructure support. In addition,
the Defense Safety Oversight Council provides governance over
Department-wide efforts to reduce mishaps, incidents, and
occupational illnesses and injuries. Separately, the Military
Departments operate safety commands with the mission to
preserve readiness and resources through mishap prevention
programs and risk management strategies.
However, the Military Departments continue to experience
serious accidents in operational and training settings that
have resulted in the loss of life and the damage or destruction
of defense systems. These accidents raise questions about the
effectiveness of the Joint Safety Council among other
Department of Defense (DOD) entities in mitigating safety risks
and preventing accidents. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees by May 1, 2027 that assess
DOD's implementation of the Joint Safety Council. The report
should address:
(1) the status of completed, ongoing, and planned
activities of the Joint Safety Council and how are these
similar and dissimilar with the activities of the Defense
Safety Oversight Council and the Military Department safety
commands;
(2) the extent the Joint Safety Council has the authorities
and resources necessary to perform its activities; and
(3) any other matters the Comptroller General determines to
be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the House Committee on Armed Services no later than April
1, 2027 on preliminary observations from the ongoing review and
on planned reporting formats and schedules.
Modernization and Sustainment of the Navy Department Library
The committee recognizes that the Navy Department Library
maintains one of the Department of the Navy's most significant
repositories of naval, maritime, operational, and strategic
records. The committee is concerned that rapid changes in
technology may require modernization of the library's
capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the modernization,
sustainment, and future development of the Navy Department
Library. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) an assessment of the current mission, staffing,
collections, facilities, and digital infrastructure of the Navy
Department Library;
(2) a description of current and future efforts to digitize
historical collections, operational archives, technical
publications, and rare naval materials;
(3) a description of efforts to incorporate modern search
technologies, artificial intelligence-enabled research tools,
and digital knowledge-management capabilities into library
operations;
(4) an assessment of preservation requirements for rare
books, manuscripts, and other historically significant naval
materials;
(5) a description of partnerships with other Federal
libraries, academic institutions, museums, archives, and
nonprofit organizations to expand research of naval history;
(6) an evaluation of whether current resourcing and
organizational authorities are sufficient to support long-term
modernization and expansion of the library's capabilities; and
(7) any recommendations for legislative or administrative
action to strengthen the Navy Department Library.
National Guard Museum of the United States
The committee notes the lack of a national museum for the
National Guard. The committee recognizes the National Guard's
unique role as both a State and Federal force and its
contributions to every major conflict, domestic emergency, and
homeland defense mission throughout the Nation's history.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility
of establishing a National Guard Museum of the United States.
The briefing shall include--
(1) potential concepts, missions, and governance structures
for such a museum;
(2) options for the design, construction, operation, and
sustainment of the museum through entirely private funding
sources;
(3) the feasibility of establishing one or more nonprofit
foundations or supporting organizations to solicit, receive,
and manage private donations for the museum;
(4) mechanisms by which a privately financed and
constructed museum could be transferred to the possession of
the National Guard upon completion;
(5) ideal characteristics of potential locations and
facility requirements;
(6) any recommendations for legislative action necessary to
facilitate the establishment, operation, or long-term
sustainment of such a museum; and
(7) such other matters as the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau considers appropriate.
Preservation of World War II-Era Aircraft in Department of the Navy
Historic Collection and/or World War II-era Aircraft Crash Wreckages
The committee recognizes the profound contributions of
American naval aviators during World War II and the lasting
importance of preserving the aircraft they flew. As the number
of surviving veterans of that conflict continues to decline,
the aircraft that remain in the Department of the Navy's
possession serve as tangible, irreplaceable links to a defining
era in American and world history.
The committee emphasizes that these aircraft are national
assets and must be treated with the respect appropriate to
their historical value. These aircraft are not only critical to
honoring those who served but also to inspiring future
generations with the legacy of service and sacrifice.
The committee is concerned that many of these historically
significant aircraft, particularly those produced prior to
December 31, 1945, are currently housed on external display
and/or are abandoned as wartime crash wreckages still under
Department of the Navy ownership and control. These aircraft
are at increasing risk of irreversible degradation due to
environmental exposure. Without urgent action to relocate these
aircraft into indoor, climate-controlled environments, their
long-term preservation may no longer be viable.
The committee supports the Department of the Navy's
stewardship of these artifacts to ensure their preservation for
future generations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by December 31, 2026 on the Secretary's plan to
relocate, preserve, and sustain its World War II-era aircraft
currently on external display, while also seeking policy
reforms that will allow properly qualified American museum
entities to recover abandoned World War II era crash wreckages
that are not deemed to be wartime aircrew graves. The briefing
should address the following:
(1) A plan to initiate the phased relocation of historic
aircraft produced prior to December 31, 1945, from external to
indoor display facilities specifically including F4F and FM1/2
Wildcats, F6F Hellcats, F4U/FG-1 Corsairs, SBD Dauntlesses,
SB2C Helldivers, PBJs (B-25s), P2Bs (B-29s), JD-1s (A-26s), PBY
Catalinas, PB4Y Privateers, R4Ds (C47s), R5Cs (C-46s), SNBs (C-
45s), and SNJs.
(2) A proposed prioritization framework for relocation,
favoring institutions such as the National Naval Aviation
Museum, National Museum of the Marine Corps, the Smithsonian
National Air and Space Museum, National Naval Aviation Museum
affiliated partner museums, National Museum of the Marine
Corps-affiliated partner museums, other Department of Defense
service museums, and national air museums of allied and partner
nations;
(3) A plan for modifying or superseding existing loan
agreements that only permit external display, in order to favor
applicants with: (a) indoor, climate-controlled display
capabilities; (b) demonstrated ability to conduct historical
restoration and preservation; and (c) public access
commitments;
(4) An assessment of opportunities for artifact trades to
enhance the National Naval Aviation Museum and National Museum
of the Marine Corps collections or broader Department of the
Navy heritage efforts;
(5) A long-term framework for the de-accessioning of at-
risk aircraft that cannot be preserved under these conditions
within 5 years, including authority to: (a) offer such aircraft
for sale with proceeds directed to National Naval Aviation
Museum and/or National Museum of the Marine Corps activities;
(b) transfer aircraft on an as-is, where-is basis, with no cost
or guarantee of condition to the Department of the Navy; and
(c) remove end-use restrictions from de-accessioned assets;
(6) A plan for the Department of the Navy to revise its
World War II era abandoned aircraft crash wreckage ownership
policy to allow U.S. 501-C3 museum entities to gain ownership
for such artifacts upon recovery, which will allow for
preservation, restoration, and indoor display. Such plan should
specifically exclude aircraft crash wreckages that are known
aircrew grave sites. It includes World War II-era crash
wreckages on land, in lakes, and in the world's oceans.
(7) A determination as to whether aircraft produced prior
to December 31, 1945, may be destroyed, scrapped, or otherwise
damaged by the Department of the Navy; and
(8) A process for granting waivers for continued external
display where environmental conditions, such as those in arid
regions, significantly reduce the risk of corrosion and
physical decay.
Radio Frequency and Electro-Magnetic Field Protective Clothing for
Military Aircrew
The committee recognizes that modern aircraft cockpits are
increasingly saturated with high-intensity Radio Frequency (RF)
and Electro-Magnetic Field (EMF) radiation which could
adversely impact cognitive performance, operational readiness,
and force retention. The committee understands that the Air
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) is currently evaluating
passive textile systems that could block RF/EMF exposure, be
integrated seamlessly with fielded Aircrew Flight Equipment
(AFE), be immediately deployable without cockpit modifications,
and be flight-ready by late 2026.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2026, on the initial
findings of the AFRL study. The briefing should include:
(1) any plans to mitigate aircrew exposure; and
(2) a military utility assessment (MUA) of the passive
textile protective clothing across wing-level units operating
bomber, fighter, mobility, special operations, and training
aircraft.
Resources Available to Servicemembers for Rescue and Transportation of
Animals Encountered During Deployment
The committee recognizes that some members of the Armed
Forces serving outside the United States develop bonds with
cats and dogs encountered during deployment and may seek
assistance with the rescue, care, documentation, importation,
and transportation of such animals to the United States. The
committee further recognizes that nongovernmental and private-
sector organizations currently perform much of this work, but
is concerned that servicemembers may not have clear, consistent
information regarding available resources, applicable public
health requirements, and potential sources of assistance.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 15, 2027, on resources available to members
of the Armed Forces serving outside the United States who seek
assistance with the lawful rescue and transportation of cats
and dogs to the United States. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of existing Department, military service,
installation, veterinary, transportation, legal assistance,
public health and family support resources relevant to
servicemembers seeking information on animal rescue, care,
documentation, importation, or transportation;
(2) an assessment of nongovernmental and private sector
organizations that commonly provide servicemembers assistance
with veterinary care, medical documentation, quarantine or
boarding, importation requirements, transportation, fostering,
adoption, or reunion with animals befriended during deployment;
(3) an assessment of how information regarding available
resources, public health requirements, and lawful importation
processes is communicated to servicemembers before, during, and
after deployment; and
(4) an identification of gaps, inconsistencies, or barriers
that may prevent servicemembers from identifying or accessing
lawful assistance, including documentation, public health,
transportation, host-nation, cost, command approval, and timing
challenges.
Sun Protection Policy for Military Field Units
The committee is aware that skin cancer is the most
prevalent cancer diagnosed among active-duty servicemembers,
with military personnel experiencing significantly elevated
melanoma rates relative to the general population due to
sustained occupational exposure to ultraviolet radiation across
high-ultraviolet environments including deployed locations and
CONUS installations in the Southwest and Pacific.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 31, 2027, on current Department of Defense
policies governing sun protection for military field units and
recommendations for improvement. The briefing should include
the following:
(1) the criteria and ultraviolet exposure thresholds that
would trigger mandatory issuance of sun protection products to
field units, including deployed forces and units conducting
sustained outdoor operations at high-ultraviolet CONUS
installations;
(2) an evaluation of individually sealed, single-use packet
formats as a means of improving point-of-need compliance in
operational and field training environments, informed by
available compliance data and operational suitability
requirements;
(3) an assessment of current Defense Logistics Agency
supply chain capacity to procure and distribute sun protection
products at scale, including existing National Stock Number
cataloguing and bulk pricing mechanisms; and
(4) recommendations for any updates to field hygiene
regulations, individual equipment standards, or unit supply
procedures across the military departments needed to improve
sun protection compliance among field units.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 301--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize appropriations for operation
and maintenance activities at the levels identified in section
4301 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment
Sec. 311--Inclusion of Nuclear Energy in Energy Policy of Department of
Defense and Related Matters
This section would amend sections 2911 and 2915 of title
10, United States Code, to include nuclear energy sources in
the energy policy of the Department of Defense and matters
relating to the use of energy for Department facilities.
Sec. 312--Modification to Pilot Program on Navy Installation Nuclear
Energy
This section would modify section 321 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (119-60) to
require the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy,
Installations, and Environment to consider a minimum capacity
of 20 megawatts when selecting nuclear reactors for use in the
pilot program.
Sec. 313--Standardized Document on Scope of Projects Carried Out Under
Military Munitions Response Program
This section would require the Department to establish a
standardized scope document for each Military Munitions
Response Program project, including cost and schedule
estimates, risk summaries, and certified approval prior to task
order issuance.
Sec. 314--Pilot Program for Secure Recycling of Domestic Electronic
Waste
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a pilot program to evaluate the use of domestic,
integrated electronic waste recycling infrastructure to support
the secure destruction of data and the recovery of critical
materials from electronic equipment of the Department of
Defense and submit a report to the congressional defense
committees on the results of the pilot program.
Sec. 315--Program for Deployment of Transportable Nuclear Microreactor
in Area of Responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
commence a program for the deployment, operation, and
evaluation of a transportable nuclear microreactor in the area
of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command.
Sec. 316--Prohibition on Operation of Connected Vehicles Designed,
Developed, Manufactured, or Supplied by Persons Owned by, Controlled
by, or Subject to the Jurisdiction of a Foreign Entity of Concern on
Department of Defense Property
This section would limit the use of certain vehicles on
military installations.
Sec. 317--Pilot Program on Off-Grid Tactical Power
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a pilot program on employing expeditionary off-grid
power generation capabilities across the Joint Force.
Sec. 318--Clarification of Certain Authorities Independent From
Designated Executive Agent for Installation or Operational Nuclear
Energy
This section would provide clarification of authorities
regarding funds authorized to be appropriated for a military
department for advanced nuclear energy for installation or
operational energy capabilities and the allocation of nuclear
fuel among the military departments.
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment
Sec. 321--Requirement for Quarterly Reports on Munitions Inventory
Numbers
This section would amend section 222c of title 10, United
States Code, by adding a section that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a quarterly report setting forth current munitions
inventory numbers.
Sec. 322--Increase of Capital Investment Program Threshold for Working-
Capital Funds
This section would modify section 2208 of title 10, United
States Code, and consistently apply a $500,000 threshold to
working capital funds associated with capital improvements.
Sec. 323--Establishment of Civil Reserve Industrial Base
This section requires the Secretary of Defense to establish
the Civil Reserve Industrial Base program under which the
Secretary shall enter into agreements with covered commercial
facilities.
Sec. 324--Modification of Minimum Capital Investment for Certain Depots
of Department of Defense
This section would modify section 2476 of title 10, United
States Code by striking ``the preceding three fiscal years''
and inserting ``the preceding fiscal year, the current fiscal
year, and the estimated amount for the following fiscal year.''
Sec. 325--Expansion of Covered Depots to Include Crane Army Ammunition
Activity, Indiana
This section would modify section 2476 of title 10, United
States Code, and add Crane Army Ammunition Activity, Indiana to
the list of covered depots.
Sec. 326--Expansion of Space-Available Travel Program for Members of
the Armed Forces Stationed at United States Naval Station Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba
This section would amend section 2641b of title 10, United
States Code, to allow servicemembers on Active Duty to purchase
transportation on Department of Defense aircraft, at
commercially-competitive rates, for travel to and from Naval
Station Guantanamo Bay on a space-available basis.
Sec. 327--Authorization of Sustainable Aviation Fuel Procurement
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
procure sustainable aviation fuel for operational or training
purposes at a cost that exceeds the cost of conventional
petroleum based aviation fuel.
Sec. 328--Modification and Extension of Pilot Program on Optimization
of Aerial Refueling and Fuel Management in Contested Logistics
Environments Through Use of Artificial Intelligence
This section would amend section 346 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) to modify and extend the pilot program on optimization of
aerial refueling and fuel management in contested logistics
environments through use of artificial intelligence.
Sec. 329--Army Expansion of Production of 155mm Artillery Ammunition
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
expand and upgrade facilities of the Army used to produce
materials of 155mm ammunition to meet production capacity of
100,000 rounds per month and meet the Out-Year Unconstrained
Total Munitions Requirement. This section would require a
report from the Secretary of the Army including necessary
resources and timelines to reach production capacity and a plan
of sustainment for artillery ammunition as requirements
fluctuate.
Sec. 330--Requirements Relating to Aerial Refueling Capability of Air
Force Tanker Fleet
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to adopt certain requirements for the sustainment of the aerial
refueling tanker fleet and report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives on an
implementation plan for addressing sustainment challenges.
Sec. 331--Navy Containerized Expeditionary Advanced Manufacturing
Capabilities Pilot Program
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
carry out a pilot program to field, evaluate and assess
containerized expeditionary advanced manufacturing capabilities
and expand the use of additive manufacturing.
Sec. 332--Expansion of Transportation Services on Navy Installations
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
seek to enter into a contract with a public transportation
services provider for the purpose of expanding transportation
services available on Navy installations for members of the
Armed Forces and their families.
Sec. 333--Requirements Relating to Sustainment of A-10 Aircraft and
Related Training
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to provide to the congressional defense committees a cost-
benefit analysis prior to moving the A-10 formal training unit
to an alternate location. This section would also require the
Secretary to maintain, as necessary, sufficient training,
development, testing, evaluation, maintenance, sustainment, and
repair capacity to support the required A-10 aircraft fleet
until 2030. Finally, this section would require the Secretary
to preserve knowledge and history relating to the A-10
aircraft.
Sec. 334--Requirement for Standardized Munitions With Respect to
Certain Unmanned Aircraft
This section would establish standardized munitions for use
in one-way attack operations by covered unmanned aircraft.
Sec. 335--Requirement to Ensure Sufficiency of Naval Mine Inventory
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy, to
the maximum extent practicable, to ensure that the inventory of
naval mines of the Department of the Navy is sufficient to meet
validated operational requirements for not fewer than two
simultaneous major regional conflicts.
Subtitle D--Reports
Sec. 341--Strategy to Support Joint Strike Fighter Sustainment and
Maintenance in Contested Operating Environments
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a strategy to support the sustainment and maintenance
of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft in contested operating
environments.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 351--Establishment of Center for the Study of the National Guard
This section would establish the Center for the Study of
the National Guard.
Sec. 352--Disposition of Accountable Property in Designated Theaters of
Operation
This section would require the Department of Defense to
account for, justify, and mitigate the risks of U.S. military
equipment left, transferred, sold, or abandoned during major
withdrawals or force reposturing.
Sec. 353--Certification Requirement for Motor Carriers Transporting
Department of Defense Freight
This section would prohibit contracts for the
transportation of Department of Defense cargo from being
awarded to or performed by a motor carrier unless it submits a
certification that it is not owned by, controlled by, and has
no significant business relationships with any entity
identified on the most recent list of Chinese military
companies required under section 1260H of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Sec. 354--Establishment of National Security Registry for Motor
Carriers Handling Department of Defense Freight
This section would establish a Secure Defense Freight
Carrier Registry of motor carriers approved to transport
freight for the Department of Defense and prohibit motor
carriers from being able to bid on or perform a Department of
Defense freight transportation contract unless the motor
carrier is included in the registry.
Sec. 355--Protection of Property Owned, Possessed, or Shipped by the
Department of Defense from Lien, Arrest, or Seizure During Shipment
This section would add a new section to chapter 157 of
title 10, United States Code, to provide protections against
the lien, arrest, or seizure of property owned, possessed, or
shipped by the Department of Defense, including household
goods, privately owned vehicles, and other items shipped during
a permanent change of station.
Sec. 356--Establishment of United States Marine Corps Museum System
The section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
establish the United States Marine Corps museum system.
Sec. 357--Requirement for FireGuard Program
This section would require the FireGuard Program to be
mandatory.
Sec. 358--Pilot Program for Testing and Evaluation of Counter-Fire
Unmanned Fire Suppression Aircraft Systems on Military Installations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
commence a three year pilot program to conduct testing and
evaluation of counter-fire unmanned fire suppression and remote
sensing aircraft systems at military installations.
Sec. 359--Pilot Program on Data Collection and Analysis in Connection
with Army Combat Training Center Rotations
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
establish a pilot program to collect, store, and analyze
covered data generated during rotations of servicemembers at
combat training centers.
Sec. 360--Minimum Maritime Firefighting Capability Standards for Naval
Installations that Berth Large Naval Vessels
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
establish minimum maritime firefighting capability standards
for naval installations that berth large naval vessels.
Sec. 361--Minimum Staffing Requirements for Fire Apparatus at Certain
Space Force Installations
This section would ensure that all Space Force
installations with launch and landing facilities have the
minimum staffing requirements related to firefighting.
Sec. 362--Activities for Evaluating Integrating and Interoperability of
Technologies for Subterranean Operations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Army and the Commander
of the United States Special Operations Command, to conduct
recurring evaluation activities in subterranean environments
for the purpose of assessing the integration and
interoperability of technologies supporting operations in such
environments, including in conditions involving the denial or
degradation of the Global Positioning System (GPS) or other
contested communications conditions.
Sec. 363--Improvements to Osprey Aircraft Safety Efforts
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy and
the Secretary of the Air Force to improve management and
readiness of the Osprey aircraft fleet.
Sec. 364--Army Pilot Program on Electronic Ammunition Simulation for
Small Arms Training
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
carry out a pilot program to evaluate the integration of
electronic ammunition simulation systems into small arms
training across the Army.
Sec. 365--Pilot Program on Hydrophobin-Based Biomanufactured Treatment
as Flame-Resistant and Water-Repellent Treatments for Military Uniforms
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
establish a pilot program to evaluate the feasibility,
performance, and scalability of hydrophobin-based
biomanufactured treatments as flame-resistant and water-
repellent treatments for military textile systems, including as
potential alternatives to conventional chemical treatments
currently used in Department of Defense uniforms.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
Sec. 401--End Strengths for Active Forces
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Active Duty personnel of the Armed Forces as of September
30, 2027:
Sec. 401.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Change from
---------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2026 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2027 FY 2026
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................................... 454,000 469,000 469,000 0 15,000
Navy........................................... 344,600 356,600 356,600 0 12,000
USMC........................................... 172,300 173,700 173,700 0 1,400
Air Force...................................... 321,500 330,400 330,400 0 8,900
Space Force.................................... 10,400 13,200 13,200 0 2,800
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................... 1,302,800 1,342,900 1,342,900 0 40,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
Sec. 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Selected Reserve personnel, including the end strength for
Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves, as of
September 30, 2027:
Sec. 411.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Change from
---------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2026 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2027 FY 2026
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 328,000 331,300 331,300 0 3,300
Army Reserve................................... 172,000 172,000 172,000 0 0
Navy Reserve................................... 57,500 56,500 56,500 0 -1,000
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 33,600 34,700 34,700 0 1,100
Air National Guard............................. 106,300 107,400 107,400 0 1,100
Air Force Reserve.............................. 67,500 67,400 67,400 0 -100
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................... 764,900 769,300 769,300 0 4,400
Coast Guard Reserve............................ 8,500 8,500 8,500 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of the
Reserves
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves as of
September 30, 2027:
Sec. 412.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Change from
---------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2026 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2027 FY 2026
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 30,845 31,154 31,154 0 309
Army Reserve................................... 16,511 16,511 16,511 0 0
Navy Reserve................................... 10,409 10,409 10,409 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 2,400 2,400 2,400 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 25,982 25,533 25,533 0 -449
Air Force Reserve.............................. 6,218 6,278 6,278 0 60
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................... 92,365 92,285 92,285 0 -80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
2027:
Sec. 413.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Change from
---------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2026 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2027 FY 2026
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 21,294 21,294 21,294 0 0
Army Reserve................................... 6,258 6,258 6,258 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 10,405 10,405 10,405 0 0
Air Force Reserve.............................. 6,455 6,455 6,455 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................... 44,412 44,412 44,412 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 414--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized to be on
Active Duty for Operational Support
This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b)
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of Reserve
Component personnel who may be on Active Duty or full-time
National Guard duty during fiscal year 2027 to provide
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count
against the end strengths authorized by section 401 or section
412 of this Act unless the duration on Active Duty exceeds the
limitations in section 115(b)(2) of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 414.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Change from
---------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2026 Committee
Authorized Request Recom- FY 2027 FY 2026
mendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................ 17,000 17,000 17,000 0 0
Army Reserve................................... 13,000 13,000 13,000 0 0
Navy Reserve................................... 6,200 6,200 6,200 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve........................... 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 0
Air National Guard............................. 16,000 16,000 16,000 0 0
Air Force Reserve.............................. 14,000 14,000 14,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total.................................... 69,200 69,200 69,200 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 415--Authorized Strengths: Senior Enlisted Members on Active Duty
or on Full-Time National Guard Duty for Administration of the Marine
Corps Reserve
This section would authorize an increase in senior enlisted
members on active duty or on full-time national guard duty in
certain grades.
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 421--Military Personnel
This section would authorize appropriations for military
personnel at the levels identified in the funding table in
section 4401 of division D of this Act.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Acceptance Of State-Recognized Custody Documentation for Defense
Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System Enrollment
The committee is aware of concerns expressed by
servicemembers related to utilization of the Defense Enrollment
Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) and the administrative
hurdles that delay servicemembers and their families from
obtaining ID cards, TRICARE coverage, and access to other
important benefits.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on the Department of Defense's ability to
accept custody or placement documents that are legally valid
under all 54 state and territorial laws regardless of whether
it was signed by a judge, magistrate, or court clerk. This
briefing should include the following information:
(1) the DEERS policy for determining a dependent child's
eligibility for benefits administered by the Department of
Defense or the Defense Finance and Accounting Service;
(2) listing of valid legal documentation accepted by DEERS;
(3) listing of states that provide valid legal
documentation of custody or placement documents that differ
from the current DEERS policy;
(4) efforts DEERS can make to bridge the administrative
gaps to accommodate servicemembers and their families that move
across states for military assignments while ensuring respect
for state-recognized legal authority;
(5) identify any potential risks for fraud the
implementation of these changes may have;
(6) historical data on any administrative backlogs and the
cause of the backlogs for the past five years; and
(7) any other topics deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Access to Student Loan Cancellation for Eligible Servicemembers
The committee notes that servicemembers may be eligible for
several forms of federal student loan cancellation, including
but not limited to Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Total and
Permanent Disability discharge, and Borrower Defense to
Repayment. However, the committee recognizes that those who
qualify for student loan cancellation through such programs
face barriers, such as administrative red tape, mismanagement
by federal loan servicers, or a lack of knowledge about loan
cancellation programs, to receive benefits.
As such, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on U.S. servicemember access to
Federal student loan cancellation programs. This report should
include, but is not limited to, the following information:
(1) how often do eligible servicemembers receive Federal
student loan cancellation, broken down by loan cancellation
program;
(2) how do the Department of Defense and Department of
Education communicate with servicemembers about their student
loan cancellation options;
(3) what challenges do eligible servicemembers face in
obtaining student loan cancellation; and
(4) any recommendations for Congress and Federal agencies
to improve eligible servicemembers access to federal student
loan cancellation programs.
Active Duty Tuition Assistance
The committee applauds the Department of Defense's
continued commitment to Off-Duty and Voluntary Education and
Training through policy that honors the family of Title 10
statutes undergirding Service member off-duty learning
pursuits. However, the committee has concerns about the
efficiency, effectiveness, and scope of outcomes the Department
is able to achieve under current application of the
appropriation provided. DODs own reporting points to as much as
thirty or more percent of the annual appropriation being
directed toward nonstatutory programs and/or providers.
Further, the twenty-four-year moratorium on raising the per-
semester hour cap of $250 has caused non-tuition fees to
proliferate. Moreover, Service member out-of-pocket expenses
have risen dramatically through the Department's policy of not
including institutional fees as eligible expenses. The
committee believes these conditions have suppressed demand for
off-duty learning, thereby potentially impacting recruitment,
retention, and readiness (both mission readiness and transition
readiness), as well as impacting local, state, and regional
economies as fewer transitioning Service members emerge as
workforce-ready into our communities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family Policy
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed services on
the analysis of Off-Duty and Voluntary Education and Training
by March 1, 2027. The report will include fiscal, volume,
compliance, and distribution metrics. The report will also
provide metrics linking investment in the Off-Duty and
Voluntary Education accounts to outcomes including, but not
limited to educational attainment, recruitment/retention,
mission readiness, and transition readiness. Finally, the
report will include analysis of mutual fidelity to the three
applicable statutes 10 U.S.C. 2005, 2006a, 2007, plus analysis
of the severability of annual ceiling requirements from per-
semester-hour caps under 32 CFR part 68.
Active Guard and Reserve Service for Purposes of Veterans Benefit
The committee is aware of concerns raised by members of the
National Guard and Reserve components regarding inconsistencies
in the recognition and crediting Active Guard and Reserve (AGR)
service for purposes of eligibility for certain benefits. The
committee acknowledges that AGR members that frequently serve
alongside Active Component personnel under similar conditions
should have their service accurately accounted for and
credited.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
March 31, 2027, on existing statutes, regulations, and policies
governing the crediting of AGR service for the purposes of
eligibility for benefits administered by the Department of
Defense. This report shall include the following information:
(1) an assessment of how periods of AGR service are
currently categorized and documented for purposes of benefits
determinations;
(2) identification of any statutory or regulatory barriers
that limit the recognition of AGR service as qualifying Active
Duty for specific benefits;
(3) an evaluation of the extent to which full-time AGR
service that does not include overseas deployment is treated
differently from other forms of full-time active service; and
(4) recommendations for legislative or administrative
action to ensure that full-time AGR service is appropriately
recognized for purposes of benefits, consistent with
congressional intent and principles of equity across the Total
Force.
Administrative Separations for Shaving Profiles
The committee notes that the September 30, 2025, Directive
issued by the Secretary of Defense titled ``Grooming Standards
for Facial Hair'' removes permanent profiles for medical
conditions that impact a servicemember's ability to remain
clean shaven, the most common being pseudofolliculitis barbae
(PFB), and instead directs only temporary profiles be
considered. Per this directive, permanent conditions requiring
a shaving profile over 12 months will result in evaluation for
administrative separation. There is an increased prevalence of
PFB among servicemembers with tight curly hair, which are
predominantly non-Hispanic Black men and constitute over 60
percent of PFB cases in the military. The committee is
concerned that this directive will disproportionately impact
servicemembers with PFB. Therefore, the committee directs the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to
submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027, including the following:
(1) all involuntary separations in which a medical shaving
profile was cited as a contributing factor with demographic
information of each separated servicemember, to include age,
sex, race, grade, duty station, length of military service, and
any other information deemed relevant for reporting purposes;
(2) the effectiveness of medical mitigation measures and
educational resources provided to servicemembers requiring a
shaving profile, and any changes to policy based on emerging
trends and medical provider feedback;
(3) the effectiveness of medical mitigation measures and
educational resources provided to servicemembers requiring a
shaving profile; and
(4) any changes to policy based on emerging trends and
medical provider feedback.
Air Force Technical Training Capacity and Support
The committee notes that under current practice, Unit
Manning Document (UMD) authorizations primarily reflect
permanently assigned personnel, since there is no statutory
requirement or enterprise-wide methodology to account for the
sustained support demands generated by large rotational student
populations. Because Average Daily Load (ADL) reflects the
steady-state population physically present and requiring
installation support, inclusion of an appropriate percentage--
based on mission requirements, support demands, and cost
considerations--would improve the accuracy of manpower planning
for essential services such as housing, medical care,
logistics, security, and base operations.
To ensure Air Force training installations are resourced in
proportion to their enduring support workload, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1,
2027 on the feasibility of establishing a standardized
methodology for incorporating a designated percentage of each
installation's ADL into UMD authorizations to preserve
flexibility for the Air Force to adjust the applicable
percentage as operational conditions evolve, while ensuring
consistent recognition of the sustained workload generated by
rotational student populations essential to force readiness.
Army Command Matching Program
The committee understands that the Army Command Matching
Program has been used to facilitate certain personnel decisions
within the Department of the Army since March 5, 2026. The
committee is interested in further detail on how this program
has been implemented. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, that
includes the following:
(1) a list of Army commands and their installations that
were identified for participation in the Army Command Matching
Program;
(2) manning information for all commands that were subject
to the Army Command Matching Program, to include the job
description of identified surplus personnel and the job
description of any critical, unfilled vacancies;
(3) a description of how enabling technologies were used
for employee-to vacancy personnel matching in any part of the
Army Command Matching Program;
(4) the number of personnel who were matched and accepted
intra-command placement per command, including whether their
assigned installation changed;
(5) the number of personnel who were matched and accepted
cross-command placement per command, including whether their
assigned installation changed;
(6) the number of personnel that selected voluntary early
retirement or separation per command; and
(7) the total amount of money paid to those that selected
voluntary separation incentive pay.
Army E9 Training Timeline
The committee believes as the Army moves forward with its
Continuous Transformation initiative, it must examine all
legacy programs, including the process, timeframe, and cost of
training its most senior enlisted members. Historically, the
Army has mandated a selection process that sends Master
Sergeants selected for promotion to attend the U.S. Army
Sergeants Major Academy through the Noncommissioned Officer
Leadership Center of Excellence. However, the Army takes
exponentially longer to train and certify its E9 population
than the Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps. These services
require short courses, not longer than 6 weeks, with some
specialized training adding only a few weeks longer. The Army
requires 10 months of training and a full permanent change of
station (PCS) before these troops are even considered for
promotion. This has a major impact on military families who
must move a minimum of 2 times in 12 months. It also generates
a significant expense for the Army.
Therefore the committee directs the Chief of Staff of the
Army to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than May 1, 2027 that includes:
(1) an overview of the curriculum required at the US Army
Sergeant Major Course (SMC), including a month-to-month
breakdown of subject matter;
(2) an explanation of why the Army requires a much longer
timeline than other services for certifying the E9 population;
(3) an estimate of total PCS costs per soldier and
cumulative costs based on the average SMC class size;
(4) average length of service of Sergeants Major after
promotion from Master Sergeant; and
(5) impacts and challenges for military families upon
selection for in-resident SMC.
Authorized End Strength at the U.S. Air Force Academy
The committee notes that section 9442 of title 10, United
States Code, establishes an authorized strength of 4,400 cadets
for the Cadet Wing at the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA),
reflecting Congress intent to sustain a 4-year commissioning
pipeline sized to meet officer accession requirements. The
committee further notes that Cadet Wing end strength reached
approximately 4,500 cadets in the year preceding sequestration,
and that the Department of the Air Force subsequently reduced
the Cadet Wing to approximately 4,000 cadets through force-
management and resourcing decisions made during the
sequestration era and that these reductions persisted for years
thereafter.
The committee observes that, during the same period, the
U.S. Military Academy and the U.S. Naval Academy generally
remained at, or near, their statutory strength levels, and the
committee is concerned that the Department's decision to reduce
USAFA end strength imposed disproportionate risk on the Air
Force's officer accession pipeline.
The committee is concerned that sustained reductions in
Cadet Wing end strength may constrain the Air Force's ability
to meet future officer requirements and believes restoring and
sustaining USAFA end strength is necessary to preserve a
resilient accession base. The committee further notes that
maintaining a predictable commissioning pipeline is
increasingly important given evolving operational demands and
the need to support the growth and maturation of the U.S. Space
Force.
The committee supports the U.S. Air Force Academy Board of
Visitors recommendation to restore the Cadet Wing to 4,400
cadets and align resources accordingly and commends the
Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air
Force for their attention to this matter, including actions to
return USAFA to its statutory capacity. The committee intends
to work with the Department of the Air Force to ensure USAFA
has the resources needed to execute and sustain this end
strength, including faculty and support personnel, training and
support capacity, and facilities sustainment.
Briefing on Expanding Externships and Emerging Technology Opportunities
for Federal Scientists and Veterans
The Committee recognizes that maintaining the United
States' technological leadership requires both a strong defense
innovation workforce and effective pathways for transitioning
servicemembers to enter emerging technology industries. The
Committee further recognizes that federal scientists and
program managers are best positioned to serve the American
people when they better understand how the private sector
operates within the broader innovation ecosystem, and that
separating servicemembers should have greater access to
training and career opportunities in critical emerging
technology fields.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
heads of the military service laboratories and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to submit a
report to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees no
later than March 1, 2027 on opportunities to expand private
sector engagement, workforce development, and transition
pathways in biotechnology and other emerging technology
sectors. The report shall include:
(1) Current mechanisms for detailees, externships, and
fellowships that could be utilized by federal scientists and
program managers;
(2) Identification of potential academic, industry, and
philanthropic partners that could host federal employees to
provide greater understanding of how their work fits within the
broader innovation ecosystem;
(3) Considerations for making private sector externships or
similar experiences a requirement for certain senior leadership
positions within the defense research enterprise;
(4) Current mechanisms for private sector partners to co-
fund externships, fellowships, or related opportunities to
minimize costs to the Department of Defense;
(5) An assessment of opportunities to expand training,
education, and workforce pathways in biotechnology and other
emerging technology fields for separating servicemembers;
(6) A feasibility assessment of establishing an Emerging
Technologies Program to support graduate, trade, or vocational
training for members of the Armed Forces transitioning from
active duty service; and
(7) an assessment of how the Department leverages existing
programs, including the SkillBridge Program and Transition
Assistance Program, to provide separating servicemembers with
greater awareness of, access to, and pathways into careers in
emerging technology industries.
Briefing on Leave Policies and Obstacles to Servicemembers Taking Leave
The committee recognizes that servicemembers face barriers
to taking leave, including deployments, permanent changes of
station, manning limitations, and required professional
military education attendance. The committee further recognizes
that, while servicemembers are entitled to 30 days of regular
leave per year, servicemembers must often carry leave year-
over-year, increasing the risk that they reach the leave carry-
over limit and lose leave days.
The committee is concerned that the military services have
uneven leave policies that restrict a servicemembers ability to
take leave beyond a reasonable level, and that certain military
occupation fields are consistently unable to take their full
entitled leave.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on current leave
policies across the military services and obstacles to
servicemembers taking leave. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) all current leave policies across the military
services;
(2) the number of leave days lost to ``use or lose''
policies, disaggregated by military service and military
occupation field;
(3) the obstacles that specifically prevent servicemembers
from using leave before leave days are lost; and
(4) the obstacles that servicemembers generally encounter
when taking leave.
Bureaucratic and Statutory Barriers for Separating Junior Enlisted
Marines
The committee understands that over the last 40 years the
United States Marine Corps discharged approximately 75 percent
of first-term Marines. The committee also understands that the
Marine Corps is transforming from a recruit and replace model
to an invest and retain model, retaining more Marines after
their first enlistment. Nonetheless, the committee acknowledges
that a substantial portion of Marines separate from service
after their first enlistment and junior enlisted veterans have
some of the steepest challenges transitioning from the military
to the civilian workforce. The committee believes that the
Transition Assistance Program (TAP) and Skillbridge are
excellent programs that address many of these challenges.
Nonetheless, the committee believes there may be bureaucratic
and statutory barriers that may prevent junior enlisted
Marines' transition into the civilian workforce. Therefore, the
committee directs the Commandant of the Marine Corps to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) the statutory barriers junior enlisted Marines have
when applying for employment in both private industry and
Government;
(2) the bureaucratic hurdles junior enlisted Marines have
when applying for employment in both private industry and
Government;
(3) what memorandums of understanding or memorandums of
agreement exist with respect to Marines transitioning to
positions of life, health, or safety at the local or state
levels; and
(4) recommendations for statutory and regulatory changes to
assist transitioning Marines.
Chaplain Corps Recruitment Report
The committee is aware that recruitment of chaplains
remains a challenge across the military services and varies
based on religion. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of
the military departments, to provide a report on current
recruitment and retention challenges for chaplains to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on
the following:
(1) challenges and barriers faced in recruitment for each
religion;
(2) abilities of chaplains to offer ministry services;
(3) number of vacant chaplain positions by religion and
branch;
(4) recommendations on authorities to expand recruitment
opportunities; and
(5) a review of the personnel requirements for chaplains
during fiscal years 2023 through 2026.
Comptroller General Review of DOD's Use of Involuntary Separations
According to the Department of Defense (DOD), military
service readiness is preserved by maintaining high standards of
performance, conduct, and discipline. The department makes a
significant investment in individuals to ensure their
commitment to the U.S. military and strives to provide service
members with training and leadership to enable them to meet
required standards. Through these standards, the military
services aim to evaluate the suitability of individuals to
honorably serve and, when leveraged appropriately, they can
strengthen the importance of one's commitment to military
service. However, the military services can initiate an
involuntary separation, or the discharge or release of a
service member from active duty, in cases where an individual
does not adhere to established standards or after those
standards are changed.
While the committee recognizes the importance of ensuring a
service member meets established standards as a basis for
continued military service, the committee is concerned about
the implementation of involuntary separations across the
military services for non-disciplinary issues.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct an assessment of involuntary
separations for non-disciplinary issues across the services
between 2021 through 2026. The assessment shall include:
(1) the criteria the military services use to oversee and
implement involuntary separations, in particular following
accession and/or retention policy changes;
(2) data on the tracking of, the reasons for, and the
disposition of involuntary separations and the use of waivers
in cases where a service member may not meet required
standards;
(3) the extent to which discharge characterizations,
narrative reasons for separation, separation program designator
codes, and reentry codes were applied consistently within and
across the military services for comparable non-disciplinary
issues;
(4) the standards, policies, guidance, and training
promulgated to the military departments and each military
service governing the issuance of such characterizations,
reasons, and codes, including how the Department ensured
comparable non-disciplinary cases are treated consistently;
(5) the extent to which outcomes may have varied by
personnel category, military occupational specialty, rating,
separation authority, and available demographic or service
related factors;
(6) the impact of involuntary separations on retention,
including among high-demand or low-density specialties;
(7) costs associated with involuntary separations;
(8) the extent to which servicemembers were informed of the
meaning and potential consequences of discharge
characterizations, narrative reasons for separation, separation
program designator codes, and reentry codes before separation
is finalized, including the mechanisms through which such
information is provided;
(9) options, if any, to improve consistency, transparency,
and accountability, across the Services, including potential
changes to policy, guidance, training, or oversight processes;
and
(10) any other matters the Comptroller General deems
appropriate.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives no later than April 16, 2027, with the
results of the review to follow in a mutually agreed upon
format and timeframe.
Credit for Prior Learning for Service Members and Veterans
The committee recognizes that translating military
knowledge, skills, and competencies into academic credit
supports individual advancement and strengthens the nation's
workforce and economic competitiveness. However, the committee
is concerned that the inconsistent application of credit for
prior learning (CPL) and variability in CPL recognition will
negatively impact service members and veterans transitioning
into the civilian and private workforce, including in high-
demand sectors such as the defense industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on CPL policies
and practices affecting service members and veterans. The
briefing should address the following:
(1) an assessment of how institutions of higher education
evaluate and award academic credit for military training and
experience, including the use of existing frameworks such as
the Joint Services Transcript and recommendations from the
American Council on Education;
(2) identification of barriers to consistent and
transferable CPL across institutions, including accreditation
standards, State policies, and institutional practices;
(3) an evaluation of the impact of CPL on time to degree
completion;
(4) an analysis of how improved CPL policies could support
workforce development in high-demand and national security-
relevant fields, including those critical to the defense
industrial base;
(5) a review of best practices among institutions, States,
and employers that improve recognition and transferability of
military training and experience for academic credit; and
(6) recommendations for legislative or administrative
actions to improve educational and workforce outcomes for
servicemembers and veterans while strengthening U.S. economic
and national security competitiveness.
Department of Defense Child Care Space Buy Down Assessment
The committee recognizes the importance of accessible and
affordable childcare to military family readiness and quality
of life. The committee further recognizes that the Department
of Defense has implemented a Child Care Space Buy Down Program
in select high-demand locations to expand childcare capacity
through partnerships with commercial childcare providers. The
committee is interested in the progress made in implementing
this program. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 5, 2027, regarding the
Department's Child Care Space Buy Down Program. The report
shall include the following elements:
(1) a description of the current structure and
implementation of the program, including participating military
departments and locations;
(2) identification of the number of childcare spaces
supported through the program, including whether such spaces
are ongoing or year-round;
(3) an assessment of the program's effectiveness in
reducing unmet childcare demand for military families;
(4) an assessment of program costs and any identified
implementation challenges;
(5) an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
expanding the program to additional high-demand locations; and
(6) an assessment of any observed impacts on local
childcare availability, provider participation, or market
capacity.
Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) Military-Connected
Academic and Support Program
The committee recognizes the importance of supporting
academic achievement and continuity of education for military-
connected students. The committee notes that Department of
Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) Military Connected Academic
and Support Program (MCASP) grants are intended to improve
educational outcomes, narrow achievement gaps, and provide
access to academic programs in school districts serving high
concentrations of military connected students. The committee is
aware that school districts with historically strong
participation in the program have relied on these grants to
support continuity of instruction and targeted academic
initiatives.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Department of Defense Education Activity to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the effects of MCASP grant funding and quality of
life improvements for servicemembers and their families. The
briefing shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) an assessment of the impact of reduced funding on
educational outcomes, including academic performance and
achievement gaps among military connected students;
(2) identification of school districts previously
participating in the MCASP program and analysis of how the
MCASP funds supported educational outcomes in these districts;
(3) an evaluation of the extent to which restoration of
funding would measurably improve educational continuity and
student outcomes;
(4) an analysis of MCASP funding levels on enhanced
servicemember quality of life outcomes and reduced family
stress; and
(5) recommendations regarding future funding levels and
program structure to support military-connected students and
their families.
Department of Defense Education Activity Phones in Schools Study
The committee commends the Department of Defense's efforts
to implement Section 589B of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60), which required
the Department of Defense to update existing regulations on the
student use of portable electronic mobile devices in Department
of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) schools to prohibit
disruption in the learning environment.
To understand the impact of these updated regulations on
the DODEA learning environment and student population, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Director of DODEA, to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on
the impact of the updated regulations on:
(1) student learning and academic achievement;
(2) student educational outcomes and engagement;
(3) student mental health;
(4) classroom instruction; and
(5) school climate and student behavior.
Department of Defense Inspector General Review of Potential Insider
Trading Activity
The committee is concerned by recent indications of insider
trading activity on prediction platforms and energy commodity
markets linked to sensitive military operations. The committee
notes unusual trading volumes and price fluctuations since
January 1, 2026, coinciding with planned operational
adjustments and heightened military activities in and around
Iran.
It is the sense of the committee that the use of insider
knowledge of planned or ongoing military operations to trade on
prediction markets by Department of Defense personnel would
compromise operational security and represent a breach of
ethics and federal law.
The committee directs the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027, on
any and all complaints received by the Inspector General during
Operation Epic Fury related to insider trading on prediction
and energy market trades, including:
(1) the number of complaints received;
(2) a breakdown of whether such complaints were against
uniformed service members, Department of Defense civilians, or
contractors;
(3) the outcomes of those complaints, including whether
they were substantiated and any accountability actions taken;
(4) any identified trends associated with the complaints;
(6) an assessment of the operational risks and security
vulnerabilities posed by activities identified in the
complaints; and
(7) recommendations of possible safeguards to detect,
deter, and reduce the likelihood of such insider trading
happening in the future.
Department of Defense Review of RAND Duty Status Consolidation Report
While the Department has provided initial findings
regarding Reserve Component duty status reform, the committee
remains concerned about the slow pace of implementing the
suggested report of consolidating the 29 statuses into 4 broad
categories.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense in
coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 31, 2027, on the Department's formal opinion in
the committee report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (H. Rept 115-404). This
briefing shall include:
(1) additional recommendations of consolidation to the
current duty status system;
(2) how changes recommended in the report will ensure
servicemembers performing similar jobs receive equitable
benefits and pay;
(3) estimated cost-savings or cost-burden to the Department
of Defense on implementing a duty status consolidation; and
(4) current barriers to implementation.
(5) any barriers to implementation in coordination with the
Department of Veterans Affairs and;
(6) estimated cost savings or cost burden to the Department
of Veterans Affairs.
Department of Defense Support for Secure Voting by Deployed
Servicemembers
The committee recognizes the responsibility of the
Department of Defense to support secure, timely, and accessible
voting for members of the Armed Forces serving overseas,
deployed, or in austere environments under the Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. The committee is
concerned that servicemembers may face barriers caused by
operational tempo, communications limitations, postal delays or
loss, inconsistent ballot status notification, administrative
rejection, cure deadlines, variation in State and local
election procedures, and foreign cyber interference, including
where timelines remain based primarily on international mail
delivery.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of the Federal Voting Assistance
Program and, as appropriate, the Director of the Cybersecurity
and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Executive Director
of the Election Assistance Commission, to provide a report to
the House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2027, on
Department of Defense authorities, capabilities, limitations,
and operational requirements for supporting secure voting
access for absent uniformed services voters and eligible
dependents. The report shall include--
(1) an assessment of the Department's current role in
assisting servicemembers with voter registration, absentee
ballot requests, ballot receipt, ballot return, status
tracking, cure notification, and use of the Federal Write-In
Absentee Ballot;
(2) a review of available data on how absent uniformed
services voters request, receive, and return ballots, including
by mail, email, fax, online portal, or Federal Write-In
Absentee Ballot;
(3) an analysis of how State and local election laws,
deadlines, postmark rules, ballot receipt windows, cure
procedures, and identification or residence verification
requirements affect the Department's ability to support timely
ballot access and return for deployed servicemembers, including
whether such requirements distinguish between absent uniformed
services voters, eligible dependents, and nonmilitary overseas
voters;
(4) an assessment of whether modern electronic delivery of
blank ballots, secure ballot-status notification, auditable
timestamping, and related integrity tools could help reduce
delays, administrative errors, and dependence on extended mail-
based timelines, without digitally transmitting, storing, or
tabulating marked ballots or reducing access for servicemembers
in austere or communications-degraded environments;
(5) an evaluation of operational constraints, including
deployed postal access, communications availability,
cybersecurity requirements, command climate, coercion risks,
and limits on the Department's role in election administration;
(6) an evaluation of whether any existing or emerging
cryptographic or distributed ledger-based integrity system
could satisfy applicable Federal and State standards,
Department of Defense cybersecurity requirements, and
independent security testing requirements for the issuance,
delivery, timestamping, tracking, and auditability of unmarked
voting materials, including a cost-benefit analysis compared to
current Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
mechanisms; and
(7) recommendations for improving Department guidance,
Federal Voting Assistance Program assistance, interagency
coordination, voter notification, data collection, and any
voluntary pilot programs that supplement existing absentee
voting methods, including metrics for participation, ballot
acceptance, rejection reduction, voter trust, security
performance, and greater alignment with Election Day where
operationally feasible.
Establishing an Exceptional Family Member Program Optimization
Demonstration Program
The committee is aware that multiple Government
Accountability Office reports, and the 2023 Department of
Defense Inspector General audit, identified significant
inconsistencies in implementation of the Exceptional Family
Member Program (EFMP) across the military departments.
Persistent deficiencies in oversight, coordination,
standardization, and centralized accountability have resulted
in uneven compliance with EFMP policy. These systemic
disparities adversely affect recruiting, readiness,
deployability, and retention. Innovative technology-enabled
case management solutions piloted at Travis Air Force Base have
demonstrated measurable improvements in connecting EFMP
families to critical community-based resources in real time.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on
the implementation of an EFMP optimization demonstration
program not later than April 1, 2027. The briefing shall
include the following:
(1) analysis on locations that would benefit from the
program;
(2) feasibility of implementing an individualized,
technology-enabled case management system which would include a
dynamic interoperable database that captures the full spectrum
of EFMP services at those locations; and
(3) cost associated with implementing the program.
Exceptional Family Member Program Respite Care Policy Review
The committee recognizes that respite care is an important
support for military families enrolled in the Exceptional
Family Member Program (EFMP), particularly at installations
with high EFMP enrollment and high operational tempo. The
committee notes that Department of Defense Instruction 1315.19
was updated in 2023 to standardize EFMP family support policy,
including respite care policy. The committee is concerned that
changes to respite care hours, eligibility, and implementation
may have affected caregiver wellbeing, family stability,
servicemember retention, and deployment availability,
particularly for families with higher levels of need. The
committee further notes that families may experience barriers
to accessing respite care, including provider availability,
waitlist duration, geographic limitations, awareness of
available benefits, and confusion regarding eligibility for
siblings residing in the same household as an enrolled family
member. The committee believes additional review is necessary
to understand whether current policy provides adequate support
for EFMP families and whether any service branch or family
category experienced a net reduction in respite care as a
result of the 2023 standardization.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the impacts of the 2023 respite
care policy changes implemented under Department of Defense
Instruction 1315.19. The review should include the following:
(1) A comparison of respite care standards across the
military services before and after the 2023 standardization,
including identification of any military service that
experienced a net reduction in available hours;
(2) Respite care utilization rates before and after the
2023 standardization, disaggregated by military service, level
of need, installation, and enrollment status;
(3) An assessment of barriers experienced by eligible EFMP
families, including provider availability, waitlist duration,
geographic limitations, and awareness of available benefits;
(4) An assessment of the impact of the standardization of
EFMP benefits on caregiver wellbeing, family stability,
servicemember retention, and deployment availability at
installations with high EFMP enrollment and high operational
tempo;
(5) An evaluation of how the current EFMP respite care
policy applies to households in which siblings of enrolled
family members reside, including the effect of sibling
exclusion policies on caregiver capacity and family stability
and the number of affected households by military service.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to brief the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and House of Representatives not later than March 1,
2027, with final results provided in a mutually agreed upon
format and timeframe.
Funding Requirements for Army National Guard Lodging-in-Kind and Travel
Support
The committee remains concerned regarding the disparity in
benefits provided to members of the Army National Guard (ARNG)
compared to their counterparts in the Army Reserve,
specifically concerning travel and lodging support for Inactive
Duty Training (IDT). The committee notes that while the Army
Reserve provides a robust Lodging-in-Kind program for Soldiers
that qualify, many ARNG Soldiers must incur significant
personal expenses to meet their statutory training
requirements.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
February 1, 2027, on the funding requirements to establish and
maintain a comprehensive Lodging-in-Kind and travel support
program for the ARNG that achieves parity with the Army
Reserve. The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the current out-of-pocket costs
incurred by ARNG members for travel and lodging associated with
IDT;
(2) a detailed cost estimate for providing Lodging-in-Kind
to all ARNG members residing more than 150 miles from their
assigned drill location;
(3) a detailed cost estimate for providing travel
reimbursement for members in critically short specialties or
those residing more than 150 miles from their assigned unit;
(4) an analysis of how such a program would impact
recruitment and retention within the ARNG; and
(5) a legislative and regulatory roadmap for the
implementation of a centralized, federally-funded program to
ensure standard application across all 54 States and
territories.
Government Accountability Office Review of Special Trial Counsel
Staffing and Resources
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
marked a seminal change in military justice. Specifically, the
Act amended the Uniform Code of Military Justice to remove the
decision-making authority to prosecute certain cases from
military commanders and place it with a newly established,
independent Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) within each
military service. Since the formal transfer of this authority
to each service's OSTC beginning in December 2023, each office
has had exclusive authority within its respective service to
prosecute a series of covered cases, including murder, rape and
sexual assault, kidnapping, domestic violence, stalking, and
child pornography. However, the committee is aware of recent
Department of Defense tasking of Judge Advocate support to
other government agencies and is concerned about the potential
impacts that such assignments may have on the resourcing and
staffing of the respective OSTCs. Therefore, the Committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to assess
the following:
(1) the extent to which the military services have
optimized their respective OSTC's workforce and resources to
meet workload requirements;
(2) the extent to which the military services have
developed and implemented a strategic plan for identifying and
addressing workforce and resource challenges in a timely
manner;
(3) the extent to which tasking Judge Advocate support to
other governmental agencies like the Department of Justice has
impacted OSTC resourcing, staffing, and workload; and
(4) the potential impacts on Judge Advocates' careers to
include promotion potential and relevant skills, gained or
lost, as a result of these nontraditional assignments.
The Committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than May 16, 2027, on preliminary findings, with the
results of the review to follow in a report not later than
December 1, 2027.
Impact of Rising Energy Costs on Servicemembers and the Department
The committee notes growing national energy demand
associated with emerging technologies and related
infrastructure. The committee is concerned that increased
energy consumption and associated utility costs in certain
regions may affect Department of Defense installations and
service members residing on and off military installations. The
committee believes the Department should assess potential
impacts on installation operating costs, housing expenses, and
financial readiness of servicemembers.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives not later than February 1, 2027, on the impact
of rising energy costs associated with the growth of emerging
technology and its infrastructure on the Department of Defense
and servicemembers. The report shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of current and projected increases in
installation energy costs attributable to regional energy
demand growth associated with emerging technology and emerging
technology facilities;
(2) an analysis of the impact of rising utility costs on
servicemembers and military families, including those residing
in privatized housing and in the surrounding civilian
communities;
(3) the number of servicemembers who have sought financial
assistance, including loans, grants, or other relief, to
support payment of utility bills during the preceding three
fiscal years, disaggregated by military department, to the
extent practicable;
(4) an evaluation of the extent to which increases in
energy costs are affecting installation operating budgets,
training activities, or facility sustainment accounts;
(5) an assessment of existing authorities and programs
available to mitigate utility cost burdens on servicemembers,
including financial readiness programs and emergency relief
societies; and
(6) a description of the Department's plan to address
projected increases in energy demand and costs, including
energy resilience measures, on-installation generation, long-
term power purchase agreements, and coordination with Federal
and State energy regulators.
Impact of State Maritime Academies On Department of Defense Personnel
and Readiness
The committee recognizes the vital role State Maritime
Academies play in producing highly trained, licensed mariners
essential for the U.S. Navy, Military Sealift Command, and the
broader commercial maritime industry. The committee notes that
the nation's Maritime Industrial Base (MIB) requires a steady,
robust pipeline of skilled professionals to support
shipbuilding, repair, and operational readiness, particularly
in the strategically critical Indo-Pacific region. State
Maritime Academies are uniquely positioned to support these
regional requirements. To ensure the long-term viability of the
maritime workforce, the Department of the Navy must maximize
its partnerships and investments in these academic
institutions, including support for training infrastructure,
workforce development programs, and student scholarships.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Director of the Maritime Industrial Base
program, to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2027, detailing current
investments and future strategies to leverage State Maritime
Academies for maritime workforce development. Specifically, the
report shall include:
(1) a detailed assessment of current Department of the Navy
and Maritime Industrial Base office investments at State
Maritime Academies, including West Coast institutions;
(2) an evaluation of existing workforce development
programs, hands-on training initiatives, and the availability
of scholarship opportunities to recruit and retain low-income
students in maritime careers;
(3) an assessment of the material condition, ongoing
maintenance needs, and fuel expenses associated with the
training vessels utilized by these academies to produce
credentialed mariners;
(4) an analysis of current workforce deficits within the
West Coast maritime industrial base and how these academies can
be further utilized or expanded to bridge those gaps; and
(5) recommendations for increased interagency coordination,
including with the Maritime Administration, statutory
authorities, or dedicated funding streams needed to optimize
these academies as a premier pipeline for military and
commercial maritime readiness.
Impacts of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Criteria, Metrics, and
Quotas on Promotion Selection Board Recommendations
The committee is pleased the Department of Defense has
rolled back and phased out diversity, equity, and inclusion
(DEI) initiatives which the Department had prioritized in prior
years. The committee considers meritocracy and the maintenance
of high standards to be essential to readiness, lethality, unit
cohesion, and the culture of excellence in the Department of
Defense and the military services. The committee is concerned
that previous DEI initiatives may have resulted in less
qualified candidates being selected for promotion, having a
negative impact on the quality and effectiveness of the United
States Military.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to report to the House Committee on Armed Services
and the Senate Committee on Armed Service not later than
December 1, 2026 on the following:
(1) whether over the last ten fiscal years, promotion
selection board recommendations have been impacted by DEI
criteria, metrics or quotas;
(2) what DEI criteria, if any, have been used by promotion
selection boards over the last ten fiscal years to base their
recommendations;
(3) how many promotion selection board recommendations over
the last ten fiscal years have recommended a less qualified
candidate for promotion over a more qualified candidate on the
basis of DEI criteria, metrics or quotas;
(4) any directives given to the promotion selection boards
over the last ten fiscal years related to DEI criteria, metrics
or quotas; and
(5) any other information the Secretary of Defense deems
appropriate.
Increasing Access to Child Care for Military Families
The committee acknowledges the importance of expanding
access to high-quality child care for military families. The
committee further acknowledges the success of the Military
Child Care in Your Neighborhood PLUS program in expanding the
pool of eligible providers to those participating in their
States' Quality Rating Improvement Systems (QRIS) as an
indicator of provider quality, in lieu of national
accreditation. The committee encourages the Department to
continue outreach efforts with state child care agencies
working towards alignment of state licensing and QRIS standards
to Departmental quality indicators.
Issues with the Reserve Component Duty Status Structure
The committee remains concerned by the continued complexity
and administrative burden with the current duty status system
of the Armed Services' Reserve Components. Section 513 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public
Law 115-91) directed the Department of Defense to study how to
consolidate the duty status system and the committee notes that
the 29 current duty statuses create significant administrative
friction, degrade operational readiness, and, most critically,
lead to inequitable disbursement of pay and benefits for
servicemembers performing substantially similar missions.
Therefore, the committee believes that a simplification to
the existing framework would provide clarity, consistency, and
continuity to our National Guard and Reserve servicemembers and
their families, as well as improve overall military readiness.
Job Placement and Career Success for Transitioning Service Members
The committee recognizes that not every transitioning
service member is best served by traditional education or
industrial training pathways, and urges that funding reflect
the full diversity of career interests and employment outcomes.
The committee further encourages the inclusion of proven,
outcome-driven employment placement organizations alongside
traditional educators and training providers to ensure
accountability for actual job placement and long-term career
success
Manner of Death Determination Standards for Active-Duty Service Members
The committee recognizes that there is a disparity in the
quality of death investigations for active military personnel.
When an autopsy is required, a medical examiner determines the
manner of death. However, on some United States military
installations and in some civilian settings, a local coroner
completes the autopsy and subsequently completes a manner of
death. The involvement of a local coroner has the potential to
fragment decision-making and could place less experienced
personnel in a position to make inadequate or erroneous death
determinations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services; not later than March
1, 2027, on the current policies and practices governing death
investigations for active duty servicemembers when an autopsy
is required. The report should include:
(1) the percentage of active duty servicemember death
investigations, where an autopsy is required, in which a local
coroner determines the manner of death, for the period
beginning January 1, 2012, through the date of the report;
(2) an assessment of the qualifications and training
standards of local coroners compared to board-certified medical
examiners, and any identified gaps in expertise that may affect
the accuracy of a manner of death determination;
(3) an assessment of whether existing policy adequately
ensures the highest possible accuracy of manner of death
determinations for active duty servicemembers when an autopsy
is required; and
(4) any recommended legislative or policy changes to
standardize death investigation practices and ensure consistent
application of the highest forensic standards for active-duty
fatalities across all installations and jurisdictions.
Military Child Care Employee Transferability
The committee is aware of ongoing challenges associated
with child care workers who transfer jobs across the military
services. The committee further notes that the Department of
Defense has been working to update its policy to facilitate the
interservice transfer of employment for child care workers for
nearly three years, and that finalization is still pending. The
committee believes the effective implementation of this policy
is critical to improving workforce retention, reducing
administrative delays, and ensuring continuity of care for
military families. The committee urges the Department to
prioritize the update of this policy and to develop a
comprehensive communication plan about the new policy and
associated changes for release upon completion.
Military OneSource Referral Accountability and Coordination Feasibility
The committee recognizes the important role Military
OneSource plays in connecting servicemembers and their families
with information, counseling, referrals, and other support
services. However, the committee is concerned that Military
OneSource may not consistently confirm whether servicemembers
and families are successfully connected to services after a
referral is made, which may limit visibility into unmet needs,
barriers to access, and the effectiveness of referrals.
The committee notes that certain public, private, and
nonprofit networks use coordinated service delivery, referral
management, and closed-loop referral models to help ensure
individuals are connected to the services for which they are
referred. The committee believes the Department should assess
whether similar capabilities, or partnerships with existing
networks, could improve accountability, reduce duplication, and
strengthen support for military families. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report
to the House and Senate Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility and advisability of
improving referral accountability and coordinated service
delivery within Military OneSource. The report shall include:
(1) A description of Military OneSource's current referral
process, including whether and how the Department tracks
referrals after they are made;
(2) An assessment of whether Military OneSource has the
ability to determine if servicemembers or family members
successfully access services following a referral;
(3) An evaluation of gaps, limitations, or inconsistencies
in current referral follow-through, including barriers related
to privacy, data sharing, provider capacity, geography, or
technology;
(4) An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
adopting a closed-loop referral or coordinated service delivery
model within Military OneSource;
(5) A review of existing public, private, and nonprofit
service coordination networks and whether such networks could
be leveraged to improve referral follow through and reduce
duplication;
(6) An assessment of potential performance measures for
referral accountability, including reasonable timelines for
initial engagement, follow-up, and documentation of unmet
needs;
(7) An evaluation of the potential benefits, costs, risks,
and administrative burden associated with implementing a
technology-enabled referral coordination capability; and
(8) Any recommendations for legislative or administrative
action needed to improve referral accountability, coordination,
and visibility into unmet needs among servicemembers and their
families.
Military Recruitment in Guam
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of Guam
and acknowledges that individuals from Guam serve in the Armed
Forces at disproportionally high rates. The committee is
concerned about persistent challenges affecting military
recruitment in Guam including extended wait times for medical
screening at Military Entrance Processing Stations and limited
facility capacity for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude
Battery (ASVAB), which may delay or deter qualified applicants.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31,
2027, that includes:
(1) an assessment of current recruitment trends in Guam;
(2) whether there are barriers to enlistment such as
medical processing times and access to ASVAB assessments; and
(3) recommendations on how to improve recruitment
efficiency in Guam, including potential investment in medical
screening capacity, increased ASVAB testing availability, and
other measures to reduce processing delays.
Modernization of Military Personnel Management Systems to Enhance
Operational Readiness
The committee recognizes that modern warfare may require a
shift from siloed legacy data management systems to a single,
cloud-native human capital management (HCM) platform, which is
a prerequisite for operational success in contested
environments. Until the current landscape of data fragmentation
is resolved, administrative friction will continue to erode
mission availability, speed of deployment, and obscure the
real-time visibility required for total force readiness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, to include the following:
(1) A plan to consider the feasibility and advisability of
transitioning all disparate personnel data into a unified
common data model using open data standards to prevent vendor
lock-in, to ensure the system supports the Department's ability
to achieve a clean financial audit by resolving disconnected
pay and personnel records;
(2) If feasible and advisable, a strategy to establish a
comprehensive inventory of servicemembers, including soft
skills, relevant government and industry certifications,
performance, experience, and specialized technical expertise to
enable rapid surge capacity and mobilization;
(3) A proposed prioritization of the top ten manual
administrative processes to be automated within 18 months of
platform deployment, including quantifiable man-hour reduction
targets;
(4) An assessment of the Services' ``Commander's Readiness
Dashboard'' that provides real-time, predictive analytics to
identify potential force posture gaps or credentialing
expirations before they impact operational readiness;
(5) A technical architecture that ensures zero-latency data
transfer between Active, Guard, and Reserve components to
eliminate delays in pay and benefits and guarantee ``Pay on Day
One'' of activation; and
(6) An analysis of Department and Resource requirements,
including cost and schedule of implementation.
Navy Command Readiness, Endurance, and Watchstanding
The committee recognizes the importance of managing fatigue
as a determinant of operational safety and readiness for
deployed naval forces. The committee notes the Navy's ongoing
implementation of the Command Readiness, Endurance, and
Watchstanding (CREW) program as a primary mechanism for
quantifying and mitigating fatigue among sailors.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to
accelerate fleetwide implementation of CREW, including the
fielding of shipboard infrastructure and the integration of
sensor technologies that enable continuous fatigue monitoring
across a broad range of occupational specialties. The committee
further encourages the Navy to ensure that aviators,
maintainers, and other operational communities are fully
incorporated into CREW as technical constraints are resolved.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than May 1, 2027, on the status of CREW
implementation, remaining technical or infrastructure gaps, and
plans to expand participation across the fleet, and funding
requirements and associated budget plans, including across the
Future Years Defense Program, to support the scaling and
sustainment of the CREW program.
Navy Ombudsman Program and Support to Military Families
The committee recognizes the critical role of the Navy
Ombudsman Program in providing a vital link between Navy
families and command leadership, ensuring access to
information, resources, and support for military spouses and
families, particularly during deployments, crises, emergencies,
and overseas assignments.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on the status, effectiveness,
utilization, and future requirements of the Navy Ombudsman
Program. The report shall be submitted in unclassified form but
may include a classified annex. The report should include:
(1) an assessment of how the Ombudsman Program supports
spouses and military families stationed overseas;
(2) qualitative and quantitative data from the last three
fiscal years to assess the effectiveness of the Navy Ombudsman
Program;
(3) an evaluation of how the volunteer-based Ombudsman
Program could be leveraged, adapted, or expanded across all
branches of the Armed Forces to strengthen military family
readiness and command communication;
(4) an assessment of limiting factors affecting the Navy
Ombudsman Program as a critical volunteer-based program; and
(5) a review of current program metrics and recommendations
to improve the effectiveness, accountability, and
sustainability of the Ombudsman Program.
Opt In Option for Applicants to Military Academies
In the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159), Congress required the Secretary of Defense to
establish a system where an applicant to a military service
academy could elect to have their information shared directly
with a senior military college, in accordance with section
2111a of title 10, United States Code. Due to the increase in
interest and competitiveness of receiving an appointment at a
military service academy, the committee is concerned that many
talented individuals are being lost to the military services.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 1, 2027, on implementation of section 559c of
Public Law 118-159. The report shall include the following:
(1) the process for applicants to the military service
academies to request their applications be shared with Reserve
Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) and senior military colleges;
(2) the number of applicants who have shared their
information;
(3) the number of applicants who chose ROTC scholarships or
another senior military college;
(4) the universities those applicants did attend instead of
a military service college (if known); and
(5) any recommended improvements to the program.
Participation of Ukrainian Students in United States Service Academies
The committee recognizes that the United States Service
Academies play a critical role in developing future military
leaders and strengthening long-term security partnerships with
allied and partner nations. The committee further recognizes
that Ukraine's armed forces have demonstrated exceptional
resilience, innovation, and battlefield effectiveness in
defense of their sovereignty.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on opportunities to expand
participation by qualified Ukrainian students at the United
States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, and
the United States Air Force Academy. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) the feasibility of designating Ukraine as a country
eligible to nominate candidates to attend the Service Academies
under section 347 of title 10, United States Code;
(2) the number of Ukrainian students that could reasonably
be accommodated on an annual basis;
(3) the anticipated benefits to the United States and
Ukraine of such participation;
(4) any statutory, regulatory, or policy barriers to
Ukrainian participation in the Service Academies; and
(5) recommendations for legislative or administrative
actions necessary to facilitate such participation.
Purple Heart Database
The committee recognizes the service and sacrifice of
members of the Armed Forces who have been awarded the Purple
Heart. The committee notes the challenges in verifying Purple
Heart recipient status due to the decentralized and incomplete
nature of certain military personnel records.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, regarding the
feasibility and advisability of establishing a centralized
database to document Purple Heart recipients. The briefing
shall include:
(1) an assessment of the availability of relevant records
for servicemembers and veterans;
(2) an assessment of privacy and security implications of
including certain data elements such as full name, branch of
service, date of the award, and operation associated with the
award; and
(3) any recommendations or identified challenges associated
with establishing such a database.
Recruitment Workforce Development and Strategic Youth Engagement
The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
success in meeting and exceeding military recruiting goals in
fiscal year 2025 and early fiscal year 2026. The committee also
applauds the Department's efforts to integrate strategies to
sustain and strengthen recruiting, including the establishment
of the Military Service Recruitment Task Force pursuant to
guidance from the Secretary of Defense in June 2025. However,
the committee is concerned that while recruiting performance
remains strong, demographic trends, eligibility constraints,
and the rising costs of traditional advertising, marketing, and
incentive-based recruiting tools warrant evaluation of
complementary, community-based approaches that support and
augment long-term recruiting objectives.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 27, 2027, on the
feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and risks of expanded
partnerships, grants, or other forms of support for nonprofit
youth development organizations with missions comparable to the
Young Marines and Naval Sea Cadet Corps, as part of the
Department's recruiting strategy. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of the comparative costs and outcomes
relative to traditional recruiting tools, including cost per
accession and long-term return on investment;
(2) an assessment and review of available data on
correlations between participation in nonprofit youth
development organizations and eligibility, readiness,
retention, or propensity to serve;
(3) identification of existing Department or Service-level
partnerships with nonprofit youth development organizations and
their effectiveness in supporting long-term military recruiting
objectives;
(4) an evaluation of applicable legal authorities, funding
mechanisms, and oversight requirements necessary to ensure any
support from the Department remains non coercive and consistent
with Department values; and
(5) any recommendations for expanded partnerships,
including whether pilot programs would be appropriate.
Report on Termination and Reconstitution of the Defense Advisory
Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault
in the Armed Forces (DAC-IPAD)
The committee notes that section 546 of the Carl Levin and
Howard P. `Buck' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2015 required the Secretary of Defense to establish
the Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution,
and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces (DAC-IPAD).
The DAC-IPAD plays a crucial role in reforming military justice
related to sexual assault, ensuring fairness for victims and
the accused. The committee notes that on April 25, 2025, the
Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum formally relieving the
members of the DAC-IPAD of their duties as part of a review of
all Department of Defense Advisory Committees. Concerningly,
over a year later, the DAC-IPAD has not been reconstituted and
there is no indication that the Department of Defense intends
to reinstate the previous members whose service was summarily
concluded without justification. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report not later
than March 1, 2027 to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services regarding the
termination and reconstitution of the DAC-IPAD. The report
shall include:
(1) A detailed justification on why the previous DAC-IPAD
was dismissed;
(2) Details on whether any members of the previous DAC-IPAD
are being considered for reappointment, and if not, why not;
(3) The timeline for reconstituting the DAC-IPAD; and
(4) The program and funding planning details for staffing
and resourcing of the DAC-IPAD.
Restoration of Rank for General John D. Lavelle
The committee is aware that recently declassified records
of conversations between President Richard Nixon and the
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Henry
Kissinger during the Vietnam War have called into question the
decision to remove General Lavelle from command of Seventh Air
Force in 1972 and demote him to the grade of Major General in
retirement. The committee understands that these recently
declassified records show unequivocally that General Lavelle
did not conduct unauthorized air strikes against North Vietnam,
nor did he order or condone the falsification of post-strike
mission reports as was previously alleged. The committee is
aware that President Barack Obama endorsed a previous Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR) request to
restore General Lavelle's rank in 2010. The committee is also
aware that a subsequent Air Force BCMR recommendation to
restore General Lavelle's rank was endorsed in 2017 by then
Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson and then Air Force
Chief of Staff General David Goldfein. However, for reasons
unclear to the committee, this recommendation has not yet been
acted on by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to report to the committee by February 1, 2027, regarding the
recommendation and restoration actions of General Lavelle's
retired rank based on recently declassified records and the
most recent BCMR recommendation.
School Safety Infrastructure at Department of Defense Education
Activity Schools
The committee directs the Director of the Department of
Defense Education Activity to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
school safety infrastructure at DoDEA schools. The report shall
include:
(1) an inventory of exterior door security systems at all
DoDEA schools, including the number and percentage of schools
with push-button locks, electronic locking mechanisms,
reinforced door frames, vestibule systems, or single-point-of-
entry systems;
(2) an assessment of gaps in exterior door security
infrastructure and the estimated cost to bring all DoDEA
schools into compliance with evidence-based school safety
standards;
(3) a comparison of DoDEA school security protocols with
those recommended by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency (CISA) K-12 School Security Guide and the
Partner Alliance for Safer Schools;
(4) recommendations for prioritizing exterior door security
improvements at DoDEA schools that currently lack such
infrastructure; and
(5) a timeline and resource requirements for implementing
recommended security upgrades.
Space Force Continuous Fitness Assessment
The committee is aware of the holistic health approach
adopted by the United States Space Force to promote year-round
physical fitness, advance short and long-term health outcomes,
and improve the operational readiness of the Space Force. The
committee notes the Space Force's service-wide Continuous
Fitness Assessment study, conducted in partnership with the Air
Force Research Laboratory, was designed to determine if
wearable fitness monitoring devices are an effective means of
measuring health and physical fitness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, that includes:
(1) the results and findings of the Continuous Fitness
Assessment study;
(2) a description of the advantages and challenges of
technology-enabled continuous health monitoring;
(3) a description of data gathered by these devices and any
privacy or security concerns;
(4) an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
implementing a standardized, digital health solution to provide
continuous fitness and health monitoring; and
(5) recommendations regarding the adoption and
implementation of wearable technologies to include proposed
next steps and alignment with the Department of Defense digital
health and force readiness initiatives.
Space-Available Travel Priority for Unaccompanied Dependents
The committee recognizes the importance of Space-Available
travel to military families assigned to remote, overseas, and
operationally isolated locations. The committee notes that
unaccompanied dependents traveling on ordinary leave may face
significant uncertainty when seeking transportation to or from
an overseas duty location, particularly when commercial options
are limited, costly, or unavailable.
The committee is concerned that military dependents
attempting to travel without their sponsor may, in certain
circumstances, receive lower Space-Available travel priority
than retired personnel, even when the dependent is traveling to
maintain family stability, address geographic isolation, or
support the morale and welfare of an active duty servicemember
assigned overseas. The committee believes the Department should
assess whether the current Space-Available priority structure
appropriately accounts for the operational and family readiness
needs of active duty households, particularly at remote or
hardship locations.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the feasibility and advisability of
placing unaccompanied dependents of active duty servicemembers
traveling on ordinary leave in a higher Space-Available travel
priority category than retired personnel. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current Space-Available travel
categories applicable to unaccompanied dependents of active
duty servicemembers and retired personnel;
(2) an assessment of the operational, readiness, family
stability, and quality of life effects of the current priority
structure for families assigned to remote, overseas, or
operationally isolated locations;
(3) an analysis of the feasibility of creating or modifying
a Space-Available travel category to provide higher priority to
unaccompanied dependents of active duty servicemembers
traveling on ordinary leave to or from an overseas duty
location;
(4) an assessment of any operational, aircraft capacity,
cost, legal, or administrative impacts associated with such a
change; and
(5) any recommended policy or legislative changes necessary
to better align Space-Available travel priority with active
duty family readiness needs.
Staffing Shortfalls in the United States Army Corps of Engineers and
the Air Force Civil Engineer Center
The committee understands that staffing shortages are
prevalent in the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
and the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC). The committee
is concerned about the impact these staffing shortfalls have on
new and long-standing operations across the country, and
whether the ability to respond to emergencies is impacted.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Commanding General of the United
States Army Corps of Engineers, and the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Commander of the Air Force
Civil Engineer Center, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027,
that includes the following:
(1) the number of vacancies at each USACE and AFCEC duty
locations;
(2) all operations that have been paused due to staffing
shortages, and the impact of having said operations paused;
(3) project delays that are the result of staffing
shortages and the added costs due to the delays;
(4) a timeline and plans to fill staffing shortages;
(5) whether hiring freeze exemptions have been granted to
fill critical USACE and AFCEC positions; and
(6) the number of USACE and AFCEC employees that have been
relocated to southern border-related missions and their
previous duty location.
Support for Local Universities
The committee recognizes the importance of accessible,
high-quality academic programs in supporting the professional
development, readiness, and long-term success of
servicemembers. Institutions of higher learning, particularly
those located in close proximity to military installations, are
uniquely positioned to provide flexible and relevant
educational opportunities that align with the demands of
military service. The committee encourages the Department of
Defense to continue to sustain relationships with local
universities and to enhance outreach efforts to ensure
servicemembers are aware of local academic programs.
Support for Military Spouse Retirement Financial Stability
The committee is concerned that military spouses face
recurring disruptions to their careers and financial planning
due to the frequency of permanent change of station moves.
These disruptions may contribute to inconsistent participation
in employer-sponsored retirement plans and, in some cases, the
premature withdrawal or cashing out of retirement savings,
undermining long-term financial security.
The committee notes that, unlike servicemembers who benefit
from structured retirement systems and financial education,
military spouses may lack access to consistent, portable
retirement planning resources. The committee further recognizes
that improving financial literacy and access to retirement
planning tools for military spouses is critical to enhancing
overall family readiness, resilience, and long-term economic
stability.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on actions the Department is
taking, or plans to take, to support military spouse retirement
planning and financial stability. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of the extent to which military spouses
cash out or otherwise fail to preserve retirement savings
during permanent change of station-related employment
transitions;
(2) a description of existing Department of Defense
programs, resources, and partnerships available to assist
military spouses with retirement planning, including financial
counseling, portability of retirement accounts, and
participation in tax-advantaged savings vehicles;
(3) an evaluation of gaps in access to retirement planning
tools and financial education for military spouses,
particularly those experiencing frequent relocations or
employment interruptions;
(4) options to expand access to portable, low-cost
retirement savings mechanisms and targeted financial literacy
resources tailored to military spouses;
(5) recommendations to improve coordination with private
sector employers, financial institutions, and nonprofit
organizations to enhance continuity of retirement savings for
military spouses; and
(6) any legislative or administrative actions the
Department considers necessary to ensure military spouses are
equipped to make informed, long-term retirement decisions.
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize the
development of accessible, consistent, and portable financial
resources that account for the unique challenges faced by
military spouses and promote long-term financial security.
Support for United Service Organizations
The committee recognizes the United Service Organizations
(USO) as a critical partner in sustaining the morale, welfare,
and resiliency of U.S. servicemembers and their families amid
an increasingly complex global security environment. Through a
global network of more than 250 locations and a wide range of
expeditionary and mobile programs, the USO delivers essential
support that directly contributes to force readiness and
operational effectiveness. The committee notes that the USO
maintains a presence in high-threat, remote, and austere
locations, ensuring continuity of care for servicemembers
regardless of location or mission. Accordingly, the committee
encourages the Department of Defense to continue its
partnership with the USO, including exploring opportunities to
expand access to USO programs and services across the joint
force.
Tactical Officers at Senior Military Colleges
The committee recognizes the value of Tactical Officers at
senior military colleges and is encouraged by their role in
developing future military leaders. TAC officers provide daily
mentorship, reinforce discipline and accountability, and bridge
academic instruction with practical leadership development
within students. Their presence is central to maintaining the
military character and leadership culture that distinguishes
senior military colleges and contributes to the readiness of
future officers.
However, the committee notes that the role of TAC officers
has evolved significantly over time and now reflects a full-
time student affairs and leadership development function rather
than a collateral duty. The committee is concerned that senior
military colleges continue to rely on state funding and reserve
component personnel to support these positions, despite their
recognized importance, and that budgetary constraints have
created challenges in sustaining and resourcing TAC officer
programs at the level required to meet current demands.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Personnel & Readiness, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1, 2026, on
the feasibility and implications of changing the authorization
of officers serving as tactical officers from discretionary to
mandatory. The briefing shall include an assessment of the
impacts on active and reserve component force management; the
current and projected requirements for TAC officers at senior
military colleges; options for resourcing and funding such
positions; and recommendations for ensuring consistent and
sustainable support for TAC officer programs across all senior
military colleges.
Termination and Reinstatement of the Statutorily Mandated Military
Justice Review Panel
The committee notes that section 946 of title 10, United
States Code, requires the Secretary of Defense to establish the
Military Justice Review Panel (MJRP) to conduct independent
periodic reviews and assessments of the operation of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice and to report its findings and
recommendations to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and House of Representatives. The committee notes with
concern that the initial MJRP was disbanded in April 2025
without any details regarding the justification for this
action. Over a year later, the MJRP is still disbanded and
there is no indication that the Department of Defense intends
to reinstate the previous members whose service was concluded
less than halfway through their eight-year statutory terms.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report not later than March 1, 2027 to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services regarding the termination and reconstitution of the
MJRP. The report shall include:
(1) the legal authority relied upon to terminate the
initial MJRP panel;
(2) a detailed justification on why the initial MJRP panel
was terminated;
(3) details on whether any members of the original MJRP
panel are being considered for reappointment, and if not, why
not:
(4) the timeline for reconstituting the MJRP; and
(5) the program and funding planning details for staffing
and resourcing of the MJRP.
The Status and Impact of Conversions to Air National Guard Contingency
Response Groups
The committee understands that the Air National Guard is
converting several units to Contingency Response Groups (CRG),
including the 182nd Airlift Wing, the 181st Intelligence Wing,
the 186th Air Refueling Wing, the 141st Air Refueling Wing, and
the 185th Air Refueling Wing. The committee is interested in
the progress associated with these conversions, including the
necessary funding for manning and equipment to support
conversions. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Air Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, that includes
the following:
(1) a list of the units identified for conversion;
(2) the planned timeline for conversion of each unit;
(3) current manning of each unit identified for conversion;
(4) manning necessary for each newly established CRG and
planned timeline for reaching required CRG manning levels;
(5) equipment necessary for the new CRGs, existing
equipment gaps for each converting unit, and plan, including
timeline, for fully equipping each unit;
(6) funding necessary for the conversion for each unit and
whether funding has yet been allocated for each conversion; and
(7) risks to the mission should the deadlines for
conversion not be met.
Ukrainian Military Instructors at Senior Professional Military
Education Institutions
The committee recognizes that the Armed Forces of Ukraine
have acquired unique operational experience in large-scale
combat operations against a near-peer adversary. The committee
believes that direct engagement with Ukrainian military
professionals would provide substantial educational value to
United States senior professional military education
institutions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility of assigning
or hosting Ukrainian military officers and defense experts as
instructors, fellows, or visiting faculty at the National
Defense University, the United States Army War College, the
Naval War College, the Air War College, and the Marine Corps
University. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) opportunities to incorporate Ukrainian military
personnel into professional military education programs as
instructors or guest lecturers;
(2) authorities available to support such assignments or
exchanges;
(3) anticipated benefits to the education of United States
military officers; and
(4) any statutory, policy, security, or resource barriers
to implementation.
USAFA 2050
The committee recognizes that the United States Air Force
Academy (USAFA) was constructed largely in the late 1950s,
causing a significant portion of its infrastructure to reach
the end of its serviceable life simultaneously. The committee
is aware that the Secretary of the Air Force established the
USAFA 2050 Task Force, chartered to develop comprehensive
courses of action to address this challenge. The committee
notes that in fiscal year 2026, USAFA awarded an Installation
Master Plan pursuant to section 2850 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60), and
that the Department of the Air Force's fiscal year 2027
Integrated Tasking Order provided funding assurance for 13
USAFA projects totaling $86.0 million, including the
Aeronautics Laboratory renovation and multiple Central Heat
Plant projects. Long-term USAFA 2050 objectives include a
wastewater treatment plant refurbishment, Jacks Valley
facilities, a Space Education Center, the Madera Cyber Center,
North Gate relocation, and other critical infrastructure
investments. The lifetime cost of the USAFA 2050 plan is
expected to be at least $4.0 billion.
The committee is concerned that USAFA may be disadvantaged
when competing for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization (FSRM) funding against other Department of the
Air Force installations that more directly support warfighting
operations. Unlike other installations in the Department of the
Air Force, USAFA's mission is the education and development of
future officers rather than direct operational support, which
may reduce its competitive standing in departmentwide FSRM
prioritization. The committee notes that the Department of the
Navy previously established a dedicated funding mechanism for
the United States Naval Academy through the Flagship Agreement,
which set aside FSRM funding from 2007 to 2013 and was renewed
in 2019 for an additional two years.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on options for establishing a
dedicated FSRM funding mechanism for USAFA to ensure sufficient
funding for the USAFA 2050 project. The briefing should include
the following:
(1) an explanation of how USAFA's annual FSRM allocation is
calculated within the Department of the Air Force, including
how USAFA competes for FSRM resources relative to warfighting
installations and quality of life infrastructure;
(2) an assessment of USAFA's current FSRM backlog and the
Department of the Air Force's plan to address it, including
projected timelines and funding requirements;
(3) an assessment of whether USAFA's FSRM allocation will
increase proportionally in response to the statutory
requirement mandating that the military departments increase
FSRM spending as a percentage of plant replacement value; and
(4) any legislative authorities that would be required to
implement a dedicated FSRM funding mechanism for USAFA.
Utilization of Intergovernmental Service Agreements to Expand Access to
Child Care
The committee understands Joint Base Langley-Eustis is
exploring the use of an Intergovernmental Support Agreement
(IGSA) authority to supplement on-installation child care
capacity by partnering with a state university. The committee
recognizes that child care is critical for force readiness and
that utilizing this authority may enable Child Development
Centers (CDC) to stabilize staffing, expand operational
capacity and reduce wait lists.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027, regarding the feasibility and
advisability of using IGSA's in such a capacity. The report
shall include:
(1) potential benefits of utilizing IGSAs for increasing
child care capacity for military families, including potential
cost savings;
(2) any transparency concerns that arise from using IGSAs
for this purpose;
(3) any challenges associated with the implementation of
IGSAs for this purpose; and
(4) identification of any statutory or regulatory
challenges that could inhibit such an approach.
Utilization of Rapid DNA Capabilities
The committee recognizes that forensic DNA supports a wide
range of Department of Defense missions, including the
investigation of crimes involving servicemembers, the
identification of human remains, the confirmation of targets,
and the development of investigative and operational
intelligence across military and defense intelligence
organizations. The committee is concerned that delays in DNA
processing may be impeding investigations and understands that
the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL) may be
experiencing a backlog in testing. Rapid DNA technology could
help address this problem by allowing certain DNA samples to be
processed more quickly and by reducing pressure on crime
laboratories.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than April 1, 2027 assessing the
Department's use of forensic DNA and rapid DNA technology. The
report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation
Laboratory's personnel requirements, funding, and resources
needed to address forensic DNA criminal casework backlogs,
reference sample testing, and maximize usable DNA profiles,
particularly in sexual assault cases;
(2) recommendations for addressing any identified
shortfalls, including estimated resource requirements;
(3) an overview of which Department of Defense entities,
including commands, organizations, and laboratories, employ the
use of Rapid DNA systems, including for investigative leads,
identification of human remains, in-theater testing of evidence
and detainees, and target verification;
(4) the extent to which those entities currently employ the
use of Rapid DNA;
(5) the feasibility and advisability of expanding the
Department's use of Rapid DNA technologies, including for use
in criminal investigations; and
(6) whether Rapid DNA technologies are currently admissible
in courts-martial, and if not, why not.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Officer Policy and Reserve Component Management
Sec. 501--Flexibility in Requirements of Selection Boards: Composition;
Convening
This section would allow for flexibility in officer
selection board composition.
Sec. 502--Requirements for Removal of Certain General and Flag Officers
This section would set requirements for notification upon
removal of certain general and flag officers.
Sec. 503--Ranks of Judge Advocates General
This section would require the Judge Advocates General to
serve in the rank of Lieutenant General.
Sec. 504--Grades of Certain Chiefs of Reserve Components
This section would amend title 10, United States Code, to
require that the Chiefs of Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, and Air
Force Reserve, and the Commander, Marine Forces Reserve, each
serve in the grade of O-9.
Sec. 505--Grade of Chief of Veterinary Corps of the Army
This section would require the Chief of the Veterinary
Corps of the Army to hold the grade of brigadier general.
Sec. 506--Limitation on the Transfer to the Space Force of Certain
Functions of the Air National Guard
This section would clarify that the transfer of Air
National Guard personnel performing space missions to the U.S.
Space Force was pursuant to a limited, one-time transfer
authority.
Sec. 507--Inclusion of Judge Advocates In Global Force Management
Processes
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
include Judge Advocates from the Active and Reserve Components
in Global Force Management processes.
Sec. 508--Role of Military Chaplains
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure Chaplains can continue to provide counseling services.
Subtitle B--Recruitment, General Service Authorities and Prohibitions,
and Military Records
Sec. 511--Recruitment: Improvements Relating to Secondary Schools
This section would provide greater access for military
recruiters at secondary schools.
Sec. 512--Prohibition on reduction in personnel assigned to duty with a
service review agency; report on reviews of certain discharges related
to PTSD
This section would prevent the reduction in personnel at a
service review agency and require a report on discharges
related to PTSD.
Sec. 513--Selective Service System: Omission of Deceased Persons from
Registration
This section would omit deceased persons from Selective
Service registration.
Sec. 514--Requirement of Equal Opportunity, Racial Neutrality, and
Exclusive Use of Merit in Military Personnel Actions
This section would require the exclusive use of merit for
all personnel actions.
Sec. 515--Prohibition of Hate Symbols: Regulations; Guidance; Training
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop uniform regulations and training on the prohibition of
hate symbols.
Sec. 516--Timely Resolution of Career-Impacting Administrative
Investigations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a policy applicable to administrative investigations.
Sec. 517--Prohibition On Use of Prediction Markets By Personnel of the
Department of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop regulations prohibiting participation in prediction
markets related to certain national security topics.
Sec. 518--Pilot Program on Modernization of Drug Testing Using Voice-
Based Risk Assessment
This section would permit the Secretary of Defense to
operate a pilot program using voice-based risk assessment
technology to test for illicit drugs.
Sec. 519--Soldier Digital Lifecycle Modernization Initiative
This section would authorize the creation of a pilot
program that utilizes existing digital platforms to better
understand the various lifecycles of military servicemembers
and the over all force health spanning data-driven recruiting
decision to predictive retention risks to servicemember
separation.
Sec. 519A--Authority to Study the Propensity of Certain Students to
Serve in the Armed Forces
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into an agreement with an entity to study the propensity
to serve for military-connected students.
Subtitle C--Member Training
Sec. 521--Ineligibility of a National of a Non-Allied Foreign Nation to
Attend a Service Academy
This section would make a national of a non-allied foreign
nation ineligible to attend a service academy.
Sec. 522--Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Program for
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
This section would develop a program to assist Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps units in providing
opportunities in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics.
Sec. 523--Additional Nominees to the Service Academies from the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
This section would provide additional nominees to the
service academies from the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands.
Sec. 524--Elimination of Cap on the Number of Cadets Or Midshipmen Who
May Receive Alternative Service Obligations to Become Professional
Athletes
This section would eliminate the cap on the number of
cadets or midshipmen who may play professional sports.
Sec. 525--Elimination of the Right of Cadets to Automatic Reexamination
This section would eliminate the separate requirements
surrounding a failed examination and makes a failed examination
the same as a cadet who is reported as deficient in conduct or
studies.
Sec. 526--Congressional Communications Officials of the Service
Academies
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
appoint civilian employees for each of the military departments
to serve as the congressional communications officials for the
Board of Visitors of each of the military service academies.
Sec. 527--Revision to Decision Timeframe for Expedited Transfers at the
Military Service Academies
This section would make the standard for a decision on
expedited transfers for the military service academies the same
as for the rest of the Department of Defense: 5 days.
Sec. 528--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Instructor Pay
This section would revise the JROTC Standardized Instructor
Pay Scale to reflect the amount of the non-foreign area cost-
of-living allowance or post allowance for instructors at OCONUS
locations.
Sec. 529--Establishment of Program to Promote Participation of Foreign
Students in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
This section would establish and promote a program that
authorizes international students to gain educational and
military experience through Senior Reserve Officers Training
Corps program at educational institutions.
Sec. 529A--Establishment of the Military Service Academy Panel On
Athletics
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a panel to review the impacts of NCAA rules with
respect to compensation of athletes as well as the transfer
portal for athletes on the military service academies.
Sec. 529B--Limitation on Authority to Eliminate the 70th Flying
Training Squadron of the United States Air Force Academy
This section would prevent the closure of the 70th Flight
Training Squadron at the Air Force Academy.
Subtitle D--Member Education
Sec. 531--Establishment of a doctor of psychology program and a master
of social work program at the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences
This section would require the Department of Defense to
establish doctor of psychology and master of social work
programs at the Uniformed Services University of the Health
Sciences.
Sec. 532--Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial
Assistance Program: Eligible Institutions; Continuity of Payments
This section would ensure any student in the Health
Profession Scholarship Program may be detailed to any
accredited civilian medical institution in the United States or
Puerto Rico.
Sec. 533--Inclusion of National Intelligence College as Part of the
National Defense University
This section would add the National Intelligence College to
the statutory list of institutions comprising the National
Defense University under section 2165(b) of title 10, United
States Code.
Sec. 534--Defense Information School: Authority to Grant Associate's
Degree in Communications
This section would authorize the Defense Information School
to grant a degree of associate arts in communication.
Sec. 535--Eligibility of an Enlisted Member to Receive a Degree from
the Naval Postgraduate School
This section would authorize enlisted members of the Armed
Forces to receive degrees from the Naval Postgraduate School.
Subtitle E--Military Justice
Sec. 541--Clarification of Qualifications for Judge Advocates
This section would provide clarifications on the
qualifications for Judge Advocates.
Sec. 542--Authority of Special Trial Counsel to Enter into Pretrial
Agreements with Respect to Certain Offenses
This section would permit Special Trial Counsel to enter
into pre-trial agreements with the same authorities and
limitations as plea agreements.
Sec. 543--Clarifying Amendment to Completion of Appellate Review Under
Article 57 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This section would clarify Article 57 of the Uniform Code
of Military Justice with respect to appellate review.
Sec. 544--Review of Courts-Martial Records
This section would amend the review of courts-martial
records when direct appeal is waived, withdrawn, or not filed.
Sec. 545--Uniform Code of Military Justice: Prohibition of Review of
Factual Sufficiency in Certain Appeals Before a Court of Criminal
Appeals
This section would prohibit the military courts of criminal
appeals from reviewing factual sufficiency.
Sec. 546--Clarification of Court of Criminal Appeals Review of
Sentencing This section would clarify that the portion of a sentence is
not inappropriately severe if it is in the President's established
sentencing parameters.
Sec. 547--Expansion of Victim Access to Court of Appeals for the Armed
Forces
This section would permit a victim of an offense to
petition the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to review
decisions and dispositions of a Court of Criminal Appeals.
Sec. 548--Modifications to Offense of Wrongful Broadcast or
Distribution of Intimate Visual Images Under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice
This section would modify the offense of wrongful broadcast
or distribution of intimate visual images under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice.
Sec. 549--Authorization of Death Penalty for Offense of Rape of a Child
under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This section would authorize the death penalty under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice for the offense of rape of a
child.
Sec. 549A--Punitive Article on Retaliation for Reporting of Sexual
Harassment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This section would create a punitive article under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice for retaliation for reporting
sexual harassment.
Sec. 549B--Revision of Department of Defense Instruction Regarding
Early Release Eligibility for Offenders Convicted of Certain Sexual
Offenses Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
revise the instruction regarding the early release eligibility
of those convicted of certain sexual offenses under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice.
Sec. 549C--Notification Required to Implement Changes to Military Legal
System Recommended by Special Review Panel Activities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
notify Congress of a change to the military legal system
recommended by the special review panel before implementing the
change.
Sec. 549D--Analysis of Potential Establishment of Separate Punitive
Article on Hazing Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
analyze the feasibility and advisability of modifying the
Uniform Code of Military Justice to establish a sperate
punitive article on hazing.
Subtitle F--Investigations and Other Legal Matters
Sec. 551--Extension of Special Victims' Counsel Services to Domestic
Violence Victims
This section would extend Special Victims' Counsel services
to domestic violence victims.
Sec. 552--Policies Regarding the Reporting of Missing Members of the
Armed Forces
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish Department-wide minimum standards for responding to
reports of missing servicemembers, including how servicemember
absences are categorized and notification to the appropriate
military criminal investigative organization and next of kin.
Sec. 553--Authority of Naval Criminal Investigative Service to
Investigate Sexual Harassment
This section would give the Naval Criminal Investigative
Service authority to investigate sexual harassment allegations.
Sec. 554--Cross-Service Data Sharing Regarding Substantiated
Allegations of Sexual Misconduct
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a data sharing arrangement to collect and make
available data concerning substantiated allegations of sexual
misconduct by members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 555--Inclusion of Sexual Harassment in Catch a Serial Offender
Program
This section would modify the Catch a Serial Offender
Program to permit members of the Armed Forces, adult
dependents, or employees of the Department of Defense to
participate in the program if they submit a complaint of sexual
harassment.
Sec. 556--Military Domestic Violence Emergent Housing Policy
This section would permit victims of domestic violence to
remain in military housing for up to one year.
Sec. 557--Requirement for Standardized Policies and Processes to Ensure
the Timely Review, Documentation, and Resolution of Requests for
Military Protective Orders
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
standardize policies and processes for Military Protective
Orders.
Sec. 558--Reestablishment of Defense Advisory Committee for the
Prevention of Sexual Misconduct
This section would reestablish the Defense Advisory
Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct.
Sec. 559--Pilot Program On Use of Advanced Monitoring and
Rehabilitative Technologies in Army Correctional Facilities
This section would direct the Army Corrections Command to
test the use of modern monitoring and rehabilitation
technologies to improve safety, accountability, and
rehabilitation outcomes within Army correctional facilities.
Subtitle G--Career Transition
Sec. 561--Establishment of Separation Oath for Members of the Armed
Forces
This section would amend title 10, United States Code, to
establish an oath for members separating from the Armed Forces.
Sec. 562--Designation of Senior Official for Military-to-Civilian
Transition
This section would direct the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness to designate a senior official to
oversee policy and programs related to the transition of
members of the Armed Forces from Active Duty to civilian life
or to the Reserve Components.
Sec. 563--Authorization of Pilot Program to Help Members Separating
from Certain Armed Forces Obtain Employment as Teachers
This section would create a pilot program for
servicemembers who are interested in pursuing careers in
academic environments following military service.
Sec. 564--Study on Separation of Members of the Armed Forces Due to the
Mandate to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccine and the Transfer of Education
Benefits by Such Members
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study on members of the Armed Forces who separated
from the Armed Forces due to the mandate to receive the COVID-
19 vaccine and the transfer of education benefits by such
members.
Subtitle H--Family Programs, Child Care, and Dependent Education
Sec. 571--Extension of Non-Medical Counseling Services Program for
Military Families
This section would extend non-medical counseling services
for military families through the Department of Defense
Military and Family Life Counseling Program until December 22,
2029.
Sec. 572--Pilot Program to Increase Payments for Child Care Services in
High-Cost Areas
This section would authorize the establishment of a pilot
program to provide grants to eligible providers seeking to
expand the capacity of child care for infants and toddlers.
Sec. 573--Pilot Program to Provide Financial Assistance to Members of
the Armed Forces for In-Home Child Care: Inclusion of Au Pairs
This section would include au pairs as eligible in-home
child care providers through the Child Care in Your Home Fee
Assistance Pilot Program.
Sec. 574--Modifications to Pilot Program to Provide Financial
Assistance to Members of the Armed Forces for In-Home Child Care
This section would provide direct payments to members of
the Armed Forces utilizing the Child Care in Your Home pilot
program.
Sec. 575--Certain Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that Benefit
Dependents of Military and Civilian Personnel
This section would authorize $50.0 million for the purpose
of providing assistance to local educational agencies with
military dependent students, and $20.0 million for local
educational agencies eligible to receive a payment for children
with severe disabilities.
Sec. 576--Policies to Support Military Families Subject to Court-
Ordered Child Custody Arrangements
This section would require the Secretary concerned to
develop regulations to support military families subject to
court-ordered child custody arrangements.
Sec. 577--Authority for Pilot Program for Certain Military Spouses to
Become Special Education Teachers in DODEA Schools
This section would provide the Department of Defense the
authority to conduct a 5 year pilot program that aims to
recruit certain military spouses to become special education
teachers in DoDEA schools.
Sec. 578--Pilot Program for Push-Text Notifications to Members and
Dependents
This section would establish a pilot program to provide
members of the Armed Forces and adult dependents, located
outside of the United States, with certain information via text
message.
Subtitle I--Decorations and Awards
Sec. 581--Gold Star Survivor: Definition Prescribed by Secretary of
Defense
This section would amend section 1126 of title 10, United
States Code, by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to
prescribe the definition of a gold star survivor.
Sec. 582--Medal of Honor Recipients: Access to Any Military
Installation; Liaison
This section would establish a liaison for Medal of Honor
recipients. It would also grant Medal of Honor recipients
unaccompanied access to military installations.
Sec. 583--Technical Correction to Authorization to Award the
Distinguished-Service Cross to Isaac ``Ike'' Camacho
This section provides a technical correction to section 592
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026.
Sec. 584--Authorization of Service Ribbon for a Member of the National
Guard who Performs Homeland Defense Duty
This section would authorize a Service Ribbon for members
of the National Guard who perform duties in support of a
homeland defense activity.
Sec. 585--Authorization for Posthumous Award of Medal of Honor to
Rafael Peralta for Acts of Valor
This section would waive the time limitation specified in
section 8298(a) and 8300 of title 10, United States Code, and
authorize the award of the Medal of Honor posthumously to
Rafael Peralta for acts of valor.
Sec. 586--Authorization for Posthumous Award of Medal of Honor to
Robert A. Lodge for Acts of Valor
This section would waive the time limitation specified in
section 9274 of title 10, United States Code, and authorize the
award of the Medal of Honor posthumously to Robert A. Lodge for
acts of valor.
Sec. 587--Authorization for Award of the Distinguished-Service Cross
for James O. Ratliff for Acts of Valor during the Vietnam War
This section would waive the time limitation specified in
section 7272 of title 10, United States Code, and authorize the
award of Distinguished-Service Cross to James O. Ratliff for
acts of valor during the Vietnam war.
Sec. 588--Authorization to Award the Distinguished-Service Cross to
Joseph P. Lynch for Acts of Valor as a Member of the Army During the
Vietnam War
This section would waive the time limitation specified in
section 7272 of title 10, United States Code, and authorize the
award of Distinguished-Service Cross to Joseph P. Lynch for
acts of valor during the Vietnam war.
Sec. 589--Sense of Congress Regarding Award of Medal of Honor to Thomas
J. Grasso for Acts of Valor During Operation Freedom's Sentinel
This section would provide a sense of Congress that the
time limitation specified in section 7274 of title 10, United
States Code, should be waived and authorize the award of the
Medal of Honor to Thomas J. Grasso for acts of valor.
Sec. 589A--Sense of Congress Regarding Award of Medal of Honor to
Retired Colonel Philip J. Conran for Acts of Valor in Laos During the
Vietnam War
This section would provide a sense of Congress that the
time limitation specified in section 9274 of title 10, United
States Code, should be waived and authorize the award of the
Medal of Honor to Philip J. Conran for acts of valor.
Subtitle J--Other Matters and Miscellaneous Reports
Sec. 591--Expansion of Eligibility of Veterans for Certain Military
Adaptive Sports Program
This section would expand the period of eligibility for
veterans participating in the Warrior and Invictus Games.
Sec. 592--Expanded Goals of Authorized Program Regarding the National
September 11 Memorial and Museum
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to seek
to amend an agreement for the September 11 Memorial and Museum
to include promoting security.
Sec. 593--Local Agricultural Procurement in Guam Commissaries
This section would designate a liaison from the Defense
Commissary Agency (DeCA) to assistant local producers in doing
business with DeCA in Guam. It would also require increased
procurement of locally grown produce for commissaires located
in Guam.
Sec. 594--Submission of Review of Operational Effectiveness of Army and
Marine Corps Ground Combat Units
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to Congress a memorandum issued by the Under Secretary
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness on December 18, 2025,
relating to ``Review of the Operational Effectiveness of Army
and Marine Corps Ground Combat Units.''
TITLE VI--MILITARY COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Assessment of Ultra-Processed Foods and Artificial Additives in
Military Food Programs
The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Defense Health Agency and appropriate
public health and nutrition experts, to conduct a comprehensive
assessment of the prevalence of ultra-processed foods,
artificial dyes, preservatives, and other synthetic additives
in foods and beverages served or made available to members of
the Armed Forces through dining facilities, commissaries,
exchanges, training environments, operational rations, and
other military food programs. The assessment shall evaluate the
extent to which such ingredients are present in military food
offerings. The assessment shall also identify opportunities to
increase the availability of minimally processed and nutrient-
dense food options and provide recommendations, as appropriate,
to improve ingredient transparency and nutritional standards
within Department of Defense food procurement and feeding
programs. Not later than March 1, 2027, the Secretary shall
submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the
findings of the assessment and any planned actions to address
the use of ultra-processed foods and artificial additives in
military food programs.
Defense Finance and Account Service Payroll Reform Review
The committee notes the Department's efforts to modernize
business processes and systems utilizing commercial best
practices and solutions. The committee further notes that there
exists a robust competitive market of commercial payroll
providers who have the technical capability to assist the
Department in retiring legacy systems, reducing cost, improving
service to personnel, and improving auditability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by May
1, 2027, on the Department's efforts to integrate commercial
payroll technologies into the operations of the Defense Finance
and Account Service (DFAS). The report should include:
(1) a detailing of payroll systems currently used by DFAS;
(2) a listing of DFAS investments in payroll software over
the past five fiscal years;
(3) a listing of current and planned DFAS investments in
payroll software for the next five fiscal years;
(4) a detailed breakdown of past and current efforts to
leverage commercially available payroll software; and
(5) identification of what barriers to acquisition of
commercial payroll systems exist and recommendations to
streamline the procurement and use of such systems.
Department of Defense Food Program and Nutrition Objectives
The committee notes poor health and nutrition are growing
challenges that threaten military readiness and our ability to
maintain a physically fit and healthy force. In 2024, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report (GAO-
24-106155) in which they found the Department of Defense had
not fully addressed congressionally directed efforts to
increase access to nutritious food. The GAO report further
notes that the Department of Defense has not established the
congressionally directed nutrition leadership structure and
that service oversight assessments show nutrition labeling
programs do not address all program elements.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to
the House Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee
on Armed Service not later than March 1, 2027 on the following:
(1) The current status of the Department of Defenses
efforts to implement programs to provide healthy and nutritious
food and nutrition labeling on foods at all military
installations;
(2) Plans for Department of Defense and the military
services to implement the recommendations of GAO-24-106155; and
(3) Such other information as the Secretary of Defense
deems appropriate.
Food Insecurity Among Members of the Armed Forces
The committee notes ongoing challenges with food insecurity
among servicemembers and military families. Section 656 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92) directed the Secretary of Defense to report on food
insecurity among servicemembers and their dependents. The
resulting analysis, conducted by the RAND National Defense
Research Institute and published in 2023, found that
approximately 25.8 percent of active duty members were food
insecure in 2018, nearly triple the rate of comparable
civilians.
The committee is concerned that recent statutory changes
may affect servicemembers' access to and eligibility for
nutrition assistance programs. The committee believes the
Department should assess potential impacts of such changes and
food insecurity levels across the Armed Forces.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Service Secretaries, to submit a report
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services, not later than March 1, 2027, on
food insecurity among members of the Armed Forces and the
dependents of such members. The report should include the
following information:
(1) an identification of the total number of members and
dependents of such members enrolled in Federal nutrition
assistance programs as of the most recent period for which data
were collected for Public Law 116-92, including but not limited
to:
(a) Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP);
(b) Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC); and
(c) Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance (FSSA);
(2) an identification of the total number of members and
dependents of such members enrolled in Federal nutrition
assistance programs as of the date of the report;
(3) a comparison of the number of members and dependents
identified under paragraph (1) with the number of members and
dependents identified under paragraph (2), including the net
change in enrollment in total numbers of members and dependents
and in percentage of members and dependents and a
disaggregation by Armed Force, grade of the member, geographic
location, and program type;
(4) an identification of the number of members receiving
the Basic Needs Allowance (BNA) under section 402b of title 37,
United States Code, as of the baseline period established under
paragraph (1) and as of the date of the report, and a
comparison of such numbers, including the net change in total
numbers of members and percentage of members and a
disaggregation by Armed Force, grade of the member, geographic
location;
(5) an identification of the number of dependents of
members using free or reduced-price school meal programs as of
the baseline period established under paragraph (1) and as of
the date of the report, and a comparison of such numbers,
including the net change in total numbers of dependents and
percentage of dependents;
(6) an identification of the number of members and
dependents of members using food banks, food pantries, or
similar charitable food assistance on or near military
installations as of the baseline period established under
paragraph (1) and as of the date of the report, and a
comparison of such numbers of members, including the net change
in total numbers of members and dependents and percentage of
members and dependents.
Funded Environmental and Morale Leave Eligibility
The committee recognizes that funded environmental and
morale leave is an important quality of life and readiness tool
for servicemembers and families assigned to remote, isolated,
or environmentally challenging locations. The committee notes
that the current eligibility framework generally requires
assignment at an authorized funded environmental and morale
leave location for 24 or more consecutive months.
The committee is concerned that a 24-month eligibility
threshold may not adequately account for servicemembers and
families assigned to 12-month tours at remote or isolated
locations where access to affordable, reliable, or regularly
available transportation is limited. The committee believes the
Department should assess whether expanding funded environmental
and morale leave eligibility to include certain 12-month
assignments would better support family stability, morale,
retention, and readiness at hardship locations.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than March 1, 2027, on the
feasibility and advisability of expanding funded environmental
and morale leave eligibility from assignments of 24 or more
consecutive months to assignments of 12 or more consecutive
months at authorized funded environmental and morale leave
locations. The report should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current funded environmental and
morale leave eligibility framework, including the rationale for
the 24-month assignment threshold;
(2) an identification of locations where servicemembers and
command-sponsored dependents assigned for 12-month tours may
experience transportation constraints, geographic isolation,
environmental hardship, or elevated quality of life challenges;
(3) an estimate of the cost of expanding funded
environmental and morale leave eligibility to servicemembers
and eligible dependents assigned to authorized locations for 12
or more consecutive months;
(4) an assessment of the potential effects of such an
expansion on morale, family stability, retention, and
readiness;
(5) an assessment of any aircraft capacity, commercial
transportation, administrative, or implementation challenges
associated with such an expansion; and
(6) any recommended policy or legislative changes necessary
to authorize or implement expanded eligibility for funded
environmental and morale leave.
Providing Debt Relief for Our Troops
The committee recognizes the quality of life and cost-of-
living constraints facing servicemembers across the U.S.
military. As inflation remains persistent, servicemembers and
their families, more than ever, are facing challenges through
no fault of their own. And at the same time, the committee
recognizes the harm financial literacy gaps can present,
especially for junior enlisted personnel.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to submit a report on to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1,
2027, which includes the following:
(1) an assessment of the leading causes of financial
hardships for military personnel, with a particular focus on
junior enlistees;
(2) an analysis of what financial literacy guidelines could
help rebuild the force and remove barriers that distract from
warfighting; and
(3) an analysis of the primary factors contributing to
cost-of-living challenges for military personnel.
Review of Alaska Remote Assignment Travel Reimbursement and Potential
Expansion
The committee notes that section 603 of the James M. Inhofe
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263) authorized Secretaries of the military departments
to reimburse eligible members assigned to a permanent duty
station (PDS) in Alaska for the cost of airfare to their home
of record. This benefit was reauthorized in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (H. Rept. 119-
231) and was intended to improve the quality of life and mental
health of servicemembers by reducing the financial burden of
traveling from remote locations, like Alaska, to see family.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than April 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) the total number of members, broken down by rank and
branch, who received reimbursement for airfare from Alaska to
their home of record in fiscal years 2023 and 2026;
(2) the average out-of-pocket savings for members using the
reimbursement and a comparison of these savings against the
cost of airfare from major Alaska hubs during peak travel
seasons;
(3) a qualitative assessment of how this travel benefit has
impacted the morale and retention of members stationed in
Alaska;
(4) a feasibility study on expanding this travel
reimbursement to members assigned to other remote or isolated
PDSs outside the contiguous United States (OCONUS); and
(5) an evaluation of the impact of allowing members to
travel to a ``designated location'' other than their official
home of record (such as a spouse's hometown or a primary
caregiver's residence) if the cost is equal to, or less than,
the cost to the home of record.
Sailors Living Ashore Briefing
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than April 1, 2027, on how section 622 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) authorization to
pay Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for off-ship
accommodations for junior enlisted is being utilized. The
briefing shall include the following:
(1) utilization of authorization;
(2) number of sailors living on ships ashore in fiscal year
2026;
(3) barriers to extending the authority to additional
sailors;
(4) the amount of BAH given under Public Law 118-159
authorization for fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2026; and
(5) additional recommendations to ensure no sailor lives
ashore.
Support for Local Produce in Commissaries
The committee recognizes the importance of providing
servicemembers and their families with access to fresh, high-
quality food. Locally sourced produce is often fresher and more
nutrient-dense, contributing to overall health and well-being.
The committee supports the continued efforts by the Defense
Commissary Agency (DeCA) to locally source fruits and
vegetables to the extent practicable. The committee further
encourages the DeCA to expand agreements with local partners to
enhance freshness, quality, and nutritional value of available
food options.
Updating Military Lending Act Regulations
The committee believes that regulations implementing the
Military Lending Act (MLA) should be periodically updated in
order to keep pace with the evolving financial services
industry and the changing needs of servicemembers and their
families. The need to update the regulations at least every two
years was recognized by the Department of Defense in 2015 when
it issued regulations to implement the 2013 amendments to the
MLA. The committee is further concerned by increasing judicial
scrutiny of Federal regulations that may exceed the provisions
of law.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 30, 2027, on an evaluation of the effects of the
2015 MLA regulations and their relevance to todays financial
services landscape and the demands and preferences of military
consumers. The briefing should include the following:
(1) whether the 2015 regulations limited the availability
of safe and affordable credit for servicemembers and their
families, including installment loans available in the civilian
marketplace;
(2) whether the 2015 regulations had the practical effect
of forcing servicemembers to seek alternative and less safe
credit products; and
(3) whether the 2015 regulations unnecessarily restricted
the ability of servicemembers to refinance auto loans to a
lower rate.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Bonus and Incentive Pays
Sec. 601--One-Year Extension of Certain Expiring Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities
This section would extend service bonus and special pay
authorities until December 2027.
Sec. 602--Authorizing Board Certification Incentive Pay for Medical
Officers with Doctoral Degrees
This section would amend section 335 of title 37, United
States Code, to ensure a qualifying Doctor of Philosophy Degree
is included for special and bonus pay authorities.
Sec. 603--One-Time Corrective Increase and Annual Adjustments for
Certain Special and Incentive Pays for Members of the Armed Forces;
Clarification of Special and Incentive Pay Authorities for Members of
Reserve Components
This section would authorize a one-time corrective increase
and annual adjustments for certain special and incentive pays
for members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 604--Payment of Maximum Amount of Aviation Incentive Pay to
Aviation Officers with More than 8 Years of Aviation Service;
Enhancement of Retention Incentives Available to Aviation Officers
This section would authorize maximum aviation incentive pay
after 8 years of service and expand Air Force rated officer
retention tools with shorter contracts, higher bonuses, and
greater assignment flexibility.
Sec. 605--Expansions of Authorities to Contract with Members of the
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
This section would authorize an increase in contracting
bonuses for members of the senior reserve officers' training
corps.
Sec. 606--Retroactive Granting of Waivers for Aviation Incentive Pay
This section would require the Navy to retroactively grant
aviation incentive pay (AvIP) gate waivers for certain Tactical
Air Control Squadron department heads, restore missed AvIP, and
report on flying-duty certification issues before ending
eligibility.
Subtitle B--Allowances
Sec. 611--Basic Needs Allowance: Exclusion of Basic Allowance for
Housing from the Calculation of Gross Household Income of an Eligible
Member of the Armed Forces
This section would modify how gross household income is
calculated for the purpose of determining a servicemember's
eligibility for a basic needs allowance.
Sec. 612--Basic Allowance for housing: Permanent Authority to Make
Certain Temporary Increases
This section would permanently extend the Secretary of
Defense's authority to provide temporary Basic Allowance for
Housing increases in areas affected by disasters, military
population surges, or significant housing cost increases.
Sec. 613--Temporary Adjustment to a Rate of the Basic Allowance for
Housing for Members of the Uniformed Services: Lower Threshold;
Permanent Authority
This section would adjust a temporary rate of the basic
allowance for housing for members of the uniformed services.
Sec. 614--Modifications to cost-of-living allowance in the continental
United States for members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps,
and Space Force
This section would modify the calculation of the cost-of-
living allowance.
Sec. 615--Payment of Costs to Ship Breast Milk of a Member Performing
Certain Duty
This section would codify existing policy that permits
reimbursement for the shipping of breast milk of up to $1,000
for eligible servicemembers.
Subtitle C--Leave
Sec. 621--Accrual of Leave for Members of the Armed Forces
This section would increase servicemember leave accrual
from 2.5 days to 3.5 days per month.
Sec. 622--Accumulation of Leave for Members of the Armed Forces
This section would eliminate the 60-day cap on accumulation
of leave for members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 623--Bereavement Leave for a Member of the Armed Forces in the
Case of a Loss of Pregnancy or Stillbirth
This section would authorize bereavement leave for a member
of the Armed Forces in the case of a loss of pregnancy or
stillbirth.
Subtitle D--Family and Survivor Benefits
Sec. 631--Payment to Participant in Survivor Benefit Plan whose Spouse
Dies Before the Participant
This section would add a $1,000 funeral/burial benefit to
the Survivor Benefit Plan for those who elect participation on
or after July 1, 2027, and are predeceased by their spouse
beneficiary.
Sec. 632--Increase in and Cost-of-Living Adjustment of Death Gratuity
This section would increase the death gratuity.
Subtitle E--Defense Resale Matters
Sec. 641--Use of Commissary Stores by Employees of the Department of
Defense Education Activity and Military Child Development Centers
This section would expand commissary access to civilian
employees of the Department of Defense Education Activity or a
military child development center.
Sec. 642--Single-Use Shopping Bags in Commissary Stores
This section would amend section 2485 of title 10, United
States Code, to prohibit the Defense Commissary Agency from
prohibiting the use of, or charging a fee for, single-use
shopping bags in a commissary store.
Sec. 643--Limitation on Implementation of Supply Chain Transformation
Initiative of the Defense Commissary Agency
This section would prohibit the use of funds to implement,
award contracts, or change commissary supply operations until
the report required by the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense
Authorization Act regarding the Defense Commissary Agency is
submitted.
Subtitle F--Other Benefits, Reports, and Briefings
Sec. 651--Career Flexibility Programs: Eligibility of a Member Already
Subject to a Period of Obligated Service; Minimum Length of Program
This section would authorize service members with existing
obligations use the Career Intermission Program and sets a one
month minimum participation period.
Sec. 652--Provision of Information Regarding Food Access and Child Care
for Members Receiving Orders for a Change of Permanent Station
This section would amend section 1056 of title 10, United
States Code, to include information regarding food access and
child care for servicemembers in permanent change of station
relocation assistance programs.
Sec. 653--Reserves and Retired Members: Acceptance of Employment,
Payments, and Awards From Foreign Governments Through Private Entities
This section would include reserves and retired service
members in the rules governing the acceptance of employment,
payments, and awards from a foreign government through a
private entity.
Sec. 654--Program to Provide to Certain Patrons a Discount on Motor
Fuel Sold at Exchange Stores
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide eligible patrons a discount on motor fuel sold at
military exchanges equivalent to federal and state tax.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Advanced Resuscitation Systems for Combat Casualty Care
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
improving survivability and neurological outcomes in combat
casualty care, particularly in austere and prolonged field care
environments where access to definitive surgical intervention
is limited. The committee notes recent advances in portable
resuscitation technologies capable of restoring and sustaining
circulation and oxygenation following cardiac arrest or severe
traumatic injury.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Defense Health Agency and the
U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, to assess the
feasibility, operational utility, and medical effectiveness of
advanced portable resuscitation systems for use in forward-
deployed and austere environments. Such assessment shall
include consideration of the potential to extend survivability
timelines, improve neurological outcomes, and enhance limb and
organ preservation.
The Secretary shall submit a report to the House Committee
on Armed services by March 1, 2027 on the results of this
assessment, including ongoing and planned research and
development efforts, pilot program opportunities, integration
pathways into current combat casualty care protocols, and any
associated resource requirements.
Advancing Non-Opioid Alternatives for Chronic Pain
The committee recognizes the significant impact of chronic
pain on thousands of service members and the potential for
overreliance on opioids to manage chronic pain conditions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027, on
the availability of FDA-approved non-opioid treatment options
to manage chronic pain conditions and actions the Department is
taking to improve access to non-opioid alternatives for chronic
pain for TRICARE beneficiaries as an early treatment option.
AI Ambient Listening Technology
The Committee encourages efforts throughout the entire
Military Health System (MHS) to reduce administrative burdens
and improve patient outcomes. The Committee supports the
Department's efforts to adopt ambient AI listening technologies
to automate clinical documentation, as demonstrated at
locations such as Madigan Army Medical Center and implemented
at the McChord Clinic on Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Successful
adoption of these technologies across the enterprise can both
improve patient care across Military Treatment Facilities and
reduce clinician documentation workload and burnout. The
Committee directs the Director of the Defense Health Agency to
provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on Armed
Services, no later than December 1, 2026, examining the results
of adopting this ambient AI clinical documentation pilot
program and discussing the feasibility of expanding these
technologies across the MHS.
Air Force Suicide Prevention Training Programs
The committee remains concerned regarding persistently high
rates of military suicide and emphasizes the need for a more
modernized approach to prevention across the force. The
committee recognizes the Department of the Air Forces efforts
to incorporate immersive training tools and techniques into its
Suicide Prevention Training programs, including virtual
reality. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Air Force to provide a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on current Suicide
Prevention Training programs. The report shall include:
(1) the efficacy of current Suicide Prevention Training
programs;
(2) associated resource requirements for existing Suicide
Prevention Training programs;
(3) proposed Suicide Prevention Training programs
incorporating immersive training tools and techniques,
including virtual reality that can reduce manpower needs;
(4) resources and time required to design, develop,
implement, and evaluate programs using immersive training tools
and techniques; and
(5) any barriers to expanding programs using immersive
training tools and techniques.
All-Hazards Military Medical Response
The committee is aware of the Department's policy for
emergency management related to medical emergencies caused by
blast, burn and/or penetrating injuries. However, given the
current and more complex ``All Hazards'' threat environment in
both CONUS and OCONUS scenarios, the committee believes that
the Department's medical response plans related to exposure to
chemical, biological and radiological weapons, potentially in
addition to more traditional injuries, should be reviewed and
updated. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the Senate committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 31, 2027, including the following:
(1) a description of current capabilities to detect, treat,
and safely transport patients with injuries related to
chemical, biological and radiological exposure, both in
isolation and when combined with blast, burn and penetrating
injuries;
(2) an assessment of gaps in current capabilities to
detect, treat, and safely transport patients with injuries
related to chemical, biological and radiological exposure, both
in isolation and when combined with blast, burn and penetrating
injuries; and
(3) a summary of policy, technology, manpower and other
resource requirements needed to resolve these capability gaps.
Ambient Artificial Intelligence Clinical Documentation in The Military
Health System
The committee is aware that the Defense Health Agency (DHA)
completed a six-week pilot program in late 2025 evaluating
ambient artificial intelligence (AI) clinical documentation
technology at four Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs). The
committee understands that ambient AI listening technology can
accurately document and synthesize relevant patient information
and clinician-patient conversations, reducing administrative
burden on providers and enabling clinicians to focus on direct
patient care. The committee is encouraged by early indicators
from installations such as Madigan Army Medical Center and the
McChord Clinic on Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and notes the
potential for this technology to reduce errors in medical
records and improve the quality and safety of care delivered to
servicemembers and their families.
The committee directs the Director of the Defense Health
Agency to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 31, 2027, on the results and
future applicability of the ambient AI clinical documentation
pilot program. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of the results of the ambient AI clinical
documentation pilot program conducted at MTFs in late 2025,
including clinician feedback, documentation accuracy, and
impacts on administrative workload and patient care quality;
and
(2) an analysis of the feasibility of expanding ambient AI
clinical documentation technology across additional MTFs within
the Military Health System, including recommended
implementation pathways, estimated costs, and potential
barriers to enterprise-wide adoption.
Anonymous Non-Medical Counseling and Peer Support
The committee recognizes the persistent challenge in
meeting the mental health needs of servicemembers due to
perceived professional barriers that may inhibit an
individual's willingness to engage with mental health resources
and services, including stigma and perceived risk of impact on
careers. The committee notes that this challenge is
particularly acute within the special operations community, in
which operators and enablers are regularly subject to high-risk
and high-stress occupational exposures, increasing the risk of
mental health issues.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, U.S.
Special Operations Command, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
the feasibility of establishing a pilot program to provide
anonymous non-medical counseling, peer support, and related
telehealth support capabilities via an anonymous telehealth
platform in order to increase the utilization of mental health
and wellness services by special operations personnel.
The briefing shall include:
(1) an analysis of projected participation by
servicemembers who may otherwise be unwilling to engage with
available mental health, wellness, or nonmedical counseling
resources, including prospective benefits to individual, unit,
and force readiness;
(2) any changes to traditional policy authorities and
funding pathways that may help better facilitate access to such
a pilot;
(3) a cost-benefit analysis of technological, privacy,
cybersecurity, and operational factors associated with the use
of anonymous telehealth versus operational telemedicine
platforms;
(4) an assessment of the current capacity of non-medical
counseling, peer support, and clinical support resources to
meet any projected increase in demand; and
(5) any recommendations regarding whether, and under what
conditions, the pilot should be expanded across the command.
Artificial Intelligence Translation for Military Medical Missions
The committee notes that servicemembers, military families,
and contractors stationed overseas frequently encounter life-
threatening delays in medical care due to their inability to
read foreign-language medical documentation, including
discharge paperwork, diagnostic results, and treatment
instructions. The committee directed the Secretary of Defense,
in the committee report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (H. Rept. 119-231), to
submit a report on the feasibility of deploying artificial
intelligence (AI) translation tools with integrated human
oversight at military medical facilities overseas. As of the
date of this report, the Department has not submitted the
required report. The committee remains concerned about this gap
in overseas medical readiness and believes that commercially
available AI translation tools have matured to a point where
deployment at military medical facilities abroad is
operationally feasible.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the status of the
report required by the committee report accompanying the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (H.
Rept. 119-231) and the Department's assessment of AI
translation capabilities for overseas military medical
facilities. The briefing should include the following:
(1) the status of the report required by H. Rept. 119-231,
including the reason for any delay in submission and the
expected submission date;
(2) an assessment of currently available AI translation
tools capable of handling medical documentation in the
languages most commonly encountered at overseas military
medical facilities, including evaluation of translation
accuracy, security requirements, and human oversight protocols;
and
(3) the Department's recommendation for whether and how to
field AI-assisted medical translation capabilities at overseas
military medical facilities, including any required policy,
authority, or resource changes.
Assessment of Emerging Clinical Research for Treatment-Resistant PTSD
The committee recognizes the importance of federally lawful
clinical research, expanded access, and right-to-try pathways
for investigational treatments addressing serious mental
illness, including post-traumatic stress disorder. These
pathways may include recent State-enabled support for Food and
Drug Administration--regulated studies of psilocybin-containing
investigational products, including naturally derived whole-
mushroom formulations administered in structured therapeutic
settings, consistent with applicable Federal law, Right to Try,
expanded access authorities, Drug Enforcement Administration
requirements, and the April 18, 2026 Presidential Executive
Order titled ``Accelerating Medical Treatments for Serious
Mental Illness.'' The committee encourages the Department of
Defense to remain informed of lawful research and access
pathways relevant to post-traumatic stress disorder and other
serious mental health conditions affecting servicemembers
during post-deployment and transition periods, and members of
the Reserve Components and National Guard who also serve as
first responders. The committee commends the rigorous, ethical
clinical research conducted in accordance with federal law and
force health protection standards to evaluate emerging
treatments for service-connected mental health conditions where
existing therapies have proven insufficient. The committee
further believes that careful Department of Defense review of
safety, dosing, and feasibility data is appropriate to inform
future Department force health protection policy, medical
readiness planning, and continuity of care during military-to-
civilian transition.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2027, assessing the data from the
Phase I Passage and Phase II Fortitude Trials and its potential
applicability to active-duty, reserve, and transitioning
servicemembers. The report shall include the following:
(1) a summary of the Phase I Passage Trial safety, dosing,
and adverse event data reviewed and analyzed by the Department
for applicability to active-duty, reserve/guard, and
transitioning servicemember populations;
(2) implications for force health protection, medical
readiness, and suicide prevention strategies, including
identification of any gaps in existing treatment options for
active-duty, reserve/guard, and transitioning servicemembers;
(3) legal and regulatory requirements for expanded access,
Right to Try, or other federally lawful pathways involving
investigational Schedule I treatments, including coordination
with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Drug
Enforcement Administration, and the applicability of the 18
April 2026 Presidential Executive Order ``Accelerating Medical
Treatments for Serious Mental Illness'' to treatment-resistant
PTSD and associated comorbidities, including elevated suicide
risk during post-deployment and transition periods; and
(4) proposed timeline for potential pilot activities or
expanded clinical research beginning in fiscal year 2027, and
for any broader implementation thereafter, as appropriate.
Automated Pharmacy Pickup Lockers and Kiosks at Military Treatment
Facilities
The committee recognizes concerns by persistent staffing
shortages at pharmacies within Military Treatment Facilities
(MTFs) and the resulting impact on access to prescription
services for service members, retirees, and military families.
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
successfully utilized automated pharmacy pickup lockers and
kiosks for more than a decade to provide secure, efficient, and
convenient prescription pickup capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Health Agency to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the Department's plans to expand the use of automated pharmacy
pickup lockers and kiosks across the Military Health System.
The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) the current inventory and locations of automated
pharmacy pickup systems;
(2) utilization rates and beneficiary demand at existing
locations;
(3) the impact of such systems on pharmacy staffing
requirements, prescription wait times, and patient
satisfaction;
(4) barriers to accelerated procurement and deployment of
such systems;
(5) estimated costs associated with expanding automated
pharmacy pickup capabilities throughout the Military Health
System; and
(6) any recommendations for legislative, policy, or
budgetary changes necessary to support broader adoption of
these technologies.
Blast Overpressure Exposure and Traumatic Brain Injury
The committee is concerned about the potential for
servicemembers to sustain traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the
line of duty, including from blast overpressure exposure, and
notes that TBI is separate and distinct from Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder and other mental health conditions. TBI is
linked to increased risk of suicide among servicemembers and
veterans, but currently, there are no diagnostic tools that can
accurately diagnose TBI and no Food and Drug Administration
approved treatments. The committee encourages the Director of
the Defense Health Agency to prioritize TBI-specific research.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to provide a report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 15, 2027, that includes:
(1) current and future initiatives for TBI-specific
research, including TBIs from blast overpressure exposure;
(2) any progress to date on identifying promising
diagnostic tools or treatments for TBI;
(3) any steps the Department has taken or plans to take to
reduce the risk of suicide among servicemembers with TBI; and
(4) the research roadmap for TBI over the next five years.
Blast Overpressure Mitigation for Small and Medium Caliber Weapons
The committee remains concerned about the cumulative
effects of blast overpressure exposure on servicemembers
operating small and medium caliber weapons systems and
recognizes the potential for commercially available blast
mitigation technologies to reduce exposure and associated risks
to warfighter health, readiness, and performance.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments and the Blast Safety Officers established pursuant
to section 508 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60), to provide a report to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2028, on the
Department's efforts to evaluate and implement blast
overpressure mitigation technologies. The report shall include:
(1) An assessment of commercially available muzzle blast
overpressure mitigation devices and related technologies for
small and medium caliber weapons that have demonstrated
reductions in overpressure exposure through independent testing
or operational evaluations.
(2) A description of current policies, testing, fielding
activities, and pilot programs involving muzzle blast
mitigation devices across the Armed Forces, including any gaps
in implementation or standardization.
(3) A plan, including estimated costs, timelines, and
performance metrics, for evaluating and integrating effective
blast mitigation technologies into training and operational
environments.
(4) An analysis of blast exposure data collected since the
establishment of Blast Safety Officers, by weapon system and
caliber category, and any observed correlations with health,
readiness, or performance outcomes.
(5) An analysis of the costs associated with not mitigating
blast overpressure exposure, including medical, disability,
readiness, retention, training, productivity, and personnel
replacement costs to the Department of Defense and the Federal
Government.
(6) Recommendations for any additional research, testing,
evaluation, procurement, policy, safety, or certification
actions necessary to accelerate adoption of effective blast
overpressure mitigation technologies while preserving
operational suitability and supporting the Department's
Warfighter Performance Optimization and Total Force Fitness
objectives.
Briefing on Department of Defense Vaccine Research and Development
The committee recognizes changes to federal vaccine
advisory structures and evolving regulatory standards may have
introduced uncertainty into the development, evaluation, and
acquisition of vaccines relevant to military populations. The
committee notes that these developments may have direct
implications for the health of service members, particularly
those deployed to high-risk environments, as well as broader
impacts on force readiness and global operational capability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives, no later than March 31, 2027 that
includes the following:
(1) the identified DoD vaccine research and development
priorities to protect service members against endemic,
emerging, and biothreat pathogens, including a list of existing
and planned DoD vaccine projects;
(2) the historical funding levels for DoD vaccine research,
development, testing, and evaluation over the last five years;
(3) the identified challenges and risks associated with
evolving regulatory pathways for vaccines intended for military
use, including implications for rapid deployment in operational
settings; and
(4) an assessment of the risks to service members' health,
force health protection, and overall military readiness if DoD
vaccine research and development priorities are delayed,
reduced, or not achieved.
Combating Respiratory Infections
Indoor air quality affects tactical and operational
readiness as well as threatens the quality of life of military
personnel and their families. The committee believes it is
important to better understand the prevalence and/or spread of
pathogens indoors. As a result, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, on
the following:
(1) status of ongoing efforts to assess the risk of indoor
pathogens at military installations;
(2) how the Department assesses and quantifies the spread
of pathogens indoors;
(3) how the Department evaluates the associated impact and
risk on military personnel resident or working in military
installation facilities where the pathogens exist;
(4) what tools and/or equipment is available to address
poor indoor air quality issues, to include personal protective
equipment, etc.; and
(5) whether the Department has the right resources and
authorities to address indoor air quality issues at military
installations.
Comptroller General Study of Uniformed Services University Medical
School
The committee remains concerned about challenges the
Department of Defense faces recruiting and retaining the
desired number of health professionals in critical specialties.
As a medical school for the armed services, Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences supports the readiness of the
warfighter and the health of the military community by
educating health care professionals, including providers, in
addition to supporting cutting edge research. Therefore, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to conduct a review of the Department's Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences. The review should include:
(1) a description of the Uniformed Services University of
the Health Sciences' structure and responsibilities, including
any recent or planned changes and related budgetary resources;
(2) the extent to which the Department of Defense captures
applicant and enrollment data and assesses the Uniformed
Services University of the Health Sciences' ability to meet its
annual recruitment goals for medical students;
(3) the extent to which the Department assesses the quality
and performance of enrolled medical students in the Uniformed
Services University of Health Sciences; and
(4) any additional matters or recommendations the
Comptroller General deems appropriate.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
by April 30, 2027, with the results of the review to follow in
a report by December 31, 2027.
Direct Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Post-Amputation Pain Management
The committee recognizes the profound challenges that
military personnel face, including traumatic limb loss. Service
members with limb loss often experience chronic post-amputation
pain, resulting in an increased risk of opioid addiction,
suicidal ideation, and suicide. The committee is aware of
emerging technologies related to direct electrical nerve
stimulation that may systematically alleviate chronic post-
amputation pain, with the potential to significantly reduce
rates of opioid abuse and suicide among service members.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 1, 2026, on the Army's efforts to study the impact of
direct electrical nerve stimulation technology on post-
amputation pain management in service members. The report shall
include the following:
(1) a description of current and planned Army research
efforts examining the use of direct electrical nerve
stimulation to address chronic post-amputation pain, including
any studies undertaken in coordination with the Defense Health
Agency or other military departments;
(2) an assessment of the available evidence on the
effectiveness of direct electrical nerve stimulation in
reducing chronic post-amputation pain and associated rates of
opioid use and abuse among service members; and
(3) the Army's plan, if any, to transition validated direct
electrical nerve stimulation technologies into clinical use
within military treatment facilities, including any barriers to
adoption and recommended next steps.
DoD Report on Medically Complex Children
Children with medical complexity (CMC) have serious long-
term health conditions that are not easily met by existing
health care models, often requiring the highest level of
support from children's hospitals and specialized pediatric
providers. CMC caregivers must manage numerous providers,
navigate complex health systems, and help their children
overcome significant social and community barriers on a daily
basis. With regular permanent changes of station, military
families with CMC often face a more overwhelming task of
changing providers, often times in settings with inadequate
access to the specialty services needed. The committee is aware
of the exceptional challenges to readiness posed by caring for
complex children and is concerned about the quality of support
for service members and their families.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services Committee no
later than December 1, 2026, on the Department's current and
planned efforts to support servicemember families with CMC. At
a minimum, the report should:
(1) Provide statistics detailing the current and historical
number of CMC dependents of active duty servicemembers by year
and service since 2016;
(2) Provide information on the number of providers
currently in the TRICARE Network and the military health system
that are classified as rare disease specialists;
(3) Detail how servicemember dependents can access
pediatric genetic screening and diagnostics for rare diseases;
(4) Provide information about any special programs to
connect military families to rare disease specialists,
including the types of specialists covered by the program;
(5) Provide statistics on utilization of telemedicine for
CMC access to specialists by specialty type;
(6) Explain the barriers military providers face when
seeking support and consultation from civilian CMC specialty
providers; and,
(7) Make recommendations on how to increase military
provider support from and engagement with civilian experts in
rare diseases and specialty providers treating CMCs.
Domestic Sourcing of Pharmaceuticals and Active Pharmaceutical
Ingredients
The committee recognizes that pharmaceuticals procured for
members of the Armed Forces are essential to military readiness
and the national security of the United States. The committee
remains concerned that the Department of Defense lacks
sufficient domestic preference mechanisms to ensure that
pharmaceuticals procured for servicemembers are manufactured in
the United States or its territories. The committee notes that
existing domestic sourcing frameworks may permit finished
pharmaceutical products to qualify as domestic even when their
APIs are sourced from foreign suppliers, creating
vulnerabilities within the defense medical supply chain and
increasing reliance on overseas manufacturing for products
critical to force health protection and operational readiness.
The committee encourages the Department to examine options
to strengthen domestic sourcing requirements for
pharmaceuticals procured by the Department of Defense,
including consideration of a modified component test under
which a pharmaceutical product would qualify as a domestic end
product only if both the finished product and the API
incorporated into that product are manufactured in the United
States or its territories. The committee further encourages the
Department to evaluate application of a reasonableness-of-cost
determination consistent with Federal Acquisition Regulation
section 25.106 as part of such a framework.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than March 1,
2027, on the feasibility and implementation of strengthened
domestic sourcing requirements for pharmaceuticals procured by
the Department of Defense. The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the extent to which active
pharmaceutical ingredients incorporated into pharmaceuticals
procured for members of the Armed Forces are currently
manufactured outside the United States or its territories;
(2) an evaluation of the national security and military
readiness risks associated with reliance on foreign-
manufactured active pharmaceutical ingredients for
pharmaceuticals critical to force health protection;
(3) an analysis of the operational, industrial base, and
cost impacts of applying a modified component test and
reasonableness-of-cost determination consistent with section
25.106 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation to Department
pharmaceutical procurement; and
(4) a plan for implementing a strengthened domestic
preference framework for pharmaceuticals, including any
statutory, regulatory, or policy changes required to carry out
such implementation.
Electronic Health Records Transition Timeliness
The Committee is concerned with delays in providing
separating servicemembers access to their electronic health
records following separation from active duty. The Committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 31, 2027,
on the timeliness of providing electronic health records to
separating members, including an explanation of delays and
recommendations for improving timeliness.
Endometrial Cancer Research Assessment
The committee recognizes the growing burden of endometrial
cancer, the most common gynecologic cancer in the United States
and one of the few cancers with increasing incidence and
mortality rates, particularly among younger women and Black and
Hispanic women. With more than 240,000 women on active duty,
one million female military spouses, and approximately two
million additional women receiving care through the Defense
Health Agency, the burden of endometrial cancer on the agency
is also increasing. The committee is concerned by the lack of
early detection tools and targeted treatment options which
limit the ability to identify the disease earlier and
contribute to the need for additional evaluation. For example,
abnormal uterine bleeding, which may be a sign of endometrial
cancer, often requires further evaluation, which can delay
deployment. Although advances in precision medicine have
improved our understanding of endometrial cancer, additional
research is needed to improve risk stratification, identify
novel therapeutic targets, and support earlier diagnosis.
The committee further recognizes the relevance of
endometrial cancer to military readiness and the health of
servicemembers, military families, retirees, and veterans.
Delayed diagnosis and inadequate access to effective treatment
for endometrial cancer can have significant impacts on quality
of life, force readiness, and long-term health outcomes.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2027, including an
assessment of opportunities to expand research on endometrial
cancer within the Congressionally Directed Medical Research
Program, as well as current investments, research gaps, and
options for establishing a focused research effort on
endometrial cancer.
Enhanced Readiness for Sudden Cardiac Arrest
The committee continues to monitor the Department's
progress in mitigating non-traumatic deaths from sudden cardiac
arrest during military training. The committee remains
concerned that current regulations, which provide a framework
for automated external defibrillator (AED) placement at routine
training sites, do not fully address the risk.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Armed Services Committee not
later than March 1, 2027, detailing the availability and
placement of AEDs at organized training events, as well as
servicemembers' proficiency in recognizing sudden cardiac
arrest and delivering lifesaving care. The report shall
include:
(1) a comprehensive list of organized training events,
sporting competitions, and high-intensity tactical evaluations,
such as the Best Warrior Competition, the Marine Recon
Challenge, or the Best Ranger Competition, as well as biannual
service physical fitness tests, where AEDs are required to be
present under the current framework;
(2) for the events listed above, the average number of
participants per event and the specific ratio of AED units to
the total number of participants;
(3) a detailed accounting of the number of personnel
present at these events who are currently certified or trained
in:
(a) Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR);
(b) The operation of an AED; and
(c) The clinical identification of SCA symptoms in high-
stress environments.
(4) an assessment of the time-to-shock standards during
these events, specifically measuring the average time required
for a responder to reach a collapsed servicemember with a
functioning AED and apply it; and
(5) an assessment of CPR and AED training provided during
Initial Entry Training (IET) and at subsequent individual
training courses such as the Tactical Combat Casualty Care--All
Service Members Course (TCCC-ASM) for all military services,
including the percentage of the force maintaining current
certification.
Enterprise-wide Revenue Cycle Management Phased-In Modernization
The Committee is concerned that fragmented Revenue Cycle
Management (RCM) processes across military treatment facilities
contribute to inconsistent documentation, coding variability,
delayed billing, denied claims, and reduced revenue recovery
within the Military Health System.
The Committee recognizes the importance of modernizing and
standardizing RCM functions across the Defense Health Agency,
including improving interoperability with MHS GENESIS and
leveraging automation technologies, including robotic process
automation, ambient documentation integration, insurance
verification, and automated claims processing, to improve
efficiency, consistency, and accountability.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs and the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on ongoing and
planned efforts to modernize Revenue Cycle Management processes
across the Military Health System, including efforts to
standardize documentation, coding, billing, claims submission,
collections, and denial management practices.
Evaluation of the Mission 100 Wellness Program
The committee recognizes the 11th Airborne Division's
efforts to reduce soldier suicidality and improve quality of
life for soldiers and their families while stationed in Alaska
through the Mission 100 program. Since its establishment in
2022, Mission 100 has proven to be a readiness multiplier
maintaining 100 percent connection between soldiers and
resources aimed at decreasing harmful behaviors through the
integration of religious support, mental health, and integrated
prevention advisory group initiatives.
To better understand the effectiveness of this program, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than April
1, 2027, on the following:
(1) metrics used to measure the effectiveness of the
program;
(2) current staffing levels for the program and any
associated shortages;
(3) staff required to sustain the program at the 11th
Airborne Division;
(4) recommendations for improving the program; and
(5) the feasibility of expanding the program to other
commands or installations, including any barriers to such
expansion.
Feasibility of Hiring Part-Time Nurses in the Military Health System
The committee recognizes the ongoing challenges the
Military Health System faces in recruiting and retaining
qualified nurses across military treatment facilities.
Persistent nursing shortages, increasing demand for care, and
competition with civilian health systems may limit access to
timely care for servicemembers, retirees, and military
families.
The committee is interested in whether expanded use of
part-time nursing positions could help improve staffing
flexibility, increase access to care, and better retain
experienced nurses who are unable or unwilling to serve in
full-time roles. Part-time positions may also provide
opportunities to attract military spouses, recently retired
nurses, nurses with caregiving responsibilities, and other
qualified professionals who could support military treatment
facilities if more flexible employment models were available.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of the Defense Health Agency
and the Secretaries of the military departments, to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives and the Senate not later than March 1, 2027, on
the feasibility of hiring part-time nurses within the Military
Health System.
The report shall include:
(1) An assessment of current statutory, regulatory, policy,
administrative, and budgetary barriers to hiring part-time
nurses in military treatment facilities;
(2) An analysis of whether part-time nursing positions
could help address staffing shortages, improve appointment
availability, reduce reliance on contract labor, or increase
continuity of care;
(3) A review of existing part-time, intermittent, flexible,
or alternative nursing employment models used by the Department
of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or comparable
federal health systems;
(4) An assessment of the potential benefits and limitations
of hiring part-time nurses, including impacts on credentialing,
scheduling, supervision, patient safety, benefits eligibility,
and workforce management;
(5) An evaluation of whether part-time nursing roles could
expand employment opportunities for military spouses and other
qualified individuals in communities surrounding military
treatment facilities;
(6) Identification of military treatment facilities or
medical specialties where part-time nursing positions may be
most feasible or beneficial; and
(7) Any recommendations for legislative or administrative
action needed to support a pilot program or broader
implementation of part-time nursing positions within the
Military Health System.
Influenza Inoculation Policy Changes
The committee is aware of the Secretary of Defense's
Memorandum entitled ``Updated Guidance on Influenza Vaccine,''
dated April 20, 2026, which makes the annual influenza vaccine
voluntary for all active and reserve servicemembers, as well as
civilian personnel, effective immediately. The influenza
vaccine was mandated across the armed services since 1950
because highly contagious viruses, like influenza, spread
quickly in close-quarters environments like ships, submarines,
and barracks and the resulting increase in illness leads to
more missed training and duty days, compromising unit
readiness. The influenza virus presents distinct operational
and medical risks that differ from civilian populations.
Influenza can cause significant illness, hospitalization, and
lost duty days, directly hindering the ability to respond to
threats. Military personnel are considered a high-risk group
for influenza due to their daily routines and working
environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027,
assessing the risk and impact of this new policy. The report
should include the following information:
(1) the Fiscal Year (FY) 26 vaccination rate in comparison
to FY25;
(2) the vaccination rate in FY27 at the time of this
report;
(3) the number of units which requested the authority to
mandate influenza vaccine due to operational risk and how many
were approved by armed service, component and type;
(4) the number of individual exceptions to the influenza
vaccination; requested and the number granted by service and
component;
(5) the changes in influenza vaccination rates among active
duty and reserve personnel since onset of policy change;
(6) the rate of influenza among active-duty personnel in
FY25 and FY26; and Log 6702 [Revision 0]
(7) the quantification and qualification of health outcomes
related to influenza among active-duty personnel and stratified
by influenza vaccination status.
Medical Readiness in the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands
The committee recognizes that section 735 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159) emphasizes medical readiness in the Indo-Pacific region,
including access to foreign medical facilities during peacetime
and wartime operations. However, the committee further
recognizes that regional medical readiness is complex,
particularly across the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands
(USAPI), including Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, American Samoa, as well as the Republic of
Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated
States of Micronesia, which collectively serve a population
approaching 500,000 across geographically dispersed and
resource-limited environments and occupy strategically
significant locations along key Indo-Pacific operational
corridors.
The committee is concerned that current authorities and
planning frameworks do not adequately integrate USAPI civilian
medical infrastructure into Indo-Pacific medical readiness and
contingency planning, even though these civilian hospitals are
likely to be the first to receive patients during mass casualty
events involving both military and civilian populations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives not later than May 1, 2027, addressing
the following:
(1) an evaluation of civilian hospitals and health systems
located across the USAPI, including trauma capabilities, surge
capacity, staffing limitations, medical evacuations, and
infrastructure gaps relevant to mass casualty response;
(2) an assessment of strategic infrastructure upgrades and
capability development necessary to enable select USAPI
civilian hospitals to achieve appropriate trauma center
certification, including emergency surgical capacity, blood
banking, imaging, communications interoperability, and patient
transfer protocols;
(3) an assessment of sustained trauma training and
readiness programs for local medical professionals and civilian
responders, including military-civilian joint exercises, tele-
mentoring, and networking of partnerships; and
(4) recommendations for formally incorporating USAPI
civilian hospitals into Department of Defense medical
readiness, including mechanisms for certification, sustainment
funding, and operational integration during contingency
operations.
Medical Sustainment and Casualty Evacuation in Contested Unmanned
Operational Environments
The committee recognizes that recent conflicts have
demonstrated the increasing role of unmanned and autonomous
systems in shaping the modern battlespace and is concerned that
persistent aerial surveillance, loitering munitions, and
contested air environments may challenge longstanding
operational assumptions regarding medical evacuation timelines,
air superiority requirements, casualty collection procedures,
and the survivability of forward medical assets during large-
scale combat operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, and the
Director, Defense Health Agency, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on the Department's assessment of the battlefield medical
sustainment, casualty evacuation survivability, and force
health support requirements in contested unmanned operational
environments. The briefing shall include, but is not limited
to:
(1) the impact of contested unmanned operational
environments on casualty evacuation and battlefield medical
operations, including the viability of the ``Golden Hour''
standard in Large-Scale Combat Operations;
(2) an assessment of the risks to medical evacuation
aircraft, casualty collection points, and forward medical
infrastructure posed by persistent unmanned surveillance and
loitering strike systems;
(3) the extent to which current doctrine and force design
assumptions remain viable in future large-scale combat
operations;
(4) efforts to develop alternative casualty evacuation
concepts, autonomous medical resupply systems, distributed
medical support operations, and prolonged field care
capabilities in denied or degraded operational environments,
including the use of artificial intelligence for decision
support; and
(5) recommendations for additional investments,
authorities, training, or doctrinal updates required to sustain
battlefield medical operations in drone contested environments.
Mental Health and Suicide at Naval Nuclear Power Training Command
The committee is concerned with the state of mental health
conditions and suicide attempts at Naval Nuclear Power Training
Command (NNPTC). The committee recognizes that NNPTC is
critical for training new nuclear technicians to man the
world's largest fleet of nuclear-powered ships. The committee
also recognizes that the nuclear power training program is
necessarily one of the most rigorous training curriculums in
the entire department of defense. However, the committee is
also concerned about the persistent reports of mental health
issues and high rate of suicide attempts at NNPTC. The
committee is highly interested in the steps that NNPTC has
taken and will take to ensure that personnel's mental health
needs are being met, reduce the rate of suicide and attempted
suicide; while ensuring that NNPTC continues to produce
graduates that uphold the high standards of the NNPTC.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to report to the House Committee on Armed Services and the
Senate Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1,
2027, on the steps that the Department of the Navy and the
NNPTC are taking to meet the mental health needs of its
students and reduce the rate of suicide. The report should
include:
(1) A breakdown of concrete actions and programs
implemented at NNPTC to manage student stress and assist
students with mental health issues;
(2) An exploration into the exceptional drivers of student
stress at NNPTC and steps that can be taken to mitigate stress;
(3) Information on the process for a student or faculty to
seek mental health assistance;
(4) Career impacts of seeking mental health assistance and
ways to minimize or eliminate negative impacts on career
progression from attempting to seek help;
(5) A breakdown of career alternatives that personnel may
seek if they cannot complete the curriculum; and
(6) Any additional information the Secretary of the Navy
deems appropriate.
Military Health System Structure and Health Care Delivery
The committee is concerned that the Military Health System
(MHS) budget has not kept up with the cost of medical care in
the United States. Funding for the MHS has been relatively flat
since 2015, while the cost of health care across the United
States has steadily increased over the same period.
Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has noted
in analyses of recent budget requests (such as the fiscal year
2025 budget request) that the Department of Defense's projected
annual growth rate for MHS costs is often lower than CBO's
projections for economy-wide medical cost growth.
The Defense Health Program (DHP) developed ``Service Change
Requests (SCR)'' in fiscal year 2025 to address health care
delivery if the MHS budget remained at existing levels and
notified Congress of this change on March 9, 2026. The
restructuring effort would convert three Medical Treatment
Facilities (MTF) from inpatient hospitals to outpatient
ambulatory care centers with surgical capabilities. According
to the Department, these, and the rest of the changes in the
SCR, are projected to generate 1,350 positions and $77.0
million in commodity expenditures that would be redistributed
to other MTFs. The Department of Defense alleges the total
savings for the SCR restructure is approximately $89.0 million;
however, beneficiaries normally seen at the clinics and MTFs
with reduced services will be redirected into the network,
which is on average 33 percent more costly to the Department
than the direct care system. The committee is concerned that
the fiscal year 2027 budget request, nor this SCR, adequately
address the resource challenges facing the MHS including,
access to care, personnel shortages, facility degradation,
supply chain inefficiencies, and medical readiness. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on
the following:
(1) an analysis of impacts to services at an MTF when any
uniform medical provider permanently changes station without a
uniform, civilian, contractor medical provider backfill;
(2) a budget request that reflects the obligation to
provide medical care to all beneficiaries within the laws and
regulations with respect to access and quality;
(3) the utilization of enhanced appointment and
compensation authorities (such as 1599c of title 10, United
States Code), to recruit and retain civilian employees;
(4) the number of positions required to fully staff the
current direct care footprint and needs of the system including
the number, position, and type: civilian, military, or
contractors;
(5) an analysis of the managed care network's ability to
absorb any beneficiary that cannot be serviced by the direct
care system to include the exact elements that go into cost
analysis between the direct care and managed care system;
(6) an analysis of the success by the Defense Health Agency
to reattract beneficiaries to use MHS facilities over the
managed care system since launching the effort in December
2023;
(7) the status of efforts to close all GAO recommendations
from the July 21, 2025 report: Defense Health Care: Information
Needed to Improve Monitoring of Military Personnel Staffing at
Medical Facilities, GAO-25-106988;
(8) the status of efforts to close all GAO recommendations
from the April 2025 report: Defense Healthcare Actions Needed
to Address Long-Standing Management Challenges with Medical
Facilities, GAO-25-107432; and
(9) the status of efforts to close all recommendations from
the December 8, 2025 report: Audit of the Defense Health
Agency's Management of Military Medical Treatment Facilities
Outside the Continental United States in Meeting Access to
Primary Care Standards, Inspector General, U.S. Department of
Defense, Report No. DODIG-2026-025.
Military Surgical Readiness and Combat Casualty Care Capacity
The committee is concerned that declining surgical case
volumes within the Military Health System may be reducing the
ability of military surgeons to maintain proficiency in
deployment-relevant trauma and damage-control procedures. The
committee notes that recent operational planning scenarios
involving large-scale combat operations indicate casualty
volumes that may significantly exceed those experienced during
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
The committee further notes that partnerships with civilian
level-1 trauma centers were critical to maintaining combat
casualty care proficiency during the conflicts in Iraq and
Afghanistan. The committee is aware that such partnerships
currently exist but are inconsistent across the military
services and are not integrated into a Department-wide
readiness framework.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives not later than March 1, 2027, on the
readiness of the military surgical force. The report shall
include the following:
(1) specialty-specific annual surgical case volume data for
active and reserve component surgeons;
(2) identification of minimum procedural thresholds
required to maintain deployment-relevant readiness;
(3) the percentage of military surgeons meeting such
thresholds;
(4) identification of operational risks to combatant
command war plans associated with surgical readiness
shortfalls;
(5) an assessment of the adequacy of current forward
resuscitative surgical team manning levels;
(6) the extent to which the Department relies on civilian
trauma partnerships to maintain readiness;
(7) a plan to expand partnerships with civilian level-1
trauma centers, including assignment durations and legal
authorities required;
(8) an assessment of the readiness and utilization of
reserve component surgeons for large-scale combat operations;
(9) the role of the Joint Trauma System in pre-deployment
certification of surgical teams;
(10) recommendations for improving wartime medical
mobilization of military and civilian surgeons; and
(11) an assessment of whether current Military Health
System structure supports or degrades combat casualty care
readiness.
Military Treatment Facility Readiness, Network Reliance, and Cyber
Resilience
The committee recognizes that military treatment facilities
are essential readiness platforms that support force
generation, clinical currency, beneficiary access, graduate
medical education, and wartime medical capacity. The committee
is concerned that changes to the scope of services, staffing,
specialty care, and inpatient capability at military treatment
facilities may affect both beneficiary access and operational
medical readiness, particularly in regions where civilian
network capacity is limited or TRICARE participation is
insufficient to absorb additional demand.
The committee is also concerned that medical readiness
data, referral and appointment systems, beneficiary access
data, and other health-of-the-force indicators may present
cybersecurity and data-integrity risks that could affect the
Department's ability to assess readiness, mobilize medical
capability, and sustain care during crisis or contingency
operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs and in coordination with the Director of the Defense
Health Agency, the Surgeons General of the military
departments, and the Chief Information Officer of the
Department of Defense, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
military treatment facility readiness, private-sector care
reliance, and cyber resilience across the Military Health
System.
The briefing shall include:
(1) the process and metrics used by the Department to
evaluate proposed changes to military treatment facility scope
of services, staffing, specialty care, inpatient capability,
emergency care, or surgical capacity against operational
medical readiness requirements and beneficiary access
standards;
(2) an assessment of whether private-sector care networks
can absorb additional beneficiary demand without degrading
access to care, military medical personnel clinical currency,
deployment-relevant skills, procedural volume, or readiness at
military treatment facilities; and
(3) any recommendations for congressional action to
preserve military medical readiness, protect beneficiary
access, improve private-sector network oversight, and
strengthen cybersecurity and data integrity across the Military
Health System.
Military-Civilian Medical Surge Planning for Contested Environments
The committee recognizes that future large-scale combat
operations and major contingencies in contested environments
may place unprecedented demands on the military health system
and civilian medical systems. The committee further recognizes
that casualty volumes, contested logistics, degraded
communications, limited transportation capacity, and medical
resource constraints could challenge the Department of
Defense's ability to rapidly deliver medical care and evacuate
casualties during sustained operations.
The committee notes that effective medical planning for
contested environments must evaluate the Department's ability
to rapidly assess and communicate the operational consequences
associated with such the constraints of contested environments.
The committee further recognizes the value of recurring end-to-
end evaluations that integrate military and civilian medical
systems, and encourages the Department to leverage existing,
commercially available, and cybersecurity-compliant digital
planning and decision-support capabilities, including
artificial intelligence-enabled tools where appropriate, to
improve the speed, accuracy, auditability, and repeatability of
medical planning assessments and operational decision-making.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's efforts to establish
and conduct recurring evaluations of military-civilian medical
surge readiness and interoperability across the military health
system and civilian medical systems for operations in contested
environments. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of the Department's ability to rapidly
assess and communicate the medical consequences of operational
decisions, including impacts on patient movement, lift
allocation, sustainment priorities, and medical facility
utilization;
(2) an assessment of the Department's current capability to
manage large-scale casualty surges during major combat
operations or other large-scale contingencies under contested
conditions, including degraded communications, constrained
transportation assets, and mass-casualty scenarios;
(3) an evaluation of medical logistics planning inputs,
constraints, and dependencies affecting operational decision-
making;
(4) a description of recurring evaluation, exercise,
wargaming, simulation, or modeling efforts used to assess
medical surge readiness, patient movement, and operational
medical planning;
(5) a description of existing digital planning tools,
modeling capabilities, or decision-support systems, including
artificial intelligence-enabled capabilities, able to integrate
casualty forecasts, capacity models, logistics requirements,
and patient movement constraints into operational planning for
the Department;
(6) an assessment of the Department's use of commercially
available technologies and cybersecurity-compliant decision-
support platforms capable of producing predictive modeling,
simulation outputs, and auditable recommendations for
operational decision-makers;
(7) an assessment of interoperability between military
treatment facilities, civilian healthcare systems, federal
agencies, and private-sector healthcare partners during
contested operations; and
(8) an identification of any capability gaps, resource
shortfalls, policy barriers, data-sharing challenges, or
interoperability deficiencies affecting medical surge
readiness.
Military-Civilian Trauma Readiness Partnerships: Southwest Border
Assessment and Prioritization
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
military medical readiness and the unique training value
offered by high-acuity civilian trauma environments,
particularly in border-adjacent regions with elevated rates of
penetrating trauma and mass-casualty incidents. The committee
is concerned that existing military-civilian trauma partnership
authorities may not be fully leveraged to maximize readiness
outcomes along the Southwest border, and that identified gaps
in program placement and capacity may limit the Department of
Defense's ability to develop and sustain combat-relevant
medical skills in forward and austere environments.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
December 1, 2026, on the utilization and sufficiency of
existing military-civilian trauma readiness partnership
authorities as applied to the Southwest border region. The
report should include the following:
(1) a comprehensive assessment of existing military-
civilian trauma readiness partnerships authorized under section
1096 of title 10, United States Code, and the grant program
under section 300d-91 of title 42, United States Code, to
determine the extent to which current program capacity,
placement decisions, and partnership agreements address
readiness requirements along the Southwest border, including an
evaluation of whether existing program authorities are being
fully leveraged to generate military medical readiness value in
border-adjacent trauma environments and an identification of
specific gaps, if any, that cannot be addressed through current
authorities;
(2) where the assessment identifies border-region civilian
trauma facilities that offer measurable military medical
readiness value--including high-acuity penetrating trauma
volumes, mass-casualty incident frequency, or injury patterns
consistent with combat medicine requirements--a description of
actions taken or planned to prioritize those facilities for
inclusion in existing military-civilian partnership programs
under authorities available under section 1096 of title 10 and
section 300d-91 of title 42, consistent with readiness and
capacity criteria;
(3) an assessment of opportunities to expand integration
between Department of Defense medical personnel and civilian
emergency medical systems in border regions, including joint
mass-casualty planning, coordinated trauma transport protocols,
and pre-hospital interoperability with State, local, and tribal
partners, as well as the feasibility of leveraging existing
transfer authorities to provide excess or surplus medical
equipment and supplies to partner institutions in high-need
border communities;
(4) an assessment of mechanisms by which licensed civilian
trauma professionals may undertake structured training
rotations within Department of Defense medical treatment
facilities participating in programs established under section
1096 of title 10, United States Code, designed to strengthen
national trauma system surge capacity and prioritize skill sets
relevant to military readiness, including damage control
surgery, critical care transport, and mass-casualty triage
management; and
(5) any recommendations for additional authorities, only
where the Secretary determines existing authorities under
section 1096 of title 10 and section 300d-91 of title 42 are
insufficient to address identified capability gaps.
Optometry Services at Military Treatment Facilities
The committee recognizes that eye health and military
optometrists play an important role in military readiness. The
committee notes that more than 10 states currently permit
optometrists to become licensed in certain laser surgeries and
that all 24 United States based optometry schools provide
training in laser procedures. The committee is aware that
military optometrists in military treatment facilities do not
perform these laser surgeries and are therefore not being
utilized to their full potential. Therefore, the committee
directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than April 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) what regulations or policies prohibit optometrists from
performing laser procedures within medical treatment
facilities;
(2) what resources and equipment would the Department need
to allow optometrists to do these procedures within a medical
treatment facility;
(3) would there be an increase in the readiness of the
military optometrist and the readiness of military personnel if
the Department permitted optometrists to do laser procedures;
(4) if so, what are the benefits to both the optometrist
and the military personnel; and
(5) any additional information the Department deems
relevant.
Patient Safety during Sensitive Medical Exams and Procedures
The Defense Health Agency (DHA) manages over 700 military
medical treatment facilities worldwide where it delivers
healthcare to servicemembers and their families, military
retirees, and other eligible beneficiaries. DHA has stated its
commitment to patients' rights to respectful treatment, privacy
and security, and to receive care in a safe environment, among
other things. However, recent high-profile investigations have
revealed accusations of sexual misconduct committed by military
doctors against patients in these facilities. In response, DHA
launched an internal review to ensure accountability and review
systemic safeguards, clinical protocols, supervision
mechanisms, and reporting and complaint procedures. DHA has
taken additional steps to ensure patient safety, such as
issuing a memo clarifying its requirement that all patients and
healthcare staff have the right to request a chaperone for any
physical exam or medical encounter, and that a chaperone must
be offered prior to any sensitive exam.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review efforts within the Department of
Defense to address patient safety, including the extent to
which the Department has developed and implemented policies and
procedures to ensure patient safety and prevent, identify, and
respond to sexual misconduct by healthcare providers in
military medical treatment facilities; the extent and nature of
the Department's oversight of efforts to ensure patient safety
and prevent, identify, and respond to sexual misconduct in
military medical treatment facilities; and the measures the
Department is employing to assess the effectiveness of efforts
to ensure patient safety and prevent, identify, and respond to
sexual misconduct in military medical treatment facilities.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing on the findings to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027.
Perioperative Care within the Military Healthcare System
The committee recognizes that surgical and procedural
services furnished under chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code, are a core component of the Military Health System (MHS)
and are essential to sustaining beneficiary care, force health
protection, and the medical readiness of the Armed Forces. The
committee further recognizes that perioperative care,
encompassing the full continuum of care provided before,
during, and after surgical or invasive procedures, directly
affects clinical outcomes, patient safety, operational
capability, and the readiness of military medical personnel.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 31, 2027, on the delivery, oversight,
effectiveness, and readiness implications of perioperative care
across the MHS. The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the current state of perioperative
care delivery across military medical treatment facilities and
within the TRICARE network, including variability in access,
capacity, and clinical throughput;
(2) an assessment of the workforce, infrastructure, and
digital systems that support perioperative services, including
identification of capability gaps affecting care delivery in
deployed, austere, or far-forward operational environments;
(3) an analysis of infrastructure and technology platforms
supporting perioperative services, including electronic health
records, operating room management systems, sterile processing
systems, data analytics and performance monitoring tools,
interoperability with private-sector partners and referral
networks, and any other technology platforms the Secretary of
Defense determines appropriate;
(4) a description of clinical quality assurance programs,
patient safety practices, credentialing and privileging
oversight, and performance monitoring activities applicable to
perioperative care, including those conducted pursuant to
section 1094 of title 10, United States Code, and other
relevant statutory authorities; and
(5) an evaluation of clinical quality and patient safety
outcomes, including trends in adverse events, compliance with
established safety protocols, benchmarking against appropriate
civilian health systems, and the adequacy of data collection,
reporting, and transparency mechanisms.
Plan for Testing for Helicobacter Pylori for Certain Members of the
Armed Forces
The committee is aware Active Duty servicemembers are at
increased risk of contracting Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori),
especially if they are deployed outside the continental United
States in areas in which it is highly prevalent, or if they are
subject to crowded living conditions. The vast majority of
stomach cancers are caused by H. pylori. The bacteria also
cause ulcers, gastritis and MALT lymphoma. Many people do not
have any symptoms until an advanced disease state. Research has
shown that approximately one fourth of the U.S. veteran
population may be at risk for some consequence of chronic H.
pylori infection. However, studies show that when H. pylori are
detected through testing and then eradicated with antibiotics,
the risk of developing stomach cancer and other diseases drops
significantly. The committee is also aware that current
recommendations are that all patients with H. pylori infection
should be treated, and re-tested to confirm successful
eradication, and that adults living with those infected need to
be tested.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Health Agency to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31, 2027, on
the following:
(1) current Armed Services adherence to clinical guidelines
to detect and treat H. pylori in Active Duty servicemembers,
including the testing, treatment and retesting protocols and
modalities used;
(2) a plan, cost estimate and feasibility study for
implementing H. pylori testing and treatment for Active Duty
servicemembers during accession physicals for the Armed Forces,
and for members of the Armed Forces deployed to countries with
high rates of H. pylori or subjected to crowded living
conditions, such as ship berthing; and
(3) an estimate of costs for implementing a program for
conducting testing using breath and stool-based methods.
Prostate Cancer Incidence and Emerging Technologies
The committee remains concerned that prostate cancer is the
second leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men in the
United States and that emerging evidence suggests a higher
incidence rate among certain military populations. The
committee notes that a study mandated by the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, completed in 2024,
found that military aviators experience significantly elevated
rates of various cancers, including prostate cancer, with
incidence rates approximately 20 percent higher than those of
the general population.
In response to these findings, Congress directed additional
research efforts. The Department of Veterans Affairs is
conducting a study on cancer incidence among fixed-wing
aviators and associated ground crews pursuant to the ACES Act
authorities, while the Department of Defense is conducting a
complementary study on rotary-wing aviators and associated
ground crews as directed in the fiscal year 2026 National
Defense Authorization Act. The committee awaits the results of
both studies.
At the same time, the committee understands that
significant advances have been made in prostate cancer
detection and treatment within the civilian medical community.
These advances include less invasive diagnostic technologies
and tools capable not only of detecting prostate cancer but
also of predicting the aggressiveness of the disease with a
high degree of accuracy. The committee is concerned that such
technologies may not yet be fully evaluated or adopted within
the Military Health System or the Department of Veterans
Affairs healthcare system.
While the committee maintains a broad interest in the
health effects of occupational and environmental exposures
during military service, it is particularly focused on prostate
cancer given its prevalence and potential link to service-
related factors. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than November 13, 2026, on the
status of ongoing cancer incidence studies and on the
availability, evaluation, and potential adoption of emerging
prostate cancer diagnostic and prognostic technologies.
Radiological Medical Countermeasures
The committee recognizes the work of the Armed Forces
Radiobiology Research Institute (AFRRI) and its role in the
development of a promising medical countermeasure that provides
both prophylactic and therapeutic protection in radiological or
nuclear exposure events. The committee believes this
countermeasure has potential to increase protection for
warfighters in the event of radiological incidents. AFRRI's
Strategic Plan emphasizes the need to adapt preparedness and
response capabilities in light of evolving conventional and
unconventional global threats and identifies radiological
threats as a top priority for the Department. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Nuclear,
Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs), in coordination
with the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), to
develop a resource and fielding plan for this capability and to
brief the House Armed Services Committee on this plan by March
1, 2027.
Results of Prohibition of Painful Animal Research
Section 732 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) prohibited the Department
of Defense from conducting or supporting painful research on
dogs and cats. The committee also recognizes the Department of
Defense's other efforts to eliminate harmful dog and cat
research, including the implementation of a ban by the
Secretary of the Navy. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 30, 2027, that includes,
at a minimum, the following:
(1) a list of all grants and contracts supporting painful
dog and cat research that were ended or modified because of the
funding prohibition in Public Law 119-60;
(2) a list of all grants and contracts supporting dog and
cat research that were ended or modified because of other
Department-wide efforts since January 27, 2025;
(3) an estimate of taxpayer dollars saved by these
programmatic changes;
(4) an estimate of how much dog and cat use was avoided by
these programmatic changes;
(5) a list of any waivers granted per section 732 of Public
Law 119-60, including the detailed justification for each; and
(6) an assessment of all Department-wide policies governing
the use of dogs and cats in research.
Review of Access to Care at Military Medical Treatment Facilities
within the United States
The committee remains concerned about TRICARE
beneficiaries' access to care at the direct care system of
military medical treatment facilities (MTFs) operated by the
Defense Health Agency (DHA). A recent Inspector General report
(DODIG-2026-025) reported on access delays experienced by
service members and their families at MTFs outside of the
continental United States and problems with the reliability of
MTF data on access to care.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a study on access to health care
for all eligible TRICARE beneficiaries at DHA's MTFs within the
continental United States (CONUS). The study should include an
assessment of access to care standards for the TRICARE health
program to include the direct care system of MTFs and the
private sector care system of community providers for all
relevant access standards (that is, primary care, specialty
care, and urgent care); the methods and data used to measure
access to care for CONUS MTFs and an assessment of the steps
taken to ensure the reliability of these data; and how MTF
access data are used to facilitate specialty care referrals
between MTFs and civilian providers and whether these referrals
maximize the use of MTFs, such as with the right of first
refusal process.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and House of Representatives no later than March 31,
2027, with a report to follow by a date mutually agreed upon at
the time of the briefing.
Strengthening Industrial Preparedness Through Domestic Manufacturing of
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients
The committee is concerned by the inaction of the
Department of Defense to strengthen and secure the supply
chains for pharmaceutical materials for the Department, based
on findings from the report required by section 860(a) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263). Furthermore, the committee remains concerned by
the Department's reliance on foreign suppliers for critical
advanced pharmaceutical ingredients (API), 27% of which are
considered very high risk due to the country of origin, despite
the issuance of Department of Defense Instruction 4140.01,
``Department of Defense Supply Chain Material Management
Policy.''
A 2021 Department of Defense Inspector General report
(Report No. DODIG-2021-126) evaluated the Department's
mitigation of foreign suppliers in the pharmaceutical supply
chain in accordance with Instruction 4140.01. The Inspector
General report concluded that the Department did not mitigate
the risks of disruptions to its pharmaceutical supply chain,
did not have implementing guidance on supply chain risk
management for Department material, and that the Department's
reliance on foreign suppliers for pharmaceuticals is a public
health, readiness, and national security risk.
The committee is aware that there is an ongoing pilot
program to develop and manufacture critical countermeasures
such as Atropine and Midazolam. The committee encourages the
Department to continue to develop the pilot program and onshore
a catalog of critical medical countermeasures.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than
December 1, 2026, on the Department's issuance and
implementation of guidance pursuant to section 860 of Public
Law 117-263. Specifically, the briefing shall include:
(1) supply chain information gaps for pharmaceutical
materials, including APIs;
(2) APIs identified by supply chain analysis for which the
United States is dependent on foreign adversaries, including
the People's Republic of China;
(3) status of the working group established by section
860(b)(2) of Public Law 117-263;
(4) an assessment of critical, scarce pharmaceutical
resources and policies to address shortages of those resources;
and
(5) Department efforts to leverage previous investment by
other federal stakeholders, including the Administration for
Strategic Preparedness and Response, in domestic reshoring and
manufacturing infrastructure to build capacity in medical
countermeasures for chemical weapons and other essential
medicines for the warfighter.
Suicide Analytic Variable Evaluation System
The committee notes the Department of the Air Force's
ongoing efforts to address suicide, including the development
of the Suicide Analytic Variable Evaluation System (SAVES), an
artificial intelligence-enabled capability intended to identify
and mitigate suicide risk among servicemembers through advanced
data analysis. To better understand the SAVES program's current
performance, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and House Committee on Armed Services not later than
January 1, 2027, that includes:
(1) the current status of SAVES, including key milestones
achieved in its development and integration;
(2) the metrics and methodologies used by the Department of
the Air Force to assess the effectiveness of SAVES, including
measures of accuracy, reliability, and impact on suicide
prevention outcomes;
(3) costs associated with the program, including
development and sustainment costs;
(4) any barriers to expansion of SAVES, including any
technical, legal, ethical, or data-sharing constraints; and
(5) a description of how SAVES integrates with and supports
existing suicide prevention efforts.
Suicide Prevention Training Effectiveness
The committee continues to be concerned about high rates of
service member suicide and is committed to working with the
Department of Defense to ensure proper prevention is in place.
The committee is aware that the Government Accountability
Office's report, dated May 20, 2026, identified significant
issues with how DOD and the military services monitor and
assess their suicide prevention training. GAO found that the
DOD does not require the military services to report data on
training completion rates to its suicide prevention office, and
the services have not fully assessed whether their training is
effective.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
on how the Department of Defense is implementing the
recommendations outlined in the GAO report not later than April
1, 2027. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) The current status of establishing a department wide
requirement for the military services to report suicide
prevention training completion data to the Defense Suicide
Prevention Office (DSPO), including milestones met and
remaining;
(2) Any interim processes or pilots the Department is using
to collect and validate training completion data, and how many
components are currently participating;
(3) Progress in putting in place systems or policies for
each service to regularly monitor completion of required
suicide prevention training;
(4) Steps taken or planned to address noncompletion,
including accountability mechanisms and how many units or
installations are currently covered by such mechanisms;
(5) The status of developing and implementing formal
evaluation plans for suicide prevention training in each
service, including whether plans now meet DOD policy
requirements for process and outcome metrics;
(6) How far is the Department in reviewing and, if
applicable, updating suicide prevention training content in
light of the GAO report and any broader DOD training
integration efforts;
(7) Identification of key obstacles, external dependencies,
or resource gaps slowing implementation, and any planned
actions or timelines to address them.
TBI Detection Devices
The committee remains concerned about the near- and long-
term effects of head trauma, and the subsequent impact on
soldier health and readiness. The committee applauds efforts
the Department has made to address the identification and
treatment of traumatic brain injury but is concerned that the
focus of the Department has not been broadened to include sub
concussive events, which may also result in significant long-
term damage.
The committee understands that detection of all traumatic
brain events is critical in the development and administration
of treatment, and to identify means to prevent future injury.
Further, the committee is aware of existing technology that
would allow for the rapid detection of all levels of brain
injury, that is non-intrusive, wearable, and can be
administered without a technician, allowing for potentially
real time identification of injury in the field.
The committee directs the Director of the Defense Health
Agency in coordination with Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army to
provide a briefing on efforts to expand the diagnostic
detection of brain injury beyond traumatic brain injury events
to include sub concussive events to the House Armed Services
Committee no later than February 1, 2027.
Total Wound Management in the Military Care Continuum
The committee is aware of the challenges that future
operational environments will place on medical support
operations and the need for modernized casualty care
capabilities for combat operations, including total wound
management and infection prevention and treatment. The
committee commends the Department of Defense for engaging
subject matter experts from the extramural community and the
Military Health System to develop a strategy for total wound
management, including prevention, treatment, and advanced wound
care to address infection in future operational environments.
The committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Health Affairs to prioritize investments focused on total wound
management and infection prevention and treatment needs of
servicemembers in future conflicts consistent with the
capability gaps and recommendations identified by the combat
casualty care and infectious diseases communities of interest.
TRICARE Coverage for Advanced Molecular Diagnostic Tests
The committee is concerned that the Defense Health Agency's
coverage determination process for molecular diagnostic tests
may lag Medicare Local Coverage Determinations for Proprietary
Laboratory Analysis code-designated tests used in oncology and
transplant care by one to two years, during which clinically
validated tests may remain classified as experimental or
investigational under TRICARE. The committee believes this
misalignment may result in delayed access to evidence-based
diagnostic tools for servicemembers, retirees, and their
dependents, with adverse effects on force health protection and
return-to-duty timelines.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of the Defense Health Agency, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027, on TRICARE coverage policies for
molecular diagnostic tests used in oncology and transplant
care. The briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the alignment between current TRICARE
coverage determinations and Medicare Local Coverage
Determinations for Proprietary Laboratory Analysis code-
designated molecular diagnostic tests, including identification
of tests covered under Medicare that are not currently covered
or are classified as experimental or investigational under
TRICARE;
(2) an analysis of the Defense Health Agency Technology
Assessment Committee review process for molecular diagnostics,
including the average time between a Medicare Local Coverage
Determination and a corresponding TRICARE coverage
determination, and any statutory, regulatory, or administrative
barriers to accelerating alignment; and
(3) recommendations for modernizing TRICARE coverage
determination processes to reduce the lag between Medicare
Local Coverage Determinations and TRICARE coverage for
molecular diagnostics, including any legislative changes
required to implement those recommendations.
TRICARE Drug Pricing Under the Inflation Reduction Act Negotiation
Program
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
and beneficiaries may be paying more for prescription drugs
than necessary, and that significant cost savings may be
achievable by applying the CMS-negotiated maximum fair prices
to TRICARE drug purchases. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
(Public Law 117-169) established a Drug Price Negotiation
Program administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) that authorizes the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical
manufacturers on the prices of high-expenditure, single-source
drugs covered under Medicare. Beginning with 10 drugs selected
for negotiation in FY26 and expanding annually thereafter, the
program is projected to cover a growing number of high-cost
drugs and produce significant savings for Federal health care
programs. TRICARE's pharmacy benefit covers many of the same
brand-name pharmaceutical products subject to negotiation under
the CMS Drug Price Negotiation Program. Currently, TRICARE
pharmacy reimbursement rates for negotiated drugs are not
automatically aligned with the maximum fair prices established
through the CMS negotiation process. TRICARE's procurement of
drugs is aligned with the Department of Veterans' Affairs
Federal Supply Schedule.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to review the potential cost savings to the U.S.
Government from establishing the negotiated maximum fair prices
under the CMS Drug Price Negotiation Program as the maximum
reimbursement price for drugs under TRICARE. The report shall
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the total estimated cost savings to
the Department of Defense, and to TRICARE beneficiaries that
would result from aligning Federal Ceiling Price drug
purchasing rates and Joint National Contracts with the
negotiated maximum fair prices established under the CMS Drug
Price Negotiation Program, including an analysis of savings
from the initial slate of drugs selected for negotiation for
fiscal year 2026;
(2) an assessment of projected savings attributable to each
cohort of drugs added to the CMS Drug Price Negotiation Program
through fiscal year 2027, based on current statutory expansion
schedules and publicly available CMS projections; and
(3) an analysis of the methodology used to estimate such
savings, including data sources, assumptions regarding TRICARE
utilization rates, and any limitations of the analysis.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the congressional defense committees on its review no
later than March 15, 2027 with a final report to follow at a
mutually agreed upon date.
TRICARE for Life Cost Savings
The committee notes the rising cost of providing
supplemental medical benefits for enrollees under the TRICARE
for Life program. In its most recent baseline projection, the
Congressional Budget Office forecast an average increase in
per-beneficiary inpatient and outpatient costs under the
TRICARE for Life program of nearly 5 percent annually over the
next 10 years. The committee understands that many carriers of
Medicare Supplement insurance have employed methods to control
cost, such as the use of a national affiliation of facilities
that have agreed to best pricing, without reducing benefits or
restricting enrollees' choice of provider. The committee
strongly encourages Defense Health Agency to evaluate and adopt
proven means of reducing cost growth in TRICARE for Life that
do not increase out-of-pocket costs for military retirees and
survivors.
Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel
Congress created the Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory
Panel (BAP) in section 1074g(c) of title 10, United States
Code, to provide independent advice and recommendations on the
development of the Tricare Uniform Formulary. The committee
notes that on March 7, 2025, the Department of Defense paused
all Defense Advisory Committees to conduct a 45-day review to
ensure that each advisory committee's efforts align with
strategic priorities and the President's goals. On September 8,
2025, the Department of Defense issued a memorandum that the
BAP was authorized to resume operations in Phase I pending the
approval and appointment of new members by the Department of
Defense. As of April 2026, the BAP has not resumed operations
and due to the lack of membership. The panel has made zero
recommendations during fiscal year (FY) 2025 to address the FY
2025 Department of Defense Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee
recommendations to the Uniform Formulary, implementation
timelines, and prior authorization criteria. The committee is
concerned that any further delay in reinstating the BAP has
resulted in denying new therapies from advancing and impacted
servicemembers, families, and beneficiaries from getting the
care and treatment they need. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 31, 2026,
detailing the following:
(1) the number of members of the BAP who have been vetted
by the Department of Defense for appointment on the BAP;
(2) the number of members who have been appointed to the
BAP;
(3) the number of individuals who still need to be vetted
and appointed to the BAP;
(4) a detailed cause for the delay in reconstituting the
BAP;
(5) a list of future BAP meeting dates;
(6) a detailed plan on how to address the backlog of
therapeutics that the BAP needs to address; and
(7) the effects on beneficiaries who were unable to obtain
needed therapeutics.
Virtual Physical Therapy Solution Pilot Program
The committee understands that musculoskeletal injuries are
a leading cause of non-deployability and duty restrictions
across the Armed Forces. The committee is aware of the Defense
Health Agency's recently initiated virtual physical therapy
pilot program across five Army and Navy installations that has
since expanded beyond its original footprint to include a site
in Puerto Rico. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services Committee not
later than February 1, 2027, on the outcomes of the existing
pilot. The briefing should include the following information:
(1) how has the pilot expanded access to physical therapy
at the existing locations;
(2) the mechanism by which the military treatment
facilities are able to avoid private sectors costs for these
encounters through the pilot; and
(3) the feasibility and advisability of pilot program and
plans to make virtual physical therapy more widely available
across the Department.
Wellness Applications Expansion Report
The committee notes that the Defense Health Agency does not
have the ability to meet current demand of behavioral health
referrals through traditional networks. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Director of the Defense Health Agency (DHA) and the
Service Surgeons General, to submit a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the following:
(1) how the expansion of tele-behavioral health, using both
military providers and vetted third-party digital health
platforms, can assist by bypassing geographic limitations of
physical specialty clinics, reducing the administrative burden
on Military Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs) referral
management centers;
(2) comprehensive strategy to expand tele-behavioral health
services to servicemembers;
(3) options for making tele-behavioral health available to
servicemembers deployed or underway;
(4) current pilot programs being conducted and data
associated, including estimated impact on number of mental
health referrals and any cost savings or increase; and
(5) other considerations related to providing tele-
behavioral health services.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Benefits
Sec. 701--Dental Readiness for Certain Members of Selected Reserve
This section would provide no cost dental coverage under
TRICARE for members of the Reserve Component in the grades of
E-1 though E-4.
Sec. 702--Expanded Access to Dental Care for Certain Dependents
This section would permit all authorized dependents to
receive dental care on a space available basis from post-
graduate dental residents.
Sec. 703--Fertility Treatment for Certain Members of the Armed Forces
and Dependents
This section would provide fertility treatment for certain
Activity Duty members of the armed forces and dependents.
Sec. 704--Limitation on Ability of Secretary of Defense to Modify Scope
of Medical Services
This section would require updated reporting criteria for
any service change request made by the Defense Health Agency.
Sec. 705--Prohibition on and Reversal of Actions to Modify Scope of
Medical Services Provided at Certain Military Medical Treatment
Facilities
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
taking any action with respect to the service change request
submitted to Congress on March 4, 2026, and requires the
Secretary to reverse any steps taken to carry out that service
change request within 30 days.
Sec. 706--TRICARE Coverage for Increased Supply for Contraception
This section would provide covered beneficiaries 365 days
of contraception.
Sec. 707--Pilot Program to Help Certain Members of the Armed Forces
Stop Smoking
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a 1-year pilot program to provide covered
servicemembers alternatives to smoking.
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration
Sec. 721--Improvements to Defense Health Agency
This section would require improvements to the
administration of medical treatment facilities and the Defense
Health Agency.
Sec. 722--Improvements to Administration of Military Medical Treatment
Facilities
This section would update the administration of Military
Medical Treatment facilities.
Sec. 723--Designation of Defense Health Agency as Combat Support Agency
This section would codify the Defense Health Agency as an
enumerated Combat Support Agency.
Sec. 724--Accounts for Medical and Health Care Programs of the
Department of Defense
This section would amend section 1100 of title 10 United
States Code to replace the single Defense Health Program
Account with two distinct accounts: the Combat and Operational
Medicine Program Account (COMP), and the Private Sector Care
Program Account (PSCP).
Sec. 725--Availability of Combat and Operational Medicine Program
Account and Other Funds for Certain Medical Countermeasures
This section would authorize the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to expend funds appropriated to the Combat and
Operational Medicine Program account for medical readiness to
fund certain medical countermeasures.
Sec. 726--Inclusion of Defense Health Agency in Reporting Requirements
Relating to Unfunded Priorities
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to submit an unfunded priority list to Congress.
Sec. 727--Joint Trauma System
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
maintain the Joint Trauma System as a permanent operational
element of the Defense Health Agency.
Sec. 728--Clarification of Consistent Evaluations of Medical
Malpractice Claims
This section would ensure uniform evaluations for medical
malpractice claims in the military departments.
Sec. 729--Chaperones for Certain Sensitive Examinations at Military
Medical Treatment Facilities
This section would require chaperones for certain sensitive
exams at military medical treatment facilities.
Sec. 730--Requirement to Offer Medical Chaperones During Sensitive
Medical Examinations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish and implement a policy to require medical chaperones
for certain sensitive medical examinations.
Sec. 731--Uniform Protocols on Screening for Unwanted Sexual Behavior
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to develop uniform protocols for providing a
screening for unwanted sexual behavior to patients at military
medical treatment facilities.
Sec. 732--Requirement to Notify Committees on Armed Services of
Hospitalization of Combat Wounded Members of the Armed Forces
This section would require notification to the Committees
on Armed Service of the Senate and the House of Representatives
when members of the Armed Forces are seriously wounded in
combat and hospitalized.
Sec. 733--Authority to Provide Residencies, Internships, and Similar
Postgraduate Programs for Civilian Health Care Professionals of the
Department of Defense
This section would permit the Secretary of Defense to
establish internships and residencies at military medical
institutions to train civilian medical personnel that the
Secretary has appointed.
Sec. 734--Notification to TRICARE Beneficiaries of Coverage Transition
Requirements
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide TRICARE beneficiaries with notice of transition
requirements.
Sec. 735--Waiver of Referral Requirement Under TRICARE Prime for
Certain Physical Therapy
This section would authorize TRICARE beneficiaries to
access physical therapy services without a prior referral.
Sec. 736--Rates of Pay for a Provider of Care or Services Furnished
Under TRICARE Program
This section would establish a policy of site-neutral
payments for healthcare services reimbursed under TRICARE.
Sec. 737--Plans on Military Health System
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide long term plans for stabilization of the Military
Health System on a quarterly basis to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
Sec. 738--Modification to Qualification Waiver Authority for Applicants
for Nursing or Practical Nurse Positions in the Department of Defense
This section would modify the qualification waiver
authority for applicants for nursing position in the Department
of Defense.
Sec. 739--Aerial Transport and Department-Wide Capability for High-
Consequence Infectious Diseases
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a program providing for long-range aerial transport
of individuals infected by high-consequence infectious
diseases.
Sec. 740--Availability of Obstetrician-Gynecologists and Certified
Nurse-Midwifes at Military Medical Treatment Facilities
This section would require obstetrician-gynecologists and
certified nurse-midwifes at military medical treatment
facilities.
Sec. 741--Availability of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Services at
Military Treatment Facilities
This section would require each medical treatment facility
to have sexual assault nurse examiner services available.
Sec. 742--Improvement of Process for Filing of Complaints and Reporting
of Issues Under TRICARE Program
This section would improve the process for filing TRICARE
complaints.
Sec. 743--Pilot Program on Filling Primary Care Management Positions at
Remote Military Medical Treatment Facilities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a pilot program permitting commanders of military
medical treatment facilities in remote locations to fill any
medical or administrative positions necessary for the
operations of the facility.
Sec. 744--Establishment of Pilot Program on Use of Health Care
Assessments Other Than Periodic Health Assessments
This section would establish a pilot program at two Army
installations to have no less than 100 soldiers get an in-
person physical and blood panel and compare it to those who go
through the standard periodic health assessment.
Subtitle C--Studies, Reports, and Other Matters
Sec. 751--Quarterly Briefing on Military Treatment Facilities
This section would require the Director of Health Affairs
to brief the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services on a quarterly basis to ensure the
quality and effectiveness of the Military Health System.
Sec. 752--Enhanced Medical Coverage for Civilian Employees of the
Department of Defense and Dependents in Certain Locations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a contract to provide enhanced medical coverage for
services that are not covered by the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Plan in certain locations.
Sec. 753--Modifications to Pilot Program to Assist Certain Members of
the Armed Forces and Dependents with Additional Supplemental Coverage
Relating to Cancer
This provision would amend section 734 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) pertaining to a pilot program for supplemental coverage
relating to cancer.
Sec. 754--Modifications to Evaluation and Report on TRICARE Program
Effectiveness
This section would restart the expired reporting
requirements for the Department of Defense Health Agency and
require additional elements.
Sec. 755--Extension of Extramedical Maternal Health Providers
Demonstration Project
This section would extend the Doula Demonstration program
from section 746(f)(2) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) for 3 additional
years and request a feasibility briefing for the expansion of
the program.
Sec. 756--Modification of Traumatic Brain Injury Oversight Strategy and
Action Plan of the Department of Defense
This section would modify the traumatic brain injury
oversight strategy and action plan of the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 757--Expansion of Prohibition on Painful Research on Certain
Animals
This section would prevent painful research on nonhuman
members of the order Primates.
Sec. 758--Pilot Program to Treat Pregnancy as a Qualifying Event for
Enrollment in TRICARE Select
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a 5-year pilot program treating pregnancy as a
qualifying life event for the purposes of eligibility to enroll
in TRICARE Select.
Sec. 759--Access to Automated External Defibrillators During Military
Physical Training
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure an automated external defibrillator is available and
accessible for any required unit level physical training event
or high-intensity exercise.
Sec. 760--Pilot Program on Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring for Certain
Pregnant and Postpartum TRICARE Beneficiaries
This section would create a pilot program to monitor blood
pressure for pregnant and postpartum TRICARE beneficiaries.
Sec. 761--Pilot Program on Secure, Mobile Personal Health Record for
Members of the Armed Forces
This section would establish a pilot program that allows
servicemembers to have access to their medical records via
their personal mobile device to ease the record sharing aspect
of transitioning from military to civilian status.
Sec. 762--Pilot Program to Provide for the Use of Blue-Light
Dissipating Displays to Certain Individuals
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Health Agency to conduct a pilot program for the use of blue-
light dissipating displays to assist the visually impaired.
Sec. 763--Extension and Improvement of Pilot Program of the Uniformed
Services University of the Health Sciences on Pharmaceutical Supply
Chain
This section would authorize and extend a pilot program
carried out by Uniformed Services University to assess and
develop risk ratings for generic drugs procured by the
Department of Defense based on their country of origin and
location of manufacturing.
Sec. 764--Working Group on Digital Strategy for Traumatic Brain
Injuries
This section would require the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs to establish a working group to
develop a digital strategy that leverages artificial
intelligence for the treatment of brain injuries.
Sec. 765--Study on Long-Term Effects of Military Flight Operations on
Brain Health and Mental Health
The section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a comprehensive study assessing the long-term health
effects of military aviation.
Sec. 766--Study on Feasibility of Establishing Military Treatment
Facility at Homestead Air Reserve Base
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a feasibility study on establishing a military medical
treatment facility at Homestead Air Reserve Base.
Sec. 767--Study on Feasibility of Establishing Digital System Relating
to Access to Care at Military Medical Treatment Facilities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a
digital system related to access to care at military medical
treatment facilities.
Sec. 768--Review by Inspector General of the Department of Defense on
Efforts to Prevent Suicide
This section would require the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense to conduct a review of efforts of all
military services and their approach to suicide training
requirements, public awareness campaigns, and developed crisis
response plans.
Sec. 769--Requirements Relating to Wellness Checks for Health and
Welfare of Certain Members of the Armed Forces
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish policy and procedures to require a wellness check for
any servicemember sustaining significant injury or illness to
account for the health and welfare of the servicemember.
Sec. 770--Reports on Department of Defense Comprehensive Autism Care
Demonstration Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
report on the implementation of the recommendations made by the
National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine on the
comprehensive autism care demonstration program.
Sec. 771--Transition of Medics to Civilian Workforce
This section would require the Secretaries of the military
departments to develop recommendations to improve the
transition of medics into the civilian workforce in healthcare
occupations.
Sec. 772--Strategic Plan to Address Mental Health of Certain Members of
the Armed Forces
This section would require the Department of Defense to
increase awareness of mental health assistance and resources
for servicemembers and standardize training for leadership.
Sec. 773--Briefing on Prostate Cancer Incidence and Emerging Diagnostic
Technologies
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing on the findings and results of the prostate
cancer incidence studies.
Sec. 774--Assessment of Access, Fairness, and Transparency Under
TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program
This section would require GAO to audit the TRICARE
pharmacy benefits program, examining reimbursement rates, prior
authorizations, dispensing timeliness, and pharmacy network
adequacy.
Sec. 775--Report on Feasibility of Pilot Program on Behavioral
Neurology Fellowships
This section would require a study on the feasibility of
establishing a pilot program at the Lovell Federal Health Care
Center for behavioral neurology fellowship to provide training
opportunities with respect to treating members of the Armed
Forces and veterans with traumatic brain injuries.
Sec. 776--Government Accountability Office Study on Reserve Component
Dental Readiness and Benefit Sufficiency
This section would require the Government Accountability
Office to conduct a study on Reserve Component dental readiness
and the adequacy of current TRICARE dental benefits.
Sec. 777--Review of the Occupational Health and Safety Conditions of
Operational Facilities Associated with the LGM-30G Minuteman III
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile System
The section would require an independent review of the
methodology and findings of the Missile Community Cancer Study.
Sec. 778--Continued Evaluation of the TRICARE Program through
Beneficiary Experience Surveys
This section would require continued evaluation of TRICARE
through beneficiary experience surveys.
Sec. 779--Removal of Peptides from Prohibited Performance Enhancing
Substances List
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
including legally available peptides on the prohibited dietary
supplement ingredient list.
Sec. 780--Study on Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Toxic Substances on
Reproductive Health and Fertility
This section would require a study on the long-term effects
of exposure to toxic substances on reproductive health and
fertility.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Acquisition Transformation and Innovation Implementation Report
The committee recognizes the conclusions of the Government
Accountability Office in GAO-25-107569, including that the
Departments traditional linear acquisition had not adapted to
effectively integrate emerging innovation and remained
entrenched as of June 2025.
The committee further notes that the Department of Defense
is implementing a transformation of the acquisition process by
prioritizing speed, flexibility, and rigorous execution. The
committee supports these reform efforts and notes the value of
accelerating the delivery of cutting-edge capabilities to the
warfighter.
Recognizing the depth, scale, and scope of the reform
efforts, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to provide a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than July 1, 2027, assessing:
(1) the effectiveness of the Acquisition Transformation
Strategy in expanding the industrial base, integrating emerging
innovation, and shortening time to contract awards that
facilitate iterative deliveries of capability;
(2) the degree to which changes in the Department have
shifted incentives and encouraged the acquisition workforce at
all levels to consider iterative development on traditional and
non-traditional pathways, to include Portfolio Acquisition
Executives, Program Executive Officers, and Program Managers;
(3) the extent that the Department is utilizing pathways
with smaller efforts to rapidly develop and deploy iterative,
innovative capabilities to the warfighter; and
(4) identify additional changes needed to meet the intent
of the reform efforts.
Acquisition Workflow Modernization
The committee is concerned that section 862 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) has been implemented in a way that led each of the
military services to spend more than a decade and over $1.0
billion developing bespoke electronic contract writing systems,
despite viable and less expensive commercial options being
readily available.
The committee notes that there are currently several
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software solutions for contract
writing that support other Federal agencies, the intelligence
community, and Department of Defense Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities. These COTS contract writing solutions
operate from a single, vendor-maintained code base that is
deployed across all the vendor's customers. They can be
implemented with only minor code modifications and minimal
government funding to integrate with other systems, such as
enterprise resource planning tools, and become fully
operational. Such COTS solutions may be delivered through a
single or multi-tenant software-as-a-service arrangement and
may be hosted on vendor-operated or Department-operated
infrastructure.
Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a
provision that would clarify the original intent of section 862
and require the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment to implement a phased strategy to ensure that all
electronic contract writing solutions or Federal acquisition
management systems of the Department of Defense are compliant
with section 3453 of title 10, United States Code, and are COTS
solutions unless the head of the agency determines that no
commercial product, commercial service, or nondevelopmental
item exists that is suitable to meet the needs of the agency.
Acquisition Workforce Data and Analytics
The committee notes that the Department of Defense
currently relies on multiple, fragmented systems and external
analysis to manage acquisition workforce data, limiting
enterprise-wide visibility into workforce capacity and
capability, and impeding effective and adaptive talent planning
and management. The committee also notes that integrated
workforce data and real-time analytics capabilities are
standard practice across leading private sector organizations
and are foundational to strategic talent management.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the implementation of the acquisition workforce
data transparency capability established elsewhere in this Act.
The briefing should include:
(1) progress toward achieving full operational capability
not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act;
(2) identification of the data systems, sources, and tools
being used to integrate acquisition workforce data across the
Department of Defense in support of such capability, including
any data analytics or visualization tools;
(3) an explanation of the extent to which commercially
available workforce analytics, talent management, and data
visualization tools are being used;
(4) an assessment of actions taken to standardize data
definitions and reporting requirements across the military
departments, defense agencies, and other Department of Defense
components to support the capability;
(5) identification of any challenges associated with
integrating existing data sources, including challenges related
to data access, standardization, or the provision of data by
the military departments, Defense Agencies, and other
Department of Defense components, and the steps being taken to
address such challenges; and
(6) a description of how the capability is being used to
support acquisition workforce planning, assessments of
acquisition workforce capacity and capability, and acquisition
decision-making by the Department.
AI-Enabled Commercial Lifecycle Management Platforms for Acquisition
and Sustainment Execution
The committee notes persistent cost growth, schedule
instability, and execution risk across defense acquisition and
sustainment efforts, which are often exacerbated by fragmented
program data and limited enterprise visibility into performance
drivers. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
expand the use of firm-fixed-price commercial off-the-shelf,
cloud-based lifecycle management software-as-a-service. The
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing to the House
Armed Services Committee by January 15, 2027, that includes:
(1) an implementation approach to scale the use of firm-
fixed-price commercial off-the-shelf lifecycle management
software-as-a-service across covered acquisition and
sustainment activities;
(2) priority use cases for such software, including
inventory availability, demand and supply modeling,
identification of new sources, visibility into cost growth,
schedule instability, performance degradation, and supply chain
risk and solutions;
(3) a feasibility analysis based on cost, software
maturity, and schedule of procuring and deploying commercial
off-the-shelf software versus organic development of such
systems; and
(4) identification of and solutions to Department of
Defense barriers to adoption, including contracting practices,
data access limitations, and workforce implementation
constraints.
Compliance with Commercial Preference Requirements in the Acquisition
of Simulation Capabilities
Subtitle C of title 18 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) is
comprised of numerous provisions that clarify congressional
intent and strengthen the longstanding federal contracting
framework that requires the use of commercial preference in
acquisition practices to the maximum extent practicable. The
committee is concerned that the military services are not fully
implementing such laws when it comes to requirements related to
the acquisition of simulation and training capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than April 1, 2027, on the acquisition of simulation
capabilities, including those that enhance the ability to
develop image-generated mission scenarios; plan and manage
complex missions across a range of capabilities, such as radar
jamming, electronic warfare, and adversarial actions; employ
firearms in complex and often dangerous scenarios; and perform
real-time aircraft threat evasion and response. The briefing
should include the following:
(1) an assessment of current compliance with commercial
preference requirements under section 3453 of title 10, United
States Code, for simulation capabilities;
(2) an accounting of all sole-source contracts awarded for
design or development of simulation capabilities during fiscal
years 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026, including the justification
provided for such awards; and
(3) a description of specific steps the Department is
taking to ensure future compliance with commercial preference
requirements in the acquisition of simulation capabilities,
including a discussion of any updates or clarifications to
policy being made or planned; a summary of training programs
for contracting officers and program managers in the
application of commercial preference in defense acquisitions;
and an analysis of barriers to commercial competition in the
training and simulation market, including any recommendations
for legislative or regulatory changes to further enhance
competition and commercial participation.
Defense Civilian Training Corps Integration into Acquisition Workforce
Planning
The committee continues to support the Defense Civilian
Training Corps (DCTC), established by section 860 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92). The committee notes that DCTC builds critical
skills among students in postsecondary education and better
prepares them to contribute to the acquisition workforce upon
entering civilian service.
The committee further notes that the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60)
expanded DCTC by providing direct hiring authority for program
graduates. However, the committee notes that the Department has
not fully integrated the program into acquisition workforce
planning and hiring strategies in the same way it has
incorporated other structured talent pipelines, such as the
Reserve Officers' Training Corps.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Director of the Acquisition Innovation Research Center and
the Service Acquisition Executives, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1,
2027, on the Department's strategy for integrating and scaling
DCTC as part of the acquisition workforce pipeline. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) the Department's plan to integrate DCTC into
acquisition workforce planning, including planning and
budgeting for hiring DCTC graduates into permanent acquisition
workforce positions;
(2) lessons learned from the DCTC talent development
program regarding experiential learning for the future civilian
acquisition workforce; and
(3) recommendations for potential legislative or policy
changes required to expand existing DCTC program authority to
include opportunities for DCTC graduates to gain experience
with industry partners.
Demonstrated Proficiency for Critical Acquisition Positions
The committee believes that individuals serving in critical
acquisition positions, as defined in section 1731 of title 10,
United States Code, should be able to demonstrate proficiency
in achieving the key performance objectives established for the
acquisition workforce, including through the use of the
expanded acquisition authorities, pathways, and methods
Congress has provided to the Department of Defense.
Accordingly, elsewhere in this Act, section 1731 would be
amended to require demonstrated proficiency for individuals
serving in such positions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the Department's plan to implement demonstrated
proficiency requirements for individuals in critical
acquisition positions. The briefing should include:
(1) how the Department will establish and implement the
framework to assess demonstrated proficiency requirements
beyond the completion of training or certification
requirements;
(2) how such demonstrated proficiency requirements will be
incorporated into workforce development, career progression,
and assignment decisions;
(3) how the Department will ensure that such demonstrated
proficiency requirements are applied appropriately across
different acquisition career fields and roles; and
(4) any challenges to implementation, including legal,
policy, or practical limitations.
Department of Defense Contractors' Research and Development Expensing
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to review the effectiveness of immediate Research and
Development (R&D) expensing as an incentive for research and
product development. The committee directs the Comptroller
General to submit a report on the review to the committee no
later than May 1, 2027, which shall include an assessment of
changes in Department of Defense contractors' investment
decisions during the lapse in immediate R&D expensing. The
report shall address, at a minimum, the following:
(1) how much money each defense contractor spent on R&D-
eligible expenses in tax years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023,
and 2024;
(2) a qualitative assessment of the role of immediate R&D
expensing in incentivizing investments by defense contractors
that would not have been made otherwise; and
(3) any other effects of R&D amortization policy on the
health and strength of the defense industrial base.
Enhancing Decision Efficacy Through Scenario-Based Artificial
Intelligence-Enabled Capabilities
The committee recognizes the growing importance of data-
driven and scenario-based decision support capabilities to
improve defense resource management, acquisition oversight, and
Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)
processes across the Department of Defense. The committee
believes that advances in artificial intelligence-enabled
software and analytics tools present significant opportunities
to improve transparency, traceability, and rigor in Department-
wide decision-making.
The committee notes that the Department continues to face
challenges in aligning resources to strategic priorities,
evaluating trade-offs across portfolios, integrating
information from multiple systems, and assessing program
performance in a timely and consistent manner. The committee
encourages the Department to adopt scalable, scenario-based,
artificial intelligence-enabled software capabilities that can
support decision-making across the Department, improve the
Department's ability to evaluate operational and budgetary
trade-offs, and provide auditable rationale for major
decisions.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than February 1, 2027, on the Department's use of
scenario-based, artificial intelligence-enabled capabilities to
support defense resource management, acquisition oversight, and
PPBE decision-making. The report shall be submitted in
unclassified form but may include a classified annex. The
report should include the following:
(1) a description of the Department's current and planned
use of scenario-based and artificial intelligence-enabled
decision-support capabilities across defense resource
management, PPBE processes, requirements prioritization, and
acquisition program oversight;
(2) an assessment of how such capabilities may improve
transparency, traceability, analysis of alternatives, portfolio
trade-off analysis, and alignment of budget and acquisition
decisions with Department strategy;
(3) a description of any standards, governance structures,
guidance, or oversight mechanisms established to support the
adoption and responsible use of such capabilities, including
approaches to data integrity, traceability, and human
oversight;
(4) an assessment of the extent to which such capabilities
are being used to support acquisition program performance
monitoring, including schedule execution, prototype
development, production timelines, and other programmatic
metrics;
(5) an assessment of barriers limiting broader adoption of
such capabilities across the Department, including
organizational, technical, security, cultural, acquisition, or
data-related challenges;
(6) a description of any office, official, or governance
body responsible for overseeing implementation of decision-
support modernization initiatives across the Department; and
(7) any recommendations for additional authorities,
resources, or policy changes the Secretary determines necessary
to support implementation of scenario-based, artificial
intelligence-enabled decision-support capabilities across the
Department.
Implementation of the Chief Acquisition Talent Officer
The committee notes that sections 1701 and 1702 of title
10, United States Code, establish Department-wide
responsibilities for the management and uniform implementation
of acquisition workforce policy. However, the committee remains
concerned about persistent fragmentation in acquisition
workforce planning, development, and management across the
Department, which limits capacity and complicates the
Department's ability to achieve acquisition outcomes.
The committee believes that the Department should adopt
leading private sector management practices by designating a
senior official responsible for integrating acquisition
workforce strategy, planning, data, and performance management.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Service Acquisition Executives and the Component
Acquisition Executives, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
the Department's plan to implement the role of Chief
Acquisition Talent Officer, established elsewhere in this Act.
The briefing should include:
(1) a timeline and key milestones to achieve full operating
capability for the Chief Acquisition Talent Officer not later
than 1 year after enactment of this Act;
(2) the delineation of roles and responsibilities among the
Chief Acquisition Talent Officer, Service Chief Acquisition
Talent Officers, Component Chief Acquisition Talent Officers,
Service Acquisition Executives, Component Acquisition
Executives, and Portfolio Acquisition Executives;
(3) plans to develop and implement a Department-wide
acquisition workforce strategy, planning processes, and data
standards;
(4) plans to effectively leverage the Department-wide
acquisition workforce data analytics capability established
elsewhere in this Act in workforce planning, assessments, and
decision-making; and
(5) any challenges to implementation, including resource,
policy, or statutory limitations.
The committee believes that establishment of the Chief
Acquisition Talent Officer will support execution of the
Department's Acquisition Transformation Strategy, particularly
with respect to strengthening acquisition workforce capacity,
capability, and performance.
Importance of Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring Contractor Business
Systems
Consistent with the recent changes made to streamline,
modernize, and leverage commercial practices for business
systems internal to the Department of Defense, the committee
believes that additional changes are necessary to streamline
and develop a more agile and risk-based approach for monitoring
contractor business systems. Accordingly, the committee
includes a provision elsewhere in this Act that would require
the Secretary of Defense to transition the contractor business
systems improvement program developed and initiated pursuant to
section 893 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383), as modified by section
806 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283), to an agile, streamlined, risk-based
approach that integrates surveillance and audit activities into
the Defense Contract Management Agency's (DCMA's) standard
contractor surveillance program. The committee believes such a
streamlined framework would minimize the need for the DCMA or
the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) to maintain a separate
program for surveillance of contractor business systems and
free up valuable DCMA and DCAA resources to assist contractors
in developing corrective action plans and implementing remedial
measures.
Leveraging Subscription-Based Procurement Models
The committee recognizes the important steps the Department
of Defense has taken to modernize acquisition processes and
establish more effective and efficient pathways for delivering
innovative capabilities to the warfighter, consistent with the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public
Law 119-60). The committee supports the Department's continued
efforts to reform acquisition practices to improve speed,
resilience, and strategic alignment across the enterprise.
As these reforms progress, the committee believes the
Department should do more to leverage subscription-based
procurement models for software, platforms, and mission support
capabilities where appropriate. Such approaches have the
potential to enhance adaptability, reduce lifecycle costs, and
expand access to cutting-edge technologies. The committee notes
that a standardized framework governing subscription-first
procurement, including evaluation criteria, contracting
mechanisms, and compliance measures, would support broader
adoption across the Department.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on subscription-based procurement and related
acquisition modernization efforts. The briefing shall include:
(1) education, training, and workforce development efforts
to ensure the workforce is capable and confident in applying
subscription-based procurement models;
(2) rates of use of subscription-based procurement models
across the Department of Defense;
(3) lessons learned from the use of subscription-based
procurements, and how those lessons learned are being shared
across the workforce of the Department;
(4) benefits obtained through subscription models, such as
cost savings or other operational efficiencies; and
(5) observed or anticipated modernization outcomes.
Modernizing Acquisition Processes Through Model-Based Systems
Engineering
The committee concurs with the assessment by the Secretary
of Defense that model-based systems engineering (MBSE) is
foundational to modernizing acquisition processes, improving
requirements development and traceability, and enhancing
lifecycle system management and sustainment. The committee
notes that inconsistent implementation, fragmented tool
environments, and uneven workforce adoption continue to limit
the Department's ability to fully realize the benefits of MBSE.
The committee further notes the importance of establishing
enterprise-wide governance, standards, and measurable outcomes
to ensure MBSE is effectively integrated into requirements
generation, acquisition, testing, and sustainment activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than August 1, 2027, on the Department's enterprise-
level plan for implementing MBSE. The briefing should include:
(1) the strategic objectives for MBSE adoption aligned with
Department-wide digital engineering directives and
modernization priorities;
(2) a description of governance structures, decision
authorities, and accountability mechanisms guiding enterprise-
wide MBSE implementation;
(3) an identification of resource requirements, including
digital workforce development, training, infrastructure, and
sustainment needs;
(4) milestones and measurable metrics for phased MBSE
adoption across the Department; and
(5) a plan for integrating MBSE into requirements
development, acquisition decision-making, testing, and
sustainment processes.
Modernizing the Acquisition Education and Training Ecosystem
The committee notes that the acquisition workforce
increasingly requires specialized skills in areas such as
software acquisition, digital engineering, artificial
intelligence, data analytics, cloud computing, commercial
acquisition pathways, and an understanding of commercial
business models, private capital, and investment dynamics.
The committee recognizes that the Department relies heavily
on the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) as the primary
provider of acquisition workforce training but is concerned
that it may not be fully leveraging external training
opportunities. While DAU provides foundational training, the
committee believes the Department should ensure the workforce
has access to high-quality learning opportunities from
universities, industry practitioners, federally funded research
and development centers, certification programs, and other non-
Department providers to meet evolving mission needs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the Department's strategy for acquisition workforce
education and training with a focus on non-Department
providers. The briefing should include:
(1) an evaluation of whether the current acquisition
workforce education and training structure adequately supports
workforce needs in rapidly evolving technology areas and modern
commercial acquisition and investment practices;
(2) a description of the Department's use of experiential
learning approaches, including training simulators, gaming, or
other applied learning platforms, to accelerate the development
of acquisition workforce skills;
(3) a description of the Department's use of external
learning providers;
(4) an assessment of DAU's use of temporary staff from
leading management and business schools or research
institutions to supplement DAU faculty, broaden faculty
expertise, and improve educational experiences;
(5) an identification of any statutory, regulatory, policy,
or funding barriers limiting the use of non-Department training
providers;
(6) a description of how acquisition workforce development
funding, including amounts from the Defense Acquisition
Workforce Development Account, is allocated for training
provided by DAU and external providers;
(7) an assessment of whether acquisition workforce
development funding mechanisms or other management practices
provide sufficient flexibility to support training from
external providers; and
(8) recommendations to improve access to external expertise
and modernize acquisition workforce education and training.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management
Sec. 801--Responsibilities and Authorities of Portfolio Acquisition
Executives with Respect to Contractors
This section would amend chapter 205 of title 10, United
States Code, by inserting a section 3105a that would provide a
portfolio acquisition executive with certain authorities and
procedures to address deficiencies in contractor performance.
This section would also insert a section 3105b that would
require the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, in consultation with each component acquisition
executive and service acquisition executive, to establish a
framework of contractor performance metrics to be used by all
portfolio acquisition executives of the Department of Defense.
Furthermore, this section would insert a subsection 3105c to
authorize each portfolio acquisition executive to designate a
contractor performing under an acquisition program assigned to
such executive, as a high performer. The section would also
require a contracting officer to assign any offeror designated
as a high performer with a past performance confidence rating
of substantial confidence.
Sec. 802--Ensuring Best Value in Procurement
This section would codify two sections of public law that
limit the use of lowest price technically acceptable source
selection processes to situations where minimum requirements
are clear and paying more would provide little additional
benefit (section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and section 880 of
the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232)). This section would also
amend section 152 of title 41, United States Code, to ensure
that executive agencies do not make contracting decisions based
solely on the lowest price when higher-quality or more capable
proposals could provide better long-term value under full and
open competition procedures.
Sec. 803--Limitation on Certain Contract Clauses for Commercial
Products or Commercial Services
This section would make a clarifying amendment to section
3452 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that clauses
under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15 (Contracting
by Negotiation) do not apply to contracts governed by FAR Part
12 (Acquisition of Commercial Products and Services) when a FAR
Part 12 clause already addresses the same matter.
Sec. 804--Elimination of Late Cost and Pricing Data Submission Defense
This section would amend section 3706 of title 10, United
States Code, to preclude a contractor that submits cost or
pricing data that is more than 30 days old in response to
applicable requirements under Truthful Cost or Pricing Data
(chapter 271 of title 10, United States Code), from using such
submission as a defense against a determination of defective
cost or pricing data by a head of an agency.
Sec. 805--Reporting of Price Increases
This section would amend chapter 271 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the offeror to report to the
contracting officer certain increases in the price of a product
or service under a covered contract.
Sec. 806--Limitation on Suspension of Progress Payments
This section would amend section 3804 of title 10, United
States Code, to restrict the Secretary of Defense from reducing
or suspending a progress payment to a contractor without
finding substantial evidence justifying the suspension or
reduction of payment under Federal Acquisition Regulation
clause 52.232-16. This section would also limit a suspension of
a progress payment to not more than 60 days if the contractor
initiates corrective actions and the service acquisition
executive or portfolio acquisition executive, as applicable,
determines that the corrective actions are sufficient.
Sec. 807--Uniform Requirements for Electronic Contract Writing Systems
and Acquisition Management Systems
This section would add a new section 4755 to title 10,
United States Code, to clarify and codify existing requirements
for the Secretary of Defense to maintain uniform data
standards, internal control requirements, and independent
verification and validation requirements for processing
procurement requests, contracts, receipts, and invoices within
the Department of Defense. This section would also require the
Secretary to develop a phased implementation strategy to
transition the Department to systems that are compliant with
any new requirements developed as a result of section 4755. In
addition, this section would add a new section 1132 to title
41, United States Code, to codify requirements for electronic
contract writing systems and acquisition management systems for
executive agencies other than the Department of Defense.
Finally, this section would repeal section 862 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239).
Sec. 808--Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring Contractor Business Systems
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
implement an agile, streamlined, risk-based approach to the
surveillance of contractor business systems. Accordingly, this
section would repeal section 893 of the Ike Skelton National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383), which established the requirements for the current
contractor business systems improvement program. This section
would also require the Secretary, not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, to enter into an
agreement with the acquisition research organization described
in section 4142(a) of title 10, United States Code, to provide
recommendations for implementing the requirements of this
section.
Sec. 809--Procurement of Initial Spares
This section would require a contracting officer to
determine that sufficient funds have been programmed and
budgeted for the procurement of initial spares associated with
the covered end item.
Sec. 810--Procurement of Local Produce, Seafood, and Meat in the Area
of Responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command
This section would require the Defense Commissary Agency
and the Defense Logistics Agency to increase procurement of
local produce, seafood, and meat for dining facilities and
commissaries in the area of responsibility of the Indo-Pacific
Command.
Sec. 811--Review of Defense Audit Agencies
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
contract with an entity to review the standards, guidance, and
policies of the defense audit agencies and identify
opportunities to improve and streamline their processes. The
section would also require the entity to submit a report to the
Secretary of Defense and the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense, and require the Inspector General, not
later than 60 days after receiving the report, to provide it to
the congressional defense committees, along with any
recommendations the Inspector General considers appropriate.
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Sec. 821--Modification to Certain Acquisition Thresholds
This section would amend section 3702 of title 10, United
States Code and section 1908 of title 41, United States Code,
by requiring the inflation adjustment of acquisition-related
dollar thresholds to occur every 3 years instead of every 5
years. This section would also make adjustments to several
contracting thresholds established by title 10 and title 41,
United States Code, including the simplified acquisition
threshold and the micro-purchase threshold.
Sec. 822--Use of Accrued Interest by Certain Consortium Managers
This section would amend section 4021 of title 10, United
States Code, to establish guidelines for how interest accrued
on advance payments by the Department of Defense to a
consortium management organization can be used.
Sec. 823--Amendment to Other Transaction Authority
This section would amend section 4022 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize an official responsible for entering
into other transactions for prototype projects to assess
demonstrated performance, speed of delivery, and the alignment
of a capability with the needs of the Department of Defense as
the primary factors in determining the financial structure of
an award. This section would also preserve the flexibility for
such officials to negotiate voluntary cost-sharing arrangements
when supported by market opportunities and potential commercial
returns.
Sec. 824--Requirement for Modular Open System Approach and
Modifications to Rights in Technical Data
This section would amend section 4401 of title 10, United
States Code, to clarify that a modular open system approach
should be tailored to the characteristics, intended use,
planned service life, and other relevant factors of a system in
order to support broader adoption of modular and interoperable
designs. Accordingly, this section would also make conforming
repeals of sections 4402 and 4403 of title 10, and section 804
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
(Public Law 116-283).
Sec. 825--Modification to Requirements Relating to Long-Term
Concessions Agreements with Certain Retailers
This section would amend section 4664 of title 10, United
States Code, by modifying the waiver authorities and by
striking the exceptions to the prohibition on renewing,
extending, or entering into a long-term concessions agreement
with a retailer that is controlled by a covered nation.
Sec. 826--Prohibition on Contracting with Employers of Convicted
Traffickers
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
entering into a contract with convicted traffickers.
Sec. 827--Acquisition Thresholds for Certain Materials
This section would amend sections 4863 and 4872 of title
10, United States Code, to revise an exception for purchases of
covered materials to apply to amounts below $250,000, adjusted
for inflation every 5 years, instead of tying the exception to
the simplified acquisition threshold. This section would also
amend section 4873 of title 10, United States Code, to revise
the exception for purchases of covered printed circuit boards
to apply to amounts below $10,000, adjusted for inflation every
5 years, instead of tying the exception to the micro-purchase
threshold.
Sec. 828--Clarification of Certain Elements of Department of Defense
Mentor-Protege Program
This section would amend section 4902 of title 10, United
States Code, to ensure that firms serving as mentors are for-
profit firms operating in the United States, and to make other
clarifications to the authority for the program.
Sec. 829--Codification of Program for Negotiation of Comprehensive
Small Business Subcontracting Plans
This section would establish a new section in title 10,
United States Code, to codify the requirement for the Secretary
of Defense to maintain a program under which service
acquisition executives and heads of a Defense Agency are
authorized to negotiate and administer comprehensive
subcontracting plans.
Sec. 830--Consumption-Based Procurements and Associated Payments
This section would amend section 3324 of title 31, United
States Code, to authorize agency heads to make advance payments
for commercially available content and certain information and
communications technology subscriptions, reservations, or
tenancy arrangements, including cloud environments, where the
procuring agency establishes appropriate access and security
standards. This section would also add a new section 2314 to
title 41, United States Code, to authorize agencies to acquire
services through consumption-based solutions that are billed
based on actual usage. In addition, this section would modify
and extend the pilot program for consumption-based solutions
authorized under section 809 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31).
Sec. 831--Extension of Briefing and Certification Requirement
This section would amend section 886 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159) to modify and extend requirements related to briefings and
certification of fuel services financial management contracts.
Sec. 832--Preference for Recycled Strategic and Critical Materials
This section would amend section 848 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-238) by including sources that
produce strategic and critical materials by extracting such
materials from electronic waste to the list of preferred
sources.
Sec. 833--Transfer Authority for Rapid Transition of Other Transaction
Authority Prototypes
This section would authorize a Portfolio Acquisition
Executive (PAE) within the Department of Defense to transfer
not more than 10 percent of authorized amounts made available
for research, development, test, and evaluation programs,
projects, or activities within the PAE's portfolio. The section
would clarify that such transfers may only be made to a
corresponding procurement program, project, or activity within
the same portfolio and only under specified conditions. This
section would also require the PAE to provide written
notification to the congressional defense committees and
designated senior Department of Defense officials not later
than 15 days before making such a transfer.
Sec. 834--Portfolio-Based Acquisition of Autonomous Capabilities
This section would establish a Department of Defense
program to be known as the ``Autonomy Integration Account.''
Sec. 835--Establishment of Pathfinder Programs to Inform Requirements
Reform
This section would require each Secretary of a military
department to establish a pathfinder program to inform and
assist in efforts to reorient and reform the requirements
process within the military department concerned, and to
develop and establish requirements-related processes in a
manner that supports and is consistent with the Joint Force
Requirements Process established January 15, 2026.
Sec. 836--Requirements for Certain Unmanned Surface Vessels to be
Manufactured in the United States
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
prioritize offers for the Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel
program of the Department of the Navy that include assurances
by the offeror that their components are domestically sourced
and the manufacturing, assembling, and finishing of components
or parts is done by domestically located entities.
Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce Development
Sec. 851--Acquisition Workforce Data Analytics Capability
This section would amend section 1701a of title 10, United
States Code, to require the establishment of a Department-wide
acquisition workforce data analytics capability to support
workforce planning and performance management. This section
would also direct the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to use commercially available tools
to the maximum extent practicable when developing and
maintaining this capability.
Sec. 852--Chief Acquisition Talent Officer
This section would amend chapter 87 of title 10, United
States Code, to establish a Chief Acquisition Talent Officer of
the Department of Defense to serve as the principal staff
assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment on Department-wide acquisition workforce strategy
and talent management. This section would also require the
Chief Acquisition Talent Officer to submit an annual report to
the congressional defense committees assessing workforce
capacity and capability, identifying critical gaps, and
providing recommendations to strengthen the acquisition
workforce.
Sec. 853--Codification of Acquisition Workforce Key Performance
Objectives
This section would amend section 1722b of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to implement
mandatory key performance objectives for civilian members of
the acquisition workforce, codifying requirements previously
established under section 826 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
Sec. 854--Demonstrated Proficiency Requirements for Critical
Acquisition Positions
This section would amend section 1731 of title 10, United
States Code, to require that individuals serving in civilian
critical acquisition positions demonstrate proficiency in
achieving the key performance objectives that would be
established under section 1722b(d) of this title in a provision
elsewhere in this Act, including through the effective use of
new acquisition authorities and approaches provided by
Congress. This section would also require the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to establish a
Department-wide framework to assess demonstrated proficiency
with those key performance objectives.
Sec. 855--Extension and Modification of Acquisition Workforce
Demonstration Project
This section would amend section 1762 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase the Acquisition Workforce
Demonstration Project participation cap from 130,000 to
143,000, extend the project through December 31, 2035, and
require a briefing on projected growth and any additional
authorities needed to support the acquisition workforce.
Subtitle D--Intellectual Property Matters
Sec. 861--Reform of Technical Data and Software Rights to Support
Competition, Sustainment, and Readiness
This section would amend title 10, United States Code, by
inserting a new section that would require the Department of
Defense be provided with government purpose rights unless the
contractor establishes through clear and convincing evidence,
entitlement to more restrictive rights. This section would
establish that a contractor bears the burden for asserting
less-than-government purpose rights and would stipulate that,
if the contractor fails to satisfy that burden, the deliverable
shall be treated as having been provided with government
purpose rights. This section would further apply government
purpose rights to any critical readiness item of supply that
was found to be improperly marked. This section would also
amend section 3771 of title 10, United Stated Code, by
authorizing release, disclosure, or use of a contractor's
detailed manufacturing and process data in cases that it is
needed for operation, maintenance, installation, or training
purposes supporting wartime operations or contingency
operations. This section would apply to all competitive and
non-competitive procurements made after the date of enactment
of this Act, including commercial procurements, without
exception.
Sec. 862--Intellectual Property Ombudsman; Voluntary Expert Mediation
for Certain Intellectual Property Matters
This section would amend chapter 275 of title 10, United
States Code, by inserting a new section 3792 to require the
designation of an Intellectual Property Ombudsman to provide
independent, non-binding guidance to contracting officers,
contractors, and subcontractors regarding intellectual property
matters and to facilitate communication on such matters between
contractors and contracting officers. This section would also
insert a new section 3792a to establish a mediation process
through which the Department of Defense and contractors may
seek to resolve intellectual property disputes before resorting
to litigation. This section would further authorize the
Secretary of Defense, under certain conditions, to approve a
binding recommendation requiring a covered contractor to
provide non-deliverable access to certain disputed intellectual
property. Finally, this section would require the Secretary of
Defense to implement sections 3792 and 3792a not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 863--Expansion of Reverse Engineering Authority for Prototype
Projects
This section would amend section 4022 of title 10, United
States Code, to expand the authority for reverse engineering
projects by removing the requirement that such projects be
associated with addressing obsolescence.
Sec. 864--Clarifications to Sustainment Planning Requirements for
Covered Systems
This section would modify sections 4324 and 3744 of title
10, United States Code to clarify certain factors that must be
addressed in sustainment planning for Major Defense Acquisition
Programs (MDAP), MDAP subprograms, MDAP-equivalent Middle Tier
of Acquisition programs, and major weapon systems no later than
Milestone B or equivalent stage, and all other sustainment
needs by Milestone C or equivalent stage, in accordance with
program needs.
Sec. 865--Software Accountability Improvements Over Lifecycles
This section would amend section 4324 of title 10, United
States Code, to modify the required life-cycle sustainment plan
to include software sustainment metrics and expand the
responsibilities of portfolio acquisition executives and
product support managers related to software-enabled solutions
and technology adoption.
Sec. 866--Assessment of a Pay-to-Print Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
assess and report to Congress on the feasibility and utility of
establishing a Department-wide program to be known as the
``Pay-to-Print Program.''
Sec. 867--Prioritizing Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul for Readiness
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure that the service secretaries conduct a sustainment
review and assessment, updated not less frequently than
annually, of the performance of each major weapon system and
each critical readiness item of supply against established
operational readiness requirements and material objectives.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 871--Enhancement to Defense Supply Chain Resilience and Secondary
Source Qualification
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
implementing section 865 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to establish a
pathway to streamline and consolidate the approval authority of
the process established under such section for applications for
Source Approval Requests submitted by the manufacturer of
record for such capability.
Sec. 872--Tailored Acquisition Pathways for Non-Traditional
Intermediate-Range Fires Capabilities
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
tailor and employ existing acquisition pathways to accelerate
the development, test, evaluation, and procurement of non-
traditional intermediate-range fires capabilities.
Sec. 873--Pilot Program for Domestic Antimony and Copper Production for
Defense Applications
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, to establish a pilot program to support the recovery of
antimony and copper as byproducts of mineral production in the
United States. The pilot program would terminate not later than
5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 874--Addressing the Backlog of Open Cases Related to the Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a team of
experts in acquisition regulations to assist in addressing the
backlog of open cases related to the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement. This section would also
require the Principal Director for Defense Pricing,
Contracting, and Acquisition Policy to provide a monthly
briefing to the congressional defense committees on the
progress made in reducing the backlog until such time that the
backlog is reduced to only cases that are less than 180 days
old.
Sec. 875--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Purchase of
Photovoltaic Cells, Modules, or Inverters from Foreign Entities of
Concern
This section would prohibit the Department of Defense from
acquiring photovoltaic cells, modules, or inverters
manufactured by a foreign entity of concern.
Sec. 876--Ensuring Department of Defense Contractor Compliance with
Disability Hiring Goals
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct an audit of the compliance of contractors of the
Department of Defense with the 7-percent utilization goal for
employment of qualified individuals with disabilities, and
require a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services during each of fiscal
years 2027 through 2030.
Sec. 877--Expedited Implementation of Commercial Acquisition Reforms
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
ensure the Principal Director for Defense Pricing, Contracting,
and Acquisition Policy prioritizes the issuance of regulations,
guidance, class deviations, or other implementation materials
necessary to successfully implement sections 1821 through 1828
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026
(Public Law 119-60) related to reforming the Department's
commercial acquisition procedures and policies. This section
would limit the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized
to be appropriated for the Secretary of Defense for travel
expenses to not more than 50 percent until the Secretary issues
interim implementation instructions for the covered sections.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Army Continuous Transformation Initiative
The committee understands that, in accordance with the
Army's Continuous Transformation Initiative, First Army
headquarters is assuming the functions of Division East and
Division West. First Army provides a crucial service to the
Total Force in carrying out its critical mission of advising
and assisting the Reserve Component to ensure readiness. As the
senior operational command at the Rock Island Arsenal, First
Army supports hundreds of high-skilled military and civilian
jobs, which bolsters the Army commands co-located at the Rock
Island Arsenal, such as Army Sustainment Command, Joint
Munitions Command, and the Joint Manufacturing and Technology
Center, and contributes significantly to the regional defense
ecosystem. The committee remains supportive of the First Army
headquarters' critical role at the Rock Island Arsenal.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on changes to First Army's structure,
alignment, and personnel. The briefing should include changes
to personnel basing as it relates to the changing functions,
and how First Army fits into the establishment of the new U.S.
Army Western Hemisphere Command and the new U.S. Army
Transformation and Training Command.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 901--Transfer of Responsibility to Supervise Activities of
Department of Defense Relating to Export Controls
This section would transfer the responsibility for
supervising and directing activities of the Department of
Defense relating to export controls from the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy to the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment.
Sec. 902--Membership of Commandant of the Coast Guard on the Joint
Chiefs of Staff
This section would add the Commandant of the Coast Guard as
a full statutory member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Sec. 903--Oversight of Geographic Combatant Commands
This section would extend to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 the prohibition of funds
related to oversight of the geographic combatant commands
pursuant to section 916 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Advanced Performance Apparel for Special Operations Forces
The committee notes that special operations forces operate
across a broad range of contested and austere environments that
place exceptional physical demands on individual clothing and
equipment. The committee understands that standard-issue
military apparel might not meet all the uniform requirements of
the special operations forces community, specifically uniforms
that meet mobility, moisture management, abrasion resistance,
antimicrobial, and thermal regulation requirements of sustained
special operations missions.
The committee is aware that there are domestic based small
businesses, including veteran-founded manufacturers, that may
have developed advanced performance apparel that meets or
exceeds the physical demands described above and is currently
available for procurement through existing Defense Logistics
Agency supply mechanisms. The committee believes that the
Commander, United States Special Operations Command should
prioritize the evaluation of such apparel for special
operations forces and if the apparel meets requirements, to
leverage existing authorities to purchase uniform apparel to
fulfill existing requirements.
Amphibious Seaplane Capability For Special Operations Forces
The committee recognizes that U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) faces a critical capability gap in low-
signature, runway-independent, fixed-wing mobility for
operations in coastal, riverine, and austere environments. The
committee notes that hybrid-electric amphibious seaplane
technology may provide a viable solution by enabling fixed-wing
aircraft to operate from waterways, runways, and unimproved
surfaces with increased combat radius, reduced fuel
consumption, and lower acoustic and thermal signatures. Such
capability could support special operations forces missions,
including infiltration and exfiltration, combat search and
rescue, personnel recovery, casualty evacuation, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance, and logistics sustainment in
infrastructure-denied settings, while aligning with Agile
Combat Employment, Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations, and
Distributed Maritime Operations concepts.
The committee directs the Commander, U.S. Special
Operations Command, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1, 2026, on
plans to support development, experimentation, and potential
fielding of amphibious monohull seaplane technology. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the operational capability gap in
runway-independent, fixed-wing mobility for special operations
forces, including current platform limitations in range, fuel
efficiency, logistics footprint, and signature management;
(2) a summary of USSOCOM engagement with amphibious
seaplane technology development, including through AFWERX Small
Business Innovation Research programs and the USSOCOM Broad
Agency Announcement for Advancement of Aviation Systems and
Technologies;
(3) an evaluation of operational benefits for USSOCOM
mission sets, including infiltration and exfiltration, combat
search and rescue, personnel recovery, casualty evacuation,
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and logistics
sustainment;
(4) a proposed timeline and resource requirements for
advancing the technology from experimentation through prototype
evaluation and tactics development;
(5) recommendations regarding authorities, funding, or
acquisition pathways necessary to accelerate development and
transition of this capability; and
(6) a review of foreign military seaplane or amphibious
aircraft programs, including capabilities developed or operated
by the People's Republic of China and other nations, and the
implications of such systems for U.S. military planning.
Assessment of rotational combat training center opportunities in Puerto
Rico
The committee recognizes that Puerto Rico provides a United
States location with existing military installations, ports,
airfields, maritime access, airspace, and National Guard and
Reserve force structure that may support expanded joint
training opportunities relevant to operations in the Caribbean,
Western Hemisphere, and Indo-Pacific. The committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027, on the
feasibility and advisability of expanding rotational joint
training opportunities in Puerto Rico. The briefing should
include:
(1) an assessment of existing military installations,
ports, airfields, ranges, training areas, airspace, maritime
space, communications infrastructure, and logistics nodes in
Puerto Rico;
(2) an assessment of the marginal increases in annual
training throughput, exercise capacity, unit participation,
joint force integration, and Reserve Component training
opportunities that could be gained through targeted
infrastructure, range, communications, transportation, and
sustainment investments in Puerto Rico;
(3) an evaluation of whether Puerto Rico could support a
rotational training model analogous in concept to existing
combat training centers;
(4) identification of training missions for which Puerto
Rico may offer unique or additive value compared to existing
training venues, including littoral operations, joint logistics
over-the-shore, expeditionary sustainment, degraded port and
airfield operations, maritime security, electromagnetic
spectrum operations, information operations, and defense
support to civil authorities;
(5) an assessment of infrastructure, environmental, legal,
community, transportation, airspace, maritime, spectrum, and
range management constraints that could limit expanded training
in Puerto Rico;
(6) an assessment of opportunities to integrate Active
Component, National Guard, Reserve, interagency, allied, and
partner participation into rotational training events in Puerto
Rico;
(7) an assessment of whether expanded training in Puerto
Rico could reduce transit time, force allocation burdens, or
sustainment costs associated with comparable training conducted
at more distant locations; and
(8) recommendations for any legislative, policy,
resourcing, or interagency actions required to enable expanded
rotational joint training opportunities in Puerto Rico.
At-Sea Vertical Launch System Rearming
The committee recognizes the operational need for near-
term, expeditionary approaches to sustain naval surface-
combatant operations in contested maritime environments. The
committee notes that uncertainty regarding the availability of
future at-sea rearming capabilities underscores the importance
of identifying and advancing feasible, near-term rearming and
rapid-replenishment concepts that can be executed using
existing platforms and infrastructure.
The committee is aware of ongoing Department of the Navy
efforts to evaluate forward, at-sea vertical launch system
rearming and rapid-replenishment options and believes
additional clarity is needed regarding implementation plans,
resource requirements, and operational timelines. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's plans for near-term
forward, at-sea vertical launch system rearming and rapid-
replenishment capabilities. The briefing shall include:
(1) an overview of current requirements and operational
needs for forward at-sea rearming;
(2) a description of near-term rearming and rapid-
replenishment concepts executable with existing platforms and
infrastructure; and
(3) an assessment of risks, barriers, and enabling
investments required to accelerate implementation of these
capabilities.
Briefing on Naval Architecture Workforce Requirements
The committee is concerned that shortages in the naval
architecture workforce may be contributing to broader
challenges in Navy shipbuilding, including ship design,
production, sustainment, and industrial base capacity. The
committee notes that demand for naval architects remains high
across the public and private shipbuilding sectors, while too
few students are graduating with degrees in naval architecture
and related disciplines to meet current and future workforce
needs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the Navy's requirements for naval
architects and the steps being taken to address identified
workforce shortfalls. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of current and projected demand for naval
architects across Navy shipbuilding, design, acquisition, and
sustainment activities;
(2) an identification of workforce gaps affecting Navy
shipbuilding programs and the broader maritime industrial base;
(3) an assessment of the number of graduates entering the
naval architecture field annually and whether current education
pipelines are sufficient to meet Navy needs;
(4) a description of actions the Navy is taking, or plans
to take, to expand recruitment, training, scholarships,
internships, fellowships, and partnerships with academic
institutions; and
(5) recommendations for any additional authorities,
resources, or partnerships needed to strengthen the naval
architecture workforce and address shipbuilding challenges.
Business Intelligence
The Committee is concerned by longstanding deficiencies in
the Department of Defense's financial management controls, data
standardization, and audit readiness that continue to impede a
clean audit opinion. The Committee believes the Department
should accelerate adoption of commercially available business
process intelligence capabilities to automate controls,
standardize financial processes, and improve the reliability of
fiscal data.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 31, 2027, on the Department's plan to
improve the accuracy, standardization, and auditability of
financial management data and internal controls across the
military departments.
The briefing shall include:
(1) A description of efforts to expand use of commercially
available audit acceleration, business process intelligence,
and continuous monitoring technologies to improve internal
controls and audit readiness;
(2) A description of efforts within each military
department to improve tracking, reconciliation, and reporting
of fiscal data through technologies that enable end-to-end
visibility and predictive identification of deficiencies;
(3) Specific milestones and timelines to achieve
interoperability across financial management systems within
each military department for purposes of achieving and
sustaining a clean audit opinion; and
(4) An assessment of resource requirements, acquisition
authorities, and implementation risks associated with carrying
out such efforts.
Civilian Protection Center of Excellence Implementation
The committee notes that section 936 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232) designated the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Policy as the senior civilian official responsible for
Department of Defense policy relating to civilian casualties
resulting from United States military operations. The committee
further notes that, as required by section 184 of title 10,
United States Code, the Secretary of Defense established the
Civilian Protection Center of Excellence.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services by October 30,
2026, on the implementation of the responsibilities assigned to
the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy pursuant to
section 936 of Public Law 115-232. The report should also
include an assessment of the implementation of the Civilian
Protection Center of Excellence pursuant to section 184 of
title 10, United States Code, including the staffing and
resources dedicated to enable the entity to carry out the
purposes established in such section, and the anticipated
timeline for full implementation.
Combatant Commanders' Civilian Harm Mitigation Response
Responsibilities
Consistent with Section 936 of the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232; 10 U.S.C. 134 note), the Department of Defense Instruction
3000.17 requires each geographic combatant command and the
United States Special Operations Command to identify a lead
general officer to coordinate their respective Civilian Harm
Mitigation Response efforts and to designate a senior official
to serve as the Civilian Harm Assessment and Investigation
Coordinator. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services no later than December 1, 2026, on the Department's
implementation of such requirements. The report shall include a
list of all personnel within each geographic combatant command
and the United States Special Operations Command responsible
for such implementation; the number of full-time equivalent
personnel whose responsibilities include such implementation,
including the locations, offices, and roles of such personnel;
an assessment of progress by each geographic combatant command
and the United States Special Operations Command toward
implementation of the requirements of Department of Defense
Instruction 3000.17; and any additional resources required for
effective implementation by each geographic combatant command
and the United States Special Operations Command.
Cost Saving Measures for Security Clearance Wait Times for
Small Defense Contractors
The committee recognizes that small defense contractors
face financial barriers when employing uncleared entry-level
technical workers during security clearance processing.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 30,
2027, on mechanisms to offset costs incurred by small defense
contractors employing such workers pending adjudication. The
briefing shall include the following information:
(1) the average cost to small contractors, with an annual
revenue under $100 million, of employing workers pending a
Secret clearance adjudication;
(2) the feasibility of cost-share arrangements using
existing contract modification or indirect cost authorities;
(3) any potential fee structures or overhead adjustments
requiring no additional appropriations;
(4) any barriers in current acquisition regulations;
(5) any recommendations for implementation; and
(6) any implementing guidance if the report identifies
feasible mechanisms under existing authorities.
Counter Small Uncrewed Aerial Systems at the Southern Border
The committee notes, with concern, that transnational
criminal organizations (TCOs) are known to use small, unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) along the U.S.-Mexico border for
reconnaissance and smuggling purposes. The committee further
notes that small UAS are increasingly resistant to traditional
radio frequency (RF) detection and countermeasures. The
committee also notes that mitigation of UAS over populated
territory, including near the U.S.-Mexico border, brings unique
challenges and safety concerns. The committee encourages the
Department of Defense to pursue rapid acquisition and fielding
of UAS capable of monitoring TCO activity and low collateral
effects interceptors capable of safe, kinetic small UAS
mitigation within the United States to forces deployed at or
near the southern border.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on how the Department is using UAS
and counter-UAS technology to disrupt TCOs operating near the
U.S.-Mexico border and the small UAS capabilities of such TCOs.
Countering Adversarial Gray Zone Campaigns
The committee recognizes that adversarial gray zone
campaigns conducted by state actors fall below the threshold of
armed conflict and continue to pose a persistent and evolving
threat to United States national security interests. The
committee notes that the People's Republic of China, the
Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and other foreign
adversaries increasingly employ integrated gray zone tactics,
including information operations, cyber activities, economic
coercion, proxy force enablement, political subversion,
maritime harassment, and irregular military actions to
undermine United States influence, weaken allied cohesion, and
advance strategic objectives without triggering conventional
military responses. The committee further recognizes that
effectively countering such campaigns requires a coordinated,
whole-of-government approach integrating diplomatic,
informational, military, economic, financial, intelligence,
legal, and cyber capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department of Defense's
current approach to countering adversarial gray zone campaigns
and opportunities to improve interagency coordination,
operational effectiveness, and allied integration. The briefing
shall include:
(1) an assessment of the Department's current capabilities,
authorities, and organizational structures for identifying,
assessing, and responding to adversarial gray zone activities;
(2) an overview of how the Department coordinates with
interagency partners, allies, and strategic partners to deter
and counter gray zone campaigns;
(3) a description of ongoing Department initiatives,
exercises, security cooperation activities, or operational
concepts designed to counter gray zone coercion and malign
influence;
(4) an identification of priority geographic regions or
countries experiencing persistent adversary gray zone
aggression and an overview of Department efforts in support of
those areas;
(5) an assessment of the adequacy of existing doctrine and
planning frameworks governing the Department's gray zone
competition activities; and
(6) any recommendations for legislative, policy, resource,
or organizational changes necessary to improve the Department's
ability to counter adversary gray zone campaigns below the
threshold of armed conflict.
Countering Cartel Hydrocarbon Smuggling
The committee is concerned that the theft and illicit
transborder trafficking of crude oil, diesel, gasoline, and
refined petroleum products by Mexico-based Transnational
Criminal Organizations (TCOs) and Designated Terrorist
Organizations (DTOs) constitute a significant threat to the
national security, energy security, and public safety of the
United States.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
January 15, 2027, on:
(1) details of activities taking place pursuant to section
284 of title 10, United States Code, or other authorities of
the Department, to counter transnational criminal organizations
involved in the theft, diversion, or illicit movement of
hydrocarbon products;
(2) lessons learned in Joint Task Force-Southern Border and
related border security operations that may apply to
interdicting illicit hydrocarbon trafficking;
(3) recommendations for future additional activities to
counter transnational criminal organizations engaged in
hydrocarbon smuggling, including capacity building with
national security forces of partner nations pursuant to section
333 of title 10, United States Code, information sharing with
civilian U.S. Government agencies specializing in countering
TCOs and DTOs, and any other non-kinetic activity the Secretary
determines appropriate to deny, disrupt, or degrade the
smuggling of hydrocarbon products;
(4) any efforts to incorporate counter-trafficking of
stolen hydrocarbon products as a priority component of the
Department's counterdrug and counter-TCO and DTO organized
crime strategy;
(5) an assessment of resources used to conduct such
activities and any additional resources or statutory
authorities needed to maximize the effectiveness of the
activities, plans, and recommendations in the report.
Department of Defense Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems Coordination
The committee remains concerned about the growing threat
that unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) pose to the U.S. homeland,
military installations, critical infrastructure, and general
public. The Department of Defense must move quickly to develop
capabilities that can sufficiently counter this threat while
maintaining safety in the National Air Space. To do so, the
Department of Defense must collaborate closely with interagency
partners to ensure streamlined coordination and prevent
additional safety and security incidents in National Air Space.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of the Joint Interagency Task
Force 401, to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 1, 2026, examining interagency
coordination and authority gaps between the Department of
Defense and relevant agencies on the testing and deployment of
counter UAS technology to protect Department installations in
the United States. Furthermore, the report should include the
following:
(1) the development of directed energy counter UAS;
(2) the feasibility of deploying directed energy counter
UAS domestically;
(3) required safety precautions when deployed; and
(4) a description of the capabilities and use cases of
directed energy counter UAS.
Department of Defense Support for Recovery of United States Nationals
Abroad
The committee notes the unfortunate and continued
detention, disappearance, or unresolved status of United States
nationals throughout the world, particularly in nonpermissive
environments. These include cases involving deceased
individuals whose remains have not been recovered, individuals
who are unlawfully detained, and individuals whose status
remains unresolved. The committee recognizes the critical role
of the Department of Defense in supporting interagency efforts
led by the Department of State pursuant to the Robert Levinson
Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act (22
U.S.C. 1741 et seq.). The committee notes the Department's role
in the Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell (HRFC) and the expertise
provided in planning and execution if the Department is
directed to execute a hostage or personnel recovery of U.S.
nationals abroad. The committee believes the Department's role
in supporting hostage recovery activities abroad should be
integrated, as appropriate, into contingency planning and
operational planning, force posture considerations, and broader
theater planning. The committee notes the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict
(ASD(SOLIC)) is the policy lead for personnel recovery to
include hostage rescue and U.S. Special Operations Command
(USSOCOM) is the operational lead for executing hostage rescue
missions abroad within the Department of Defense. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on:
(1) how ASD(SOLIC)'s and USSOCOM's support to the HRFC
informs contingency planning for rescue or recovery of U.S.
nationals abroad;
(2) how the Geographic Combatant Commands incorporate
rescue or recovery of U.S. nationals abroad into operational
plans and what impact this contingency mission may have on
force requirements;
(3) what criteria must be met for the Department to
recommend using military assets to execute a rescue or
personnel recovery of detained U.S. nationals abroad, including
how such criteria differ when executing a mission in areas
where the U.S. does not maintain a permanent or temporary
military infrastructure;
(4) any potential statutory authorities, policy
constraints, intelligence limitations, or resource gaps
affecting the Department's ability to support such efforts,
including recommendations to address any potential gaps;
(5) an assessment of best practices employed by partner
nation militaries with established doctrines prioritizing the
recovery, repatriation, and accountability of detained or
deceased citizens, and the feasibility of establishing a
similar formal doctrine integrating such prioritization into
operational and contingency planning, resource allocation,
detainee policy considerations, and interagency coordination;
and
(6) a classified portion detailing Department of Defense
support equities related to the cases of deceased U.S.
nationals whose remains have not been recovered, as well as
cases involving U.S. nationals who are wrongfully detained,
missing, or of unresolved status.
Department of Homeland Security Reimbursement to the Department of
Defense for Border Security Operations
The committee notes that in Fiscal Year 2025, Congress
provided the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) $10 billion
for reimbursement of costs incurred in undertaking activities
in support of the DHS's mission to safeguard the borders of the
United States. The committee also notes that the Department of
Defense (DoD) and DHS signed a memorandum of understanding in
2025 outlining DHS's intent to reimburse DoD for costs incurred
while undertaking activities in support of DHS's mission to
safeguard the borders of the United States. The committee
understands that, since October 1, 2025, DoD has only approved
DHS requests for assistance on a reimbursable basis, but that
to date, DHS has not reimbursed DoD for any such reimbursable
activities undertaken, with up to $2 billion in DoD costs
outstanding.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services Committee not
later than December 1, 2026, on the issue of DHS reimbursement
to DoD. The briefing should include:
(1) an update on DoD's negotiations with DHS regarding
payment of owed costs;
(2) a detailed report of all transfer authorities,
reprogramming actions, or reimbursement mechanisms utilized to
relocate funding to support DHS, including the exact amounts
reimbursed and/or owed by DHS or any other federal agency;
(3) a description of any technical, budgetary, or policy
reasons why DHS has not reimbursed DoD;
(4) DoD's plan to cover costs incurred if DHS does not
provide reimbursement; and
(5) DoD's future plans to undertake activities on behalf of
DHS if reimbursement is not provided.
Development of the Golden Fleet
The committee understands that the Navy is in early phases
of developing the Golden Fleet, which seeks to revitalize
America's maritime industrial base by rapidly building the next
generation of warships. The first two elements of the Golden
Fleet are the BBG(X) Trump class Battleship and the new FF(X)
Frigate. The Navy is planning a new frigate class based
substantially on the Coast Guard's National Security Cutter,
with a goal of launching the lead FF(X) in 2028. For the
BBG(X), the Navy states that it will be substantially larger
than a destroyer and incorporate future concepts, such as
directed energy, hypersonic and nuclear missiles, and advanced
electronic warfare. As U.S. adversaries continue to advance
their weapon system capabilities and the pace of production for
those systems, the Navy's BBG(X) and the Golden Fleet will need
to be able to operate in increasingly complex environments to
deter or defeat future threats.
The committee is concerned that the Navy will, as it has in
the past, move forward with business cases for vessels in the
Golden Fleet, including BBG(X), that rely on optimistic
assumptions about technologies including: operating with a
nuclear weapon, ship design, costs, schedule, and production
and lack clear concepts of operations or a commitment to
incorporating commercial leading practices. Therefore, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to provide a brief to the House Committee on Armed Services no
later than January 1, 2027, on how they will assess:
(1) the business case for the BBG(X) program, including the
planned cost, schedule, and performance parameters, as well as
any assumptions that are inherent to the execution of the
business case.
(2) the novel systems and technologies required to build,
operate, and sustain the BBG(X), including the costs and risks
of these technologies and the Navy's steps to mitigate these
risks.
(3) the extent to which and how the Navy envisions
executing Distributed Maritime Operations with the BBG(X) as
well as other Golden Fleet assets.
(4) the extent to which the Navy plans to incorporate
commercial leading practices into its acquisition approach for
BBG(X) and other Golden Fleet assets.
(5) the impact of BBG(X) and other Golden fleet assets on
acquisition and construction plans for existing Navy
shipbuilding programs.
Dismantlement and Disposal of Nuclear-Powered Submarines
The committee recognizes the important and reliable work
that is done by the organic industrial base to inactivate,
defuel, and recycle our Navy's decommissioned submarines. Not
only does this work represent a significant and predictable
baseload of work for the highly skilled technicians and
engineers, but it also helps keep the specialized workforce
fully engaged when the shipyard is running at less than full
capacity and offers these individuals training opportunities
that help develop the skills necessary to adequately repair and
modernize the current active fleet. The committee supports the
maximum workload throughput at the public shipyards to ensure
the Navy can rapidly increase the combat readiness of our
aircraft carriers and submarines, including Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard.
However, the committee is concerned that the Navy's
logistical plan for reducing the current idle inactivation
times for these submarines lacks detail and rigor. Furthermore,
the committee has seen little evidence of steps to plan for the
relatively large influx of new submarine inactivations that are
expected in the coming years.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 31, 2027, that includes:
(1) a workload assessment of each public shipyard,
including Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, over the next 15 years to
ensure full utilization of the existing workforce;
(2) a list of the submarines currently waiting to be
disposed of and a timeline of the number and type of submarines
that are expected to be recycled over the 15 years;
(3) a review of when each inactivated submarine is expected
to enter and exit the inactivation, defueling, and recycling
phase;
(4) a cost-benefit analysis of the options available to the
Navy to mitigate these issues, including an assessment of the
impact on the organic industrial base workforce; and
(5) an analysis of what steps the Navy can take to reduce
current and future idle inactivation times.
Distributed Shipbuilding
Distributed shipbuilding, which enables qualified
manufacturers to work on early-stage fabrication and component
work at their own facilities, freeing shipyards to focus on
final assembly and delivery, has been suggested as a key
accelerator for both submarine and surface ship construction.
There are benefits and challenges associated with this
approach. For example, moving work from the shipbuilders to the
supplier base could have the benefit of expanding the
industrial base and alleviating the physical constraints and
workforce limitations at shipyards. However, many suppliers are
also constrained, which could result in problems with their
ability to produce quality materials on time. In addition,
without synchronization of the varied manufacturing entities
contributing to the construction of a vessel, delays can be
exacerbated instead of alleviated. Therefore, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to provide
a brief to the House Committee on Armed Services no later than
January 1, 2027, on how they will assess:
(1) how distributed shipbuilding is being used on Navy
shipbuilding programs and what plans the Navy has for future
use.
(2) what investments the Navy has made to date to help its
shipbuilders implement distributed shipbuilding.
(3) how the Navy and its shipbuilders are ensuring
sufficient oversight of distributed shipbuilding efforts.
Electric And Hybrid-Electric Powertrain Options for Special Operations
Light Tactical Vehicles
The committee is aware that United States Special
Operations Command (USSOCOM) operates Lightweight Tactical All-
Terrain Vehicles (LTATVs) as a primary ground mobility platform
for special operations forces. The committee understands that
modular electric and hybrid-electric powertrain technologies
developed by domestic small businesses and non-traditional
defense contractors may offer significant operational
advantages for LTATV-equipped forces, including silent
mobility, reduced acoustic and thermal signatures, vehicle-
mounted electrical power export, and utility in fuel-denied
environments. The committee is concerned that mature
technologies in this area have not been systematically
evaluated for transition into the LTATV program of record.
The committee directs the Commander of United States
Special Operations Command, in coordination with the Secretary
of the Army, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, on the
availability, suitability, and advisability of electric and
hybrid-electric powertrain technologies for LTATVs. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) a survey of modular electric powertrain systems
available from domestic small businesses and non-traditional
defense contractors capable of augmenting or replacing internal
combustion engines on existing LTATV chassis, including systems
providing silent mobility, thermal signature reduction,
vehicle-mounted electrical power export, and autonomous or
remotely operated movement capabilities;
(2) an analysis of the acoustic, thermal, and
electromagnetic signature reduction benefits of such systems
and their operational relevance to special operations missions,
including clandestine target approach, offset infiltration, and
operations in fuel-denied environments; and
(3) recommended acquisition pathways for transitioning
mature electric powertrain technologies from small business
developers into the LTATV program of record, including use of
Other Transaction Authority under section 4022 of title 10,
United States Code, and the Small Business Innovation Research
program under section 9 of the Small Business Act.
Enhancing American Commercial Remote Sensing Support to
U.S. Border Operations
The committee recognizes the proliferation of American
commercial remote sensing companies and the potential for their
integration into various Department of Defense mission sets.
The committee notes that U.S. Northern Command benefits from
commercial remote sensing capabilities to monitor illicit
aerial, land-based, and maritime drug trafficking routes,
migration, and topographical changes along U.S. borders.
The committee directs the Commander, U.S. Northern Command,
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, on current practices, identified
gaps, and planned enhancements to incorporate commercial remote
sensing data into analysis, force protection, and mission
planning while avoiding duplication of effort. The report
should include:
(1) information regarding existing use of commercial remote
sensing capabilities at U.S. military bases and Department-led
fusion centers along the northern and southern borders;
(2) details on gaps or limitations in current information
sharing related to commercial remote sensing data at these
installations, including gaps arising from coordination, data
access, or interoperability with the Department of Homeland
Security;
(3) possible areas for greater coordination and
deconfliction with the Department of Homeland Security ahead of
and during Department of Defense missions along the borders,
including mechanisms to leverage Department of Homeland
Security data holdings and analytic activities, as appropriate;
and
(4) an assessment of operational effectiveness and cost
considerations of commercial remote sensing capabilities.
Fiber Optic-Guided and First Person Video Unmanned Aerial System
Threats
The committee recognizes the growing and urgent threat
posed by fiber optic-guided and first person view unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) employed by Transnational Criminal
Organizations (TCOs). Further, the committee notes that such
organizations may incorporate lessons learned from modern,
active armed conflict environments abroad to further the goals
of their criminal enterprises. The committee supports the
Department of Defense's Joint Interagency Task Force 401's
(JIATF-401) efforts to enable rapid departmental acquisition
and fielding of modern counter-UAS, including by using
accelerated acquisition methods to specifically respond to the
threat posed by fiber optic and first person video UAS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, on a strategy to detect, track, and
defeat fiber optic-guided and first person video UAS in the
homeland. The strategy should include:
(1) an analysis of the domestic fielding of detection
sensors, physical layer signal analysis tools, and defeat
mechanisms specifically effective against fiber optic-guided
unmanned aircraft systems in varied terrain and environmental
conditions characteristic of the southern border operating
environment;
(2) a description of JIATF-401's assessment of existing
counter-fiber optic and first person video UAS defeat
capabilities, ongoing efforts to improve the Department of
Defense's inventory of such capabilities, and intentions on
rapid acquisition of such capabilities; and
(3) an analysis of the operational environment along the
southern border, including a description of TCO activity,
natural or geographic challenges to securing the border,
existing counter-UAS capabilities, and efforts to reduce risk
to deployed servicemembers and civilian communities.
GAO Study on Barriers for Industry Entry-Level Workers Requiring
Security Clearances
The committee recognizes that that small and mid-sized
defense contractors face barriers in hiring entry-level workers
for positions that require security clearances, including roles
in manufacturing, electronics assembly, precision machining,
technical maintenance, and other skilled trades critical to the
defense industrial base. Unlike large scale defense
contractors, small and mid-sized firms often lack the financial
reserves, dedicated security officer staff, and administrative
infrastructure to absorb the costs and operational disruptions
associated with extended clearance processing timelines.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to provide the results of its review to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 30, 2028
on security clearance barriers affecting small and mid-sized
defense contractors, including:
(1) the burdens of carrying uncleared employees during
initial clearance processing;
(2) effectiveness of the use of interim clearances for
entry-level positions;
(3) existing pre-employment clearance initiatives,
including through academic programs; and
(4) any other matters that the Comptroller General deems
relevant to the security clearance process for small and mid-
size defense contractors.
Human Domain Awareness for Civil Affairs, Psychological Operations, and
Special Operations Forces
The committee recognizes that Civil Affairs, Psychological
Operations, Special Operations Forces, and combatant command
planners require timely, hyper-local data on population
sentiment, influence networks, and adversary narratives to
compete below the threshold of armed conflict. The committee is
concerned that current human terrain analysis tools are
fragmented, slow, and too coarse for operational use, leaving
combatant command requirements unmet. The committee notes that
AI/ML-enabled platforms fusing representative survey data,
ethnographic research, and open-source information with
geospatial layers offer a material opportunity to close these
gaps.
The committee directs the Commander, United States Special
Operations Command, in coordination with Secretary of the Army,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 15, 2027, on human domain awareness
capabilities. The briefing shall include:
(1) an identification of unmet combatant command
requirements for hyper-local population sentiment, influence-
network, and narrative environment data;
(2) an assessment of the operational utility of AI/ML-
enabled human domain mapping platforms, including suitability
for non-kinetic options planning, narrative detection, and
population behavior forecasting; and
(3) the feasibility of accelerating the fielding of such
capabilities to Civil Affairs brigades, Theater Special
Operations Commands, and combatant command planning cells,
including any recommended adjustments for funding.
Improving Military Working Dog Wellness
The committee appreciates the immense emotional, physical,
and lifesaving support that military working dogs provide to
servicemembers and their families. Further, the committee notes
that Section 371 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013 (112-239) modified how military working dogs
are classified by adjusting their status to animals, rather
than equipment. To expand support for service animals, the
committee acknowledges the success of existing programs,
including at the state level, to improve their well-being and
productivity.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Armed Services Committee not
later than January 1, 2027, on strategies to enhance working
dog wellness, to include the following:
(1) The feasibility of establishing a ``Canine Member
Service Fund'' to provide reimbursement for veterinary costs
associated with retired Military Working Dogs;
(2) A cost estimate of such a fund, to include an
accounting of housing and healthcare costs;
(3) Whether the Department of Defense supports military
working dog eligibility for basic medical care at military
veterinary treatment facilities on a space available basis; and
(4) How the Department of Defense would execute Interagency
Coordination for Police K9s, to develop guidelines to extend
these reclassification benefits and grant access to federal law
enforcement K9s that have served in joint operations with the
Armed Services.
Information Environment Training and Simulation
The committee notes the Department of Defense's increasing
focus on the information environment in modern warfare,
specifically the integration of information operations, cyber
capabilities, and electromagnetic spectrum operations into
joint and special operations training. The committee remains
concerned, however, that existing training environments fail to
fully integrate the information environment or provide
consistent metrics to measure non-kinetic effectiveness. The
committee further recognizes that information operations cannot
be effectively trained or assessed in isolation, and must be
represented within a multi-domain environment that enables
cyber, electronic warfare, space-enabled capabilities, military
and signals intelligence, military deception, operational
security, and related mission areas to layer and synchronize
effects in the information domain.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, United
States Special Operations Command, in coordination with the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict and the Director, Joint Force Development
(J-7), to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's
ability to support a realistic, persistent information
environment across training, exercises, and mission rehearsal.
The briefing shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) an assessment of the feasibility of leveraging
commercially available capabilities through the Department's
Software Acquisition Pathway to enhance information environment
representation, options for integration into existing
architectures, and a plan for a pilot effort within a joint or
special operations training event;
(2) an analysis of the extent to which current training
environments provide persistent and realistic representation of
the information environment, including the ability to replicate
adversary exploitation of friendly force vulnerabilities;
(3) an evaluation of the ability to synchronize effects
across relevant domains and measure and validate the
effectiveness of non-kinetic activities;
(4) an assessment of the maturity of commercial solutions,
their interoperability with Joint training and simulation
environments, and an identification of specific barriers to
full-scale integration; and
(5) identification of specific requirements and
recommendations to improve multi-domain training effectiveness
and close identified capability gaps.
Irregular Warfare Center Activities and Resource Execution
The committee notes the critical role of the Irregular
Warfare Center (IWC) in bolstering the Department of Defense's
irregular warfare capabilities across the spectrum of conflict
and advancing next-generation irregular warfare techniques and
concepts that enhance the lethality of the Joint Force. As
strategic competition intensifies, the committee remains
committed to ensuring the IWC is properly resourced and
integrated across the Total Force to address asymmetric
threats. Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Irregular Warfare Center, in coordination with the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the operations and
strategic trajectory of the Irregular Warfare Center. The
briefing shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) a comprehensive summary of IWC activities conducted
during Fiscal Year 2026, including research initiatives,
educational programs, and engagements with interagency and
international partners;
(2) an update on the activities, milestones, and outcomes
of the Irregular Warfare Exercise Laboratory, specifically how
exercise findings are being translated into doctrine or
operational concepts;
(3) an assessment of how IWC research and exercise outcomes
are informing Department-wide force design and global posture;
(4) a detailed description of the IWC's efforts to
integrate Reserve Component and National Guard personnel into
its mission set, including the utilization of unique civilian-
acquired skills and state-partnership program links;
(5) an accounting of resource execution for the current
fiscal year, to include funding allocations for personnel,
infrastructure, and contract support; and
(6) an assessment of any identified capability gaps or
statutory authorities that would enable the IWC to more
effectively fulfill its mission of centralizing and
institutionalizing irregular warfare knowledge.
Maritime Action Plan Workforce Development in Guam
The Committee recognizes the importance of America's
Maritime Action Plan, published by the White House in February
2026, and the impact this plan will have on ship repair
capabilities in Guam. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027 on how
the Department of Defense will support workforce development in
Guam as outlined in America's Maritime Action Plan.
National Background Investigation Services
The committee notes National Background Investigation
Services (NBIS) has missed three successive deployment
deadlines in 2019, 2023, and 2025, and major software
development is not expected to conclude until 2027 at the
earliest. The committee is concerned that cumulative
expenditures on NBIS and the sustainment of legacy personnel
vetting systems have reached approximately $2.4 billion since
2017, with an additional $2.2 billion projected through fiscal
year 2031. The committee views this trajectory as inconsistent
with sound program stewardship and expects the Department to
demonstrate measurable improvement in cost and schedule
discipline going forward.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to
review existing enterprise-wide integrity and eligibility
standards applicable to national background services and to
assess whether current standards adequately address the
deficiencies identified above. The committee encourages a
comprehensive review which draws upon existing Government
Accountability Office findings and includes consultation with
relevant privacy and civil liberties oversight bodies.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by April 1, 2027, on the
Department's assessment of fit-and-proper eligibility
standards, automated integrity validation, continuous
monitoring and anomaly detection, exposure of risk toward high-
risk positions, and audit trails and recordkeeping. The
briefing should also include consideration as to whether an
alternative approach to address the technical shortcomings of
NBIS is warranted, such as a time-limited pilot program and
market survey to evaluate currently untapped solutions that may
exist and are able to address the stated needs of NBIS.
National Defense Area Boundary Data
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense
established multiple National Defense Areas (NDAs) along the
United States-Mexico Border, some of which is former federal
public land. The committee encourages the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to update publicly available geographic data of
Department of Defense Military Installations, Ranges, and
Training Areas (MIRTA) to include current and future National
Defense Area boundaries. Furthermore, the committee directs the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and
Americas Security Affairs to provide a report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 31, 2026, on the following:
(1) efforts the Department is taking to inform the public
of current areas which are designated as NDAs;
(2) efforts the Department undertakes to notify the public
prior to future expansions or additional establishments of
NDAs; and
(3) the number of individuals, if any, that have been
detained for trespassing on NDAs that are U.S. citizens.
Navy Resource Management and Decision-Support Modernization
The committee recognizes the importance of modernizing the
Department of the Navy's resource management and decision-
support infrastructure to support the Secretary of the Navy's
efforts to improve data integration, auditability, and
enterprise-wide resource visibility across the naval services.
The committee remains concerned that the Navy's reliance on
disaggregated systems which rely on time-consuming manual entry
of information limit the Department of the Navy's ability to
make timely resource-informed decisions for the Navy and Marine
Corps. The committee notes that there are a growing number of
commercially available decision support tools capable of cross-
functional data- integration that could improve the Department
of the Navy's ability to make such decisions.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 1, 2027 on its assessment of available
resource management and decision support capabilities that
could enhance the Department of the Navy's ability to make
timely resource-based decision informed by integrated data sets
from across the enterprise. The report shall include at a
minimum the following.
(1) An assessment of commercially available tools that
could aid in the Navy's effort to integrate operational,
acquisition, programmatic, financial, and production command
demand and capacity data across Navy and Marine Corps
components and mission portfolios;
(2) An assessment of whether these tools could improve
trade-off analysis, resource reallocations, and reprogramming
decisions across the Navy's mission areas; and,
(3) The cost, timeline, and any barriers to adopting these
systems into the naval enterprise.
Oversight of Military Working Dogs
The committee is aware that Government Accountability
Office reports, and the Department of Defense Inspector General
report titled ``Evaluation of the DoD Military Working Dog
Program's Management of Canine Welfare'' dated February 17,
2026, identified significant unsatisfactory conditions and
treatment of military working dogs (MWD). This report found
that the military working dogs were lacking the required 5
hours per day of physical activity, social, and cognitive
enrichment. Additionally, it describes finding unsatisfactory
and unsafe kennel conditions that have resulted in the death of
multiple working dogs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
on how the Department of Defense is implementing the
recommendations outlined in the IG report and how the
Department is ensuring MWDs are properly cared for not later
than April 1, 2027. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) The number of caretakers assigned to MWDs in non-
training status in each DoD MWD operational unit.
(2) Approximate number of hours the MWDs receive of
enrichment activities per day and per week in each DoD MWD
operational unit.
(3) Number of diseases, injuries, and behavioral issues
present in each DoD MWD operational unit.
(4) How the Secretary of the Air Force, as Executive Agent
for the DoD MWD Dog Program, and the DoD MWD Program Manager,
in coordination with the Service Components, plan to develop
and implement the enterprise-wide plan to upgrade DoD MWD
kennel facilities to meet current DoD standards.
(5) Any recommendations for legislative action necessary to
facilitate the well-being of military working dogs.
Pass-Through Budget Transparency
The committee recognizes the importance of transparency and
accountability in Department of Defense budgeting. The
committee notes that the practice of including pass-through
funding within the top-line budgets of the Departments of the
Army, Navy, and Air Force, while a necessary tool for certain
national security purposes, can complicate unclassified
transparency into military department funding priorities, often
without input from the relevant military department. The
committee therefore believes that this practice should be used
only when necessary and appropriate and when accompanied by
full transparency at appropriate levels of classification.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's use, reporting, and
management of pass-through funding and efforts to improve
transparency in the presentation of such funding within budget
justification materials. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of current pass-through funding
mechanisms within the Department of Defense;
(2) a description of the criteria used to designate
programs, projects, or activities as pass-through items;
(3) an identification of organizations, agencies, or
entities responsible for executing pass-through funds;
(4) an assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of
consolidating pass-through funding within Defense-wide
accounts, or any other alternative reporting structures; and
(5) recommendations for legislative, policy, or budgetary
changes necessary to improve accountability, transparency, and
oversight of Department of Defense pass-through funding
activities.
Recapitalization of the Oceanographic Research Fleet
The committee notes that the Auxiliary General
Oceanographic Research (AGOR) Global-class oceanographic
research vessels are nearing the end of their service lives.
These vessels are vital to U.S. Navy research objectives and
inform our understanding of the world's oceans which is needed
to control the maritime domain. Because of this critical
mission, the committee believes there is a need to increase
research vessel availability through recapitalization. An
overall fleet recapitalization strategy for the oceanographic
research fleet is essential to maintain a balanced research
fleet that meets growing national and scientific demands.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the strategy to complete design
and construction of new AGOR Global-class research ships. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) information on efforts to maintain the operational
capabilities of the AGOR Global-class fleet until they are
replaced;
(2) any limitations of the current AGOR Global-class fleet
in the Arctic region;
(3) a feasibility assessment of converting current civilian
or military operational ship designs to meet the Global-class
research vessel missions; and
(4) an assessment of funding required to operate and
recapitalize the Navy's oceanographic research fleet.
Report on Medals and Commendations for Military Working Dogs and
Handlers
The committee recognizes the importance of the work
performed by Military Working Dogs and their handlers and
desires to ensure that they are appropriately recognized and
commended for valorous acts in service to the United States.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to report to the House Committee on Armed Services and the
Senate Committee on Armed Service not later than February 1,
2027, on the status of implementation of Sec. 582 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232): Award of Medals or Other Commendations to
Handlers of Military Working Dogs. The report shall include:
(1) whether any medals or commendations have been issued to
Military Working Dogs and their Handlers;
(2) a breakdown of the criteria for issuing an medal or
commendation;
(3) examples of actions and types of actions that have
merited commendation;
(4) how many medals and commendations have been issued
Military Working Dogs and their Handlers, disaggregated by year
and by service;
(5) which medals and commendations are available to
Military Working Dogs and their Handlers; and
(6) any other information the secretary deems necessary to
include.
Report on the Department of Defense's Coordination Process with DHS and
the FAA in Relation to the February 2026 Friendly Fire Incident on a
U.S. Government Unmanned Aircraft
The committee notes with concern that the Department of
Homeland Security used equipment provided by the Department of
Defense to shoot down a U.S. Government unmanned aircraft
system (UAS) in the vicinity of Fort Hancock, Texas and that
the operation of Department of Defense equipment led to the
temporary closure of El Paso International Airport in February
2026. The committee further notes with concern that friendly-
fire incidents are usually a result of an error or series of
errors in either communication, fire control, positive
identification, decision making, or operator error, and that
such errors are not conducive to a safe civilian aviation
environment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026 on the Department of Defense's
process for coordinating with the Federal Aviation
Administration and the Department of Homeland Security on the
use of counter unmanned aircraft systems equipment. The report
should include:
(1) a detailed, step-by-step description of the friendly
fire incident that occurred in February 2026;
(2) changes to the Department of Defense's counter-UAS
process as a result of interagency coordination following the
temporary closure of El Paso International Airport and the
friendly fire incident that occurred in February 2026;
(3) a description of standard rules for the use of force
for employment of counter-UAS systems domestically; and
(4) a classified list of the current domestic locations of
counter-UAS systems similar to the counter-UAS system that was
used in the friendly fire incident in February 2026.
Resourcing Requirements to Sustain Special Operations Forces Tactical
Geospatial Intelligence Access
The committee recognizes that U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) is required to develop and employ Special
Operations Forces (SOF) to conduct global special operations
and activities as part of the Joint Force. SOF routinely
operate in denied, degraded, intermittent, and low bandwidth
(DDIL) environments and require persistent access to geospatial
intelligence (GEOINT) to visualize and share a common
operational picture at the tactical edge. The committee notes
that the Tactical Assault Kit (TAK) is a foundational
capability for SOF operators and that unfettered access to
precision GEOINT is essential for planning, rehearsal, mission
execution, and maintaining a shared understanding of the
battlespace. Commercial systems, managed under the auspices of
the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and fully
compatible with TAK devices, provide SOF with critical DDIL
resilient access to curated GEOINT. These systems have been
widely adopted across all SOF components, serve as USSOCOM's de
facto enterprise GEOINT distribution architecture, and are
designed for use with coalition partners.
However, the committee is concerned that USSOCOM has not
resourced the capacity to procure sufficient commercial system
licenses to meet validated SOF requirements, leading to many
USSOCOM users being unsupported. Therefore, the committee
directs the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on a plan to ensure SOF operators
have access to GEOINT for planning and execution of missions.
The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of current commercial solution licensing
allocations, associated demand signals, and if there were
unsatisfied user requests across all SOF components for fiscal
years 2024 through 2026, what was that number;
(2) an analysis of any potential operational and readiness
impacts resulting from insufficient licensing capacity,
including effects, if any, on mission planning, training,
coalition interoperability, and operations in DDIL
environments;
(3) a comprehensive plan for sustaining and expanding
USSOCOM's GEOINT enterprise distribution architecture, through
commercial solutions, to meet current and projected SOF
requirements; and
(4) an identification of funding, acquisition, or policy
limitations that prevent USSOCOM from fully resourcing required
licenses.
Security Clearance Reciprocity Implementation
The committee remains concerned that individuals with
current and favorable eligibility determinations for access to
classified information continue to experience delays or
duplicative reviews when transferring between agencies or
organizations despite reciprocity requirements and the
implementation of continuous vetting and Trusted Workforce 2.0.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Director of National Intelligence, to submit a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services and the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by April 6, 2027, on
the implementation of security clearance reciprocity across the
Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community. The
report should include:
(1) an assessment of the extent to which agencies accept
other agencies' prior favorable determinations of individuals'
eligibility for access to classified information or eligibility
to hold sensitive positions;
(2) data on the number of reciprocal determinations
accepted, denied, delayed, or otherwise subjected to additional
investigative or adjudicative review during the preceding three
fiscal years, to include the average and median duration of
delays or additional reviews;
(3) identification of the most common factors hindering
acceptance of prior favorable determinations, including
investigative gaps, continuous vetting enrollment issues, IT
system shortcomings, distrust of other agencies' security
clearance processes, derogatory information, position-specific
requirements, special access requirements, or other risk-based
exceptions;
(4) an assessment of the extent to which continuous vetting
has reduced the need for duplicative investigations and
adjudications;
(5) identification of any statutory, regulatory, policy,
technical, or information-sharing barriers that impede full
implementation of reciprocity requirements; and
(6) recommendations for legislative or administrative
actions necessary to improve reciprocity, reduce onboarding
delays, and strengthen workforce mobility while maintaining
appropriate security standards.
Security Cooperation and Partnerships in the Western Hemisphere
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of Latin
America and the Caribbean to United States defense interests
and is concerned by the expanding engagement of the People's
Republic of China (PRC) in the region. The committee encourages
the Department of Defense to continue security cooperation with
partner nations in Latin America and the Caribbean. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretaries of the military departments, to provide a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 31, 2026, on the following:
(1) the effectiveness of existing professional military
education and training exchange programs across military
services in countering PRC influence in the region;
(2) Avenues to align these programs with broader United
States security cooperation objectives; and
(3) strategies for security cooperation activities to
mitigate risks associated with PRC access to and influence with
regard to strategic regional infrastructure in the western
hemisphere, including commercial ports, telecommunications
networks, satellite ground stations, and other dual-use assets
with potential military significance.
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems for Base Security and Maintenance
The committee is aware that military installations,
shipyards, and other strategic sites face growing security
challenges, including increased drone incursions, surveillance
attempts, and persistent perimeter vulnerabilities. At the same
time, these installations must manage aging infrastructure and
constrained manpower while maintaining readiness. The committee
understands that various pilot programs have demonstrated that
small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) could be leveraged to
reduce inspection time, identify maintenance issues earlier,
and lower overall repair costs. Recent advances in autonomous
docking stations now allow sUAS to operate persistently with
minimal human intervention, making them uniquely suited for
both physical security and routine maintenance missions. The
committee believes sUAS docking stations could be leveraged at
military installations to enhance perimeter security, support
maintenance efforts, and help improve readiness. The committee
encourages the Department to continue leveraging this
technology.
Special Operations Command Comprehensive Brain Health and Trauma
Program
The committee commends U.S. Special Operations Command
(USSOCOM) for its efforts to help injured Special Operations
Forces (SOF) with the Comprehensive Brain Health and Trauma
Program (ComBHaT). The committee notes USSOCOM believes this
pilot program has reached a maturity level under an extensive
pilot phase and should be transitioned from Major Force
Program-11 research and development funds to an appropriate
funding stream. Through congressional appropriations, this
pilot is funded through fiscal year 2028, allowing for
continued treatment of SOF members as USSOCOM works with the
appropriate Department of Defense equities to determine a
permanent way forward. The committee encourages the Commander
of USSOCOM to work with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict and the Defense
Health Agency to transition this program to the appropriate
funding source.
Support for the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympic Games
The committee understands the Department of Defense may
provide support for planning, organization, and execution of
the events surrounding the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympic
Games. The committee notes that section 2564 of title 10,
United States Code, authorizes the Secretary of Defense to
provide assistance on a reimbursable basis to certain civilian
sporting events, including the Olympic Games, if the Attorney
General certifies that such assistance is necessary to meet
essential security and safety needs.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 31, 2027, on any assistance the Department will
provide the 2028 Olympic Games. The briefing shall include a
description of:
(1) the number of military personnel expected to provide
assistance;
(2) the types of assistance planned to be provided;
(3) the command structure governing such assistance; and
(4) the anticipated costs of such assistance.
Sustaining Operational Lethality Through Strategic Stockpiling of One-
Way Attack Unmanned Aerial Systems for Special Operations Forces
The committee believes the rapid proliferation of one-way
attack small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) has enhanced
situations on the battlefield, providing strategic,
operational, and tactical advantages to U.S. Special Operations
Forces (SOF). The ability to procure these expendable precision
strike systems at a low cost is critical to fulfilling a
sustained operational demand and critical to preserving SOF
lethality, survivability, and mission tempo. The committee
believes ensuring operators retain immediate replacement
capability without operational pause or degradation in combat
effectiveness helps maintain the advantage during critical
moments on the battlefield. Therefore, the committee encourages
the Department of Defense and U.S. Special Operations Command
to maintain a sufficient inventory and stockpile of advanced
one-way attack unmanned aerial systems to ensure ready access
to replacement systems ensuring uninterrupted operational
capability, to mitigate the risk of capability gaps and prevent
degradation in combat effectiveness.
Technological Capabilities to Improve Financial Management and
Auditability
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
growing adoption of advanced software and artificial
intelligence (AI) capabilities across various operational and
administrative functions. The committee notes that the
Department of the Navy, in particular, has demonstrated
successful implementation of digital tools for shipbuilding,
logistics, and program management.
The committee believes these technological capabilities
present a significant opportunity to improve the Department's
financial management and auditability. Modern software
platforms with AI-enabled analytics can process vast quantities
of transactional data, identify anomalies, track assets in
real-time, and provide continuous financial visibility. A real-
time audit capability represents a fundamental improvement over
current periodic audit methodologies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on plans to implement real-
time audit capabilities using software and artificial
intelligence. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of current software and AI platforms
already operational within the Department of Defense that could
be expanded or adapted to provide continuous financial
monitoring and audit capabilities across all military services
and defense agencies;
(2) a roadmap for implementing real-time audit capabilities
that would enable continuous transaction validation, asset
tracking, and financial reconciliation rather than relying
solely on annual audit cycles;
(3) an identification of integration requirements to
connect disparate financial systems across the Department of
Defense into unified platforms capable of providing enterprise-
wide financial visibility;
(4) an evaluation of how real-time audit capabilities could
support improved financial decision-making, fraud detection,
waste reduction, and resource allocation; and
(5) any policy, regulatory, or contractual barriers that
may impede the deployment of commercial software platforms
capable of delivering real-time audit functionality.
Technological Innovation in Shipyards
The Navy's shipbuilders are often hampered by processes,
systems, and infrastructure that hinder their ability to
deliver new ships at the pace the Navy needs. Investments in
areas such as automation and robotics, digital technologies
including digital twins and artificial intelligence, and smart
shipyard technologies have been used by shipbuilders in other
countries to increase the rate of production. A historic level
of investment by the Navy in the maritime industrial base
offers an opportunity to spur improvements in this area, but
the Navy must ensure it is focusing on the most promising
technology and understands the long-term efforts needed by the
department and shipbuilders to achieve the intended benefits of
these technologies. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to provide a brief to
the House Committee on Armed Services no later than January 1,
2027, on how they will assess:
(1) what technologies the Navys shipbuilders are adopting
to modernize shipbuilding processes, systems, and
infrastructure.
(2) what investments the Navy has made to date to help its
shipbuilders adopt these technologies and how the Navy is
prioritizing its investments.
(3) what have been the results of those investments and
what factors, if any, have hindered the adoption of these
technologies.
(4) how the Navy and its shipbuilders are planning for the
long-term efforts needed to achieve the intended benefits of
these technologies.
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Force Posture Plan
The committee notes the 2012 agreement between the United
States and Japan to relocate Marine Corps Air Station Futenma
within Okinawa, Japan, and move 9,000 Marines currently
stationed in Okinawa to a location outside of Japan, with many
to be stationed at Camp Blaz, a newly constructed installation
on Guam. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a classified briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than February 1, 2027, on the broader Indo-
Pacific Joint Force posture plan. The briefing shall include:
(1) a summary of the various international agreements and
posture initiatives governing Joint Force deployments and
presence in the Indo-Pacific and how these agreements integrate
into the broader theater strategy;
(2) the number of service members that have already been
relocated out of the First Island Chain, and the locations to
which they have been moved;
(3) the projected Joint Force laydown and the specific
numbers of service members for each military service expected
to be located in Japan, including separate projections for each
installation located in Okinawa; Guam; Hawai'i; and other
locations, as appropriate, for each year for the 20-year period
beginning in 2027;
(4) an update on implementation of the 2012 agreement
between the United States and Japan, including the construction
and expected timeline for completion of the replacement for
Marine Corps Air Station Futenma;
(5) an update on discussions with the Government of Japan
and other allies regarding U.S. force posture;
(6) a summary of any challenges associated with optimizing
force posture in the Indo-Pacific; and
(7) any other information that the Secretary believes is
important for the committee to know about the efforts of the
Department to optimize Joint Force posture in the Indo-Pacific.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems for Military Medical Support
The committee recognizes that advances in unmanned aircraft
systems present potential opportunities to enhance medical
logistics, casualty transport, and sustainment operations
across the Department of Defense. The committee is aware of
emerging commercial and military applications involving the
delivery of medical supplies, blood products, and human organs,
as well as the potential use of such systems to assist in
casualty transport. The committee believes that evaluating
these capabilities may improve survivability, reduce response
times, and strengthen coordination between military medical
facilities and civilian trauma centers.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Surgeon General of the Army, the Surgeon
General of the Navy, and the Surgeon General of the Air Force,
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on the feasibility of employing
unmanned aircraft systems for medical support missions. The
report shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of the operational feasibility of using
unmanned aircraft systems to deliver medical supplies, blood
products, and human organs to military treatment facilities and
civilian trauma centers;
(2) an assessment of the feasibility and limitations of
using unmanned aircraft systems for casualty transport between
operational units, military treatment facilities, and civilian
trauma centers;
(3) an evaluation of regulatory, safety, airspace, and
force protection considerations associated with such
operations;
(4) an analysis of the logistical, technological, and
infrastructure requirements necessary to support such
capabilities across the Active Component, Reserve Component,
and National Guard;
(5) a review of any ongoing pilot programs, experiments, or
demonstrations within the Department related to medical
applications of unmanned aircraft systems; and
(6) recommendations for potential next steps, including
acquisition pathways, policy updates, partnerships with
civilian trauma networks, or additional testing requirements.
Will to Fight
The committee is aware that U.S. Special Operations Forces
routinely conduct advise, assist, and accompany missions, as
well as training activities, with foreign partner forces across
multiple theaters. These engagements generate significant
operational and tactical observations, assessments, and lessons
learned, including insights related to partner force
capability, cohesion, leadership, military will to fight, and
national will to fight.
The committee is concerned that information generated by
special operations forces in the field on military will to
fight at the unit level may be inconsistently reported,
fragmented across commands and systems, and not readily
accessible across the Department of Defense. The committee
further notes that gaps in the visibility and accessibility of
such information may hinder the Department's ability to
accurately assess partner force reliability at the operational
and tactical level.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Commander, U.S.
Special Operations Command, in coordination with the Director
of the Defense Intelligence Agency, to submit a report to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than December 4,
2026, that describes current practices for reporting,
transmitting, storing, and accessing information derived from
special operations forces engagements with partner forces. At a
minimum, the report shall include:
(1) a description of how special operations forces units in
the field document and report on missions, training activities,
and engagements with partner forces, over a longitudinal
period, including the types of reports generated;
(2) an identification of the systems, platforms, or
databases into which such information is submitted, including
any service-specific, combatant command, or joint systems;
(3) an assessment of the extent to which such information
is standardized across units, theaters, and services;
(4) a description of which entities within the Department
of Defense have access to such information, and under what
conditions;
(5) an assessment of the ability of users to search, query,
and analyze such information across systems, including any
limitations on interoperability, discoverability, or usability;
(6) an identification of any gaps, redundancies, or
barriers that limit the effective use of such information for
operational planning, force design, security cooperation, or
risk assessment;
(7) any recommendations to improve the consistency,
accessibility, and utility of such reporting, including options
for greater standardization or centralization, to include the
feasibility of using a centralized repository if one does not
already exist; and
(8) any other matters the Commander or Director determines
relevant.
The committee encourages the Commander to include
perspectives from operational units, including special
operations forces personnel with recent field experience,
regarding the usability and effectiveness of current reporting
mechanisms.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
Sec. 1001--General Transfer Authority
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense, with
certain limitations, to make transfers between amounts
authorized for fiscal year 2027 in division A of this Act. This
section would limit the total amount transferred under this
authority to $6.00 billion.
Sec. 1002--Annual Report on Unfunded Priorities of Defense POW/MIA
Accounting Agency
This section would authorize the Director of the Defense
POW/MIA Accounting Agency to submit an annual unfunded
priorities report to Congress.
Sec. 1003--Equivalency Standards for Financial Management Positions
This section would amend section 1599d of title 10, United
States Code, by requiring the Secretary of Defense to include
equivalency standards in the Department regulation for
professional certification and credential standards for
financial management positions. This section would require that
such standards identify any test-based professional
certification or credential issued by an authority other than
the Department that satisfies Department of Defense
requirements.
Sec. 1004--Compliance with Payment Integrity Information Act
Requirements and Strengthening Improper Payments Detection
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) to achieve full compliance with requirements
under the Payment Integrity Information Act not later than
September 30, 2027. This section also would require the
Department of Defense Inspector General to complete an updated
audit, including certification of compliance with these
requirements not later than May 30, 2028. This section also
would require the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to
provide a briefing on strengthening the recovery audit program
and improper payment detection not later than September 30,
2027.
Sec. 1005--Authority to Establish Joint Task Force Audit
This provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
establish Joint Task Force Audit to support the goal of
achieving an unmodified audit opinion by December 31, 2028.
Sec. 1006--Budget Transparency for Army Multi-Domain Task Force and
Marine Littoral Regiment
This section would require a consolidated budget display
with respect to certain formations of the military department
starting not later than March 1, 2027.
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards
Sec. 1011--Modification of Authority to Purchase Used Vessels with
National Defense Sealift Fund
This section would amend section 2218 of title 10, United
States Code, to allow the Secretary of the Navy to purchase
more than 12 used, foreign-constructed vessels if the Secretary
meets certain conditions. To use the authority to buy more than
12 used, foreign-constructed vessels, the Secretary would have
to procure two new vessels constructed in the United States for
each used, foreign-constructed vessel after a 12th vessel is
procured. Further, section 2218 of title 10, United States
Code, would be amended to prohibit the procurement of used,
foreign-constructed vessels that were constructed in the
People's Republic of China or by a Chinese military company.
Sec. 1012--Requirement For Procurement of Components for Naval Vessels
from Manufacturers in National Technology and Industrial Base
This section would amend section 4864 of title 10, United
States Code, to require additional ship components be procured
from National Technology and Industrial Base sources.
Sec. 1013--Settlement of Admiralty Claims Against the United States
This section would increase the monetary thresholds for
settlement of admiralty claims against the United States under
section 7802 of title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 1014--Amphibious Fleet Force Structure
This section would provide the sense of Congress on the
importance of the amphibious fleet and desired management of
the Secretary of the Navy's amphibious fleet. This section
would mandate an annual risk assessment by the Commandant of
the Marine Corps of the amphibious fleet, establish a floor of
33 amphibious ships, provide modifications to the management of
amphibious ships at the end of their service life, require the
Secretary to submit to the congressional defense committees a
mid-life maintenance plan for the San Antonio-class amphibious
transport dock ship class, and require further reporting to the
congressional defense on the amphibious ships force structure.
Sec. 1015--Armament of Naval Auxiliary Vessels
This section would add a new section in chapter 863 of
title 10, United States Code, that requires the Secretary of
the Navy to ensure to the maximum extent practicable that naval
auxiliary vessels operated by the Military Sealift Command are
equipped with defensive armament sufficient to provide self-
defense against air, surface, and asymmetric threats in
contested environments.
Sec. 1016--Additional Measures for Navy Strategy for Investment in and
Support for the Maritime Industrial Base
This section would add additional requirements for the
Navy's strategy for investment in the maritime industrial base
that was required by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
Sec. 1017--Inclusion of Navy Surface Combat Ship Maintenance as a
Separate Line Item in Operation and Maintenance Budget
This section would require future budget requests to
display Navy surface combat ship maintenance as one or more
separate line items under each subactivity within operation and
maintenance, Navy.
Sec. 1018--Contracting Reform for Surface Ship Maintenance, Repair, and
Overhaul
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into a contract for the maintenance, repair, and overhaul
of covered vessels, and shall issue task orders for the
performance of such activities.
Sec. 1019--Realignment of Contract Management for Polar Security Cutter
Program
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
transition contract management for the Polar Security Cutter
program to the United States Coast Guard. That transition would
be required no later than 180 days after enactment and the Navy
may only provide advisory support after that realignment.
Sec. 1020--Domestic Sourcing of Bulk Fuel to Support Tanker Security
Program
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Logistics Agency to seek to procure at least 10 percent of
covered bulk fuel from domestic refineries with excess
production capacity. That domestically procured fuel would be
transported for delivery to locations outside of the United
States on Tanker Security Program vessels.
Sec. 1021--Requirements Relating to Unmanned Surface Vessels
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
certify to the congressional defense committees that concepts
of operation and employment have been developed prior to
acceptance of an unmanned surface vessel. The Secretary of the
Navy would also be required to develop and implement a strategy
for the integration of unmanned surface vessels naval force
design and joint maritime operations. The Secretary of the Navy
would be required to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than 210 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act on the strategy for unmanned surface
vessel integration and provide an annual brief on integration
efforts thereafter.
Sec. 1022--Enhancement of Navy Submarine Rescue Capabilities
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
develop and maintain multiple, redundant submarine rescue
capabilities that, to the extent practicable, integrate
emerging technologies, ensure sufficient training exercises,
expand cooperation with allied submarine-operating nations, and
ensure independent oversight.
Sec. 1023--Navy-Coast Guard Maritime Workforce and Capacity
Coordination Plan
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy and
Commandant of the Coast Guard to establish a recurring
coordination mechanism to align maritime industrial workforce
requirements and capacity planning activities.
Sec. 1024--Pilot Program on Use of Additive and Advanced Manufacturing
to Support Naval Shipbuilding
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
establish a pilot program to expand the use of additive and
advanced manufacturing technologies to address supply chain
constraints, production delays and part shortages affecting
naval shipbuilding and ship repair.
Sec. 1025--Limitation on Use of Funds for Procurement of a Battle Force
Ship
This section would prohibit any of the funds authorized to
be appropriated by this Act from being obligated or expended
for the procurement of a battle force ship to be built in a
foreign shipyard, if that ship will be commissioned a United
States Ship.
Sec. 1026--Strategy for Distributed Shipbuilding
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
develop and implement a strategy to increase the construction
of modules by entities independent from the final assembly
yards.
Sec. 1027--Strategy of Department of Defense Relating to Small Uncrewed
Surface Vessels
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Navy and the Director of
the Defense Autonomous Working Group, to develop and implement
a strategy for the acquisition, sustainment, and operational
deployment of small uncrewed surface vessels.
Sec. 1028--Arctic-Focused Forecasting, Ice Modeling, and Naval
Readiness Assessment
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
assess options to expand and enhance Arctic-focused
meteorological, oceanographic, and ice-modeling capabilities to
improve naval readiness, operational planning, and force
posture in the Arctic region.
Sec. 1029--Renaming of USNS Cesar Chavez
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
rename the USNS Cesar Chavez (T-AKE-14) in keeping with the
naming conventions for that class of vessels.
Sec. 1030--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of Vessel for Battle of
Dai Do
This section would express a sense of Congress that the
Secretary of the Navy should name an amphibious or
expeditionary class vessel for the Battle of Dai Do (Vietnam
war).
Sec. 1031--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Vessel ``USS
Guadalcanal''
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of the Navy should strongly consider naming a future
vessel of the United States Navy the ``USS Guadalcanal.''
Sec. 1032--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Naval Vessel for
Battle of Midway
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of the Navy should give favorable consideration to
naming a future vessel of the United States Navy the ``USS
Midway.''
Sec. 1033--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of a Naval Vessel in
Honor of Casimir Pulaski
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of the Navy should name an appropriate vessel of the
United States Navy as the ``USS Casimir Pulaski.''
Sec. 1034--Sense of Congress Regarding Naming of Vessel for Rear
Admiral Alene Duerk
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of the Navy should consider naming a vessel of the
United States Navy the ``USS Rear Admiral Alene Duerk.''
Subtitle C--Counterterrorism
Sec. 1041--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
This section would prohibit the use of any amounts
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for
the Department of Defense during the period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this Act and ending on December 31,
2027, to transfer or release detainees at U.S. Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to or within the United States, its
territories, or possessions.
Sec. 1042--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
This section would prohibit the use of any amounts
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for
the Department of Defense to be used during the period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending
on December 31, 2027, to construct or modify any facility in
the United States, its territories, or possessions to house any
detainee transferred from U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, for the purposes of detention or imprisonment in the
custody or under the effective control of the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 1043--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
This section would prohibit the use of funding authorized
to be appropriated or otherwise made available for the
Department of Defense during the period beginning on the date
of the enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2027,
to transfer, release, or assist in the transfer or release of
any individual detained at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, to Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan.
Sec. 1044--Extension of Prohibition on Use of Funds to Close or
Relinquish Control of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
This section would prohibit the use of any amounts
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to
the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2027 for the closure
or abandonment of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, the relinquishment of control of Guantanamo Bay to the
Republic of Cuba, or the implementation of a material
modification to the Treaty Between the United States of America
and Cuba signed in the District of Columbia on May 29, 1934,
that constructively closes United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay.
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Sec. 1051--Establishment of the Secretaries of Defense Historical
Series and Priority Declassification Authority
This section would authorize the Office of the Secretary of
Defense Historical Office to publish the Secretaries of Defense
Historical Series regarding the Department's role in the
formulation and implementation of foreign policy and defense
strategy.
Sec. 1052--Inclusion of National Guard Relief Foundation as a Military
Welfare Society for Certain Purposes
This section would expand the definition of ``military
welfare society'' in title 10, United States Code, to include
the National Guard Relief Foundation.
Sec. 1053--Joint Experimentation and Training Range Innovation Office
This section would establish a Joint Experimentation and
Training Range Innovation Office.
Sec. 1054--Establishment of Army Information Operations Center of
Excellence
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
establish an Army Information Operations Center of Excellence.
Sec. 1055--Extension of Limitation on Retirement or Divestment of EA-
18G Aircraft
This section would extend the existing prohibition on the
retirement of any EA-18G aircraft until September 30, 2032.
Sec. 1056--Authority for Secretary of Defense Waiver Relating to
Certain Training
This section would amend section 1050 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to waive the
prohibition under subsection (a) with respect to special
operations forces.
Sec. 1057--Expansion of Prohibition on Destruction or Scrapping of
World War II-Era Aircraft
This section would amend section 1051 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) to expand the prohibition on the destruction or scrapping
of World War II-era aircraft to the Department of the Navy.
Sec. 1058--Prohibition on Department of Defense Contracts with Certain
Foreign-Owned Online Tutoring Services
This section would amend section 854 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159) by expanding the prohibition to cover Russia, Iran, and
North Korea.
Sec. 1059--Prohibition on Display of Unapproved Flags
This section would permit the display of the Honor and
Remember flag.
Sec. 1060--Prohibition on Lobbying Activities with Respect to the
Department of Defense by Certain Officers of the Armed Forces and
Civilian Employees of the Department Following Separation from Military
Service or Employment with the Department
This section would extend the prohibition on lobbying the
Department of Defense for departing flag and general officers
and senior civilian equivalents.
Sec. 1061--Integration of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Counter-
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training into Initial, Officer, and Joint
Collective Training
This section would require the relevant service secretary
to integrate small unmanned aircraft systems operation and
counter-UAS recognition and defeat protocols into certain
programs of instruction.
Sec. 1062--Eastern Regional Range Complex Demonstration Project
This section would require a demonstration project to
implement section 1048 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
Sec. 1063--Pilot Program on Total Replacement Value for Air Force Test
Center Ground Test Infrastructure
This section would create a pilot program on Total
Replacement Value for Air Force Test Center Ground Test
Infrastructure.
Sec. 1064--Pilot Program for Blockchain-Enabled Inventory Management
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
establish a pilot program to use commercially available
distributed ledger technology to improve inventory management.
Sec. 1065--Extended Deadline to Reassess Necessity of Use of Immediate
Response Authority of Department of Defense
This section would require the Department of Defense to
revise its Defense Support of Civil Authorities policy to
extend immediate response authority for disasters from 72 hours
to 1 week.
Sec. 1066--Reconstitution of A-10 Demonstration Team
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to reconstitute and operate an A-10 flight demonstration team.
Sec. 1067--Implementation of Cognitive Performance Enhancement Program
for Special Operations Forces
This section would require the Commander of the U.S.
Special Operations Command to implement a cognitive performance
enhancement program to enhance cognitive performance metrics
across the special operations forces.
Sec. 1068--Senator Robert J. Dole Greatest Generation Education Program
This section would establish an educational program through
the Department of Defense to increase awareness and
understanding of the Greatest Generation and World War II. It
would also authorize a grant program for state and local
governments and nonprofit organizations to carry out similar
education activities.
Sec. 1069--Recognition Program for Working Dogs
This section would establish a Department of Defense
recognition program for working dogs that contribute to mission
success through force protection, lifesaving actions, or
exceptional service.
Sec. 1070--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Closure of Rock
Island Arsenal Museum
This section would prohibit fiscal year 2027 funds to close
Rock Island Arsenal Museum, located in Rock Island Arsenal,
Illinois.
Sec. 1071--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Deactivation of
Expeditionary Combat Aviation Brigades
This section would limit Army funds to retire, deactivate,
schedule to deactivate, or proceed with any other action that
would reduce the capabilities, resources, training, aircraft,
or personnel available, as of the date of the enactment of this
Act, for the Expeditionary Combat Aviation Brigades unless the
Secretary of the Army submits certain items to the
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 1072--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Travel Expenses of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense
This section would limit the funds available to the Office
of the Secretary of Defense for travel expenses to not more
than a 75 percent until the Secretary of Defense submits to the
congressional defense committees a certification that the
Department of Defense is compliant with the requirements of
section 1067 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
Sec. 1073--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Travel Expenses of
Office of the Secretary of Defense Until Submission Certain Assessment
This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure
of not more than 95 percent of amounts authorized to be
appropriated by this Act for fiscal year 2027 for the travel
expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense until the
Secretary submits the assessment required by section 835(a)(1)
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(Public Law 118-31) related to domestic source content of major
defense acquisition programs.
Subtitle E--Studies and Reports
Sec. 1081--Repeal of Obsolete Reporting Requirements
This section would repeal certain obsolete reporting
requirements from prior statutes.
Sec. 1082--Extension of Briefing Requirement Regarding Civil
Authorities at the Southwest Border
This section would extend a briefing requirement regarding
the support provided by the Department of Defense to civil
authorities at the southwest border.
Sec. 1083--Extension of Requirement for Annual Briefings on National
Biodefense Strategy
This section would amend section 1086(d) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328; 6 U.S.C. 104(d)) to extend the briefing requirement until
March 1, 2031.
Sec. 1084--Annual Report and Briefing on Implementation of Army
Transformation Initiative
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
report annually to the committee detailing the programmatic
choices made to implement the Army Continuous Transformation
initiative, the Army Transformation Initiative, and the
Transformation in Contact initiative. The report would include
both new developmental and fielded capabilities, as well as
capabilities and capacity divested.
Sec. 1085--Quarterly Reports on Effects of Unplanned Global Taskings on
Operations, Deterrence, and Readiness in the Area of Operations of
United States Indo-Pacific Command
This section would provide the sense of Congress that
deterring China and maintaining a favorable balance of military
power in the Indo-Pacific region is a strategic priority of the
United States. This section would further require quarterly
reports from the Director of the Joint Staff on the effects of
unplanned global taskings, contingency deployments, and
diverted assets on operations, deterrence, and readiness within
the area of operations of the United States Indo-Pacific
Command.
Sec. 1086--Biannual Reports on Operational Adaptation and Fielding of
Defense Autonomous Warfare Group
This section would require biannual reports on the
adaptation cycles of the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group and
associated autonomous warfare programs.
Sec. 1087--Service-Wide Enterprise Strategies for Human Performance
This section would require each military department to
establish a strategy for utilizing human performance technology
and services.
Sec. 1088--Mobility Capabilities Strategic Plan
This section would direct the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a mobility roadmap report.
Sec. 1089--Required Doctrine on Use of Unmanned Autonomous Systems and
Autonomous Formations
This section would require doctrine on the use of unmanned
autonomous systems and autonomous formations.
Sec. 1089A--Strategy for Sustainment of Certain Unmanned Aircraft
Systems
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop a strategy for ensuring the proper sustainment of small
unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 1089B--Strategy for Use of Low-cost and Attritable Group 4 and 5
Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Contested Logistics Operations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Under Secretary for Research and
Engineering and Under Secretary for Acquisition and
Sustainment, to submit a strategy on the integration of low-
cost and attritable Group 4 and 5 unmanned aerial systems for
use in contested logistics operations.
Sec. 1089C--Feasibility Study on Tactical Information Operations
Command Authority
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the
feasibility of revising Department of Defense Directive 3600.01
to delegate authority to approve and execute tactical
information operations to commanders below the level of the
combatant commander.
Sec. 1089D--Public Availability of Findings of Inspector General
Investigation of Certain Targeting Operations
This section would require the release of an unclassified
summary of the Department of Defense Inspector General's
evaluation of targeting operations within the U.S. Southern
Command area of responsibility.
Sec. 1089E--Report on Cost of United States Military Operations in Iran
This section would require a report on the total financial
cost of United States military operations conducted in Iran.
Sec. 1089F--Report on Operation Southern Spear
This section would require the Department of Defense to
provide a report on Operation Southern Spear.
Sec. 1089G--Report on Civilian Harm Investigation Relating to Shajareh
Tayyebeh Elementary School
This section would require the Department of Defense to
submit a report on the findings of the civilian harm
investigation related to the February 28, 2026 strike in Minab,
Iran, not later than 30 days after the investigation is
completed.
Sec. 1089H--Report on Port Shuaiba Investigation
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
transmit the findings of the investigation into the attack on
Port Shuaiba, Kuwait that occurred on March 1, 2026, to the
congressional defense committees.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Sec. 1091--Deeming References to the Department of Defense and
Secretary of Defense as References to the Department of War and
Secretary of War
This section would require that any reference to the
Secretary of Defense or Department of Defense in any law,
regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United
States shall be deemed to be a reference to the Secretary of
War or Department of War, respectively.
Sec. 1092--Definition of Special Operations Activities
This section would amend section 167(k)(6) of title 10,
United States Code, by striking ``Military information support
operations'' and inserting ``Psychological and cognitive
warfare''.
Sec. 1093--Definition of Counter-sUAS System for Purposes of Joint
Interagency Task Force 401
This section would amend section 199(h)(1) of title 10,
United States Code, and add new definitional language.
Sec. 1094--Increase in Cap for Support of Small Scale Construction
Projects of Foreign Partners in Support of Counterdrug Activities and
Activities to Counter Transnational Organized Crime
This section would raise the funding cap for the Department
of Defense's support of counterdrug small-scale construction
projects.
Sec. 1095--Modification to Funding Limitation for Procurement of
Equipment for Certain Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities
This section would increase the funding limitation for
equipment procured under certain National Guard counterdrug and
drug interdiction activities authorized by section 112 of title
32, United States Code, raising the threshold from $15,000 to
$25,000.
Sec. 1096--National Guard Attorney License Portability
This section would permit National Guard judge advocates
license portability.
Sec. 1097--Oversight and Direction of Irregular Warfare Exercise
Laboratory
The section would amend section 1094 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) by requiring the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict to provide oversight of
the Irregular Warfare Exercise Laboratory through the Director
of the Irregular Warfare Center.
Sec. 1098--Ubiquitous Technical Surveillance and Digital Force
Protection
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
designate the head of an organization of the Department of
Defense to be responsible for ubiquitous technical surveillance
functions and develop a strategy for research, development and
procurement of secure communications and obfuscation
technologies. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a
plan to establish a program of record to meet counter-
ubiquitous technical surveillance and digital protection needs
across the Department of Defense. This section would require
the Secretary of Defense to submit a report not later than
December 1, 2027, on the plan required and the identification
of the Department of Defense organization that has been
designated.
Sec. 1099--Potential Designation of Information as a Domain of Warfare
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees a determination
as to whether to designate information as a domain of warfare
of the Department of Defense.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Acknowledgment of the United States Naval Sea Cadets as a Youth and
Charitable Organization
The committee recognizes the invaluable contributions of
youth and charitable organizations in encouraging young
individuals to explore various avenues of public service in and
out of uniform. The United States Naval Sea Cadets, a
congressionally chartered, nonprofit, military-oriented youth
program, has provided young individuals with the experience and
confidence to become productive participants who value our
maritime services through exposure to highly relevant fields
like science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of Defense
to exercise their existing authorities to support youth and
charitable organizations at their discretion in accordance with
section 508(d) of title 32, United States Code.
Civilian Workforce Recruitment and Retention Challenges at Remote and
Isolated Defense Installations in the Western United States
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of
Department of Defense installations located in remote and
geographically isolated areas of the western United States,
including installations, ranges, proving grounds, depots,
laboratories, aviation facilities, training areas, logistics
sites, and operational support activities in the Western
states. The committee is particularly concerned by reports of
recurring difficulties recruiting and retaining civilian
personnel at installations such as Marine Corps Air Station
Yuma, U.S. Army Yuma Proving Ground, and other similarly
situated defense facilities that rely on such personnel for
mission-critical positions, including engineers, scientists,
first responders, skilled trades, and senior technical and
leadership positions.
The committee notes that the location of these
installations, limited local labor pool, competition from
governmental and private sector opportunities in adjacent labor
markets, and compensation disparities relative to neighboring
locality pay areas, long commuting distances, limited spousal
employment opportunities, and housing constraints, may
contribute to hiring challenges, applicant declinations, and
prolonged workforce vacancies.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments
concerned and the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027, on civilian
workforce recruitment and retention challenges affecting
Department of Defense installations the rural western United
States. The briefing shall include--
(1) an identification of remote or isolated Department of
Defense installations in the western United States experiencing
persistent civilian workforce recruitment or retention
challenges;
(2) vacancy rates and hiring metrics for mission-critical
civilian positions;
(3) applicant declination rates and identified causes of
offer rejection;
(4) an assessment of the impact of workforce shortages on
installation operations, safety, readiness, testing, training,
and mission execution;
(5) an evaluation of whether existing compensation
authorities, including recruitment incentives, retention
incentives, relocation incentives, special salary rates, and
other workforce flexibilities, adequately support civilian
workforce requirements;
(6) an assessment of whether existing locality pay
boundaries adequately reflect labor market realities for remote
western installations that compete with higher-paying nearby
labor markets or face unusually constrained local hiring pools;
and
(7) recommendations for administrative or legislative
actions necessary to improve civilian workforce recruitment and
retention at affected installations.
Department of Defense Cyber Workforce Framework
The committee commends the Department of Defense for
establishing the Department of Defense Cyber Workforce
Framework (DCWF) as the foundation for a holistic approach to
cyber workforce talent management, including identifying,
categorizing, and tracking cyber roles, skills, and
competencies across the cyber workforce. The committee is aware
of challenges in implementing the DCWF consistently across the
Department, which has led to a lack of comprehensive visibility
into the cyber workforce and the training required to meet
optimal mission readiness. The committee urges the Secretary of
Defense to ensure that DCWF implementation best practices are
shared across the military services and components to help
ensure qualified personnel are recruited and retained to
support the cyber mission across the Department.
Minimum Firefighter Manning Requirements on Army Installations
The committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense's compliance with section 388 of the James M. Inhofe
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263) which established minimum staffing requirements
for firefighters. These requirements are critical to ensuring
the safety of military installations, personnel, and assets.
An April 2025 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
found that the Department has not developed an enterprise-wide
strategy to address civilian firefighter staffing gaps. The GAO
recommended each service develop and implement a Fire and
Emergency Services civilian strategic human capital plan,
assess the current state of its civilian firefighter workforce,
and forecast future requirements. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary Defense, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March
1, 2027, on the following:
(1) the timeline for each service to achieve compliance
with section 388 of Public Law 117-263 and GAO recommendations;
(2) the specific plans each service will implement to
achieve compliance; and
(3) current mitigation efforts.
Report on Civilian Test Pilot Support to Military Test Activities
The committee notes that Defense Contract Management Agency
Instruction (DCMA INST) 8210-1D provides pathways for
individuals who have attended non-U.S. military test pilot
schools to support military test activities. The committee is
interested in understanding whether these pathways could be
expanded to support military test activities. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretaries of the military departments, to provide a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
January 1, 2027, on the feasibility and advisability of
expanding the pathways available under DCMA INST 8210-1D for
graduates of U.S. certificated civilian test pilot schools to
support military test activities as test pilots and flight test
engineers. The report should include:
(1) an assessment of the current capacity of military and
approved civilian test pilots to support military test
activities, broken down by military service;
(2) an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
modifying DCMA INST 8210-1D to authorize all graduates of
accredited U.S. civilian test pilot schools to support military
test activities beyond the current pathways, including any
potential benefits or risks associated with such a
modification; and
(3) a determination of the appropriate certification for
U.S. civilian test pilot schools to ensure curriculum aligns
with that of the U.S. military test pilot schools and that the
graduates of the certificated civilian test pilot schools fully
meet the education and training requirements stipulated in DCMA
INST 8210-1D.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 1101--Limitation on Outside Income for Individuals in Office of
the Secretary of Defense
This section would prohibit any outside earned income
during the period a covered employee is employed by the Office
of the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 1102--Skills-Based Hiring for Department of Defense Civilian
Positions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a skills-based hiring framework for appointment to
the competitive service and the excepted service.
Sec. 1103--Establishment of a Student Internship Program for Military
Child and Youth Programs
This section would establish a student internship for
military child and youth programs.
Sec. 1104--Expansion of Eligible Educational Programs Under the Smart
Defense Education Program
This section would amend the Department of Defense STEM
program to allow for scholarships to cover relevant career and
technical education programs.
Sec. 1105--Military Technician (Dual Status): Elimination of Title 32
Authority; Conversions of Existing Positions
This section would eliminate Dual Status Military
Technicians and allow those positions to transfer or convert to
either Active Guard and Reserve Duty or a civilian position.
Sec. 1106--One-Year Extension of Authority to Waive Annual Limitation
on Premium Pay and Aggregate Limitation on Pay for Federal Civilian
Employees Working Overseas
This section would waive limitations on premium pay for
Federal civilians overseas.
Sec. 1107--One-Year Extension of Temporary Authority to Grant
Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to Civilian Personnel on Official
Duty in a Combat Zone
This section would extend the temporary authority to grant
allowances, benefits, and gratuities for civilian personnel in
a combat zone.
Sec. 1108--Living Quarter Allowance for Department of Defense Civilian
Employees with Permanent Duty Station in Guam
This section would permit the Secretary of Defense to
provide a living quarter allowance for rent or mortgage
payments of civilian employees with permanent duty station in
Guam.
Sec. 1109--Pilot Program on Integration of United States Tech Force
with Skills-Based Hiring Authorities
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a pilot program to integrate the United States Tech
Force into the Department of Defense.
Sec. 1110--Enhanced Hiring Authority for Instructor Pilots and Civilian
Simulator Instructors
This section would provide direct hire authority to
instructor pilots.
Sec. 1111--Pilot Program on Tech Talent Competitiveness
This section would facilitate the rapid recruitment of
innovative talent in critical technology areas such as
artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, business process
innovation, biotechnology, and materials and manufacturing.
Sec. 1112--Civilian Employee and Contractor Financial Management
Workforce Within the Department of Defense
This section would require the Department of Defense to
establish a Financial Management Skills Assessment Integrated
Product Team to assist in the Department's audit readiness.
Sec. 1113--Department of Defense Best Practices Guide for Family Child
Care Homes
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
publish a best practices guide for individuals seeking to
establish and operate a Family Child Care home on a military
installation.
Sec. 1114--Delegation of Authority for Corrective Action for
Nonappropriated Fund Employees in Cases of Complaint of Reprisal
This section would delegate the authority for corrective
action for Nonappropriated Fund employees.
Sec. 1115--Limitation on Use of Funds to Limit Collective Bargaining
This section would prevent the use of funds authorized by
this bill to implement Executive Order 14251, issued on March
27, 2025, relating to exclusions from Federal labor management
relations programs.
Sec. 1116--Hiring Freeze Exceptions
This section would prohibit a hiring freeze for certain
positions in the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2027.
Sec. 1117--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Termination of
DODEA, Childcare, and Healthcare Workers
This section would prevent the use of funds to terminate
DODEA, childcare, and healthcare workers.
Sec. 1118--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and Personnel Policies
for Employees at Ground-Based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
Development and Maintenance Facilities
This section would permit the Secretary of the Air Force to
establish a demonstration program related to the pay and
personnel policies of ground-based intercontinental ballistic
missile development and maintenance facilities.
Sec. 1119--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and Personnel Policies
for Employees at Naval Shipyards, Navy Regional Maintenance Centers,
and Navy Trident Refit Facilities
This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to
establish a demonstration project for pay and personnel
policies for employees at naval shipyards.
Sec. 1120--Demonstration Project Relating to Pay and Personnel Policies
for Prevailing Rate Employees at Covered Depots
This section would update or upgrade the personnel and pay
system for the defense industrial base by establishing a pay
band structure, providing advancement opportunities for
progression, broader classification authority and job grading,
and pay flexibilities for recruiting and retention.
Sec. 1121--Prohibition on Carrying out Hiring Freeze, Reduction in
Force, or Hiring Delay Without Cause at Public Shipyards of the
Department of Defense
This section would prohibit hiring freezes, unjustified
hiring delays, or workforce reductions at public shipyards.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Additional Support for NATO Air Defense Against Unmanned Aircraft
Systems
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consideration of Army support for the Eastern Flank Deterrence
Line of NATO, to submit a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services by January 1, 2027, on the feasibility and
advisability of providing additional support to bolster the air
defense capabilities of NATO allies to defeat unmanned aircraft
systems and deter Russian aggression against NATO allies,
particularly on the alliance's eastern flank. The report should
include:
(1) an identification of existing gaps in the defense
efforts of NATO allies against unmanned aircraft systems,
particularly with respect to impediments to using mass-
produced, low-cost effectors against low-cost unmanned aircraft
systems;
(2) a description of United States contributions to the air
defense capabilities of NATO allies;
(3) a determination of whether it is feasible and advisable
to provide additional support to bolster the air defense
capabilities of NATO allies;
(4) if the determination described in paragraph (3) is
affirmative, an identification of actions to be taken over the
next five years by the Department of Defense to enhance the
ability of NATO allies to produce and field, at scale, low-cost
effectors to defeat low-cost unmanned aircraft systems; and
(5) if the determination described in paragraph (3) is
negative, a detailed explanation of that determination,
including the identification of any changes to funding or
policy required to provide the support described in paragraph
(3).
Assessment of Chinese Communist Party Malign Influence within the
Republic of Korea
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, detailing malign influence by the
Chinese Communist Party within the Republic of Korea and its
implications to the defense interests of the United States. The
briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of how People's Republic of China (PRC)
malign influence creates human intelligence and defense risks
to United States forces stationed in the Republic of Korea;
(2) an assessment as to whether the growth of technology
firms of the PRC in the Republic of Korea are a defense threat;
and
(3) an assessment as to whether measures can be taken by
the Republic of Korea to assist the growth of U.S. technology
firms and to address any defense threats identified by the
Department of Defense from the PRC that impact the information
security of the United States Armed Forces based in the
Republic of Korea.
Australia-United Kingdom-United States Academic Partnerships
The committee recognizes the opportunities for research and
development opportunities presented by the Australia-United
Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) security agreement, including
partnerships between the three countries' academic institutions
that are facilitated by respective defense departments.
However, the committee is aware of potential barriers to
international academic partnerships, including security
clearance restrictions, classification, U.S. acquisition and
expert controls, and research security and foreign influence
compliance.
As such, the committee directs the Director of AUKUS
Integration and Acquisition to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027, on
barriers to academic partnerships between AUKUS academic
institutions that fall under the purview of the Department of
Defense. The briefing should include the following:
(1) current guidance from the Department of Defense that
dictates academic research partnership parameters between U.S.
and United Kingdom or Australian academic institutions when
conducting defense-related research;
(2) current guidance from the Department on control
procedures related to research on key undersea technologies,
such as anti-submarine warfare systems, acoustic signature
reduction, and undersea detection systems; and
(3) barriers or challenges identified by the Department
that hinder research collaboration or academic partnerships
between U.S. and United Kingdom or Australian academic
institutions. This list may include consideration of, but may
not be limited to, laboratory restrictions; controlled badging/
access; network segmentation; device restrictions; visitor
controls; data classification procedures; export reviews before
publication; travel restrictions/travel security; citizenship-
based participation rules; and security training mandates.
Baltic Integrated Air and Missile Defense
The committee recognizes that strengthening integrated air
and missile defense in the Baltic region is critical to
reinforcing the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO)
deterrence and defense posture and addressing persistent and
evolving Russian air and missile threats along the Alliance's
eastern flank.
The committee directs the Commander, U.S. European Command,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, assessing integrated air and
missile defense (IAMD) in the Baltic region, including efforts
undertaken to enhance Baltic IAMD in coordination with NATO
allies and partners. The briefing shall include:
(1) a description of the current and projected air and
missile threats to the Baltic region, specifically those
emanating from the Kaliningrad region and western Russia;
(2) a summary of the equipment, services, and training
provided to the Baltic states using section 333 and other title
10 authorities to enhance Baltic IAMD;
(3) an evaluation of the requirements identified in NATO's
regional plans and the Eastern Flank Deterrence Line as they
relate to addressing current and projected air and missile
threats to the Baltic region, including surveillance
capabilities, interceptor capacity, command and control
systems, and integration with NATO allies;
(4) an identification of any capability gaps associated
with the aforementioned requirements;
(5) a summary of NATO's updated standing defense plan for
integrated air and missile defense across the Alliance and an
assessment of how such plan addresses current and projected air
and missile threats to the Baltic region; and
(6) a description of opportunities for cooperative
acquisition programs and training among NATO allies to address
current and projected air and missile threats to the Alliance,
including efforts that promote standardization and
interoperability.
Baltic Training Ranges
The committee recognizes the importance of ensuring that
U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces train
in the environments and conditions along the Alliance's eastern
flank to strengthen allied capability, deterrence, and defense
against the Russian Federation. The committee further notes
that training ranges in the Baltic States already provide
unique capabilities for realistic operational training, while
recognizing that enhancements to capacity and capability would
further improve readiness and interoperability across the
Alliance.
The committee directs the Commander, U.S. European Command,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility and
requirements for expanding training ranges and live-fire
opportunities in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The briefing
should include:
(1) an assessment of the suitability of training ranges in
the Baltic States to support brigade-level maneuver;
(2) an evaluation of U.S. and allied ability to conduct
combined arms live-fire exercises on training ranges in the
Baltic States;
(3) an analysis of the feasibility of employing long-range
fires on training ranges in the Baltic States;
(4) an evaluation of the ability to test unmanned aircraft
systems (UAS) and counter-UAS technologies on training ranges
in the Baltic States;
(5) an assessment of the infrastructure to support
realistic contested electromagnetic spectrum operations on
training ranges in the Baltic States;
(6) an assessment of supporting infrastructure on training
ranges in the Baltic States, including barracks, maintenance
facilities, ammunition and fuel storage, and rail and road
access;
(7) a summary of any host-nation restrictions that impede
NATO exercises on training ranges in the Baltic States;
(8) an assessment of the prioritization of NATO allies for
access to training ranges in the Baltic States; and
(9) a plan to coordinate with NATO allies to implement any
necessary improvements to training ranges in the Baltic States
to improve multilateral exercises, readiness, and
interoperability across the Alliance.
Briefing on Biosecurity Threats from Iran
The committee is concerned that Iran's long running dual-
use biological research and production capabilities pose an
increased risk to the United States and allies and partners in
the Middle East.
The committee notes that sustained conflict, disruption to
command-and control structures, damage to facilities, and
internal instability could elevate the risk of diversion,
accidental release, or loss of visibility or control over
biological materials and expertise. These risks may be
compounded by Iran's reliance on proxy networks and asymmetric
means of retaliation, even as its conventional capabilities are
degraded.
The committee recognizes the importance of ensuring that
the United States is prepared to detect, attribute, and respond
to biological threats, including low complexity or novel
agents, in the context of evolving conflict environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
February 1, 2027, on biosecurity risks emanating from Iran. The
briefing may include a classified annex. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) the Department's assessment of the risk that Iranian
biological materials, expertise, or dual-use equipment could be
lost, degraded, or diverted, including to Iranian proxy actors;
(2) any changes to Department of Defense force protection,
medical countermeasure readiness, or biosurveillance posture
within the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility in
response to this risk;
(3) the mechanisms in place between the Department of
Defense, the intelligence community, and combatant commands to
detect and monitor biological diversion or use scenarios
associated with the conflict;
(4) an assessment of the adequacy of current Department
capabilities to detect, attribute, and respond to low-
complexity or novel biological threats; and
(5) whether the fiscal year 2027 budget request
sufficiently resources the prevention, detection, attribution,
and response capabilities identified in Department strategies.
Combating Chinese Communist Party Influence
The Committee recognizes the threat of expanding foreign
malign influence by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to the
United States and its allies. Therefore, the Committee directs
that the Director of National Intelligence, in coordination
with the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and other
relevant branches of the intelligence community, submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
June 30, 2027. Such report should address the following
activities occurring during a three-year period beginning
January 1, 2023: foreign malign influence activities undertaken
outside the United States by the Chinese Communist Party at the
expense of the United States and our allies; the effect of such
foreign malign influence activities, including on United States
alliances, perceptions of the United States, global and
localized financial systems; trends in foreign malign influence
activity by the Chinese Communist Party in key regions
including Latin America, the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the
African continent; and any other national security implications
of such increased foreign malign influence activities that
affect interests of the United States and allies of the United
States, as determined relevant by the Director.
Conducting Oversight of the Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC)
The Committee recognizes the important role of the Civil-
Military Coordination Center (CMCC) in facilitating
humanitarian aid, monitoring the Gaza ceasefire, and plans for
post-war reconstruction. However, the Committee is concerned
about reports of the future of the Civil-Military Coordination
Center (CMCC). Therefore, the Committee directs the Commander
of U.S. Central Command to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31, 2027,
that includes:
(1) The current status and manning of the CMCC, plans for
its continuation, or subsumption by another entity;
(2) details related to the CMCC's coordination of
humanitarian aid delivered into Gaza including the number of
aid trucks and pallets and an itemized list of the aid
delivered by type;
(3) a description of the percentage of aid reaching
civilians and any barriers to aid entering Gaza, or reaching
the civilian population;
(4) metrics on the benefits of the aid to the population in
Gaza and risks if the aid were to cease;
(5) a description of the CMCC's role in facilitating and
maintaining the current ceasefire;
(6) a description of the involvement of the CMCC in the
establishment of and deployment of the International
Stabilization Force including current status; and
(7) the potential impacts of closing the CMCC on the
delivery of humanitarian aid and the current ceasefire.
Countering Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing
The committee is concerned that large-scale Illegal,
Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing operations--
particularly those conducted or enabled by state-directed
enterprises--undermine maritime security and international
norms, and in certain theaters overlap with foreign state
maritime coercion activities that implicate United States
defense interests.
The committee is concerned that IUU fishing activities
intersect with transnational maritime nation-state and criminal
networks. The committee notes the People's Republic of China
(PRC) and PRC-linked entities have leveraged distant-water
fishing fleets, opaque ownership structures, and civilian
maritime logistics as part of broader gray-zone operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026 on the following:
(1) an assessment of the defense threats posed by IUU
fishing operations, including those that are affiliated with
the governments of foreign nations and transnational criminal
enterprises;
(2) the Department of Defense's current efforts to support
the detection, monitoring, and disruption of IUU fishing
operations, including activities conducted through combatant
command theater campaign plans, security cooperation programs,
and maritime domain awareness initiatives;
(3) the Department's strategy to support the
identification, tracking, and countering of IUU fishing
activities that pose a threat to our defense;
(4) an assessment of gaps in the Department's ability to
collect, analyze, and disseminate information relevant to IUU
fishing activity, including with respect to dark vessel
detection, beneficial ownership of IUU-linked enterprises, and
the overlap between IUU fishing networks and foreign state
maritime militia activity;
(5) an assessment of options for information sharing--
including declassified or unclassified vessel tracking data--to
relevant Federal departments and agencies and to partner nation
maritime enforcement authorities;
(6) an assessment of commercially-available technologies
and systems that could improve the Department's and partner
efforts to support the detection, monitoring, and disruption of
IUU fishing operations; and
(7) any other information the secretary deems necessary.
Countering Iranian Threat Networks in the Eastern Mediterranean
The committee notes the growing threat posed by Iran-backed
terrorist groups, including Hezbollah, to U.S. allies and
partners in the eastern Mediterranean. The committee recognizes
the eastern Mediterranean as a critical area for U.S., allied,
and partner interests relating to regional security in both
U.S. European Command and U.S. Central Command, deterrence of
Iran, and efforts to counter malign actors and proxy networks.
The committee notes the Department's extensive collaboration in
the eastern Mediterranean region with NATO allies and regional
partners and seeks to expand these efforts with additional
countries.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, U.S.
European Command, in consultation with the Commander, U.S.
Central Command, to provide a report to the House Armed
Services Committee by no later than March 1, 2027, on
opportunities to expand defense partnerships with countries in
the eastern Mediterranean with whom the United States has no
treaty alliance or mutual defense agreement, including Cyprus,
Malta, or any other country in the region that he deems
relevant to include. The report should include opportunities to
strengthen such countries' counter-unmanned aerial systems or
integrated air and missile defense capabilities to support U.S.
and/or allied interests, maritime and air domain awareness, and
counterterrorism objectives.
Counterterrorism Posture and Requirements in West Africa
The committee remains concerned by the rapidly
deteriorating security environment in West Africa and the
Sahel, driven by the continued expansion and increased
operational tempo of violent extremist organizations, including
Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), regional
affiliates of the Islamic State, Boko Haram, and other aligned
militant groups. The committee is aware of persistent
intelligence and operational coverage gaps across large
portions of the Sahel, including areas where terrorist
organizations are actively expanding territorial control and
operational reach.
The committee notes that effective counterterrorism
operations in West Africa depend on timely, persistent, and
multi-domain intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
(ISR) capabilities, as well as sufficient force posture,
access, and operational enablers. The committee is concerned by
reductions in airborne ISR coverage despite increased threat
activity and growing demand for ISR across the United States
Africa Command area of responsibility.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Commander, United States Africa
Command, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by February 15, 2027, on U.S. counterterrorism
requirements in West Africa. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of current and projected threats posed by
violent extremist organizations operating in West Africa and
the Sahel, including the extent of territorial control, attack
trends, and intelligence and operational coverage gaps that
limit situational awareness and early warning;
(2) identification of shortfalls in airborne and space-
based ISR, including contracted and organic platforms, as well
as associated processing, exploitation, and dissemination
capabilities required to support timely counterterrorism
operations and crisis response; and
(3) an assessment of U.S. force posture, access, basing,
mobility, and force protection in West Africa, including
operational reach, response timelines, sustainment
requirements, and risk to U.S. forces under current and
projected ISR availability.
Department of Defense Authorities Subject to Foreign Assistance Review
On January 20, 2025, the President ordered that no foreign
assistance be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned
with the foreign policy of the President and directed reviews
of each foreign assistance program. The responsible department
and agency heads were further directed to make determinations
on whether to continue, modify, or cease each foreign
assistance program based upon the review recommendations. The
committee is aware that the Department of Defense completed the
foreign assistance review (FAR) in accordance with the
President's order. The Department has not, however, provided to
the committee requested information regarding the applicable
program authorities that were reviewed for the purposes of the
FAR. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, consisting of the list of
programs, assistance, and program authorities, identified by
statute or code, which were reviewed for the purposes of the
FAR. Further, the report shall describe the length of time, if
any, that such programs, assistance, and program authorities
were paused, and include a list of programs or assistance that
were terminated as a result of the FAR.
Department of Defense Engagements with the Country of Georgia
The committee is concerned by the continued detention and
imprisonment of opposition leaders, activists, and other
individuals widely regarded as political prisoners in Georgia
and believes this issue should be raised consistently and at
appropriately senior levels in bilateral engagements with the
Government of Georgia and the Armed Forces of Georgia.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit an unclassified report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than October 1, 2026, detailing the
Department of Defense's strategy for incorporating the issue of
political prisoners into military-to-military engagements with
Georgia.
Feasibility of Foreign Transfer, Security Cooperation, and Contingency
Basing Options for Surplus A-10 Aircraft
The committee recognizes that surplus A-10 aircraft may
retain value for security cooperation, partner burden-sharing,
contingency operations, or recoverable storage arrangements.
The committee is interested in understanding whether such
aircraft could be transferred to eligible foreign partners
through existing authorities, maintained in recoverable status
for future foreign military sales or excess defense articles
consideration, or used to support contingency basing or
coalition interoperability requirements.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the
Director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and in
consultation with the Secretary of State, to submit a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than January
15, 2027, on the feasibility of transferring surplus A-10
aircraft to eligible foreign partners, or otherwise maintaining
such aircraft in recoverable status to support future security
cooperation or contingency operations. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the feasibility of transfer through
foreign military sales, excess defense articles, or other
appropriate authorities;
(2) an identification of allies or partners that may be
suitable candidates to operate, host, or support surplus A-10
aircraft;
(3) an assessment of training, maintenance, sustainment,
basing, interoperability, and force protection requirements
associated with any such transfer or arrangement; and
(4) an assessment of export-control, technology security,
and end-use monitoring considerations.
The report may include a classified annex, as necessary.
Feasibility of Permanent Basing an F-35 Squadron in Poland
The committee recognizes the growing importance of forward-
based fifth-generation tactical aviation in deterring
adversaries. The committee believes that the Department of
Defense should assess the operational, infrastructure, force
protection, logistics, sustainment, and host-nation
requirements associated with the potential basing of a United
States Air Force F-35 squadron in Poland.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, U.S.
European Command, to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the
feasibility of basing a United States Air Force F-35 squadron
in Poland. The briefing should include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) an assessment of potential locations in Poland suitable
for the permanent basing of an F-35 squadron;
(2) an evaluation of runway, ramp, hangar, maintenance,
weapons storage, fuel, cyber, communications, and secure
mission-planning infrastructure requirements;
(3) an analysis of aircraft maintenance and logistics
support requirements;
(4) an assessment of host-nation contributions, cost-
sharing opportunities, military construction requirements, and
NATO security investment program eligibility; and
(5) an assessment of the operational benefits for
deterrence, NATO reinforcement, Baltic air defense, Black Sea
contingency response, and large-scale combat operations in
Europe.
Global Fragility Act Implementation
The Global Fragility Act (GFA) mandates that the Department
of State lead an interagency strategy, with the United States
Agency for International Development and the Department of
Defense, to address conflict and instability in five priority
countries/regions. The interagency is currently implementing
10-year country strategies in Mozambique, Haiti, Libya, and
Papua New Guinea, and a regional strategy in the Coastal West
African states. The committee notes the importance of the role
of the Department of Defense in GFA implementation as required
by statute. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services no later than December 1, 2026 on the Department's
implementation of GFA. The report shall include a description
of the Department's contributions to GFA implementation in 2025
and 2026, planned funding levels for GFA implementation in
fiscal year 2027, efforts to coordinate GFA implementation with
the Department of State, a description of Global Fragility
Strategy objectives met by the Department in priority
countries, and a description of challenges and lessons learned
related to GFA implementation.
Mozambique Security Conditions
The committee notes with concern the rise of radical
Islamist terrorism in the Cabo Delgado province of Mozambique
that threatens the economic, security, and political interests
of the United States and its partners in the region. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Commander of United States Africa Command to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on risks posed by radical Islamist
terrorism in Mozambique to U.S. defense interests. The briefing
shall include:
(1) an assessment of the intent, operational capabilities,
territorial influence, external support networks, financing
mechanism, and freedom of movement of ISIS-Mozambique and
associated violent extremist organizations operating in
northern Mozambique;
(2) a description of ongoing counterterrorism and
stabilization operations conducted by the Government of
Mozambique, the United States and its regional partners, and
other international actors;
(3) an assessment of the extent to which terrorist activity
in Mozambique threatens regional stability in Africa;
(4) an assessment of the extent to which terrorist
organizations in Mozambique possess the capability or intent to
conduct external operations;
(5) an assessment of whether such terrorist organizations
in Mozambique possess the capability or intent to threaten the
U.S. homeland or U.S. interests abroad; and
(6) a description of current United States security
cooperation, intelligence sharing, and train-and-assist
activities.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Acquisition Reform Coordination
The committee recognizes the need to reform acquisition
processes to enable the Department of Defense to fully exploit
innovations in technology and achieve a decisive advantage on
the battlefield. The committee is concerned, however, that the
absence of coordinated reform efforts may limit
interoperability and collective defense capabilities across the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
December 1, 2026, on current efforts to coordinate and share
best practices for acquisition reform with NATO partners. The
report shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include
a classified annex. The report should include the following:
(1) an overview of existing bilateral and multilateral
mechanisms through which the Department of Defense currently
engages NATO allies on acquisition reform, including any formal
agreements, working groups, or information-sharing
arrangements;
(2) an assessment of the extent to which the Department has
implemented foreign military sales (FMS) reforms laid out in
its Acquisition Transformation Strategy and where gaps remain
that may affect interoperability or allied defense procurement
timelines;
(3) an identification of best practices in defense
acquisition reform that have demonstrated measurable
improvements in procurement speed, cost efficiency, or
technology integration, and an assessment of the feasibility of
sharing those practices with NATO partners; and
(4) any recommended legislative or policy changes to
strengthen coordination mechanisms between the United States
and NATO allies on acquisition reform efforts.
Participation of Ukrainian Students in United States Service Academies
The committee recognizes that the United States Service
Academies play a critical role in developing future military
leaders and strengthening long-term security partnerships with
allied and partner nations. The committee further recognizes
that Ukraine's armed forces have demonstrated exceptional
resilience, innovation, and battlefield effectiveness in
defense of their sovereignty.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on opportunities to expand
participation by qualified Ukrainian students at the United
States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, and
the United States Air Force Academy. The briefing should
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) the feasibility of designating Ukraine as a country
eligible to nominate candidates to attend the Service Academies
under section 347 of title 10, United States Code;
(2) the number of Ukrainian students that could reasonably
be accommodated on an annual basis;
(3) the anticipated benefits to the United States and
Ukraine of such participation;
(4) any statutory, regulatory, or policy barriers to
Ukrainian participation in the Service Academies; and
(5) recommendations for legislative or administrative
actions necessary to facilitate such participation.
Permanent Stationing of United States Armored Brigade Combat Teams in
Poland
The committee stresses that the rotational presence of two
U.S. Army Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs) in the Republic
of Poland provides a critical contribution to the deterrence
and defense posture of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), and notes with great concern the recent decision by the
Department to temporarily delay one of the rotational ABCT
deployments. The committee further notes that the permanent
stationing of such forces would enhance deterrence and reduce
the long-term costs associated with persistent rotational
deployments, particularly considering host nation support and
infrastructure investments provided by the Government of
Poland. The committee therefore directs the Commander, U.S.
European Command, to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than October 1, 2026, that
includes the following information:
(1) an independent risk assessment of the Department's
decision to temporarily delay the rotational presence of one of
the two rotational ABCTs in Poland;
(2) an assessment of whether the permanent stationing of
one or two U.S. ABCTs in Poland would enhance deterrence
against the Russian Federation;
(3) identification and assessment of the logistics
requirements, including force enablers, equipment, supplies,
storage, maintenance, and sustainment necessary to support the
permanent stationing of one or two ABCTs in Poland;
(4) identification and assessment of infrastructure
investments, including new construction or upgrades to existing
facilities, required to support the permanent stationing of one
or two ABCTs in Poland;
(5) an assessment of the willingness and ability of Poland
to provide host nation support, including Polish-provided
infrastructure or operations, maintenance, and sustainment
tasks, to support the permanent stationing of one or two ABCTs
in Poland;
(6) an assessment of the comparative costs of permanently
stationing of one or two ABCTs in Poland relative to continued
rotational deployments, including consideration of anticipated
or likely host nation contributions;
(7) an assessment of the effects of the permanent
stationing of one or two ABCTs in Poland on servicemember and
family quality of life as compared to continued rotational
deployments;
(8) an estimate of the timeline required to achieve the
permanent stationing of one or two ABCTs in Poland if such a
policy decision were taken; and
(9) an assessment of whether episodic deployments of United
States Army Multi-Domain Task Force long-range fires to Poland
would enhance deterrence against the Russian Federation.
Professionalization of Syrian Defense Forces
The committee supports U.S. policy objectives of
establishing a Syria that is stable, free from radical Islamist
terrorism, at peace with its neighbors, and protective of all
its ethnic and religious minority groups.
The committee supports efforts by the Syrian Arab Republic
to integrate brigade-sized units of the Syrian Democratic
Forces (SDF) and appoint senior SDF leadership to positions of
equivalent influence in the Ministry of Defense. The committee
recognizes this as the model for the continued integration of
security and governance institutions of minorities and supports
efforts by the U.S. government to facilitate it.
The committee notes with concern, however, that
inconsistent command and control of forces associated with the
Syrian Arab Republic, compounded by limited capabilities,
contribute to a fragile security environment. The committee
remains concerned about unresolved incidents of atrocities
against ethnic minorities, reports of civilian casualties
during the winter 2025-2026 offensive, and the escape of
thousands of ISIS-affiliated fighters and associates from
prisons and camps in northeastern Syria.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Director of the
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, to provide a report to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31,
2027, on the feasibility of utilizing existing security
cooperation authorities to build the institutional capacity of
and professionalize vetted, cross-sectarian, and cross-ethnic
Syrian security forces. The report should evaluate:
(1) the feasibility of Department of Defense led seminars,
workshops, and training courses on:
(a) Professionalization training;
(b) Legal training regarding the law of war, rule of law,
and international standards of human rights; and
(c) Training on civilian control of the military;
(2) authorities currently available to the Department; and
(3) the extent to which such programs are aligned with U.S.
national defense objectives and policy.
Reaffirming the Vital Importance of U.S. Basing in Gulf States
The committee notes with appreciation the collaboration,
basing, and support provided to U.S. Central Command by many
Gulf partners. Countries such as the United Arab Emirates, the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Kingdom of Bahrain, the State of
Qatar, and the State of Kuwait play an indispensable role in
defending the region from Iranian aggression.
The committee supports expanding security cooperation,
military exercises, and joint operations with Gulf partners, as
well as maintaining the presence of U.S. Central Command forces
across the region. In particular, the committee recognizes the
importance of Al Udeid Air Base and believes the installation
remains critical to U.S. national security interests. The
committee also acknowledges Qatar's significant contributions
to the construction and operating costs of the base as a strong
example of partner burden-sharing.
Recent Force Posture Adjustments within the United States European
Command
The committee notes that the Department of Defense directed
a realignment of the United States military footprint within
the United States European Command area of responsibility on
May 1, 2026, and that the realignment directed the redeployment
of approximately 5,000 U.S. military personnel from the
European theater, specifically forces stationed in or
previously slated to deploy to the Federal Republic of Germany.
The committee also notes that the Department canceled the
rotational deployment of the 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team,
1st Cavalry Division, to Poland. The committee underscores
that, pursuant to section 1249 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60), the
Commander, United States European Command, and the Secretary of
Defense are required to submit to the congressional defense
committees a certification and assessment 60 days prior to
implementing certain adjustments to force posture within the
United States European Command area of responsibility.
The committee directs the Commander, United States European
Command to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than September 1, 2026, on whether the
realignment directed on May 1, 2026, will result in any of the
adjustments to force posture within the United States European
Command area of responsibility that trigger the certification
and assessment requirements in section 1249 of Public Law 119-
60. The report should include the following:
(1) whether such realignment will result in the reduction
of the total number of American servicemembers within the
United States European Command area of responsibility below
76,000;
(2) whether such realignment will result in divesting,
consolidating, or otherwise returning to a host country any
parcel of land or facility located on real property under the
jurisdiction of United States European Command as of June 1,
2025; and
(3) whether such realignment will result in divesting,
redeploying, withdrawing, or otherwise permanently moving out
of the area of responsibility of United States European Command
any Department of Defense equipment or physical property with
an initial purchase value of more than $500,000 and positioned
in such area of responsibility as of June 1, 2025.
Report on the Impact of United States Military Operations on Iran's
Nuclear and Missile Capabilities
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, to
submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than February 1, 2027, in both classified and
unclassified form, on the impact of United States military
operations, including Operation Epic Fury, on Iran's nuclear
and missile capabilities.
The report shall include at least the following:
(1) An assessment of the impact of Operation Epic Fury, and
any other United States military operations in Iran, on the
following:
(a) The status of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched
uranium;
(b) The ability of the United States intelligence community
to confidently determine the location of Iran's stockpile of
highly enriched uranium;
(c) The amount of time that Iran would need to build a
nuclear weapon;
(d) Iran's ballistic and cruise missile capabilities,
including its missile stockpile and mobile launchers;
(e) Iran's ability to command and control its power
projection forces including proxies and drone, cruise, and
ballistic missile forces; and
(f) Iran's defense industrial base;
(2) An assessment of Iran's progress in restoring
operational access to its missile sites;
(3) An assessment of Iran's progress in rebuilding its
ballistic and cruise missile production capabilities in
response to any damage inflicted during Operation Epic Fury;
(4) An assessment of Iran's progress in restoring its
ability to access its underground missile storage and launch
facilities; and
(5) An assessment of the impact of Operation Epic Fury on
the Iranian government's calculus in determining whether to
become a nuclear-weapons state.
Russian Bases in Syria
The committee is concerned about the continued Russian
influence in Syria and the Middle East in connection with
Russian bases in Hmeimim and Tartus. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide an unclassified
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 31, 2026. The report should include the following:
(1) efforts and plans by the Department of Defense to work
with the new Syrian Government to reduce Russian influence in
Syria or secure the departure of Russian forces from Hmeimim
and Tartus;
(2) an assessment of threats to U.S. forces in Incirlik,
Turkiye posed by Russian forces in Syria;
(3) an assessment of whether such bases in Syria serve as
logistical hubs to provide weapons to Iranian proxies in the
region, such as the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah;
(4) an assessment of whether such bases facilitate the
recruitment and transport of African, Syrian, or other foreign
individuals to participate in Russia's war against Ukraine; and
(5) a description of the extent to which Russian forces
supported the repression of the Syrian people under the former
regime of Bashar al Assad from such bases.
Security Cooperation, Counterterrorism, and Countering PRC and Russian
Influence in Africa
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of the
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) area of responsibility to United
States national security, particularly regarding the persistent
threat of violent extremist organizations (VEOs) and the
expanding presence of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and
Russia, including core U.S. national security interests such as
counterterrorism, strategic competition, and freedom of
navigation. The committee notes that containing the spread of
terrorism in Africa is vital to protecting U.S. interests
abroad, preventing the degradation of regional stability, and
preventing terrorist networks from establishing safe havens to
project threats against the United States homeland.
Furthermore, the committee is concerned that regional security
vacuums allow the PRC and Russia to exploit VEO threats,
offering predatory security services, private military
contractor deployments, arms transfers, and dual-use
infrastructure investments that create strategic dependencies,
advance disinformation campaigns, undermine partner
sovereignty, and displace United States influence.
The committee finds that professional military education
(PME), leader development programs, and institutional security
cooperation remain vital tools for enhancing partner
counterterrorism capacity and building trusted defense
relationships.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Commander, U.S. Africa Command, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, on the Department's current efforts
to strengthen defense cooperation, support counterterrorism
objectives, and counter PRC and Russian influence in Africa.
The briefing shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) a review of and strategy for current Department of
Defense security cooperation plans and programs, joint
training, and combined exercise activities with partner nations
in Africa, with a specific focus on counterterrorism
operations, crisis response, and strengthening enduring
bilateral and multilateral defense relationships;
(2) an evaluation of partner capacity-building initiatives,
including tactical counterterrorism capabilities, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance operations, cyber defense,
border security, and other intelligence-sharing programs
designed to disrupt terrorist networks and reduce reliance on
PRC or Russian-provided capabilities, infrastructure, or
security services;
(3) an analysis of risks and mitigation strategies
regarding how strategic competitors leverage local instability
or VEO threats to gain access to, ownership of, or influence
over strategic regional infrastructure, including commercial
ports, telecommunications networks, satellite ground stations,
logistics hubs, and other dual-use assets with potential
military significance;
(4) an assessment of the effectiveness of, and
opportunities to expand, PME, leader development, and
institutional security cooperation for military personnel from
African partner nations; and
(5) a strategy for expanding and deepening bilateral and
multilateral security partnerships with African nations to
counter PRC and Russian Federation influence and advance U.S.
interests in the region.
Security Partnership with the Kingdom of Jordan
The committee reaffirms the importance of the longstanding
strategic partnership between the United States and the
Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and recognizes Jordan as a critical
security partner in promoting regional stability and advancing
shared defense objectives. The committee notes with
appreciation Jordan's regional leadership in countering
terrorism, narcotics, and the Iranian threat network, as well
as its steadfast willingness to host U.S. forces and coalition
operations.
The committee commends the Department on its work to
bolster this partnership and notes that security cooperation,
joint exercises, and combined operations have increased
Jordan's capacity and that Jordan remains a highly capable
partner interoperable with U.S. forces.
The committee affirms that expansion of this partnership is
in the mutual national security interest of both Jordan and the
United States. Therefore, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the
Director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency and the
Director for Joint Force Development, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than December
1, 2026, on opportunities to expand defense cooperation,
including on:
(1) integrated air and missile defense to improve early
warning, detection, command and control integration, and
interoperability with United States and partner and allied
systems;
(2) border security to enhance surveillance and detection
systems, command and control integration, and strengthen
Jordan's ability to secure its borders against evolving
threats;
(3) cybersecurity to increase the resilience of Jordan's
critical defense networks and capabilities;
(4) unmanned aerial systems production and operational use,
including capabilities to counter
adversary unmanned systems; and
(5) any other matters the Under Secretary deems relevant.
Strategy for Establishing a Two-Way Transfer Mechanism for United
States-Ukraine Unmanned Aircraft Systems Expertise
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services by February 26,
2027 on the feasibility of developing a strategy for
establishing a two-way transfer mechanism for United States-
Ukraine unmanned aircraft systems expertise that includes the
following priority areas:
(1) the rapid development, cost-effective production, and
fielding of unmanned aircraft systems without components
manufactured in the People's Republic of China;
(2) the battlefield employment of offensive unmanned
aircraft systems;
(3) the mutual transmission of best practices with respect
to force protection from unmanned aircraft systems and the
defense of fixed targets from unmanned aircraft systems;
(4) the regular transmission of relevant data collected by
unmanned aircraft systems for the purposes of software and AI
model development; and
(5) the regular transmission of lessons learned in Ukraine
to all drone and counter-drone programs of the Department of
Defense.
Strategy to Address Violent Extremism in Nigeria
The committee remains concerned by widespread violent
extremism in Nigeria, including the attacks, kidnappings, and
torture of civilians by groups including Boko Haram and ISIS-
West Africa. The committee notes the importance of the role of
the Department of Defense in working with Nigeria to
professionalize their security forces to better address such
violence, including with respect to civilian harm mitigation
and response. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services no later than December 1, 2026 on the Department's
strategy to address violence in Nigeria. The report shall
include:
(1) an explanation of United States objectives with respect
to United States and Nigerian security;
(2) a description and assessment of past and planned
efforts to engage with Nigerian armed forces on civilian harm
mitigation and response issues;
(3) an assessment of United States efforts to date on the
threat posed by nonstate armed groups in Nigeria;
(4) a description of consultation and engagement with the
Department of State on the United States strategy in Nigeria,
including a description of the responsibilities of the
Department of State with respect to the strategy;
(5) benchmarks for disengaging from operations in Nigeria;
(6) a description of how the Department of Defense assesses
the threat that Nigerian non-state armed groups pose to the
United States; and
(7) a list of groups in Nigeria that the United States
considers covered by existing authorizations for the use of
military force and justification for the application of such
authorization.
Strengthening American Defense Innovation and Commerciality
The committee notes military sales to allies and partners
increase and expand domestic production capacity and, thus, can
improve the resilience of the United States defense industrial
base and work toward the committee's continued efforts to
support the Department of Defense promoting innovation,
commerciality, and competition by incentivizing new entrants
and nontraditional defense companies.
Further, the committee is aware of examples in which the
Defense Technology Security Administration classified certain
dual-use commercial capabilities that could be used or modified
for a defense purpose as defense articles under the ``specially
designed'' definition in the United States Munitions List
(USML). Such classification of dual-use systems as defense
articles (unless, as a result of development, such systems have
properties exclusively responsible for achieving or exceeding
the controlled performance levels, characteristics, or
functions of defense articles as described on the USML)
potentially limits the possibility for such products--before
they have been modified for military use--to be made available
to allies and partners through commercial means. Advancements
in technology, and the development of a new class of software-
defined, dual-use technologies that have commercial
capabilities at their baseline configuration, could further
exacerbate the effects of such classification.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to review the Department's interpretation of the criteria for
designation of the ``specially designed'' definition under the
USML to determine the extent to which the Department defines
systems that have predominant or equivalent civil applications
as defense articles. Further, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing not later than
December 1, 2026, to the House Committee on Armed Services and
House Foreign Affairs Committee on the results of such review.
Strengthening United States-Ukrainian Drone Cooperation
The committee notes Ukraine's significant operational
experience and demonstrated capabilities in unmanned aircraft
systems (UAS) and counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS)
developed in response to Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
The committee also notes the important role UAS and C-UAS
capabilities will play in future conflict and the value for the
Department of Defense in incorporating relevant lessons learned
from Ukraine to maintain United States military superiority.
The committee also notes the support from Ukraine related to
UAS and C-UAS capabilities in assisting the United States and
its allies and partners during Operation Epic Fury is an
example of how such cooperation advances U.S. national security
interests.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on Ukrainian UAS and C-UAS
capabilities. The report should include the following:
(1) an assessment of Ukraine's UAS and C-UAS capabilities;
(2) a detailed description of assistance offered or
provided by Ukraine to the United States and its allies and
partners during Operation Epic Fury;
(3) a detailed overview of assistance provided by Ukraine
to the United States for UAS and C-UAS development,
sustainment, maintenance, capacity building, and other aspects
of the UAS and C-UAS market;
(4) a list and text of any intergovernmental agreements
between the United States and Ukraine on UAS or C-UAS
capabilities;
(5) an overview of lessons learned and best practices from
Ukrainian UAS and CUAS assistance, including during Operation
Epic Fury; and
(6) an assessment of how such lessons learned have
strengthened the United States and allies and partners' UAS and
C-UAS capabilities.
Study on Force Protection Measures in U.S. Central Command
The committee remains concerned about the increased threat
to U.S. forces in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of
responsibility posed by small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS)
and other aerial systems. The committee understands that during
Operation Epic Fury, Iran has relied on its stockpile of sUAS,
including one-way attack drones, which have been in production
for decades.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Commander, U.S. Central Command, to
conduct a study of force protection measures carried out in the
CENTCOM area of responsibility from January 2025 through the
present day. The committee directs the Secretary to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than
March 1, 2027, on the study and its findings, including:
(1) any improvements to counter-UAS systems or integrated
air and missile defense systems at forward deployed locations;
(2) any improvements to early warning systems or detection
with respect to unmanned aircraft, including unmanned aircraft
systems utilizing low-flying unmanned aircraft, or air-
breathing or ballistic missile threats;
(3) any efforts to harden facilities or provide adequate
overhead protection for critical operational or living spaces;
(4) any changes to force posture, dispersal, or basing
strategies made to mitigate risks;
(5) any coordination with partners to strengthen integrated
air and missile defense in relevant regions; and
(6) any lessons learned with respect to force protection
measures as a result of the conflict that began on February 28,
2026.
Support for Therapeutic Nutrition and Humanitarian Logistics
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
possesses existing authorities and capabilities to support
humanitarian logistics activities. The committee further notes
that these capabilities may provide important support to the
delivery of food, therapeutic nutrition commodities, and
medical supplies during humanitarian crises and disaster
response operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department of Defense's
support to humanitarian nutrition logistics activities. The
briefing shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) an assessment of legal, policy, funding, or operational
limitations affecting the execution of humanitarian nutrition
logistics support activities;
(2) a description of coordination mechanisms between the
Department of Defense, civilian agencies, international
organizations, and implementing partners in planning and
executing humanitarian logistics activities, including an
assessment of whether existing coordination mechanisms
adequately support delivery of therapeutic nutrition
commodities;
(3) an assessment of the feasibility and utility of
prepositioning therapeutic nutrition commodities, or enabling
partner-nation or interagency prepositioning arrangements, to
support rapid humanitarian response operations;
(4) an assessment of whether Department of Defense guidance
or policy should specifically identify certain eligible
humanitarian relief supplies for purposes of logistics and
transportation support activities; and
(5) recommendations regarding whether additional formal
interagency planning mechanisms, guidance, or authorities are
necessary to improve integration of Department of Defense
logistics planning into humanitarian response.
Training for Ukraine's Military and National Security Forces
The committee directs the Commander of the U.S. European
Command, in consultation with the Joint Multinational Training
Group--Ukraine, to submit a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services by February 1, 2027, on the training provided to
the military and national security forces of Ukraine,
including:
(1) an assessment and list of each location at which the
United States provides training to the military and national
security forces of Ukraine;
(2) an assessment and list of each location at which other
partners of Ukraine provide training to the military and
national security forces of Ukraine; and
(3) an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
Ukraine's partners providing such training within Ukraine,
including whether doing so would increase the number of
Ukrainian servicemembers trained on an accelerated timeline and
expedite the integration of critical capabilities into the
Armed Forces of Ukraine.
U.S. Contribution to the NATO-led Kosovo Force
The committee recognizes the importance of a robust U.S.
contribution to the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR) as it helps
sustain regional stability in the Western Balkans and supports
continued peace between Serbia and Kosovo. The committee
further recognizes that the U.S. contribution to the NATO-led
KFOR supports a democratic, multinational, and peaceful Kosovo
and contributes to the security of both Serbia and Kosovo.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense
for Policy, in consultation with the Commander of U.S. European
Command, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2027, that includes the
following:
(1) An overview of the U.S. contribution to the NATO-led
KFOR since the mission's founding;
(2) A description of the requirements of the Commander of
U.S. European Command for the U.S. contribution to the NATO-led
KFOR and the extent to which the current U.S. contribution
meets those requirements;
(3) an overview of what the U.S. contribution to the NATO-
led KFOR provides to regional stability in the Western Balkans,
including U.S. diplomatic and security interests in Kosovo;
(4) an assessment of the regional security implications of
a drawdown in the U.S. contribution to the NATO-led KFOR below
requirements set by the Commander of U.S. European Command; and
(5) a description of how Serbia and Kosovo perceive a
robust U.S. contribution to the NATO-led KFOR.
United States Africa Command Unmanned Aerial Systems Training and
Development
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in modern defense, including
their role in intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and
precision targeting, and notes the growing demand among United
States partners for training and integration of these
capabilities into military operations.
The committee further notes the recent announcement of
plans by the Department of Defense to establish a regional
drone training center in the Kingdom of Morocco, which is
intended to serve as a central location for training partner
nation forces, enhancing interoperability, and strengthening
counterterrorism capabilities across the African continent. The
committee acknowledges that this initiative, including initial
training activities conducted during Exercise African Lion, is
designed to build scalable and enduring UAS capabilities with
African and international partners.
Furthermore, the committee emphasizes the strategic value
of leveraging trusted regional partners to develop distributed
training hubs that enable joint learning, asset development,
improved interoperability, and partner-led security solutions
in regions facing persistent security challenges.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Commander, United States Africa
Command, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 27, 2027, on the Department's
strategy for developing and sustaining regional UAS training
capabilities in support of partner forces across the United
States Africa Command Area of Responsibility. The briefing
shall include, but is not limited to:
(1) an assessment of initial training activities, including
effectiveness, scalability, and partner participation;
(2) an analysis of the benefit of integrating commercial
technology vendors with partner special operations forces and
intelligence components to test battlefield systems, including
a plan to expand these efforts into future regional exercises;
(3) an evaluation of the feasibility of establishing
additional regional UAS training centers across the United
States Africa Command Area of Responsibility, including
criteria for host nation selection;
(4) an assessment of how UAS training could improve partner
nation operational capabilities;
(5) a plan to incorporate civilian harm mitigation and
principles of the Law of Armed Conflict into UAS training; and
(6) identification of any statutory, regulatory, or policy
limitations that constrain the Department's ability to
establish, expand, or sustain regional UAS training
capabilities, including a description of gaps in existing
authorities and recommendations for modifications necessary to
enable future execution at scale.
United States Army Force Posture in Europe
The committee recognizes the importance of maintaining
United States combat-credible forces in Europe to deter Russian
aggression and advance United States defense and national
security interests as North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies
increase their defense spending and assume greater capacity,
capability, and responsibility for Europe's conventional
defense. In furtherance of these objectives, the committee
notes that the budget request included funding for the
operational costs of four U.S. Army brigade combat teams within
the area of responsibility of the Commander, U.S. European
Command. The committee further notes that, during testimony
before the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives on March 18, 2026, the Commander of U.S.
European Command stated that he would not recommend changes to
the current force posture at such time. Consistent with the
budget request, the committee intends that funds authorized by
this Act be used to maintain four U.S. Army brigade combat
teams in Europe.
United States-Ukraine Drone Working Groups
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
stood up six working groups to facilitate greater unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) and counter-unmanned aircraft systems
(C-UAS) collaboration between the United States and Ukraine.
The Committee is also aware that these working groups include
participation from across the Department of Defense, including
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Sustainment, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering, the Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Policy, the Defense Innovation Unit, the
Military Departments, and the Joint Staff. The Committee
believes that deeper cooperation with Ukraine on UAS and C-UAS
capabilities advances United States national security interests
by accelerating the development and fielding of these
capabilities, strengthening the relevant defense industrial
base, and providing valuable operational insights to inform
future Department of Defense requirements and investments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services by
February 1, 2027, on progress made by each Department of
Defense working group to deepen UAS and C-UAS collaboration
between the United States and Ukraine to include:
(1) A description and assessment of the United States and
Ukrainian participation in and progress made by the
Department's working group on battlefield unmanned systems;
(2) A description and assessment of the United States and
Ukrainian participation in and progress made by the
Department's working group on long-range one-way attack
capabilities;
(3) A description and assessment of the United States and
Ukrainian participation in and progress made by the
Department's working group on electromagnetic warfare
capabilities as they related to UAS and counter-UAS efforts;
(4) A description and assessment of the United States and
Ukrainian participation in and progress made by the
Department's working group on maritime unmanned systems;
(5) A description and assessment of the United States and
Ukrainian participation in and progress made by the
Department's working group on counter-UAS drones; and (6) A
description and assessment of the United States and Ukrainian
participation in and progress made by the Department's working
group on cross-cutting issues as relates to UAS and counter-UAS
collaboration, such as manufacturing bottlenecks, supply chain
resiliency, and data sharing.
United States-Ukraine Explosive Ordnance Disposal Partnership
The committee recognizes that the ongoing conflict in
Ukraine has generated unprecedented operational experience in
explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), including countering
improvised explosive devices, unexploded ordnance, landmines,
loitering munitions, and other emerging explosive threats. The
committee believes that closer cooperation between United
States and Ukrainian EOD forces would enhance military
readiness, accelerate the exchange of operational lessons
learned, and support the development of future EOD
capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on opportunities to establish a
United States-Ukraine Explosive Ordnance Disposal Partnership
Program. The briefing should include:
(1) opportunities for professional exchanges, conferences,
and engagements between United States and Ukrainian military
EOD personnel;
(2) mechanisms to capture and share operational lessons
learned from the conflict in Ukraine;
(3) opportunities for cooperation on EOD doctrine,
training, capability development, and emerging explosive
threats;
(4) opportunities to work more with commercial demining
vendors;
(5) potential joint research, development, test, and
evaluation activities related to explosive ordnance and
counter-explosive technologies;
(6) opportunities to collaborate on blast exposure,
traumatic brain injury, resilience, and suicide prevention
programs for EOD personnel; and
(7) key EOD capability gaps and requirements identified by
the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
United States-Ukraine Military Trauma Education, Training, Research,
and Medical Readiness Partnership
The committee is aware that Ukraine has accumulated
extensive battlefield medical expertise from years of sustained
large-scale combat operations, including in the areas of trauma
care, combat casualty care, amputation and amputee care,
traumatic brain injury, blast injuries, and rehabilitation. The
committee is also aware that Section 1203 of this Act would
authorize the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, to establish joint education and training
programs on military trauma care and research with the military
forces of one or more foreign countries, and that other
existing authorities provide additional mechanisms to
facilitate medical education and training cooperation with
Ukraine.
The committee believes that sharing trauma care lessons
learned, best practices, and research between United States
military medical personnel and their Ukrainian counterparts
would advance United States national security interests by
improving the readiness and capability of the Armed Forces to
treat modern battlefield injuries, strengthening United States
military medical doctrine, and deepening the defense
partnership with Ukraine.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services by
February 1, 2027, on actions taken or planned to utilize the
authorities under Section 1203 of this Act, and other
applicable statutory authorities, to establish or support a
joint education, training, research, and clinical exchange
activities with appropriate medical personnel of the armed
forces of Ukraine. The report shall include:
(1) A description of any joint education, training,
research, or clinical exchange activities conducted or planned
with Ukrainian military and civilian medical personnel pursuant
to Section 1203 of this Act or other applicable authorities,
including activities related to trauma care, pre-hospital care,
combat casualty care, evacuation medicine, amputation and
amputee care, wound care, burn care, treatment of traumatic
brain injury and blast injuries, rehabilitative therapy, and
mental health therapy;
(2) A description of any joint conferences, case
conferences, clinical exchanges, observerships, fellowships, or
exchanges of military medical professionals conducted or
planned with Ukrainian counterparts, and an assessment of the
lessons learned and best practices identified through such
activities;
(3) A description of any voluntary data-sharing
arrangements or joint research initiatives on trauma care,
survivability, rehabilitation, and lessons learned from modern
battlefield injuries established with appropriate Ukrainian
medical institutions, including the Ministry of Defense of
Ukraine and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine, and an
assessment of the utility of such arrangements for informing
United States military medical doctrine and requirements;
(4) A description of any trauma care curricula, including
simulation-based instruction and training on the use of medical
simulation equipment, developed or exchanged with Ukrainian
medical personnel, and an assessment of the applicability of
such curricula to United States military medical training
programs; and
(5) Any recommendations for additional legislative or
administrative actions to enhance military trauma care
cooperation between the United States and Ukraine, including
through the authorities under chapter 16 of title 10, United
States Code.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Sec. 1201--Modification of Authority for Support of Special Operations
for Irregular Warfare
This section would amend section 127d(a) of title 10,
United States Code to increase the authorized amount from $20.0
million to $50.0 million.
Sec. 1202--Authority to Build Capacity for Space Domain Awareness
This section would amend section 333 of title 10, United
States Code, to include authority to build partner capacity for
space domain awareness.
Sec. 1203--Establishment of Inter-Pacific Air Forces Academy
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to establish an Inter-Pacific Air Forces Academy.
Sec. 1204--Review of Execution of Programs to Build Partner Capacity
This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to submit a report related to execution of
building partner capacity programs pursuant to section 333 of
title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 1205--Establishment of Partnership Programs on Military Trauma
Care and Research Between the United States and Foreign Countries
This section would authorize the establishment of certain
partnership programs on military trauma care and research
between the United States and foreign countries.
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to the Near and Middle East
Sec. 1211--Extension of Counter-Terrorism Support Authority
This section would extend the authority under section 1226
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016
(Public Law 114-92) to provide support to certain governments
for border security operations through December 31, 2027.
Sec. 1212--Extension of Authority for Reimbursement of Certain
Coalition Nations for Support Provided to United States Military
Operations
This section would extend to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 the authority to
reimburse or provide certain assistance to any key cooperating
nation for support provided by that nation to U.S. military
operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria pursuant to section
1233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181).
Sec. 1213--Deadline for Afghanistan War Commission Final Report
This section would modify section 1094 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-
81) to extend the deadline for the Afghanistan War Commission
to deliver its final report by 1 year.
Sec. 1214--Prohibition on Use of Funds to Support the Taliban
This provision would prohibit funds authorized or made
available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2027 to
be obligated or expended to provide assistance to the Taliban.
Sec. 1215--Extension of Authority to Provide Assistance to Counter the
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
This section would extend the authority under section 1236
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015
(Public Law 113-291) to provide support to partner forces in
Iraq to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. This
section would extend the authority through December 31, 2027.
Sec. 1216--Extension of Limitation on Availability of Funds for the
Iraqi Security Forces
This section would extend the condition that 75 percent of
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise
made available for fiscal year 2027 for the Iraqi Security
Forces under section 1236 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) may only be made
available once the Secretary of Defense certifies that the
Government of Iraq has taken credible steps to reduce the
influence of Iranian-aligned militia groups and actors within
the Iraqi Security Forces.
Sec. 1217--Prohibition on Transfers to the Badr Organization
This section would prohibit funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act to be made available to the Badr
Organization or its affiliates or successors.
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Israel
Sec. 1221--Extension of War Reserve Stockpile Authority for Israel
This section would extend the existing War Reserve
Stockpile Authority for Israel established by section 12001(d)
of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public
Law 108-287) to January 1, 2029.
Sec. 1222--United States-Israel Subterranean Cooperation
This section would modify section 1279 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-
92) to extend the authority for the Secretary of Defense to
conduct collaborative research, development, testing, and
evaluation of anti-tunnel capabilities with Israel through
December 31, 2029. This section would also expand the authority
to include subterranean threats of all types.
Sec. 1223--United States-Israel Cooperation to Counter Unmanned Systems
in All Warfighting Domains
This section would modify section 1278 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) to extend the authority for the Secretary of Defense to
conduct collaborative research, development, testing, and
evaluation of technologies to counter unmanned systems with
Israel through December 31, 2029.
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe
Sec. 1231--Arms Sales and Weapons System Transfers to NATO Countries
This section would amend section 1250 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) to require the Secretary of Defense to consider a NATO
ally's progress toward meeting its defense spending commitment
when making decisions regarding arms sales and security
cooperation.
Sec. 1232--Extension and Modification of Oversight of United States
Military Posture in Europe
This section would extend to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 the prohibition of funds
related to oversight of United States military posture in
Europe pursuant to section 1249 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
This section would also add to the certification requirement in
cases involving the withdrawal of members of the Armed Forces
or Department of Defense equipment from countries within the
area of responsibility of the United States European Command an
assessment that repositioning such personnel or equipment to
NATO's eastern flank was not feasible. This section would also
extend a nondelegable briefing requirement for the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy to brief the House and Senate
Committees on Armed Services on the policy and overall guidance
for the governance of the global defense posture.
Sec. 1233--Modification of Certification with Respect to Oversight of
United States Military Posture in Europe
This section would amend the certification requirement in
section 1249 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) to require additional
certifications related to U.S. and allied deterrence of the
Russian Federation.
Sec. 1234--Poland Defense Industrial Cooperation Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a program to expand defense industrial base
cooperation between the United States and Poland.
Sec. 1235--Policy on NATO Standardization and Allied Production for
Next-Generation Small Arms Ammunition
This section would require the Department of Defense to
align any next-generation small arms ammunition with NATO
standardization agreements.
Sec. 1236--Review of the Analytical Basis for United States Force
Posture Adjustments in Europe
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Policy, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, to submit a report on the analytical basis for
the review of global force posture conducted during development
of the National Defense Strategy, including the extent to which
that analysis informed the force posture adjustments directed
by the Department of Defense in the area of responsibility of
the Commander, U.S. European Command since January 20, 2025.
Sec. 1237--NATO Defense Planning and Burden Sharing Activities
This section would require a regular report from the
Commander, U.S. European Command assessing the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization's (NATO) defense planning and burden
sharing activities, as well as NATO's deterrence and defense
posture on the alliance's eastern flank.
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific
Sec. 1241--Sense of Congress on Defense Alliances and Partnerships in
the Indo-Pacific Region
This section would express the sense of Congress regarding
defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region.
Sec. 1242--Extension of Pacific Deterrence Initiative
This section would extend the authority for the Pacific
Deterrence Initiative and associated reporting requirements.
Sec. 1243--Extension of Requirement for Public Reporting of Chinese
Military Companies Operating in the United States
This section would amend section 1260H of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) by extending the requirement for
an annual report on Chinese military companies from December
31, 2030, to December 31, 2035.
Sec. 1244--Modifications to Public Reporting of Chinese Military
Companies in the United States
This section would amend section 1260H of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) clarifying the reporting
requirements and providing the Secretary of Defense flexibility
to determine whether the report should also be published in
Mandarin Chinese or other foreign languages.
Sec. 1245--Extension and Modification of Annual Report on Military and
Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China
This section would extend and modify the Annual Report on
Military and Security Developments Involving the People's
Republic of China required pursuant to section 1202 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public
Law 106-65).
Sec. 1246--Modification of Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative
This section would authorize up to $1.0 billion for the
Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative pursuant to section 1323
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159).
Sec. 1247--Oversight of United States Military Posture on the Korean
Peninsula
This section would extend to fiscal year 2027 the
prohibition of funds related to oversight of United States
military posture on the Korean Peninsula pursuant to section
1268 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2026 (Public Law 119-60).
Subtitle F--Reports
Sec. 1251--Oversight of Military-to-Military Exchanges and Contacts
Between the United States and the Russian Federation
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit regular reports to the congressional defense committees
on bilateral military-to-military exchanges or contacts between
the Department of Defense and the Government of the Russian
Federation.
Sec. 1252--Report on Russia's Targeting of Religious Infrastructure in
Ukraine
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit regular reports to Congress on Russian Armed Forces
attacks on religious infrastructure in Ukraine.
Sec. 1253--Study on Effectiveness of United States-Somalia Policy
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a contract with a federally funded research and
development center to study the effectiveness of United States
policy in Somalia.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Sec. 1261--Repeal of Temporary Authority to Provide Training to
Military Forces or National Security Forces of Costa Rica and Panama
This section would repeal section 1209 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159).
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Sec. 1401--Working Capital Funds
This section would authorize appropriations for Defense
Working Capital Funds at the levels identified in section 4501
of division D of this Act.
Sec. 1402--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
This section would authorize appropriations for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense at the levels
identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Sec. 1403--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide
This section would authorize appropriations for Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Sec. 1404--Defense Inspector General
This section would authorize 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.
Sec. 1405--Defense Health Program
This section would authorize appropriations for the Defense
Health Program at the levels identified in section 4501 of
division D of this Act.
Sec. 1406--Cable Security Fleet Expansion
This section would amend section 53202(a)(2) of title 46,
United States Code, to increase the number of vessels in the
Cable Security Fleet to at least six. This section would also
amend section 53209 of title 46, United States Code, to
increase the authorization for the Cable Security Fleet stiped
from $10,000,000 to $30,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
2027 through 2040.
Subtitle B--Other Matters
Sec. 1411--Extension of Authorities for Funding and Management of Joint
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center,
Illinois
This section would extend the authorities for funding and
management of joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility demonstration fund for
Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois until
September 30, 2028.
Sec. 1412--Authorization of Appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement
Home
This section would authorize an appropriation of $77.0
million from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for
fiscal year 2027 for the operation of the Armed Forces
Retirement Home.
Sec. 1413--Critical Minerals Traceability Pilot Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a pilot program within the Defense Logistics Agency
to develop and evaluate traceability systems for essential
materials managed by the Agency, including materials held in or
acquired for the National Defense Stockpile.
TITLE XV--CYBERSPACE-RELATED MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Accelerating Agentic Artificial Intelligence for Joint Planning and
Decision Advantage
The committee supports recent Department of Defense actions
to accelerate the development and integration of agentic
artificial intelligence systems to improve the speed and
quality of military decision-making. The committee notes the
Defense Innovation Unit's establishment of Project Thunderforge
designed to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) agents to
assist military planning, simulation, and operational decision-
making. As the military importance of agentic AI grows, the
committee encourages the Department to adopt and integrate
commercial software technologies, wherever possible, to improve
military decision advantage and accelerate responsible human-
machine teaming.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, on an evaluation of Project
Thunderforge, incorporating inputs from all participating
Combatant Commands regarding:
(1) the overall impact of the program on the quality and
speed of joint military planning;
(2) the ability to discover non-obvious strategies or
constraints in plans by analyzing large volumes of simulation
inputs and outputs;
(3) the ability of the program to accelerate the joint
operational planning process by leveraging AI agents to
manipulate simulated courses of action directly and test new
strategies without manual configuration; and
(4) the proposed plan to transition Project Thunderforge
out of prototyping, provide enduring funding and program
management, and scale the capability across the joint force.
Acceleration and Modernization of Cryptographic Certification Process
The committee is aware of the growing risks to the
Department's cyber posture and ability to maintain mission
assurance in modern, contested environments. To stay ahead of
adversaries, the committee believes that the Department must
continue to develop and implement a streamlined, risk-informed,
controlled evaluation framework to enable faster assessment of
emerging cryptographic approaches, including hardware-based
solutions based on non general-purpose computing architectures.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services no
later than June 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) a detailed status update on modernization efforts of
the certification process;
(2) assessments of emerging cryptographic technologies,
including hardware-centric approaches;
(3) identified barriers or technical, operational, or
bureaucratic gaps hampering acceleration; and
(4) an updated roadmap and timeline for completing
modernization milestones, including benchmarks, resources
allocated, and stakeholder engagement actions.
AI Code Assurance and Legacy Software Refactoring
The committee notes that advances in artificial
intelligence (AI) are rapidly increasing the speed at which
software vulnerabilities can be identified and exploited. The
committee is encouraged by ongoing Department of Defense
efforts related to software assurance, cyber resilience, and
automated code modernization, but remains concerned that
verification and assurance capabilities may not be scaling at
the pace required to support rapid adoption of AI-enabled
software development tools or to bring code assurance
capabilities into operational use.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's efforts to ensure
the secure deployment of code and accelerate remediation of
legacy software vulnerabilities. The report shall include:
(1) a review of software verification policies intended to
ensure that code performs intended functions and does not
introduce unintended vulnerabilities or behavioral changes;
(2) a representative review of testing, verification, and
runtime monitoring tools used before and after deployment of
code in operational systems;
(3) plans to accelerate refactoring of legacy software
written in memory unsafe programming languages, including
efforts to validate the reliability of refactored code; and
(4) recommendations on resources, authorities, acquisition
policies, workforce needs, or industrial base constraints that
could affect the Department's ability to address these
challenges.
AI-Enabled Assistive Technology for Air Crews
The committee recognizes recent advancements in artificial
intelligence (AI) enabled assistive technologies for pilots,
and notes the potential for such technologies to improve flight
safety, operational effectiveness, and aircrew performance. The
committee also notes that recent efforts by the Department of
the Air Force and U.S. Special Operations Command demonstrated
the potential for advisory and pilot-assist technologies to
enhance situational awareness and decision-making without
exercising direct aircraft control.
The committee believes such technologies could assist air
crews without modifying certified flight-critical systems or
requiring replacement of existing avionics, flight controls, or
actuators. However, the committee is concerned that the
Department of Defense has not established consistent,
Department-wide approaches to requirements development,
airworthiness coordination, cybersecurity, and acquisition
pathways for such software-centric technologies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of
the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force, and the Commander, U.S.
Special Operations Command, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
the Department's plan to evaluate, transition, and adopt AI-
enabled assistive technologies for air crew. The briefing shall
include, but is not limited to:
(1) identification of a senior official or organization
designated to coordinate Department-wide policy, requirements
development, airworthiness alignment, cybersecurity
considerations, and governance such technologies;
(2) a description of the Department's current airworthiness
approval processes applicable to these capabilities;
(3) a description of plans for evaluation, experimentation,
or limited operational use of such technologies during fiscal
years 2027 and 2028, a listing of the specific platforms and
mission sets, and the criteria used to assess operational
benefit, safety, and readiness impacts; and
(4) an overview of the Department's planned approach to
sequencing and scaling such capabilities, including an analysis
of the operational and cost benefits of software-centric
solutions relative to more hardware-intensive direct aircraft
control solutions.
AI-Enabled Defense Cyber Operations
The committee recognizes the growing sophistication and
scale of malicious cyber activity directed against Department
of Defense networks, systems, operational technology, and
critical defense infrastructure. The committee further
recognizes that advances in artificial intelligence, predictive
analytics, adaptive cyber defense, and defensive deception
technologies may enhance the Department's ability to identify,
deter, and neutralize cyber threats before compromise or
exfiltration occurs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Commander of
United States Cyber Command, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 4, 2027, on
the extent to which artificial intelligence-enabled, preemptive
cybersecurity technologies have been or are planned to be
incorporated into defensive cyber operations. The briefing
should include:
(1) the types of artificial intelligence-enabled defensive
cyber capabilities currently employed or under evaluation;
(2) the extent to which preemptive and adaptive defense
mechanisms and defensive deception technologies are or will be
utilized in operational environments;
(3) a description of the additive capability provided by
such technologies;
(4) an assessment of the operational utility of
technologies designed to mislead, detect, monitor, and disrupt
malicious cyber actors prior to successful network compromise;
(5) any operational, legal, policy, acquisition, or
workforce challenges associated with the deployment of such
technologies; and
(6) recommendations for additional authorities, resources,
or policy changes necessary to accelerate the secure adoption
of preemptive cybersecurity capabilities across the Department.
Air Force Infrastructure Cyber Defense Pilot Program
The committee is encouraged by the work of Pacific Air
Forces through the Mission-Relevant Terrain--Cyber pilot
program to improve the cyber defense of the infrastructure upon
which military installations rely in the Indo-Pacific. To build
upon the experience of the pilot program, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Air Force, in consultation with Commander,
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the following:
(1) options to scale the Pacific Air Forces pilot to the
Department of the Air Force and to the combatant commands,
beginning with U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, including required
funding and support;
(2) identification of additional authorities and agreements
necessary to improve the cyber defense and information sharing
related to the infrastructure, such as water, power, and
logistics, on both U.S. and foreign territory, on which
military platforms rely in the Indo-Pacific; and
(3) identification of needed authorities for on-base cyber
defense risk mitigation and for off-base cyber defense risk
mitigation in foreign countries, in U.S. territories and states
outside the continental United States, and within the
continental United States.
Artificial Intelligence and Enterprise Data Utilization
The committee understands that the Department of Defense is
expanding its use of artificial intelligence across many
missions. The committee notes that the Department already
possesses substantial quantities of mission-relevant enterprise
data, including operational data, much of which may remain
underutilized when new artificial intelligence environments
rely primarily on newly constructed data repositories.
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize
approaches that assess existing enterprise data sources before
pursuing new aggregation environments, leverage authoritative
data when feasible, and promote interoperable, distributed
architectures that minimize unnecessary data movement or
duplication.
Artificial Intelligence Enabled Efficiency Tools
The committee remains concerned that, despite advances in
technology, many processes of the Department of Defense remain
burdensome, with continued reliance on manual, duplicative data
entry and email-based workflows. These brittle processes
consume time and resources, drive administrative waste, and
degrade business operations and warfighting effectiveness. The
committee believes the Department has an opportunity to
reengineer these processes and more fully leverage available
technological solutions.
The committee supports sustained investment in digital
transformation and workflow optimization and encourages the
Department of Defense to pilot and scale artificial
intelligence-enabled efficiency tools to improve data flow,
mission readiness, and decision-making.
Artificial Intelligence Enabled-Advanced Manufacturing for Missile and
Munitions Production
The committee is encouraged by the progress made by the
Department of Defense in understanding and addressing the
critical shortage of missiles and other large munitions. While
the committee recognizes ongoing efforts to modernize and
expand depots throughout the United States, additional
commercial manufacturing capacity will be needed now and well
into the future. The committee is aware that artificial
intelligence (AI)-enabled advanced manufacturing has proven
particularly effective at optimizing and rapidly scaling
production of missiles in privately funded facilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2027, on the integration of AI
enabled advanced manufacturing into the defense industrial
base. The briefing should include:
(1) how AI-enabled advanced manufacturing can be fully
integrated into the defense industrial base for missile and
large munitions production;
(2) actions the Department is taking or will take to
encourage defense prime contractors to incorporate AI-enabled
advanced manufacturing capabilities into their supply chains;
and
(3) any statutory, regulatory, contractual, or workforce
barriers that may impede adoption of AI-enabled advanced
manufacturing across the defense industrial base.
Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Systems for Software-Defined Hardware
The committee notes the increasing role of software-defined
hardware in Department of Defense systems and is concerned
about the potential for resultant challenges with debugging,
validation, and sustainment. The committee believes that
systems engineering tools incorporating artificial intelligence
that are capable of continuously monitoring, diagnosing, and
conducting root cause analysis could improve readiness,
performance, and system design for heavily software-defined
systems, including phased array systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Undersecretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Chief Digital and AI Officer and the Chief Technology Officers
of the military departments, to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than February 1,
2027, on the Department's plans to adopt AI-enabled systems
engineering capabilities. The report shall include--
(1) an assessment of recurring challenges in debugging,
validating, and repairing software-defined hardware systems;
(2) a description of existing and planned efforts to apply
artificial intelligence to systems engineering, root cause
analysis, and maintenance activities; and
(3) a strategy for integrating AI-enabled systems
engineering capabilities into workforce training, test and
evaluation, and operations.
Asset Visibility and Discovery in the United States Indo-Pacific
Command Area of Responsibility
The committee recognizes that effective cyber defense
depends on maintaining visibility into assets connected to
Department of Defense networks, including information
technology, operational technology, and internet-of-things
devices. The committee is concerned that limited visibility
into assets operating on classified networks may hinder the
ability to identify vulnerabilities, reduce attack surface
risk, and support command and control of forces.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander of United
States Indo Pacific Command, in coordination with the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer, to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
June 1, 2027, on asset visibility and discovery across
classified networks operated by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
The report shall be submitted in unclassified form but may
include a classified annex. The report should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of the current and planned ability to
identify and maintain visibility into assets connected to
classified networks;
(2) significant gaps in asset visibility and discovery
across classified networks;
(3) current and planned efforts to address such gaps; and
(4) resource requirements and projected funding
requirements across the Future Years Defense Program to improve
asset visibility and discovery across classified networks.
Combatant Command Digital Persona Protection Program
The committee is pleased with the U.S. Army's effort to
expand its Digital Persona Protection Program (DP3) to protect
its general officers from online impersonations and other
digital threats. The committee has previously encouraged the
Department of Defense to expand DP3 to flag and general
officers in the U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force. The proliferation
of artificial intelligence software has made it easier for
criminals and other nefarious actors, including nation states,
to impersonate senior defense officials. These activities may
facilitate the collection of information for intelligence
purposes, the theft or exposure of personally identifiable
information, identity theft, financial fraud, harassment, or
other malicious targeting of senior military leaders.
Therefore, the committee encourages the combatant commands
to establish DP3 programs to provide protection to their flag
and general officers, who are at elevated risk of impersonation
and digital targeting.
Commercial Cross Domain Solutions Technology
The committee is concerned that, in the area of Cross
Domain Solutions (CDS), the Department of Defense may not be
consistently applying statutory requirements intended to ensure
the Department prefers commercial services and commercial
products before undertaking bespoke or government-unique
development. The committee reiterates its support for the
statutory preference for commercial acquisition set forth in
section 3453 of title 10, United States Code and expects the
Department to apply the required non-commercial determination
process consistently across CDS acquisition decisions in order
to avoid unnecessary duplication, accelerate fielding, and
support interoperable data sharing and command-and-control
capabilities.
Communications Systems Electronic Warfare Resiliency Standards
The committee remains concerned that, while Section 168 of
the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (Public
Law 116-92) restricted the obligation of funds for
communications systems that do not incorporate specified
resiliency features, the Department of Defense has not
established clear definitions, performance criteria, or
measurable thresholds for communications resiliency against
electronic warfare threats, including jamming and geolocation,
on a Department-wide basis. The committee notes that without
independent evaluations of performance in contested
electromagnetic environments, programs can assert capability
despite limited effectiveness against these threats.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than January 15, 2027, detailing standards, certification
processes, and enforcement mechanisms as they relate
specifically to the performance of communication systems in
denied or degraded environments. This report shall include, at
a minimum:
(1) the data and metrics used to assess system availability
under specified jamming conditions;
(2) the methods used to verify and independently certify
reductions in electromagnetic signature; and
(3) the testing standards applied by accredited Department
of Defense testing facilities to evaluate performance against
near-peer adversary electronic warfare threats.
Competition of Autonomous Software Capabilities for Weapon Systems
The committee recognizes progress made by the Department of
Defense in developing and fielding autonomous control software
capabilities across a range of weapon systems. However, the
committee remains concerned that the use of proprietary or
tightly coupled software architectures may limit competition,
reduce interoperability, and slow the adoption of improved
capabilities over time.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Department to
maximize competition for autonomous software capabilities to
the greatest extent practicable, including through approaches
that enable autonomy software to be developed, integrated, and
competed separately from platform-specific hardware and
software.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than June
30, 2027, on the Department's plan to promote competition for
autonomous software capabilities across a variety of weapon
programs. The briefing shall include:
(1) a strategy for promoting competition in autonomous
software capabilities, including approaches to enable autonomy
software to be developed and competed independently from the
underlying weapon platform;
(2) a list of candidate weapon programs for which competing
autonomous software capabilities may be appropriate;
(3) a list of weapon programs for which competing
autonomous software capabilities may not be appropriate,
including the rationale for such determinations;
(4) the methodology for evaluating autonomy software
efficacy; and
(5) the estimated impact on cost and schedule of competing
autonomy software capabilities.
Continuity of Commercial Support to Cyber Operations
The committee recognizes the significant national security
value of commercial capabilities and partnerships that provide
unique visibility, threat intelligence, and other support to
cyber operations. The committee notes the importance of
sustaining and strengthening these partnerships, which have
played an important role in supporting cyber operations in the
U.S. European Command area of responsibility. The committee
strongly encourages the Department of Defense to provide stable
funding and contractual arrangements to ensure continuity of
such support.
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Program Reform
The committee recognizes the importance of the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program in
protecting sensitive defense information across the defense
industrial base and notes the shift from self-attestation to
third party assessments was a meaningful step toward ensuring
the integrity of cybersecurity standards.
However, the committee is concerned that the current
structure of the CMMC program imposes excessive regulatory
burdens that drive up costs for smaller defense contractors and
deter new entrants into the defense industrial base. The
committee is also concerned about the transparency of cost
within the CMMC ecosystem, including fees charged by the Cyber
AB and CMMC Third-Party Assessment Organizations (C3PAOs).
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense Chief
Information Officer is conducting an ongoing review of the CMMC
program. The committee is concerned that, without reform, the
current program disproportionately disadvantages small
businesses.
The committee directs the Chief Information Officer of the
Department of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the following:
(1) planned efforts to reduce the compliance burden on
small businesses, including whether small applicants require
the same assessor team size or certification pathway as larger
applicants;
(2) an assessment of whether the Department should develop
standardized architectures or implementation templates to
reduce CMMC compliance costs for defense contractors,
particularly small and medium-sized businesses;
(3) planned efforts to increase assessor capacity,
including barriers to entry for new assessors and C3PAOs, and
whether assessors of limited or software-only environments
could be exempted from Tier 3 background check requirements;
(4) a representative survey of the costs incurred by small,
medium, and large companies to implement CMMC, disaggregated,
to the extent practicable, by assessment costs, Cyber AB fees,
and the costs incurred to meet security requirements;
(5) an assessment of existing Department oversight and
legal authorities applicable to the Cyber AB and C3PAOs,
including any gaps;
(6) an overview of the fee structures and revenue sources
associated with Cyber AB, including charges to entities
participating in the CMMC ecosystem; and
(7) a summary of current and planned efforts to incorporate
automation and artificial intelligence-enabled workflows to
improve continuous cybersecurity compliance and reduce
administrative burden.
Cybersecurity Protections in Telecommunications Systems
The committee remains concerned that the Department of the
Navy, in its administration of Department of Defense wireless
telecommunications contracts, is failing to prioritize
cybersecurity protections in its telecommunications contracting
and procurement processes. The committee believes that recent
cyber intrusions and continued cyber threats, including Salt
Typhoon and incidents involving the disclosure of the personal
information of special operations personnel, highlight the
urgency for the Department to strengthen cybersecurity
capabilities to protect sensitive and classified information.
The committee notes that section 1511 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) requires the Department of Defense to ensure that each
wireless mobile phone provided to senior officials or any other
employee who performs sensitive national security functions
have enhanced cybersecurity protections. The committee believes
the Department should expand the deployment of these
protections as broadly as possible.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief Information
Officer of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services, not later than March 1, 2027,
detailing steps the Navy is taking or plans to take to enhance
cyber protections for wireless telecommunications devices and
how the Navy is ensuring current and future telecommunications
contracts are abiding by section 1511 of Public Law 119-60.
Data Strategy to Accelerate Artificial Intelligence and Analytics
Across the Department of Defense
The committee recognizes that enterprise data readiness is
essential to the Department of Defense's ability to scale
artificial intelligence and advanced analytics capabilities in
support of operational, business, and warfighting requirements.
The committee is concerned that data silos, limited
interoperability, inconsistent governance, and restrictive
access practices continue to impede secure data sharing and
reuse across the Department.
The committee is further concerned that the Department's
ability to preserve Government control of data assets and avoid
dependence on closed or proprietary architectures is critical
to ensuring long-term flexibility, competition, and mission
effectiveness. The committee believes that the use of open
standards, interoperable architectures, open-source
technologies, and multi-vendor approaches, where practicable,
can improve the Department's ability to accelerate adoption of
artificial intelligence and advanced analytics capabilities.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's strategy to improve
data readiness in support of artificial intelligence and
advanced analytics. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of efforts to reduce data silos and
improve secure data sharing and reuse across the Department;
(2) an assessment of efforts to improve interoperability
and governance across cloud, on-premises, and operational
environments;
(3) a description of how the Department is preserving
Government control of data assets and avoiding unnecessary
dependence on closed or proprietary architectures;
(4) an assessment of the Department's use of open
standards, interoperable architectures, open-source
technologies, and multi-vendor approaches, where practicable;
(5) a description of the governance structure for
implementing the Department's data readiness strategy,
including roles and responsibilities across the Department;
(6) an assessment of barriers to implementation; and
(7) any recommendations for additional authorities or
resources.
Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity
The committee remains concerned by increasingly
sophisticated malicious cyber activity from actors affiliated
with China, including the pre-positioning of capabilities
intended to disrupt critical defense infrastructure within the
United States and degrade military readiness during a potential
crisis or conflict. The committee notes such activity often
targets the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) and frequently
employs ``living-off-the-land'' techniques to maintain
undetected persistence on these networks.
The committee is aware of the National Security Agency
Cybersecurity Collaboration Center attack surface management
(ASM) program, which provides DIB entities with asset discovery
and vulnerability assessments to proactively prevent compromise
of mission-critical systems and Department of Defense data.
The committee directs the Chief Information Officer of the
Department of Defense, in coordination with the Director of the
National Security Agency, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the ASM program. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of the program's effectiveness in
reducing the DIB attack surface over the preceding fiscal year;
(2) a plan to scale ASM coverage to additional priority DIB
entities; and
(3) milestones and resource requirements associated with
the proposed scaling.
Defense Travel System Modernization
The committee is aware that the Defense Travel System (DTS)
requires significant modernization. The committee also
recognizes that the unique travel requirements of Department of
Defense servicemembers and civilians, as well as the
requirements under the Joint Travel Regulations, may make
adoption of a commercial travel management platform
challenging.
The committee notes that recent and ongoing enhancements to
DTS have included integrations with external systems, workflow
modernization, and infrastructure improvements resulting in
improved security and performance. While the committee believes
these efforts represent progress, it notes further action is
needed to ensure effective program management and sustained
improvements for users.
The committee urges the Department to address the
recommendations identified in the Government Accountability
Office report, ``DoD Systems Modernizations: Further Action
Needed to Improve Travel and Other Business Systems' (GAO-26-
107663), including documenting Agile practices, establishing
clearly defined leadership roles, and developing performance
metrics that are clearly linked to program goals.
Department of Defense Attack Surface Visibility
The committee recognizes that recent exploitation of
vulnerabilities in internet accessible enterprise software
demonstrated the importance of maintaining visibility into
internet-accessible systems, services and applications. The
committee recognizes that improved visibility into the
Department's attack surface can support the rapid
identification of vulnerable systems, misconfigurations, and
unauthorized internet facing assets.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than June 1, 2027, on the Department's approach to
maintain visibility into and reduce its internet-accessible
attack surface. The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of the Department's ability to identify
internet-accessible systems, services, and applications;
(2) significant gaps in visibility into internet-accessible
systems, services, and applications; and
(3) planned actions to address such gaps.
Department of Defense Zero Trust Implementation
The committee welcomes the Department of Defense's recent
updates to its zero trust implementation strategy, which
reflect a modernized approach to continuous, automated security
and platform consolidation. The committee is concerned,
however, that fragmented point solutions and manual processes
may continue to impede the Department's progress in achieving
target-level zero trust maturity. To evolve from passive
visibility to automated detection and response, the Department
must accelerate adoption of architectures that unify data
models and enable artificial intelligence (AI)-driven security
operations.
The committee urges the Department to deploy modern,
scalable architectures that ensure zero trust controls are
enforced continuously across the enterprise, including within
Disconnected, Intermittent, and Low-Bandwidth and browser-based
environments. Such architectures should reduce latency, ease
network defender workload, and ensure policies can dynamically
adapt to emerging threats without extensive manual
reconfiguration.
The committee directs the Chief Information Officer of the
Department of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the implementation of the Department's zero trust strategy. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) how acquisition efforts align with AI-driven security
operations; and
(2) the estimated cost savings and operational efficiencies
achieved through capability consolidation and automation.
Deployment and Scaling of Quantum Network Infrastructure
The committee notes that as the Department of Defense
considers its transition to post-quantum cryptography, it must
consider current weaknesses on its networks, including the
threat posed by ``Harvest Now, Decrypt Later" attacks. The
committee is aware of quantum technology's potential to enable
additional capabilities of telecommunications networks. The
committee is also aware of additional benefits provided by
quantum networking technologies, including facilitating
infrastructure that will be a critical enabler to scaling
future quantum compute.
As such, the committee recognizes the potential for the
deployment and scaling of quantum networking technologies, both
to protect current datasets and to scale future quantum
infrastructure. Therefore, the committee directs the Chief
Information Officer of the Department of Defense, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering and the Director of the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, to submit not later than June 1,
2027, a report to the House Armed Services Committee detailing
its efforts to support the deployment of quantum networking
technologies. At a minimum, the report shall include:
(1) An assessment of entities that specialize in quantum
networking technologies that currently exist in the commercial
market;
(2) A summary of the Department's participation, if any, in
multiagency consortia to build and experiment with quantum
network testbeds; and
(3) Current plans and efforts to deploy and scale quantum
networking technology across the Department's networks.
Digital Hygiene Training and Cybersecurity Posture of National Guard
and Reserve Personnel
The committee recognizes the critical role National Guard
and Reserve personnel play in supporting Department of Defense
missions across the homeland and abroad. The committee further
recognizes that the continued prevalence of credential theft,
phishing, and related cyber threats requires sustained efforts
to strengthen cybersecurity awareness and digital resilience
across the total force.
The committee believes it is important to ensure that
National Guard and Reserve personnel have access to effective
digital hygiene training and cybersecurity resources consistent
with the Department's broader zero trust and identity
management efforts.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Department of Defense Chief
Information Officer and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on existing and planned efforts
to strengthen digital hygiene training and cybersecurity
posture across the National Guard and Reserve components. The
briefing shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current state and effectiveness of
digital hygiene training available to National Guard and
Reserve personnel;
(2) an assessment of cyber risks to National Guard and
Reserve personnel associated with credential compromise,
phishing, and related threats;
(3) an evaluation of the feasibility and cost of expanding
access to cybersecurity tools and services across the National
Guard and Reserve Components; and
(4) recommendations to improve digital hygiene training and
cybersecurity readiness across the Reserve Components,
consistent with zero trust principles.
Edge-Based Artificial Intelligence and Supporting Infrastructure in
Denied Environments
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of
artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities that operate in
communications-denied and contested environments. The committee
notes that connectivity in operational environments is often
constrained, including through adversary actions that target
communications infrastructure. While the Department has begun
advancing edge-based AI capabilities, the committee believes
additional emphasis is warranted on systems capable of
autonomous operation without persistent network connectivity,
as well as rapid and reliable deployment of supporting
infrastructure at the tactical edge. This includes the
development and integration of agentic AI, automation, and
infrastructure-as-code approaches. The committee further notes
that such technologies may reduce deployment timelines, human
error, and onsite support requirements in operational
environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief Digital and
Artificial Intelligence Officer, in coordination with the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 31, 2027, on the Department's strategy for
identifying, evaluating, and rapidly fielding edge-based AI
capabilities for use in disconnected and contested
environments. The report shall include:
(1) the Department's approach to identifying and
prioritizing edge-based AI and supporting infrastructure
technologies;
(2) how such technologies are being evaluated, including in
operationally relevant environments;
(3) the extent to which automation, including
infrastructure-as-code, can improve the speed, consistency, and
scalability of deploying edge capabilities and reduce support
requirements;
(4) a plan for integrating such capabilities into existing
tactical networks and operations;
(5) barriers to adoption, including acquisition,
deployment, and integration challenges; and
(6) identification of at least three commercially available
edge AI platforms suitable for evaluation in operationally
relevant exercises.
Efforts to Counter Transnational Cyber Fraud
The committee recognizes the threat posed by transnational
criminal organizations using cyberspace to conduct fraud and
theft and compromise private data. The committee understands
that countering such activities requires a whole-of-government
approach and that the Department of Defense's expertise in
countering malicious cyber activities is of great value.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
July 1, 2027, on the role of the Department of Defense in
countering transnational criminal organizations conducting
cyber-enabled fraud and related malicious cyber activities. The
report should be submitted in unclassified form but may include
a classified annex. The report should include:
(1) an assessment of the threat to Department of Defense
objectives, operations, personnel, or property posed by
transnational criminal organizations conducting cyber-enabled
fraud;
(2) a description of current Department of Defense roles
and activities to counter transnational criminal organizations
conducting cyber-enabled fraud;
(3) identification of any statutory, regulatory, authority,
or resource limitations affecting the Department's ability to
conduct such activities; and
(4) actions the Department could take in cyberspace,
consistent with current authorities and responsibilities, to
contribute to efforts to counter transnational criminal
organization threats to Department of Defense objectives,
operations, personnel, or property.
Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations Review
The coordination and modernization of Electromagnetic
Spectrum Operations (EMSO) remains of vital importance to the
committee. The committee is concerned, however, that the
current EMSO governance structure has not fully realized the
unity of effort envisioned by the 2020 EMS Superiority
Strategy. With increasing complexity associated with cognitive
electronic warfare and adaptive, autonomous capabilities, the
committee is concerned that the United States is not prepared
to maintain EMSO superiority against advanced near-peer
adversaries.
The committee understands there are multiple potential
organizational structures for EMSO, including, but not limited
to, establishing a combat support agency or realigning the
responsibilities associated with the EMSO Executive Committee
and the EMSO lead for joint EMS operations, as established by
sections 500 and 500e of title 10, United States Code,
respectively. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2027, on the following:
(1) An update on the progress of the implementation of the
2020 EMS Superiority Strategy;
(2) An evaluation of potential governance structures for
EMSO, including an analysis of alternatives using criteria such
as operational effectiveness, manning, and resourcing; and
(3) Any legislative adjustments necessary to support the
recommended governance structure identified pursuant to
paragraph (2).
Enterprise and Operational Integration of Agentic Artificial
Intelligence
As the Department of Defense implements its recently
released Artificial Intelligence (AI) strategy to transform
into an AI-first force, maintaining security and control over
the Department's data and workflows is critical. Likewise,
ensuring interoperability and scalability of these technologies
will be imperative to keep pace with rapid technical
innovation. The committee further recognizes that agentic AI
systems have the potential to support a range of joint
operational functions and deliver decision advantage across
mission areas.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief Digital and
Artificial Intelligence Officer to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31,
2027, on the Department's agentic AI strategy and its
operational integration. The briefing shall include:
(1) the status and initial demonstration results of the
Enterprise Agents Pace-Setting Project identified in the
Department's January 2026 AI Strategy;
(2) identification of priority use cases for agentic AI,
including those aligned to joint functions such as command and
control, intelligence, fires, movement and maneuver,
protection, information, and sustainment;
(3) an assessment of the security, scalability, cost,
interoperability, and data sovereignty considerations for all
cloud computing deployment options, including private, hybrid,
and public cloud environments;
(4) identification of not fewer than five efforts employing
agentic AI capabilities in support of joint functions,
including the supported combatant command, military department,
or defense agency; and
(5) identification of any barriers to rapid deployment and
operational adoption, including challenges related to lifecycle
management and sustainment, with recommendations for
remediation.
Integrated Operational Planning and Wargaming
The committee recognizes the potential for automation and
the integration of models, data, and analytical tools across
the joint force to improve modeling and simulation, operational
planning, and joint wargaming. The committee believes such
capabilities may reduce manual processes, support concurrent
work across and within planning processes, and improve joint
decision-making.
However, the committee understands that challenges may
remain regarding interoperability, integration with existing
command-and-control systems and legacy models, data, and
analytical tools, incorporation into operational planning
processes, and rapid deployment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2027, on:
(1) approaches to better integrate operational planning,
wargaming, training exercises, and operations into a unified
framework, including opportunities to improve course of action
generation and evaluation;
(2) current and planned efforts to improve concurrent and
collaborative planning across and within staffs;
(3) technical, operational, and acquisition barriers to
integrating such capabilities across the joint force, including
barriers related to interoperability, command-and-control
systems, and operational planning processes; and
(4) recommendations to accelerate the adoption and
integration of such capabilities.
Internet Operations Management
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense
Cyber Defense Command's (DCDC) piloting of security automation
capabilities within the Internet Operations Management (IOM)
program. The committee believes that successful deployment and
scaling of security automation will help equip DCDC to keep
pace with increasingly sophisticated threats by mitigating new
and emerging vulnerabilities at machine speed. The committee
recommends that the Department:
(1) scale IOM's integration with automated cyber defense
capabilities that enable coordinated detection, response, and
remediation; and
(2) extend deployment of these capabilities across the
Department of Defense Information Network to ensure enterprise-
wide visibility and defense.
Internet Operations Management Security Automation
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
Cyber Defense Command (DCDC) has piloted security automation
capabilities that operationalize the attack surface visibility
and vulnerability discovery capabilities of its Internet
Operations Management (IOM) program. The committee notes the
potential for full deployment and scaling of security
automation capable of mitigating new and emerging
vulnerabilities at machine speed to enhance United States Cyber
Command (USCYBERCOM)'s ability to keep pace with increasingly
sophisticated cyber threats against the Department of Defense
Information Network.
The committee is therefore concerned that without a clear
implementation plan and dedicated resources, full deployment of
advanced security orchestration and automation capabilities
across the Department of Defense Information Network may not be
achieved within operationally relevant timelines.
The committee directs the Commander of United States Cyber
Command to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 31, 2027, on the implementation
plan, timeline, and resource requirements necessary to achieve
full deployment of the IOM program, or equivalent security
automation capabilities, across the Department of Defense
Information Network.
Interoperable Multi-Cloud Solutions Across the Defense Enterprise
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense's
current approach to cloud infrastructure has led to a
proliferation of stove-piped systems, limiting the Department's
ability to move data, integrate across systems, and operate in
contested or degraded environments. The committee believes the
Department's mission is best served by an interoperable multi-
cloud environment that enables flexibility, resilience, and
competition while reducing dependence on any single provider.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, that includes the following:
(1) a description of the Department's current multi-cloud
architecture and its approach to interoperability across cloud
environments;
(2) case studies of the War Data Platform and the GenAI.mil
platform, including the extent to which data, applications, and
artificial intelligence workloads can be moved across cloud
environments without significant reengineering, along with the
time, costs, and technical effort required;
(3) a summary of security challenges regarding multi-cloud
implementation, including issues related to reciprocity of
authorizations to operate and differences in security controls
and authorization timelines across cloud environments;
(4) a description of barriers to interoperability and data
portability, including licensing, propriety services, data
formats, and application dependencies; and
(5) a description of the technical, acquisition,
governance, and policy changes necessary to transition to a
vendor-agnostic multi-cloud architecture.
Maven Smart System Update
The committee recognizes that Maven Smart System (MSS) has
been adopted across a range of mission areas and operational
environments within the Department of Defense and has provided
useful data integration and analysis. However, the committee
seeks to better understand the extent of MSS adoption across
the military services and combatant commands, as well as the
Department's plans for further development and expansion of
this capability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chief Digital and Artificial
Intelligence Officer, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services no later than June 4, 2027, on the
adoption and future plans for the Maven Smart System. The
briefing shall include:
(1) a description of current MSS deployment and utilization
across the Department of Defense;
(2) an assessment of operational requirements or mission
areas where additional MSS adoption could provide operational
benefit;
(3) any technical, security, infrastructure, data, policy,
classification, or cost barriers that limit broader adoption or
integration;
(4) efforts to integrate MSS capabilities across multiple
security domains, networks, and command-and-control systems;
(5) estimated resource requirements and timelines
associated with planned or proposed expansion efforts; and
(6) recommendations for improving AI-enabled support
capabilities across the joint force.
Memory Safe Programming Languages and Software Security Roadmap
The committee recognizes that memory management
vulnerabilities continue to represent a significant source of
exploitable software weaknesses across commercial and defense
systems. The committee further recognizes the importance of
memory safe programming languages, formal methods, and
commercial technologies that improve software assurance and
reduce cybersecurity risk across Department of Defense systems.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of the National Security Agency
and the Director of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by March 1, 2027, containing a roadmap for reducing
memory management vulnerabilities across Department of Defense
software systems. The report shall examine:
(1) technologies for preventing the exploitation of memory
management vulnerabilities and other mitigation techniques;
(2) approaches for re-writing critical legacy code bases
composed in unsafe memory management programming languages
using memory safe programming languages or formal methods,
either manually or with the assistance of artificial
intelligence technologies;
(3) recommendations regarding when and under what
circumstances the use of memory safe programming languages for
new programs and major system upgrades should be required;
(4) options for establishing preferences in the acquisition
of commercial systems and products developed using memory safe
programming languages;
(5) methods for encouraging the Defense Industrial Base to
accelerate the hiring and training of software developers
proficient in memory safe programming languages; and
(6) technologies capable of generating software bills of
material identify risks posed by memory management
vulnerabilities.
Mission Partner Identity Verification
The committee notes the progress made by the Defense
Manpower Data Center (DMDC) in implementing Identity,
Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) solutions for non-
Department personnel, including dependents, foreign military
partners, and the defense industrial base. The committee
believes that modernizing identity verification is essential to
enhancing Department of Defense (DoD) security,
interoperability, and governance.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Manpower Data Center, in coordination with the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 1, 2027, on the Department's strategy for mission
partner identity verification. The briefing shall include the
following:
(1) a plan for developing standard security requirements to
enable interoperability among identity management and identity
verification capabilities; and
(2) an assessment of approaches to improve identity
verification and credential management for mission partners,
including methods for establishing trust in credentials issued
by foreign mission partners.
Modernization of Commercial Solutions for Classified Program
The committee believes that modernization of the Commercial
Solutions for Classified (CSfC) program could enable more rapid
adoption of secure commercial technologies, improve scalability
and interoperability across National Security Systems, and
better align the program with the Department's ongoing efforts
to accelerate acquisition and fielding of systems handling
classified data. The Committee further recognizes the
importance of ensuring that CSfC policies support joint and
coalition operations and are responsive to emerging
technologies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of the National Security
Agency, to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services that details a modernization roadmap for the CSfC
program not later than March 1, 2027, that includes the
following:
(1) an assessment of the existing CsfC framework, including
any structural and operational limitations within certification
and validation processes;
(2) a plan to modernize CSfC governance, certification, and
compliance mechanisms, including consideration of adoption of
performance-based security criteria;
(3) a representative sample of mission areas in which CSfC-
approved solutions have been deployed, including operational
value provided; and
(4) an evaluation of NSA-DoD coordination mechanisms to
ensure synchronization of CSfC policy.
Modernizing Identity, Credential, and Access Management Activities
The committee recognizes that effective identity,
credential, and access management (ICAM) is foundational to
securing Department networks, protecting sensitive information,
and ensuring that only authorized individuals have access to
Department systems and resources. The committee also recognizes
the importance of modern capabilities, including multifactor
authentication, privileged access management, identity
governance, and continuous monitoring of identity-based
threats. The committee notes the importance of improving the
functionality, security, interoperability, and cost-
effectiveness of the ICAM program. The committee encourages the
Department to leverage commercial capabilities, including cloud
services, and to promote competition across its ICAM program.
Open-Source Software Supply Chain Security
The committee recognizes that modern software applications
used throughout the Department of Defense rely extensively on
open-source software (OSS) components developed and maintained
by globally distributed contributors. While OSS provides
significant innovation and cost advantages, the committee is
concerned that the Department lacks sufficient visibility into
the origins, maintenance, and security of OSS applications and
software dependencies. The committee notes that some Department
organizations, such as the Space Development Agency, have begun
efforts to improve OSS supply chain visibility and risk
mitigation, but believes a coordinated Department-wide strategy
is required to scale secure OSS supply chain practices.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense
Chief Information Officer, in consultation with the Chief
Information Officers of the military departments, to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
December 1, 2026, containing a plan to scale secure OSS supply
chain practices across the Department of Defense. The report
shall include:
(1) an assessment of current Department-wide visibility
into OSS components and software dependencies used in
Department systems, including identification of adversarial
foreign ownership, control, or influence;
(2) a plan to improve traceability, risk identification,
and mitigation within OSS supply chains;
(3) recommendations for policies, standards, and
acquisition requirements necessary to ensure secure use and
maintenance of OSS components;
(4) identification of implementation pathways and the
capabilities required to scale secure OSS supply chain
practices across the Department; and
(5) an estimate of resources required to execute this plan.
Open-Weight Artificial Intelligence Models for Military Applications
The committee notes the existence of open-weight artificial
intelligence (AI) models that allow for a significant degree of
customization through users' ability to alter the numerical
parameters that govern the model's output. The committee
further understands that open-weight AI models are capable of
on-premises deployment, which could make them suitable for use
in secure settings.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chief Digital and Artificial
Intelligence Officer, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by March 15, 2027, summarizing the
existing use of open-weight AI models by the Department, any
plans for further adoption and deployment, and the Department's
views on the relevance of these models to military
applications.
Partner Security Forces Operating High-Risk Telecommunications
Equipment
The committee recognizes that the security of United States
military operations, intelligence sharing, and defense
cooperation depends in large part on the integrity and security
of information and communications technology (ICT) networks
used by security forces from partner nations. The committee
highlighted these risks in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) by establishing
government-wide restrictions related to the used of covered
telecommunications equipment or services and in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) by requiring the Secretary of Defense to identify risks to
Department personnel, equipment, and operations prior to basing
major weapons systems or permanently assigned forces in
countries operating high-risk telecommunications
infrastructure. The committee believes that such foreign
security forces should be encouraged to eliminate reliance on
high-risk ICT equipment or services that pose national security
risks to the United States and its allies.
The committee also notes that under the telecommunications
security program authorized in section 223 of Public Law 115-
232, the Defense Information Systems Agency and the United
States Cyber Command are responsible for monitoring government-
transiting packet streams for 5G data for foreign adversarial
threats on Department of Defense frequencies. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency and
the Commander of the United States Cyber Command, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the integrity and security of ICT
networks used by the Department of Defense and partner security
forces. Such briefing shall include:
(1) an update on progress made in identifying foreign
adversarial threats on Department of Defense networks through
the telecommunications security program;
(2) an assessment of high-risk ICT equipment and services
used in foreign security partners' information and
communications technology networks;
(3) an evaluation of risk mitigation measures undertaken to
address the risk of Department network traffic transiting
through foreign, high-risk ICT infrastructure; and
(4) recommendations on whether further statutory measures
may be necessary to discourage partner forces from relying on
high-risk ICT equipment.
Phased Implementation of Operational Technology Cybersecurity
The committee notes that the Department of Defense does not
expect to achieve ``target level'' zero trust for operational
technology (OT) systems until fiscal year 2030 and finds that
this timeline creates unacceptable risk to mission readiness
given the threats to Defense Critical Infrastructure. The
committee is further concerned that current implementation
approaches do not sufficiently prioritize foundational
capabilities needed to reduce near-term risk and enable
progress toward zero trust outcomes.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief Information
Officer of the Department of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 2027,
on a phased and operationally sustainable approach to improving
OT cybersecurity across the Department. The report shall
include:
(1) a prioritized implementation framework for OT
cybersecurity, aligned to the Department's zero trust
framework, that breaks ``target level'' zero trust outcomes
into sequenced increments with defined objectives, timelines,
and metrics;
(2) a plan to achieve enterprise-wide visibility into OT
assets and network communications, including system
dependencies and external connections;
(3) a plan to implement foundational cybersecurity
practices across OT environments, including configuration
management, risk-informed patching, passive monitoring, and
other measures necessary to reduce risk; and
(4) an assessment of the feasibility of accelerating OT
cybersecurity measures for Tier 1 Mission Assurance
installations to not later than fiscal year 2028, including
associated resource requirements and barriers to
implementation.
Post-Quantum Cryptography Transition Readiness Assessment
The committee notes with concern that the Department of
Defense has not yet established a comprehensive, system-level
inventory of cryptographic assets vulnerable to quantum-enabled
attacks. The National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) finalized post-quantum cryptography (PQC) standards in
2024, and the Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) has
issued binding guidance under the Commercial National Security
Algorithm Suite 2.0 (CNSA 2.0) requiring migration of National
Security Systems to quantum-resistant algorithms by specific
deadlines. The committee is concerned that the pace of
transition planning within the Department of Defense does not
align with these timelines, particularly for legacy hardware
and constrained network environments.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Director of the National
Security Agency, to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than March 31, 2027, on the
Department of Defense's readiness to transition to quantum
resistant cryptographic standards. The report shall include:
(1) the current status of the Department of Defense's
cryptographic inventory, including identification of systems
operating on pre-quantum cryptographic standards;
(2) the Department of Defense's plan and timeline for
migrating all National Security Systems to CNSA 2.0-compliant,
quantum-resistant cryptographic algorithms, including systems
operating on legacy hardware and bandwidth-constrained tactical
networks;
(3) any interoperability challenges identified in
transitioning to post-quantum cryptographic standards and the
Department of Defense's strategy to address such challenges;
(4) an assessment of the Department of Defense's use of
testbed infrastructure to validate PQC deployment on
operational and legacy systems; and
(5) the extent to which the Department of Defense is
leveraging existing cooperative research and development
agreements (CRADAs) with standards bodies, including NIST, to
accelerate PQC migration.
Procurement of Enterprise Collaboration and Communication Systems
The committee notes its prior direction regarding the
procurement of software licenses, data, and services through
the Department of Defense Enterprise Software Initiative and
anticipates the results of the briefing required in the Joint
Explanatory Statement accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60).
The committee recognizes that enterprise software vendors
increasingly offer collaboration and communication capabilities
as integrated suites rather than standalone products. The
committee encourages the Department of Defense to evaluate
acquisition approaches that preserve visibility into the costs
and value of individual capabilities, promote competition, and
ensure that Department components can obtain capabilities that
best meet mission requirements.
Rapid Classified Software Development Capabilities
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
continues to face delays in developing and deploying
operational software capabilities within classified
environments due to lengthy acquisition timelines, clearance
requirements, and limited access to experienced cleared
software engineers. The committee notes the growing operational
importance of commercially available software development
models that leverage embedded and cleared engineering teams,
sprint-based delivery methodologies, fixed-price task
structures, and development conducted directly within existing
classified environments.
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize
acquisition pathways consistent with Executive Order 14265 and
the Adaptive Acquisition Framework, including commercial
solutions offerings, Other Transaction Authority agreements,
and Software Acquisition Pathway authorities.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on:
(1) the Department's implementation of Executive Order
14265 and software acquisition reform guidance as applied to
classified software delivery and operational AI integration;
(2) remaining barriers associated with software acquisition
timelines and cleared workforce constraints; and
(3) opportunities to leverage non-traditional defense
contractors and commercially available software development
practices.
Real-time Audit Capabilities Using Software and Artificial Intelligence
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
growing adoption of advanced software and artificial
intelligence capabilities across operational and administrative
functions. The committee notes that the Department of the Navy,
in particular, has demonstrated successful implementation of
digital tools for shipbuilding, logistics, and program
management.
The committee believes these technological capabilities
present a significant opportunity to transform the Department
of Defense's financial management and auditability. Despite
years of effort and billions of dollars invested, the
Department of Defense has yet to achieve a clean financial
audit, and traditional periodic audit approaches have proven
insufficient to address the scale and complexity of defense
financial operations. The committee believes that continuous
transaction validation and asset tracking to improve financial
visibility may provide a more effective path toward achieving a
clean audit.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on plans to implement real-time
audit capabilities using software and artificial intelligence
technologies. The report shall include:
(1) an assessment of existing software and artificial
intelligence platforms that could be expanded to support
continuous financial monitoring and auditability;
(2) a roadmap for implementing real-time audit capabilities
to enable continuous transaction validation and asset tracking;
(3) identification of integration requirements necessary to
provide enterprise-wide financial visibility across Department
financial systems;
(4) an assessment of how real-time audit capabilities could
improve financial decision-making, fraud detection, and waste
reduction; and
(5) identification of any policy, regulatory, or
contractual barriers that may impede implementation of real-
time audit capabilities.
Resilient and Hardened Telecommunications Networks for National Defense
The committee remains concerned about the resilience and
hardening of secure command and control communications. The
committee notes that adversaries increasingly seek to exploit
vulnerabilities in civilian telecommunications infrastructure
to undermine military readiness, without crossing traditional
thresholds of armed conflict. The committee commends the
inclusion of resilient command, control, communications, and
data capabilities in both the 2026 National Defense Strategy
and the 2025 National Security Strategy.
The committee further notes that fifth-generation wireless
networks, when appropriately hardened, offer opportunities to
enhance secure connectivity during contested operations,
infrastructure-degraded environments, and national emergencies.
Such architectures, when combined with zero-trust security,
modern software, and technology that can survive
electromagnetic pulse, could significantly increase
survivability, redundancy, and operational flexibility. The
committee believes that responsibly leveraging these
technologies could strengthen the resilience and maturity of
telecommunications supporting national defense missions.
Resilient Command, Control, and Communications for Taiwan
The committee recognizes that resilient communications
between the United States and Taiwan are essential to support
effective coordination during both steady-state operations and
crisis scenarios. The committee is concerned that disruption or
degradation of communications infrastructure in a contested
environment could significantly limit Taiwan's ability to
communicate with United States forces and partners. The
committee believes it is necessary to assess current
capabilities and address gaps now to ensure continuity of
communications under stressed conditions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, assessing the extent to which mobile
ad hoc networking and commercially derived communications
systems in Taiwan support United States operational
requirements in contested or degraded environments. The report
shall include:
(1) key Taiwan communications networks across civil and
military organizations necessary to support United States and
coalition operations;
(2) connectivity and integration of Department of Defense
systems with such networks;
(3) gaps in Taiwan's ability to communicate with United
States forces under contested conditions;
(4) network architectures enabling resilient,
infrastructure-independent communications, including secure,
segmented data transmission;
(5) opportunities to rapidly field and scale solutions,
including through the use of existing equipment;
(6) cybersecurity and supply chain risks affecting such
communications; and
(7) prioritized potential actions to improve resilient and
interoperable communications, including continued progress on
coalition information sharing.
Secure Bring-Your-Own-Device Access for the National Guard Bureau
The committee recognizes potential for improved mobile
access solutions to enhance cybersecurity, reduce costs, and
improve operational flexibility across geographically
distributed units. The committee notes that the Department of
the Army has transitioned to a software-based bring-your-own-
device (BYOD) capability that enables remote access to
enterprise resources from personal devices without storing or
transmitting any government data on the device, thereby
eliminating data-at-rest and data-in-transit outside the
enterprise boundary. Such solutions have demonstrated
significant cost savings by reducing reliance on government-
furnished equipment (GFE) while protecting servicemember
privacy and improving secure mobile access across the force.
The committee believes that other elements of the Department of
Defense, including the National Guard Bureau (NGB), should
similarly consider the adoption of an enterprise-wide BYOD
solution meeting these characteristics.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than February 1, 2027, containing the following:
(1) a description of current NGB mobile access practices,
including an analysis of compliance with Department-wide
cybersecurity requirements and personal privacy standards;
(2) where applicable, an analysis of whether waivers for
any existing non-compliant mobile access solutions should be
restricted or phased out; and
(3) the feasibility, cost, operational, cybersecurity, and
personal privacy impacts related to adoption of an enterprise
wide, virtualized BYOD capability meeting the characteristics
described above, including a cost comparison between
procurement and subscription-based secure BYOD solutions.
Secure Document Generation for the Department of the Air Force
The committee is encouraged by the Department of the Air
Force Digital Transformation Office's digital business process
modernization efforts that leverage technologies from industry,
including those developed by the Air Force Small Business
Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer
programs. The committee encourages the Department of the Air
Force to expand deployment of secure document generation
capabilities across the Air Force and Space Force, particularly
capabilities that operate at appropriate classification levels,
provide open application programming interfaces, and comply
with Zero Trust and Department of Defense records management
requirements.
Shipboard Cyber-Physical Survivability and Artificial Intelligence-
Enabled Anomaly Detection
The committee recognizes that increasing strategic
competition in the maritime domain has expanded the cyber
threat surface facing the U.S. Navy's information technology
(IT) and operational technology (OT) systems, which could
disrupt naval operations, degrade readiness, and threaten
mission execution. The committee is encouraged by the efforts
to improve visibility across shipboard IT and OT environments
and notes the potential value of artificial intelligence and
machine learning technologies to identify cyber anomalies,
detect threats, reduce response times, and enhance the
resilience of mission-critical systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility,
effectiveness, and operational impact of expanding and
modernizing the SHARKCAGE program to bridge the visibility gap
between shipboard enterprise networks and mission-essential
industrial control systems through a unified IT and OT defense
architecture. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of current cyber gaps in visibility
across shipboard IT, OT, and mission-critical control systems,
and the operational risks associated with such gaps;
(2) an evaluation of the current and potential use of
artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies for
detecting cyber anomalies and threats across shipboard IT and
OT environments;
(3) an assessment of the operational feasibility of
continuous monitoring and threat detection across shipboard IT
and OT environments, including the ability to operate in
contested, disconnected, intermittent, or degraded
environments;
(4) an assessment of interoperability and integration of
shipboard IT and OT monitoring and cyber defense capabilities
with existing Navy cybersecurity, command-and-control,
maintenance, and fleet readiness systems; and
(5) recommendations regarding the expansion or
modernization of SHARKCAGE, including technical and resource
considerations associated with scaling such capabilities.
Software-Enabled Sustainment
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is
increasingly deploying advanced software solutions and
software-based capabilities across the organization, and
encourages the Department to take steps to appropriately
incorporate software sustainment into life-cycle planning.
Managing software systems against readiness and cybersecurity
risks will continue to drive mission capable rates across
platforms.
Furthermore, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) established portfolio
acquisition executives and provided those officers with
additional responsibilities to oversee life-cycle sustainment
of programs under their purview. Public Law 119-60 also
elevated product support managers to the same authority and
program managers. These changes reflect the committee's intent
to prioritize sustainment for the joint force and across the
services, and the committee encourages the Department to
further incorporate the maintenance of software into the duties
and responsibilities of those positions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than February 1,
2027, detailing efforts to expand best practices and lessons
learned in developing and scaling software-enabled sustainment
practices. The report shall include, at a minimum, the
following information:
(1) software sustainment metrics, including mission capable
rate contribution, patch currency rates, and vulnerability
remediation timelines;
(2) processes to assess costs and readiness outcomes;
(3) leading practices for replication across the
Department; and
(4) and other information the Deputy Secretary deems
relevant.
Spectrum Sharing with Adaptive and Reconfigurable Technology
The Committee understands that the many Department of
Defense systems dependent upon access to the electromagnetic
spectrum (EMS), including sensors and communications, face an
ever-growing challenge from both increasing EMS congestion and
the continuing evolution of electronic warfare technologies and
techniques. The committee believes that EMS-dependent systems
will need to be resilient against such challenges in order to
prevent degraded or denied capabilities. The committee
therefore notes the importance of the development of
technologies and procedures to mitigate EMS challenges,
including but not limited to advanced spectrum sharing and
management technologies.
The committee report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (H. Rept. 118-125)
required information be provided on Department efforts to
advance spectrum use research, management, and sharing, as well
as on planned investments in spectrum management tools and
capabilities that are essential to the development and
deployment of future spectrum capabilities. The Committee is
thus concerned that, despite this effort, the Department has
yet to make investments sufficient to yield and maintain
improvements in EMS resiliency and management. The Committee
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
February 1, 2027, on the Department's strategy, schedule, and
estimated resource requirements for development and adoption of
adaptable and reconfigurable spectrum sharing and management
technologies. Such report shall include and, where appropriate,
differentiate between the various users, use cases, and
employed spectrum bands across the Department.
Weather and Environmental Data Acquisition Improvements
The committee is concerned that combatant commands may have
unmet or partially met weather and environmental data
requirements that support operations and that current
Department practices for meeting such requirements may result
in protracted timelines, duplicative acquisitions across
components, and contract terms that limit government ownership
and usability of the data.
The committee therefore directs the Chief Digital and
Artificial Intelligence Officer, in coordination with the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on processes for and potential
improvements to the acquisition of weather and environmental
data. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) the process for identifying combatant command weather
and environmental data requirements that could be met through
commercial data, including the most common reasons requirements
could be unmet or partially met;
(2) an identification of such purchased weather and
environmental data over the preceding two fiscal years,
including the average time from identification of requirements
to delivery of appropriate data to appropriate data enclaves
across components and identification of any duplicative
acquisitions, disaggregated by method of acquisition,
consumption model, and responsible program office;
(3) an identification of unmet or partially met weather and
environmental data requirements for each combatant command
during the preceding fiscal year, including the operational
missions or functions affected;
(4) the extent to which Department of Defense components
are using consumption-based acquisition approaches for weather
and environmental data, including any enterprise-level
vehicles, and an assessment of barriers to broader adoption;
and
(5) recommendations for administrative, regulatory,
contract, or acquisition policy changes the Department can take
without additional statutory authority to reduce acquisition
timelines, eliminate duplicative acquisitions, and ensure
government ownership of commercially acquired weather and
environmental data without deployment restrictions.
Worker Feedback in Development of Department of Defense Artificial
Intelligence Systems
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is
rapidly deploying artificial intelligence (AI) systems across
the defense enterprise and wants to ensure workers who use or
are affected by these systems are engaged before and during
deployment and have a channel to provide feedback after
deployment.
The committee directs the Chief Digital and Artificial
Intelligence Officer, in coordination with the Under Secretary
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation, to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than February 1,
2027, on the Department of Defense's processes for gathering
worker feedback before AI systems are deployed, during
operations, and after fielding. The report shall include the
following:
(1) an evaluation of the extent to which Department
workforce is actively and systematically solicited for input on
the design and deployment of AI systems before fielding,
including impacts on work roles, workflows, decision
transparency, changes to daily tasks, productivity, training
requirements, and usability;
(2) an assessment of whether standing mechanisms exist for
the workforce to report feedback after deployment;
(3) examples of whether such feedback resulted in
modifications or corrective actions; and
(4) an assessment of gaps in the Department's processes for
gathering worker feedback and any planned actions and
associated timelines to address identified gaps.
The report should be submitted in an unclassified form but
may include a classified annex.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Cybersecurity
Sec. 1501--Data Recovery Requirements and Strategy
This section would amend section 391 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to establish
mandatory recovery time objectives for mission critical or
essential data. It would also require the Secretary of Defense
to establish a pilot program to assess the feasibility of
fielding data resilience capabilities for such data.
Sec. 1502--Department of Defense AI Incident and Vulnerability
Reporting Program
This section would amend title 10, United States Code, and
establishes a program to report, track, analyze, and remediate
covered artificial intelligence incidents and vulnerabilities
rising from development, testing, procurement, fielding, or
operation of artificial intelligence systems within the
Department of Defense.
Sec. 1503--Review and Realignment of Department of Defense
Cybersecurity Responsibilities
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
review and as needed, reorganize the Department of Defense's
cybersecurity, information technology, network defense, and
defensive cyber operations responsibilities to establish clear
accountability, reduce duplication and fragmentation, and
improve the alignment and integration of cybersecurity efforts
across the Department.
Sec. 1504--Inclusion of Critical Infrastructure and Operational
Technology Security in Combatant Command Planning and Readiness
Exercises
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
direct commanders of combatant commands to incorporate critical
infrastructure and operational technology security
considerations into planned activities and joint and combined
planning, training, and readiness exercises.
Sec. 1505--Pilot Program for Autonomous Mission Integration of Unmanned
Surface Vehicles
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy, in
consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering, to establish a pilot program to assess
integration of autonomy services and multi-mission payloads on
medium unmanned surface vehicles for cross-platform
collaboration.
Sec. 1506--Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve Corps Pilot Program
This section would require the Security of Defense to
develop a plan for a Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve pilot
program and provide the report and the briefing to the
congressional defense committees before initiating the pilot.
Sec. 1507--Federal Contractor Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
This section would require the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, in consultation with the Director of the
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the National
Cyber Director, the Director of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, and any other appropriate head of an
executive department to recommend updates to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) designed to ensure that covered
contractors implement a vulnerability disclosure policy
consistent with National Institute of Standards and Technology
guidelines for contractors. This section would also require the
Federal Acquisition Regulation Council to review the
recommendations and update the FAR as necessary to incorporate
requirements for covered contractors to receive information
about a potential security vulnerability relating to an
information system owned or controlled by a contractor in
performance of the contract.
Subtitle B--Information Technology and Artificial Intelligence
Sec. 1521--Software Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution
Reform
This section would amend section 2221 of title 10 United
States Code and requires the Department of Defense to revise
financial management regulations to allow any of the
Department's primary appropriation funds to be used flexibly
across the full lifecycle of software capabilities, regardless
of appropriation category.
Sec. 1522--Requirement for Guidance and Prohibition on Use of
Artificial Intelligence of Certain Artificial Intelligence Companies
This section would amend section 1532 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) to require the Secretary of Defense to issue Department of
Defense-wide guidance for the identification of covered
artificial intelligence companies and processes for exclusion
and removal of artificial intelligence developed by such
companies.
Sec. 1523--Artificial Intelligence Model Rapid Deployment Framework
This section would direct the Chief Digital and Artificial
Intelligence Officer to establish an Artificial Intelligence
Model Rapid Deployment Framework to enable rapid onboarding,
security, authorization, deployment, and governance of
artificial intelligence (AI) systems on Department of Defense
enterprise AI platforms.
Sec. 1524--Update of Policy on Autonomous and Artificial Intelligence-
Enabled Systems
This section would direct the Department of Defense to
update its policies governing autonomous weapon systems and
artificial intelligence-enabled systems that support,
recommend, or materially influence operational decisions
associated with the employment of force, including through
revisions to the Department of Defense Directive 3000.09. The
updated policies are required to establish risk-informed
requirements for approval, oversight, preserved command
accountability, testing, human involvement, auditability,
operational use, and rapid revalidation of such systems.
Sec. 1525--Expansion of AI-Enabled Maintenance Intelligence Platforms
Across Air Education and Training Command
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to establish a pilot program to operationalize and expand
artificial intelligence enabled maintenance data cleansing and
correction capabilities across the Air Force.
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters
Sec. 1541--Roadmap for Modernization of Top Secret and Special Access
Program Network Architectures
This section would direct the Department of Defense to
develop and begin implementing a comprehensive roadmap to
modernize Top Secret and Special Access Program network
architectures, to include improvements to resilience,
interoperability, and artificial intelligence computing
infrastructure.
Sec. 1542--Semiannual Reports on Cyber Operational Readiness Assessment
Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, acting
through the Chief Information Officer of the Department of
Defense and the Commander of the Department of Defense Cyber
Defense Command (DCDC), to submit to the congressional defense
committees a semiannual report on the implementation of the
Cyber Operational Readiness Assessment program (CORA) for the
following 3 years.
TITLE XVI--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Intelligence Matters
Ability to Scale Innovations at Services Intelligence Centers
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
Intelligence Enterprise has increasingly leveraged novel
acquisition authorities, including Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) pathways, Other Transaction Authorities (OTAs),
and rapid prototyping contracts, to field advanced intelligence
support capabilities at speed. Service Intelligence Centers
have effectively used these tools to pioneer transformational
technologies that enhance analytic performance, operational
awareness, and mission support. However, the committee is
concerned that capabilities developed under these rapid
acquisition pathways are often not structured for transition or
scale across the Defense Intelligence Enterprise and
underscores the importance of establishing clear transition
pathways and enterprise governance mechanisms to improve
enterprise-wide fielding of validated capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security, in coordination with the
Director, Defense Intelligence Agency, to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 27,
2027, identifying barriers preventing Service Intelligence
Centers from transitioning validated capabilities to
enterprise-wide use. The briefing shall include, but is not
limited to:
(1) an assessment of structural, acquisition, or governance
barriers to scaling pilot or prototype intelligence
technologies across the Defense Intelligence Enterprise;
(2) an identification of funding, contracting, or
programmatic gaps that inhibit transition from prototype to
sustained capability;
(3) a plan to establish standardized transition pathways
for capabilities validated through SBIR, OTA, or rapid
prototyping authorities;
(4) recommendations for enterprise management structures to
enable adoption of successful technologies across services; and
(5) any legislative or policy changes necessary to improve
the transition and scaling of innovative intelligence
capabilities.
Commercial Foreign Identity Intelligence Infrastructure
The committee notes that servicemembers and national
security professionals require real-time ground truth regarding
people, networks, vessels, and infrastructure in contested
environments. At times, traditional government collection of
foreign identity information can result in classified data that
cannot be readily shared with allied and partner nations,
thereby limiting utility at a time when multinational
coordination is essential to counter hybrid threats.
The committee recognizes that commercially sourced
intelligence infrastructure offers an alternative approach
capable of delivering information regarding adversarial
entities, ownership networks, and transactions and has
demonstrated utility in a number of environments. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the potential for integration of
commercially sourced foreign identity intelligence capabilities
across the combatant commands. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of current commercially sourced foreign
identity intelligence capabilities employed by the Department
of Defense;
(2) an evaluation of the utility of commercially sourced
intelligence infrastructure for enabling information sharing
with allied and partner nations without classification
restrictions;
(3) an assessment of operational gaps in foreign identity
intelligence support to combatant commands; and
(4) recommendations for expanding the integration of
commercially sourced foreign identity intelligence capabilities
across the Department.
Common Intelligence Feed
The committee supports the work being done by the Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA) to revamp the Common Intelligence
Picture, now deemed the Common Intelligence Feed. The committee
also appreciates that, through the Common Intelligence Picture
Joint Program Management Office (CIP-JPMO), DIA has been
engaging with various elements within the Department of Defense
and industry to discuss goals, challenges, and objectives for
the future of the Common Intelligence Feed. Although the
committee is encouraged by the progress the CIP-JPMO has made
so far, the committee understands that much work remains to be
done.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of DIA to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 31, 2027, on the progress made by the CIP-
JPMO toward delivering a modernized Common Intelligence Feed.
The briefing shall include updates on governance, training
standards, information sharing, and data standards.
Defense Strategy and Assessments for Biological Threats
The committee recognizes the importance of developing and
accessing high-quality military intelligence related to the
threats that manmade and naturally occurring biological agents
pose to Department of Defense personnel and operations. The
committee believes that a comprehensive, proactive approach to
evaluating these threats is vital to maintaining strategic
readiness and ensuring robust force protection.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on how the Department
incorporates biological threats into its strategies and
assessments. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) what specific biological threat vectors, capabilities,
and scenarios--both manmade and naturally occurring--are
currently included in defense intelligence assessments;
(2) how the Department integrates biological threat
intelligence into overarching defense strategies;
(3) how the Department addresses biological intelligence
collection needs and information gaps; and
(4) how these assessments inform detection, mitigation, and
protection efforts against the threats to servicemembers.
Foreign Languages Program
Foreign language capabilities, and the development of such
capabilities, are critical to ensuring the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise can fully support Department of Defense intelligence
requirements and activities. The committee recognizes the
importance of the Foreign Languages Program that is jointly
carried out by the Secretary of Defense and the Director of
National Intelligence, as required in section 3201 of title 50,
United States Code. The purpose of this program is to ensure
members of the intelligence community have the advanced foreign
language skills necessary to carry out their duties, and the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise has benefitted from it.
However, the committee is concerned about the long-term
viability of this program with respect to the Defense
Intelligence Enterprise. The committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, in
coordination with other relevant representatives from the
Department of Defense, to submit a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, on
the status of the Foreign Languages Program as it pertains to
the Defense Intelligence Enterprise. The report shall be in
unclassified form but may include a classified annex. The
report shall include:
(1) a description of how the Department currently utilizes
the Foreign Languages Program to further develop foreign
language capabilities within the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise;
(2) an overview of how the Department works with the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence to ensure Defense
Intelligence Enterprise personnel have access to the program;
(3) information about how many Defense Intelligence
Enterprise personnel qualify for participation in the program
compared to how many personnel can enroll;
(4) recommendations for strengthening the program for the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise; and
(5) anything else the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security deems relevant.
Intelligence Support at the Tactical Edge
The committee recognizes that rapid changes in the
battlefield environment necessitate advancing warfighting
capabilities at speed and scale. As the Department of Defense
pursues advancements in intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, it must also work to ensure
the policies governing the generation and dissemination of
actionable intelligence at the tactical edge are aligned.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than February
28, 2027, on how each of the military services are working to
ensure forward-deployed intelligence elements can generate and
disseminate intelligence out at the tactical edge, including in
a denied, disrupted, intermittent, and limited environment. The
briefing shall include an assessment of current policies and
oversight mechanisms and recommendations, if necessary, to
enable timely intelligence support.
Open-Source Intelligence Collector Skill Identifier
The committee recognizes the growth in the role of open-
source intelligence (OSINT) within the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise. The committee also understands the challenges of
training and maintaining experts in the collection and analysis
of OSINT, including with the use of publicly available
information and artificial intelligence, to ensure quality
finished intelligence production. The committee believes the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise should develop minimum
training, certification, and tradecraft standards for OSINT.
The committee further believes it may be beneficial for the
military services to develop skill identifiers for
servicemembers who are qualified to conduct OSINT.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments and the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, on
the feasibility of creating a skill identifier for those
qualified to conduct OSINT activities and on efforts to develop
minimum training, certification, and tradecraft standards
across the Defense Intelligence Enterprise.
Principal Staff Assistant for Tradecraft
The committee recognizes that the operating environment for
the Department of Defense to conduct its intelligence,
intelligence-related, and sensitive activities is increasingly
difficult. The committee further recognizes that, in addition
to providing capabilities and training, robust oversight, clear
guidance, and high standards help ensure mission success. The
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security was
designated as the Principal Staff Assistant for Tradecraft in
Department of Defense Directive 5240.01, effective as of
September 27, 2024. The committee supports this designation but
is concerned that further guidance outlining the
responsibilities of the Principal Staff Assistant for
Tradecraft has not yet been developed.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than December
15, 2026, on progress made toward defining the Principal Staff
Assistant for Tradecraft role and publishing further guidance,
as necessary. The briefing shall also include a description of
how this role can help facilitate improved oversight of
intelligence, intelligence-related, and sensitive activities.
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Accreditation Delays
The committee has expressed its longstanding support for
Department of Defense development of shared classified
commercial infrastructure to better enable collaboration
between the Department and the Defense Industrial Base and
academia. Efforts such as the pilot program established in
section 874 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) aim to establish such
shared classified spaces, but the committee is increasingly
concerned about the slow accreditation process. Without
accreditation, the benefits of these facilities cannot be fully
realized.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security, in coordination with the
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 31, 2027, on the Sensitive Compartmented
Information Facility (SCIF) certification and accreditation
process. The briefing shall cover, at a minimum, the following:
(1) an overview of the current accreditation process,
including the process for certifying special access program
facilities;
(2) a detailed overview of how the Department provides
resources, guidance, and points of contact throughout the
certification process for Service cognizant security
authorities or Department of Defense Component senior
intelligence officers or their designee;
(3) a review of Department of Defense SCIFs currently
undergoing the physical accreditation process that have been
assigned as SCIF ID, in accordance with Department of Defense
Manual 5105.21-V2;
(4) the number of facilities currently waiting for
acceptance of the accreditation package; and
(5) recommendations to accelerate accreditation approval
timelines.
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Pilot Program Update
The committee reiterates its support for expanded access to
shared classified facilities and networks to support the
Defense Industrial Base, including qualified small businesses,
and academia. Section 874 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) required the
Department of Defense to establish a pilot program for access
to shared classified commercial infrastructure, including
access to accredited sensitive compartmented information
facilities (SCIFs) and special access program facilities
(SAPFs), to increase opportunities for the Defense Industrial
Base and academia.
The committee is pleased to learn that the pilot program is
underway but seeks to learn more about the progress made to
date. Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security to provide an
unclassified briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on the status of the pilot
program required by section 874 of Public Law 118-159, lessons
learned to date, and a road map for the duration of the pilot
program.
Space Activities
AI-Equipped Secure Satellite Communications for Missile Defense
The committee notes that the Department's efforts to
rapidly deploy a comprehensive homeland missile defense
architecture, in addition to the expanding and integrating
regional missile defense systems, will require real-time
integration of data from multiple sensor types to generate a
clear and accurate operational picture. Advanced missile
defense terminals must rapidly transmit precise missile track
data to operational units with minimal latency to support
lethal engagements. Direct delivery of tactical data from space
requires time-sensitive decision-making, secure on-orbit
encryption of tactical data links, and resilient space-based
processing capabilities. The committee notes that routing time-
sensitive missile tracking data through ground stations for
downlink and uplink processing may introduce latency that could
affect interceptor timelines in certain operational scenarios.
Therefore, the committee directs the Direct Reporting
Manager for Golden Dome, in coordination with the Chief of
Space Operations and the Director of the Missile Defense
Agency, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 1, 2027, on the feasibility, operational
utility, and integration considerations associated with
procuring and integrating commercially available low earth
orbit space terminals into future missile defense
architectures. The briefing should include the following
information:
(1) an examination of the latency implications associated
with routing time-sensitive missile tracking data through
ground stations for downlink and uplink processing, including
an assessment of whether such latency could affect interceptor
timelines or operational effectiveness in high-tempo
engagements;
(2) an assessment of commercially available terminals
capable of combining electronic warfare for terrestrial and
space domain awareness, artificial intelligence-enabled sensor
fusion, and secure tactical communications using software-
defined radio and programmable on-orbit cryptography;
(3) an evaluation of the ability of such terminals to
provide target detection, identification, geolocation, sensor
fusion, and target tracking consistent with relevant low-earth
orbit mission requirements;
(4) an analysis of the latency, resiliency, cybersecurity,
and encryption considerations associated with direct space-
based tactical data delivery compared to ground station-
dependent architectures; and
(5) an assessment of acquisition pathways, testing
requirements, cost considerations, and timelines associated
with integrating such capabilities into the Golden Dome future
missile defense architectures.
Broad Area Search Requirements
The committee recognizes that commercial imagery sources
can contribute to combatant command persistent awareness
requirements. The committee encourages the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security and the Commander, United
States Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), in coordination with
the Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, to
leverage non-traditional imagery sources to support broad area
search requirements. Further, the committee supports the
establishment of a dedicated program within the Department that
leverages the successful pilot efforts at INDOPACOM that
incorporated artificial intelligence, machine learning, a
secure tasking interface enabling theater-level prioritization
and commercial analytic automation.
Cislunar Capabilities
The committee notes that activity in cislunar space is
increasing, as countries expand their in-space presence and
capabilities beyond geosynchronous orbit. The committee
recognizes that assured positioning, navigation, and timing
capabilities in the cislunar regime are important to United
States defense, civil, and commercial activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Commander of the Air Force
Research Laboratory, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2027, on proposals to
expand space situational awareness, command and control, and
positioning, navigation, and timing capabilities within the Air
Force Research Laboratory Oracle-P program. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) a description of the current Oracle-P program
objectives, capabilities, and planned experimentation
activities relevant to cislunar operations;
(2) an assessment of how non-traditional acquisition
approaches could be used to enable additional space vehicles
and expanded experimentation, including planned acquisition
pathways and decision points;
(3) a description of potential additions in space vehicles,
payload capabilities, and supporting ground and mission
operations infrastructure, including planned timelines;
(4) an assessment of estimated costs, planned funding
sources, and any anticipated impacts to other Air Force
Research Laboratory space programs; and
(5) identification of technical, schedule, and programmatic
risks, and associated risk mitigation strategies.
Commercial Imagery Limits
The committee notes the increased capability and capacity
of commercial imagery providers to support national security
requirements for both the intelligence community and Department
of Defense, and is supportive of efforts of the Department to
utilize commercial capability to augment responding to
warfighter requirements. The committee further notes that
recent conflicts have highlighted the need to establish a
transparent process to ensure the dissemination of imagery is
done in such a manner that takes into account national
security.
Therefore, not later than December 1, 2026, the Director of
National Intelligence, in coordination with the Secretary of
Defense, shall submit to the House Committee on Armed Services
and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence a
report detailing a process and timeline to uniformly ensure
U.S. commercial remote sensing providers, that have active
contracts with the United States Government, operate in such a
manner as to preserve the operational security of military
personnel, civilians, and installations of the United States
and partner nations. The report shall further assess whether
operational security requirements, dissemination restrictions,
or other mitigation measures applicable to U.S. commercial
remote sensing providers could be circumvented through foreign
parent companies outside the United States, including in ways
that could place U.S. companies at a competitive disadvantage
or harm U.S. national security interests.
Commercial Satellite Buses in Proliferated Space Architectures
The committee notes the importance of proliferated space
architectures for enabling resilience and mission assurance for
national security needs derived from space-based capabilities.
Further, the committee believes the Space Force should fully
leverage the expansion of the commercial satellite bus market
to continue proliferation across low-earth, medium-earth, and
geosynchronous-earth orbits to increase resiliency of future
architectures.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than May 1, 2027, on how the core
mission areas of the United States Space Force would benefit
from leveraging advancements in commercial providers across all
orbital regimes through the acquisition of productized,
domestically produced commercial satellite buses. The briefing
should include:
(1) an assessment of how the Space Force is leveraging the
commercial satellite bus marketplace to support its plans to
develop and deploy proliferated space architectures across all
mission areas and orbital regimes in the current program of
record;
(2) an assessment of areas where commercial satellite bus
providers can address future requirements of the Space Force;
(3) an assessment of the current commercial industrial base
capacity, by orbit, to support Space Force proliferated
architectures; and
(4) estimated cost and schedule savings of transitioning to
acquisition strategies that fully take advantage of commercial
satellite bus procurement compared to the Government being
responsible for non-recurring engineering costs of developing
mission-unique satellite buses.
Commercial Space
The committee notes that despite the highest overall budget
request for the U.S. Space Force since its establishment, the
Commercial Services request was half of the fiscal year 2026
request. Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve (CASR),
initiated by this committee in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159),
the Tactical Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Tracking pilot
program, and several other lines of effort of high
congressional interest are all funded out of this budget line
item. The committee would like to highlight the Department of
Defense and the U.S. Space Force have, in two separate strategy
documents, stated the desire to better incorporate commercial-
built space solutions to enhance national security. The
committee is concerned that, despite these strategies and
congressional direction, the service is not making the
investments needed in these areas to make them a reality for
the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than February 1, 2027, on the overall
strategy for procuring commercial space products. The briefing
shall also include:
(1) a plan to sustain and scale current Tactical
Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Tracking capabilities without
disruption to combatant command support;
(2) how the Tactical Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and
Tracking pilot is in alignment with the United States Space
Force Commercial Space Strategy, integration into joint all-
domain command and control architectures, continued use of
competitive commercial capabilities, and compliance with
applicable intelligence oversight requirements;
(3) the current operational status of the Joint Commercial
Operations Cell for each mission area;
(4) a detailed description of how the Joint Commercial
Operations Cell is currently resourced, including funding
sources, budgetary mechanisms, and staffing level;
(5) plans to integrate CASR into additional mission areas;
and
(6) a funding and resource plan for all commercial services
for the next 5 years that details the on-ramp opportunities for
new vendors and phenomenologies as they mature, such as
Synthetic Aperture Radar, Positioning, Navigation, and Timing,
hyperspectral, and many others.
Commercial Space-Based Environmental Monitoring
The committee notes that accurate and timely environmental
monitoring and weather forecasting are foundational to joint
force mission planning and execution. Space-based environmental
monitoring capabilities support operational environmental
awareness for space, air, missile warning, ground, naval, and
global strike missions, particularly in contested and data-
sparse environments. The committee is concerned that the
Department of the Air Force may face a capability gap as legacy
space-based environmental monitoring systems degrade or retire
and successor capabilities mature. The committee further notes
that commercial space-based environmental monitoring data may
provide a means to augment legacy capabilities, improve
resilience, and support continuity of critical weather and
environmental data for operational users. The committee
understands that the United States Space Force has ongoing
activities related to commercial weather data augmentation
within the Space-Based Environmental Monitoring portfolio.
However, the committee is concerned that additional clarity may
be required with respect to Service ownership, acquisition
strategy, requirements development, funding visibility, and
integration of commercial space-based environmental monitoring
data into operational systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Chief of Space Operations, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's plan to acquire,
integrate, process, and disseminate commercial space-based
environmental monitoring data. The briefing shall include the
following:
(1) an assessment of current and projected capability gaps
and operational risks associated with the degradation, loss, or
retirement of legacy space-based environmental monitoring
systems;
(2) a description of ongoing and planned United States
Space Force activities to leverage commercial space-based
environmental monitoring capabilities;
(3) an assessment of whether a formal program of record, or
other enduring acquisition and budget structure, is necessary
to provide sustained access to commercial space-based
environmental monitoring data;
(4) a proposed acquisition strategy for commercial space-
based environmental monitoring data, including procurement,
integration, processing, validation, dissemination, and
delivery to operational users;
(5) a plan to ensure continuity of space-based
environmental monitoring coverage as legacy systems decline and
successor capabilities mature;
(6) an assessment of measures to avoid introducing new
single points of failure in access to environmental monitoring
data;
(7) projected funding requirements across the future years
defense program, beginning with fiscal year 2027, for
procurement, integration, and operational use of commercial
space-based environmental monitoring data; and
(8) recommendations for any legislative or administrative
action necessary to clarify roles, responsibilities,
acquisition authorities, or funding visibility for commercial
space-based environmental monitoring capabilities.
Continuity of Operations Capability for Space Force Ground
Infrastructure
The committee recognizes that survivable and geographically
distributed ground infrastructure is essential to delivering
holistic resilience to future Space Force architectures that
will support cross-service capabilities, such as Golden Dome.
The committee believes that geographically distributed
continuity of operations sites can directly contribute to the
ground segment of the Advanced Fire Control Ground
Infrastructure system and other proliferated constellations as
they are delivered, including commercial based space domain
awareness and custody missions to facilitate and augment Space
Force operations. These sites will provide resilient and
continuous ground operations and mission management
capabilities necessary to ensure operational continuity for
custody, targeting, and fire control integration under degraded
or contested conditions in support of global combatant
commanders' missions.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's plan to establish a
geographically distributed continuity of operations
architecture for ground infrastructure and systems. The
briefing shall include:
(1) the operational requirements necessary to maintain
assured 24-hour per day, 7-day per week mission capability for
commercial based space domain awareness and custody missions to
facilitate and augment the Proliferated Warfighter Space
Architecture and other operations;
(2) the Department's plan to incorporate mission
management, command and control, custody, and targeting
functions across geographically distributed operating
locations;
(3) an assessment of existing government-owned
infrastructure, facilities, and operational nodes capable of
supporting continuity of operations requirements;
(4) an assessment of commercially available architecture
that could provide additional augmentation for the missions
required;
(5) estimated resourcing requirements, acquisition
strategy, and planned funding across the Future Years Defense
Program; and
(6) key milestones required to achieve initial and full
operational capability, including an assessment of whether
operational capability can be achieved by September 30, 2027.
Ensuring Hybrid Space Architectures Remain Open to Trusted Allied
Vendors
The committee notes the importance of the Hybrid Space
Architecture (HSA) program, which provides global, ubiquitous,
and secure internet connectivity throughout the space domain
for commercial, civil, and military users, including
international allies and partners. The committee further notes
that trusted international allies and partners possess mature
commercial space capabilities that could contribute to a
resilient hybrid space architecture. The committee encourages
acquisition and governance approaches that facilitate
participation by trusted allied vendors in HSAs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, in
coordination with the Director of the Defense Innovation Unit,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by March 31, 2027, on how the Department of Defense is ensuring
that HSA efforts remain open to participation by trusted allied
vendors. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of current policies or acquisition
approaches governing industry participation in HSA efforts,
including but not limited to, the Defense Innovation Unit's HSA
Prototype and Pilot program(s);
(2) an assessment of how trusted allied commercial vendors
are being considered or incorporated into hybrid space
architecture development and demonstration activities;
(3) an identification of any statutory, policy, or security
barriers that limit participation by trusted allied vendors;
and
(4) an explanation of how the Department plans to ensure
interoperability, security, and coalition integration while
maintaining an open and competitive HSA.
Evaluation of Advanced Non-Volatile Memory and In-Memory Computing for
Space Payloads
The committee recognizes that future space-based missile
warning, missile tracking, space domain awareness, tactical
communications, and command-and-control architectures will
require increased onboard processing, data storage, and power-
efficient edge computing. The committee is aware that advanced
non-volatile memory technologies, including memristor-based in-
memory computing, may offer potential improvements in size,
weight, power, cost, latency, onboard data retention, and
processing efficiency for space payloads and communications
systems.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in
coordination with the Director of the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency, to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027, on the
feasibility and military utility of advanced non-volatile
memory and in-memory computing technologies for space missions.
The briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of potential applications for advanced
non-volatile memory and in-memory computing in space-based
sensor payloads, including electro-optical, infrared,
hyperspectral, synthetic aperture radar, light detection and
ranging, and electronic support payloads;
(2) an assessment of potential applications in satellite
communications systems, including optical terminals, radio-
frequency transceivers, telemetry, tracking, and command
systems, optical inter-satellite links, and uplink and downlink
processing;
(3) an assessment of potential applications for onboard
data storage, onboard mission processing, data reduction, edge
analytics, and resilient data retention in support of missile
warning, missile tracking, space domain awareness, and time-
sensitive targeting functions;
(4) an assessment of technical maturity, manufacturability,
radiation effects, thermal constraints, cybersecurity, supply
chain security, and space qualification challenges associated
with such technologies;
(5) identification of relevant Department of Defense,
national laboratory, university, and commercial research
activities related to advanced nonvolatile memory, memristor-
based computing, and other edge-processing technologies for
space missions;
(6) an assessment of whether ground-based testing, hosted-
payload demonstrations, or on-orbit demonstrations would be
appropriate to evaluate military utility and operational risk;
and
(7) recommendations for additional research, development,
test, and evaluation activities needed to mature such
technologies for deployable national security space missions.
High Cadence Launch
The committee notes that assured, responsive, and resilient
access to space is in the national security interest of the
United States. The committee further notes that the missions of
the Space Force are growing, and the fiscal year 2027 budget
request includes a significant increase to deliver capability
on orbit in the next 2-to-10-year timeframe. To that end, the
committee encourages the Space Force to continue investing in
capability and capacity to enable high-cadence launch to ensure
satellites can be placed into orbit as they are delivered in a
cost-effective and flexible manner. The committee also
encourages the use of nontraditional acquisition mechanisms,
including other transaction authority under section 4021 of
title 10, United States Code, to accelerate development and
reduce barriers to participation by nontraditional defense
contractors.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services on a High Cadence Launch Plan not later than March 1,
2027, that includes:
(1) the projected launch cadence required to support
national security space missions through 2035, including
deployment, sustainment, and reconstitution scenarios;
(2) an assessment of existing and projected commercial and
government launch capacity;
(3) identification of non-traditional contractors that
could contribute to high cadence launch activities;
(4) estimated costs associated with achieving sustained
high cadence launch capability; and
(5) a description of contract vehicles and acquisition
authorities that will be used to expand high cadence launch
capacity.
Hybrid Satellite Communications
The committee recognizes the increasing strategic,
operational, and tactical importance of resilient satellite
communications (SATCOM) for command and control and situational
awareness across all domains to enable successful U.S.
warfighting and lethality. Commercial SATCOM capabilities have
expanded significantly across multiple orbital regimes (low-
earth, medium-earth, and geosynchronous orbits) and frequency
bands, creating opportunities for enhanced resilience through
diversified procurement approaches. To benefit from this
capability and capacity, the committee encourages the
Department to prioritize innovative ways to procure commercial
SATCOM as a service and deploy hybrid multi-band terminals.
The committee supports acquisition approaches that provide
access to multiple commercial SATCOM capabilities across all
orbital regimes and frequency bands by leveraging unified
vendor-agnostic integrators capable of managing end-to-end
service delivery.
The committee believes the department should, whenever
possible, support the imperative of building out SATCOM
architectures with the long-term goal of multi-vendor
resiliency. SATCOM modernization is being contemplated across
the Department, and the committee believes unique platform or
mission constraints should not drive stovepiped communications
architectures.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the service secretaries, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on acquisition approaches for commercial
SATCOM and a Hybrid SATCOM implementation strategy. The
briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of the operational benefits of
communications path diversity using multi-vendor capable
commercial integrators that combine multi-orbit, multi-
bandwidth SATCOM services with available terrestrial-based
networks and private network gateways for no-fail missions such
as VIP transport, nuclear command, control, and communications
aircraft, and other critical national security requirements;
(2) a description of the potential cost savings of using
multi-vendor capable integrators as opposed to singular
contractual vehicles for specific frequency bands or vendors
that provide a single SATCOM pathway;
(3) the current Hybrid SATCOM acquisition and
implementation strategy;
(4) an inventory of platforms being considered for SATCOM
modernization and estimated timelines for completing fielding
of new SATCOM capabilities by service;
(5) the readiness of the defense industrial base to produce
interoperable terminals and antennas to support a hybrid
architecture; and
(6) how each service intends to prioritize multi-
constellation, multi-band, multi-orbit solutions over single-
vendor solutions.
Improvements to the Firefly Algorithm
The committee continues to support the Department of
Defense's contributions to the National Guard-staffed FireGuard
program to detect and monitor wildfires in coordination with
the United States Forest Service and other entities. The
committee notes the support from the National Air and Space
Intelligence Center (NASIC) on the FireFly algorithm and work
of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) on the
FireHawk program, which ingest data from multiple sources, are
integral in assisting firefighters in characterizing the size,
scope, and intensity of active wildfires and for purposes of
evacuation notifications and to support to civil organizations.
The committee notes that the commercial sector has been
developing advanced tools and techniques that could be
beneficial to both the FireFly algorithm and more broadly the
FireGuard program. Therefore, the committee directs the
Director of NGA, in coordination with the Commander of NASIC,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2027, on options to improve the
FireFly algorithm, and opportunities to incorporate commercial
techniques to improve wildfire notification, characterization,
and tracking in support of the FireGuard program.
In-Space Mobility Industrial Base and Supply Chain
The committee notes the importance of in-space mobility to
national security space missions, including maneuver, orbital
logistics, and operational flexibility in contested
environments. The committee notes that certain propulsion and
fluid-control components essential to in-space mobility rely on
constrained industrial capacity, including limited-source
suppliers, foreign dependencies, or insufficient surge
capability. These factors may affect the Department of
Defense's ability to field and sustain space systems capable of
maneuver, repositioning, refueling, servicing, and
reconstitution.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition
and Integration, to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on supply chain
risks associated with in-space mobility capabilities. The
briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current domestic and allied
industrial base for propulsion components, including thrusters,
valves, and other components required for in-space mobility;
(2) identification of supply chain vulnerabilities,
including foreign dependencies, limited-source suppliers, sub-
tier fragility, and barriers to scaling production;
(3) an evaluation of how these vulnerabilities affect the
Department of Defense's ability to field resilient and
maneuverable space architectures on mission-relevant timelines;
(4) an assessment of ongoing Department of Defense efforts
to mitigate such risks, including industrial base investments,
qualification of alternate suppliers, and use of commercial and
non-traditional vendors; and
(5) recommendations for acquisition and industrial base
actions within existing authorities to strengthen domestic
production and reduce foreign dependence.
Integrating Commercial Data into the Space Force High Accuracy Catalog
The committee recognizes that comprehensive and resilient
space domain awareness (SDA) is foundational to the U.S.
ability to protect space assets and ensure the safety and
survivability of the space environment. The committee notes
that the Space Force's High Accuracy Catalog (HAC) is a
critical component of this SDA architecture, providing precise
tracking data for on-orbit objects.
The committee is aware that commercially available space
domain awareness data sources have matured significantly in
recent years and now offer persistent and globally distributed
sensing capabilities that can complement government-owned
sensors. The committee emphasizes that, when effectively
integrated, cost-effective commercial data can enhance the
accuracy and resilience of the HAC by reducing reliance on a
limited number of exquisite government sensors and increasing
revisit times.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of the
Air Force, in coordination with the Chief of Space Operations,
to continue developing and operationalizing mechanisms to
ingest, validate, and fuse relevant commercial data into the
HAC. The committee continues to encourage the Space Force to
treat commercial data as a core element of a resilient, hybrid
SDA architecture designed to operate effectively in a contested
space domain.
Further, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations, not later than March 1, 2027, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services on the Department's
progress toward integrating commercial SDA data into the HAC
and broader SDA enterprise. Such briefing may include a
classified annex and shall include:
(1) an assessment of current and planned mechanisms for
ingesting and validating commercial SDA data;
(2) an evaluation of the operational benefits and
limitations associated with commercially sourced SDA data,
including any geographical gaps in the HAC that commercial data
can fill;
(3) an identification of any technical, contractual,
security, or policy barriers limiting broader integration of
commercial SDA capabilities; and
(4) recommendations, if any, for legislative or budgetary
actions needed to accelerate the integration of commercial data
into the Space Force SDA architecture.
Narrowband Ultra High Frequency Satellite Communications
The committee notes that narrowband Ultra High Frequency
(UHF) satellite communications support worldwide, multi-service
mobile and fixed-site terminal users with beyond line-of-sight
satellite communications (SATCOM). The committee acknowledges
that the current Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) provides
performance and capacity in support of critical Combatant
Command SATCOM priorities, and specifically to disadvantaged
users. Due to the requirement to service distributed and
disadvantaged users with UHF, the committee agrees that
backwards compatibility for existing terminals drives the Space
Force to pursue the MUOS service life extension program in the
Fiscal Year 2027 budget request.
In parallel, the committee is supportive of Space Force
efforts to disaggregate the requirements of the existing MUOS
system and determine how commercially available solutions with
cutting edge technology can address UHF users globally as it
contemplates a future, multi-orbit UHF architecture.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027 on how it plans to pursue new and innovate
solutions for future narrowband communications needs. The
briefing should include:
(1) plans to disaggregate the requirements currently met by
the MUOS system;
(2) ability of commercial market to meet joint force
secure, beyond line of sight, voice, and data services to
include industrial base capacity;
(3) a description of requirements for disadvantage users
that cannot be met with commercial capabilities, including all-
weather, dense urban and triple canopy applications;
(4) identification of any early technology investments
required to maintain service for legacy users; and,
(5) estimated cost and schedule for the first phases of
implementation of a new narrowband architecture.
National Security Space Launch Lane One
The committee believes that the National Security Space
Launch (NSSL) Phase 3 approach, as stated by Space Systems
Command, is to provide assured access to space for the
integrated space architecture at affordable prices and to lower
the costs of national security space launches through
competition between multiple commercial providers.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to
assess NSSL Phase 3 Lane 1 acquisitions and missions, in
coordination with the Chief of Space Operations and the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and
Integration, with commercial space industry representatives, as
appropriate. The committee encourages review of the cost,
schedule, performance, and impacts to mission assurance of each
awarded mission in NSSL Phase 3 Lane 1 to date and the impact
competition has had in maximizing commercial bids, developing
new entrants, and ensuring corporate diversity. Further, the
committee believes there could be cost and schedule
efficiencies gained through NSSL Lane 1 given excess capacity
in launch vehicles.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Chief of Space Operations and
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition
and Integration, to submit a report to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than June 1, 2027, on how NSSL Phase 3
could fully take advantage of commercial advancement in launch
vehicles; including an assessment on:
(1) the potential use of excess launch vehicle capacity to
integrate additional payloads (government or commercial),
whereas the government is not the integrator, and such payloads
do not adversely impact the national security mission;
(2) permitting increased mission assurance levels to
compensate for launching a higher quantity of payloads per
launch;
(3) consideration for pricing per payload rather than by
the price of a launch vehicle;
(4) offering task orders that allow for the aggregation of
payloads being delivered to similar orbital planes;
(5) removing the requirement to adhere to the NSSL Phase 3
Lane 2 Standard Interface Specification for Lane 1 launches;
(6) removing the requirement for any specific launch
location to take advantage of a best value solution proposed by
the launch service provider; and
(7) analysis of alternative solutions that may be
applicable for future awards, including with respect to
strategic, operational, and financial considerations
(8) evaluating which upcoming Space Force and NRO high-
energy missions could be appropriate for NSSL Lane 1 with low
or moderate levels of mission assurance.
Nuclear Fission Power to Enable Dynamic Space Operations
The committee recognizes the potential high-power nuclear
fission could have on future Space Force requirements for
sustained in-space operations, and as the Department's reliance
on maneuverable and power-intensive systems increases, enduring
and resilient power generation will be essential to support
offensive and defensive space control, long-duration mobility,
high-duty-cycle sensing, secure communications, and autonomous
operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, the Secretary of the Air Force, and
the Chief of Space Operations, to provide an unclassified
briefing, with a classified annex, if necessary, to the House
Committee on Armed Services Committee not later than March 1,
2027, on the Department's plan to develop and field operational
nuclear fission power systems for in-space operations. The
briefing should include:
(1) operational nuclear fission power requirements across
anticipated Department of Defense missions, to include in low-
earth orbit, mid-earth orbit, geosynchronous orbit, cislunar
space, and other deep-space environments;
(2) an assessment of barriers and capability gaps that have
prevented previous nuclear fission efforts from conducting in-
space deployment and testing;
(3) an overview of previous congressional funding and
Department expenditures related to in-space nuclear fission
capabilities since fiscal year 2017;
(4) a proposed architecture and acquisition pathway for
operational in-space nuclear fission power capabilities,
including technology maturation milestones, test and evaluation
plans, and integration with Space Force programs;
(5) a funding and resource plan identifying need
investments through fiscal year 2035, including opportunities
for interagency and commercial collaboration, to deliver an in-
space nuclear fission power capability; and
(6) a risk assessment, and mitigation options, for
deploying in-space nuclear fission power capabilities.
Nuclear Thermal Propulsion
The committee is aware of the Chief of Space Operations and
Commander of U.S. Space Command's needs for advancements in in-
space mobility technologies. The committee agrees that reliant
and repeatable maneuver capability is a key enabler of on-orbit
warfare. The committee is concerned that despite the strong
demand signal from the Space Force and Combatant Commanders,
and the increasing grey zone activities by adversaries in
space, the Department of Defense does not currently have a
program to develop and deploy nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP)
capabilities.
The committee directs the Commander of Space Systems
Command, in coordination with the Administrator of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the following, which may include a classified annex:
(1) an assessment of the current state of NTP technology
maturity, including any existing Department of Defense or
interagency efforts underway;
(2) a summary of known adversary development activities in
NTP, including assessed timelines and capabilities; and
(3) a plan to develop and deploy NTP capabilities,
including proposed acquisition strategy, key milestones, and
estimated costs.
Operational Test and Training Infrastructure Use of Commercial Space
Capabilities
The committee recognizes the growing importance of
realistic, on-orbit training environments to prepare Space
Force Guardians to recognize, characterize, and respond to
increasingly complex and aggressive behaviors in space. The
committee notes that commercially operated on-orbit systems now
provide mature capabilities that could support operational
test, training, and threat-representative environments in ways
that are not achievable through ground-based or purely
simulated systems alone.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, in
coordination with the Portfolio Acquisition Executive for
Infrastructure, to examine leveraging commercially available
on-orbit assets to the maximum extent practicable to support
training, test, and exercise activities. Such capabilities may
include, but are not limited to, rendezvous and proximity
operations, inspection, maneuver characterization, space domain
awareness, and other activities relevant to contested space
operations.
To enable rapid integration, the committee encourages the
Space Force to utilize flexible contracting and funding
mechanisms, including other transaction authorities, commercial
solutions openings, broad agency announcements, and
reimbursable agreements, as appropriate, to engage commercial
providers and reduce barriers to entry for non-traditional
performers. The committee further directs the Chief of Space
Operations, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration and the
Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Infrastructure, to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 30, 2027, on the following:
(1) a plan to integrate commercial on-orbit capabilities
into Operational Test and Training Infrastructure-supported
training and test activities;
(2) the funding and contracting mechanisms to be used to
procure such capabilities;
(3) a proposed timeline for initial operational use, with
the goal of incorporating commercial assets into Guardian
training events within 12 to 24 months; and
(4) any policy, classification, or authorities barriers
that may inhibit the use of commercial systems for training
purposes.
Operational Transition of Space-Based Visual Intelligence Capabilities
The committee notes prior congressional direction regarding
commercial space domain awareness capabilities, including low-
latency video, advanced edge computing, commercial motion
imagery intelligence, and space-based full motion video and
edge analytics for orbital awareness. The committee remains
concerned that the Department lacks sufficient operational
capability to provide persistent, close-range, time-sensitive
characterization of dynamic on-orbit behavior in contested
space environments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Chief of Space Operations, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's plan to
transition space-based visual intelligence, onboard processing,
and autonomous orbital awareness capabilities from pilot
activities into operational architectures.
The briefing shall include--
(1) operational use cases for onboard visual sensing, edge-
based analytics, and autonomous event detection to support
spacecraft protection and anomaly characterization;
(2) ongoing or planned demonstrations, pilots, or prototype
activities related to space-based visual intelligence
capabilities;
(3) integration considerations for incorporating visual
intelligence-derived insights into operational Space Force
space domain awareness architectures; and
(4) recommendations for accelerating operational transition
pathways for commercially developed onboard sensing and
autonomous orbital awareness technologies.
The briefing may include a classified annex, if necessary.
Proliferated Ground Architectures for Space
The committee notes the significant priority and resources
dedicated to increasing the effectiveness and resilience of
space-based capabilities by leveraging commercial technologies
and business models from the United States' industrial base.
While the committee has long been a proponent of these efforts,
the committee notes that the priority has been given to space-
based capabilities and comparable priority and resources have
not been dedicated to implementing a ground architecture that
also leverages commercial advances in technology and business
models, such as phased array antennas and proliferated
satellite ground services being developed by the industrial
base. Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than May 1, 2027, on the benefits of acquiring commercial
ground services to support current and emerging national
security space requirements. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of the operational risk to missions
relying on legacy, government-operated ground segment
infrastructure, including vulnerabilities arising from a lack
of resilience and capacity;
(2) a comprehensive assessment of current and future
requirements for ground segment capability and capacity across
the national security space enterprise, including frequency
bands, geographies, orbits, and other relevant parameters;
(3) an evaluation of the potential benefits of leveraging
commercial ground architectures to mitigate the identified
risks and address the capacity and capability requirements laid
out in (1) and (2); and
(4) a plan for leveraging commercial ground architectures
to enhance resilience and effectiveness across the space
enterprise, including long-term funding and acquisition
strategies such as other transaction authorities, indefinite
delivery/indefinite quantity contracts, working capital funds,
and other agile, commercial-friendly purchasing mechanisms.
Protected Tactical SATCOM-Global (PTS-G)
The committee notes that the Protected Tactical SATCOM-
Global (PTS-G) is part of the broader Protected Tactical
Service effort by the Space Force to provide beyond-line-of-
sight, Anti-Jam (AJ), low-probability-of-intercept satellite
communications. PTS-G as part of this program is intended to
provide a degree of assured access communications across
military Ka-band and X-band, and the Space Force highlighted
proliferation and disaggregation as attributes they were
prioritizing in the President's budget request. The committee
is concerned that the original program objectives sought to
increase the industrial base with innovative, new-entrant
companies that would leverage using existing commercial
manufacturing capabilities and heritage hardware, the
subsequent award of procurement for just two spacecraft results
in a program that is counter to the original tenets to achieve
resiliency through proliferation using higher numbers of lower-
complexity spacecraft.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, to provide
a briefing to the House Armed Services Committee not later than
December 1, 2026, detailing how the Service intends to
implement a resilient tactical satellite communications
architecture per the original PTS-G program objectives. The
report should include options to accelerate procurement of
additional single-band satellites to achieve disaggregated,
proliferated capability sooner.
Space Access, Mobility, and Logistics
The committee notes the continued U.S. Space Command
requirement for sustained space maneuver. The committee also
notes that while the U.S. Space Force has established a program
office for Space Access, Mobility, and Logistics (SAML), it has
not been adequately resourced to transition from initial
demonstrations to providing scalable capabilities for the
warfighter. The committee believes that investment in this
mission area would improve the mission assurance, resilience,
and operational flexibility of existing and planned space
architectures and would lower the overall cost of national
security space programs over their planned lifetime. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on
capabilities for SAML of unprepared satellites by May 1, 2027.
The briefing should include the following:
(1) cost, schedule, and performance milestones for a
sustained on-orbit SAML capability for unprepared satellites
achieving initial operating capability by fiscal year 2028;
(2) an assessment of the risks and benefits associated with
the development of a sustained on-orbit SAML capability; and
(3) an integration plan for such capabilities to support
future national security space architectures.
Space Data Network
The committee recognizes the importance of resilient and
high-throughput, commercially derived space data networks that
provide robust global capability to enable multi-domain
operations and emerging space systems and sensors.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the strategic importance of establishing
a global high-throughput, resilient Space Data Network. The
briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of current gaps in global space-based
data transport capabilities and their implications for national
security operations, including command and control,
intelligence dissemination, and real-time warfighter support;
(2) recommendations for leveraging existing government-
owned, commercially derived satellite constellations that can
achieve global operational capability on orbit by fiscal year
2028, ensuring alignment with timelines for delivery of on-
orbit, terrestrial, airborne, and sea-based capabilities that
will be operational or under test in that timeframe;
(3) cost estimates, funding requirements, and a phased
implementation plan to deploy the global network by fiscal year
2028; and
(4) how the acquisition strategy will ensure opportunities
for competition in the Space Data Network as new capability and
capacity is delivered by industry.
Spaceport Congestion and Diversification for Small and Medium Launch
Vehicles
The committee recognizes the significant contributions of
Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, which has served as the
Nation's premier gateway to space. The committee notes the
success of Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in managing the
increase in launch cadence over the last decade. However, the
committee remains concerned that increasing congestion at the
Eastern and Western Range is unsustainable, particularly as
launch requirements for high-cadence and heavy-lift programs
critical to national security continue to grow.
The committee believes that a resilient and distributed
national spaceport architecture will require increased
utilization and capability development at alternative launch
sites and alignment of launch vehicle class to those sites. The
committee further believes Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska
and the Wallops Flight Facility should be fully utilized for
small and medium launch vehicles to alleviate congestion at
Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and increase overall launch
resiliency. The committee supports additional Department of
Defense investment and prioritization of small and medium
launch activity at these facilities.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Chief of Space Operations, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on spaceport congestion and
diversification. The briefing should include the following:
(1) a description of the role of the Department of Defense
at Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska and the Wallops Flight
Facility;
(2) an assessment of the current challenges at Cape
Canaveral Space Force Station, including limitations related to
pad allocation and launch scheduling;
(3) an outline of the investment by the Department of
Defense in Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska and the Wallops
Flight Facility;
(4) an explanation of the potential benefits to national
security space launch of additional Department of Defense
investments in Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska and the
Wallops Flight Facility;
(5) an outline of the process for prioritizing small- and
medium-sized launch vehicles, defined as vehicles with an
expendable payload capacity of less than 20,000 kilograms, for
launch operations at Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska or the
Wallops Flight Facility; and
(6) any other matters the Secretary deems relevant.
U.S. Space Force Warfare Center
In the committee report accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (S. Rept. 119-39), the
Senate Committee on Armed Services required a briefing on Space
Force education and the feasibility of establishing a dedicated
Center for Orbital Warfare. The committee continues to
recognize the importance of increasing Guardian expertise in
mission areas, including orbital warfare, electronic warfare,
and cyberspace warfare, in order to provide integrated tactical
and operational capabilities to joint warfighters.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 31, 2027, on the potential
stand-up of a U.S. Space Force (USSF) Warfare Center. The
briefing should include:
(1) analysis of existing warfare center functions within
USSF and where they are currently located;
(2) analysis on how a USSF Warfare Center could ``provide
integrated tactical and operational solutions to warfighters,
MAJCOMs and COCOMs'' based on the U.S. Air Force Warfare
Center's method of ``collaborate and integrate to dominate'';
(3) need for experienced operators based on existing force
design of similar organizations, such as the Air Force Warfare
Center and U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, resulting
in the need for USSF end strength increases;
(4) a cost-benefit analysis of creating a dedicated Warfare
Center as opposed to including these duties in an established
Space Force Delta; and
(5) capability and capacity to operate space weapon systems
(live or virtually) in support of warfare center missions and
associated costs.
Very Low Earth Orbit Resilience
The committee is encouraged by the U.S. Space Force (USSF)
focus on advancing very low earth orbit (VLEO) capabilities as
a critical enabler of space domain awareness, resilience, and
responsive operations. The committee is concerned that U.S.
space assets operating in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) could face a
rapidly evolving threat environment, including kinetic and non-
kinetic anti-satellite weapons, electronic warfare, nuclear
weapons, and growing orbital debris. The committee recognizes
that resilient VLEO constellations--enabled by advances in
propulsion, materials, autonomous orbital management, and power
systems--have the potential to provide enhanced responsiveness,
higher-resolution sensing, orbital diversity, and deterrence
against debris-generating and nuclear radiation threats through
inherent survivability and rapid reconstitution, improving
continuity of operations under contested conditions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the inclusion
of VLEO satellites into USSF architectures. The briefing should
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the physical, radiological,
electromagnetic pulse, and debris-related effects of a nuclear
detonation in space on satellites operating in VLEO compared to
satellites operating in traditional LEO regimes;
(2) an evaluation of the degree to which orbital altitude,
atmospheric characteristics, orbital decay timelines, and
natural debris-clearing effects influence post-detonation
survivability and reconstitution timelines;
(3) an analysis of the resilience advantages and
limitations associated with VLEO architectures in the context
of nuclear radiation belts, electromagnetic pulse effects, and
debris-generating events; and
(4) a description of how VLEO survivability considerations
are incorporated into broader space resilience and integrated
defense architecture planning.
Nuclear Forces
Addressing Strategic System Subsystem and Component Test Needs with
Commercial Reentry Flight Tests
The committee continues to support the inclusion of a wide
range of commercial space capabilities to support critical
Department of Defense needs, and notes the strategic flight
test bed program that supports strategic systems' component
development and maturation established pursuant to section 1645
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(Public Law 118-31).
The committee notes further opportunities exist to leverage
commercial capabilities to meet the Department's development
and testing needs in a cost-effective manner. To that end, the
committee encourages the Director of the Navy's Strategic
System Program (SSP) office to leverage commercial capabilities
during the technology maturation, risk reduction, advanced
component development, and prototyping phases for Submarine-
Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) re-entry vehicles, to include
the assessment of future upgrades. Therefore, the committee
directs the Director of SSP to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the plans to integrate commercial solutions to support the
advancement of technologies considered in the Department of the
Navy's strategic systems reentry technology roadmap. The
briefing should include:
(1) a summary of activities carried out in connection with
the authorities provided in section 1645 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) and section 1625 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159);
(2) a description of the Department of the Navy SLBM
component and subscale test needs, to include thermal
protection system technologies within the next five years;
(3) commercial space capabilities available to support SLBM
component and sub-scale test needs; and
(4) recommended funding levels necessary to fulfill the
test needs identified in (1).
Department of Defense Efforts for Nuclear Risk Reduction with China
The committee is concerned with the rapid expansion of
China's nuclear forces and its potential implications,
including those for future nuclear risk reduction measures. As
China's strategic capabilities evolve, the risk of
miscalculation, misinterpretation, or accidental escalation
increases, posing a significant challenge to national security.
The committee recognizes that the Administration has made clear
its desire for future arms control and risk reduction
agreements addressing nuclear peer arsenals, including China
and Russia.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the Department of Defense's
activities in support of this objective, including:
(1) a description of how the Department of Defense is
supporting the interagency process with respect China strategic
engagement;
(2) a description of the Department's activities in support
of arms control and risk reduction objectives, including
recommendations, if any, provided by the Department on key
attributes of a future multi-lateral arms control agreement
that would contribute to nuclear risk reduction and multi-
lateral strategic stability;
(3) an analysis of the military implications of potential
transparency and verification measures, such as launch
notifications or data exchanges, that could be implemented
multi-laterally to build mutual confidence without compromising
operational security; and
(4) an assessment of current hotline capabilities and
protocols between the Department of Defense and the People's
Liberation Army, including recommendations for improving real-
time communication during strategic tensions.
The report shall be submitted in unclassified form but may
include a classified annex.
Material Performance Requirements for Smart Thermal Protection Systems
The committee notes the continuous development of advanced
defense platforms, including missile, space, and hypersonic
systems, that operate in extreme thermal environments. The
committee understands that establishing Department-wide
material performance requirements for smart thermal protection
systems may streamline future research, development, test,
evaluation, and acquisition activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, on the status of the development of
material performance requirements for advanced thermal
protection systems.
The briefing should, at minimum, address:
(1) thermal tolerance and survivability across relevant
temperature, pressure, and aerodynamic regimes;
(2) structural integrity and durability under repeated
thermal cycling;
(3) integration of sensing, health monitoring, or adaptive
thermal response capabilities;
(4) manufacturability, scalability, and quality assurance
for production-relevant processes;
(5) compatibility with qualification, certification, and
lifecycle sustainment requirements;
(6) details on how the Department of Defense will leverage
existing test data, military specifications, commercial
standards, and lessons learned from relevant Department
programs; and
(7) details on how the Department will ensure that the
requirements established under this section are made available
for use, as appropriate, in research, development, test, and
evaluation activities, acquisition programs, and future
solicitations involving smart thermal protection systems.
Review of Safety, Security, and Reliability of Nuclear Weapons and
Related Systems
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
continue identifying and preventing threats to the United
States nuclear enterprise, including cyber threats and unmanned
aircraft system intrusions. The committee notes that section
1644 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2022 (Public Law 117-81) required the Department to conduct an
assessment of the safety, security, and reliability of the
nuclear enterprise. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Administrator
for Nuclear Security, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the safety, security, and reliability of nuclear weapons and
related systems. The briefing should include the following:
(1) a summary of actions taken in response to the
assessment required by section 1644 of Public Law 117-81;
(2) an updated assessment of current threats to the United
States nuclear enterprise, including cyber threats, unmanned
aircraft system intrusions, and other risks that could affect
nuclear systems; and
(3) a description of ongoing activities to address threats
described in paragraph (2), and reduce other risks related to
the unauthorized or inadvertent use of nuclear weapons.
Structural Health of Launch Facilities
The committee understands that commercial software and
robotic inspection technology can provide enhanced, detailed,
digitally encoded, localized time-series data to measure the
material health of infrastructure, and that such technology can
provide significant efficiency benefits when deployed early in
construction to document baseline data. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to consider leveraging
these technologies and lessons learned from associated best
practices in the private sector to the maximum extent
practicable.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director, Critical
Major Weapon Systems, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027, on
the feasibility and advisability of leveraging robotic
inspection technology and associated commercial software tools
for material health inspection of Minuteman III ballistic
missile infrastructure.
United States Nuclear Deterrence Strategy in Europe
The committee continues to support the deployment of U.S.
theater nuclear forces in Europe, which play unique and
essential roles in meeting U.S. deterrence requirements and
assuring allies. The committee also notes that forward-deployed
U.S. nuclear capabilities have been a foundational element of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) since its
founding, and the 2024 Washington Summit Declaration reaffirmed
that ``Nuclear deterrence is the cornerstone of Alliance
security.'' Moreover, adversaries' expanding nuclear
capabilities strengthens the need for effective and credible
U.S. theater nuclear forces based in Europe to enhance
deterrence against regional nuclear conflict and limit
potential conventional conflict escalation. Therefore, the
committee believes the United States should maintain theater
nuclear capabilities in Europe and encourages the Secretary of
Defense to emphasize the U.S. commitment to NATO nuclear
sharing arrangements at the upcoming Ankara Summit.
Missile Defense Programs
Excess Radars for Homeland Defense
The committee recognizes the need for improved domain
awareness for defense of the homeland from air and missile
threats and notes the potential use of already-procured sensors
for this purpose. Specifically, the committee is aware of radar
arrays awaiting installation that may have the potential to be
utilized in support of homeland air and missile defense needs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility and suitability of
utilizing stored and undeployed radar assets to enhance
integrated air and missile defense of the homeland. The
briefing shall include the following:
(1) an inventory of radars and related assets awaiting
installation, as well as planned deliveries over the next five
years;
(2) an analysis of the suitability of systems identified in
paragraph (1) in a ground-based configuration to meet sensing
requirements related to integrated air and missile defense;
(3) consideration of existing sustainment and logistics
networks, electronic protection capabilities, spectrum co-
existence, non-interference with commercial aircraft,
integration with existing effectors, and the relevance of these
factors for accelerated fielding of a ground-based
configuration; and
(4) the associated funding and schedule required to address
impacts to existing programs of record as a result of
repurposing any radars for integrated air and missile defense
of the homeland.
Homeland Air and Missile Defense Security-By-Design
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on a security-by-design strategy for
homeland air and missile defense architecture. The briefing
should include the following:
(1) an examination of operationalizing zero trust
principles beyond enterprise networks, including identity-based
segmentation, device security, and workload protection at the
tactical edge;
(2) an assessment of the adoption of commercial artificial
intelligence-driven capabilities to provide real-time
situational awareness and automate responses in time-sensitive
environments;
(3) a description of methods to ensure verified data
ingestion and integrity for sensor feeds entering the domain
awareness layer; and
(4) an evaluation of the implementation of outcome-based
incentives within acquisition frameworks to prioritize
cybersecurity automation and secure system designs that reduce
risk, improve mission performance, and lower lifecycle costs.
Large Tactical Power System (LTPS)
The committee recognizes the critical role of expeditionary
power generation in enabling the effectiveness of next-
generation air and missile defense systems, including the Lower
Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS). The committee is
encouraged by the Department of the Army's progress in
developing and fielding the Large Tactical Power System (LTPS),
a mobile and scalable power generation solution designed to
meet the significantly increased power requirements of modern
radar and command-and-control systems. The committee directs
the Secretary of the Army to submit a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services, not later than April 1, 2027,
detailing the planned quantity of LTPS units, the breakout of
LTPS funding in LTAMDS procurement funding, and the long-term
acquisition strategy to achieve the approved Army Acquisition
Objective.
Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor
The committee is concerned that the Army has not adequately
defined the requirements for spares for Lower Tier Air and
Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS) radars to ensure the system
stays fully mission capable to meet requirements for air
defense of forward-deployed forces. This may risk operational
availability, which would undermine the significant investment
made in LTAMDS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the sustainment and sparing
plan for LTAMDS. The briefing should also include the
following:
(1) a system sustainment strategy overview and support
concept that details the sustainment needs of the LTAMDS radar
for warfighter requirements;
(2) a maintenance planning framework that ensures long-term
readiness of deployed systems;
(3) an integrated approach that supports initial and
recurring spares and repairs;
(4) a plan for sustaining engineering services;
(5) identification of near-term mission support gaps and
mitigation recommendations related to currently deployed
systems; and
(6) any additional considerations the Secretary deems
necessary.
Missile Defense Agency Digital Modernization
The committee notes the budget request for fiscal year 2027
for the Missile Defense Agency includes significant investment
in cybersecurity, digital modernization, artificial
intelligence and associated technologies as part of the Missile
Defense System-Next (MDS-Next) initiative. While the committee
recognizes the need for modernization and the adoption of new
and innovative digital technologies, the committee notes such a
process must be appropriately time-phased as part of a long-
term deliberate strategy to obtain enduring results and limit
mission disruption. Therefore, the committee directs the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than September
30, 2026, on the digital modernization elements included in the
MDS-Next initiative. The briefing shall include:
(1) the current gaps in cybersecurity, digital
modernization, and implementation of artificial intelligence
the initiative intends to address;
(2) a detailed description of the entire project, to
include infrastructure needed to support the future MDS-Next
initiative; and
(3) total funding estimates and the timeline needed to
complete implementation of projects associated with the
initiative.
Missile Defense Applications for Unmanned Sea-based Platforms
The committee recognizes the potential of unmanned sea-
based platforms to contribute to multiple Department of Defense
needs, including ballistic missile defense testing. The
committee notes the ongoing review of such capabilities
pursuant to the Senate Committee on Armed Services report
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2026 (S. Rept. 119-39) and encourages the Department to
expedite its evaluation of the potential application of such
capabilities.
Patriot Interceptor Procurement
The committee supports the Army's continued investment in
Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) to address the
spectrum of current and future aerial threats and notes the
ongoing efforts to address munitions production capacity within
the domestic defense industrial base. The committee further
notes that the Army's procurement of Patriot interceptors in
recent budget requests has been for the Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (PAC-3 MSE), and not
for the PAC-2 Guided Enhanced Missile-Tactical (GEM-T), which
has complemented the MSE in real-world engagements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on missile inventories for
Patriot. The briefing should include:
(1) an overview of the capabilities and limitations of both
PAC-2 and PAC-3 interceptors against current and emerging
theater ballistic missile and air breathing threats;
(2) current stockpile levels for PAC-2 and PAC-3
interceptors, planned deliveries of both types across the
Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP), and an assessment of
inventory sufficiency relative to approved force growth, and
remaining shelf-life;
(3) a description of the Army's Total Munitions Requirement
for the Patriot family of interceptors; and
(4) any recommendations to address shortfalls in inventory,
to include additional procurement of PAC-2 interceptors,
modernization of the PAC-2 missile, and development of a new
interceptor for the Patriot system.
Resilient and Cost-Effective Integrated Air and Missile Defense
Architectures
The committee notes the cost asymmetry between United
States integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) systems and
the low-cost offensive systems adversaries employ to challenge
them. While these systems provide critical capabilities, over-
reliance on a small number of high-end nodes and interceptors
creates operational resilience and affordability risks.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services,
not later than April 1, 2027, on options to develop and field
cost-effective and resilient IAMD architectures that complement
existing capabilities. The briefing shall also include:
(1) an analysis of distributed and complementary missile
tracking systems, including ground-based, maritime, airborne,
and space-based sensors, that could improve network resilience
and reduce single-point dependencies;
(2) an assessment of lower-cost and complementary
engagement systems, including kinetic and non-kinetic
approaches, that could expand magazine depth, improve
affordability, and provide scalable responses against massed or
low-cost threats;
(3) a cost-benefit analysis comparing distributed, lower-
cost architectures against current architectures, including
assessments of reconstitution timelines, attrition tolerance,
interceptor expenditure rates, and lifecycle costs; and
(4) recommended programmatic and budgetary actions to
accelerate the fielding of resilient low cost, distributed
architectures, including an assessment of domestic industrial
base capacity to produce such systems at scale.
TEAMS Next Transition
The committee understands that the Missile Defense Agency's
(MDA) TEAMS Next program has successfully executed a system-of-
systems engineering, integration, and global testing approach
that underpins and enables the current worldwide Missile
Defense System (MDS). The committee is aware that MDA plans to
compete for future engineering, facility, test, acquisition,
and logistics work under the MDA Agile Professional Services
Solutions (MAPSS) vehicle and seeks to better understand the
potential risk of mission disruption during the transition from
TEAMS Next to MAPSS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the MDA to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 1, 2027, on the plan to transition to the
MAPSS contract structure. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) a current schedule of transition activities, target
award dates, and remaining decision points for the planned
transition to MAPSS contracts;
(2) a summary of lessons learned from transition activities
to-date;
(3) a description of expiration dates for existing legacy
TEAMS Next contracts;
(4) a cost-benefit analysis of transitioning to a MAPSS
procurement approach; and
(5) identification of risk mitigation measures, including
consideration of adjustments to the transition schedule, to
minimize disruption to ongoing missile defense mission
activities.
Other Matters
Acceleration of Commercial Hypersonic and Air-Launched Target
Capabilities
The committee recognizes that the joint force, particularly
in the INDOPACOM theater, faces a number of urgent threats from
hypersonic weapons, including recently unveiled fighter-
launched hypersonic missile capability from the Peoples
Republic of China.
While progress has been made in rapid hypersonic testing
and prototyping, the committee notes the Department's continued
utilization of commercial providers to provide the necessary
affordable and maneuverable, air-launched, hypersonic targets
necessary for use in live-fire exercises to test our defensive
capabilities. The Committee supports the Department's use of
commercial companies capable of air-launching hypersonic test
articles from geographically diverse locations, in multi-salvo
configurations, and capable of rapid reconfiguration of test
articles to closely represent current and emerging threats.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering to provide a briefing to
the House Armed Services Committee no later than March 1, 2027,
detailing plans to further utilize commercial providers for
hypersonic targets, for the testing of missile defense and
counter-hypersonic systems.
Biological Threat Detection Capabilities
The committee is concerned about the state of the
Department of Defense Biological Threat Detection program and
the fielding of the Joint Biological Detection System (JBDS).
Enhanced biological threat detection capabilities within the
Department of Defense are essential to safeguard the warfighter
against emerging biological threats. As adversaries advance
their own biotechnologies, the ability to rapidly detect,
assess, and respond to potential hazards becomes a critical
force-protection priority. Strengthening biological threat
detection infrastructure not only improves early warning and
situational awareness but also ensures that commanders can make
timely, informed decisions that preserve troop readiness and
operational effectiveness.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 1, 2026, on the following:
(1) an enterprise-wide plan for forward-edge biological
detection, including current capability gaps, ongoing
acquisition efforts, and the timeline and resourcing required
to achieve full operational capability across the joint force;
(2) the funding and fielding plan for JBDS, including
program status, current and projected funding levels across the
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), anticipated fielding
timelines, and any programmatic or funding risks; and
(3) the plan for the Joint Biological Point Detection
System (JBPDS) and Enhanced Maritime Biological Detection
(EMBD) technology refresh, including the status of
modernization efforts, timeline for fielding updated
capabilities, and how these systems will integrate with the
broader biological threat detection enterprise.
Broad Spectrum Host-Directed Antiviral Research
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
efforts to advance threat-agnostic medical countermeasures, as
outlined in the 2022 Chemical and Biological Defense Program
acquisition strategy, to address both known and novel
biological threats, and notes that this approach emphasizes the
development of broad-spectrum capabilities as a first line of
defense to enhance protection of the Joint Force against
emerging and engineered biological agents. However, the
committee is concerned that no broad-spectrum host-directed
antiviral candidates have advanced into late-stage development,
which may delay the availability of critical medical
countermeasures and increase risk to the warfighter in an
increasingly complex threat environment. The committee further
recognizes the potential of host-directed antiviral
therapeutics, which target human cellular pathways rather than
viral components and may offer broad-spectrum protection while
reducing the likelihood of resistance, including small-molecule
therapeutics targeting human proteins. Accordingly, the
committee encourages the Department of Defense, through the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency, to prioritize the development
and maturation of broad-spectrum host-directed antiviral
therapeutics and to continue advancing promising candidates
toward later stages of research and development.
Chemical Neurotoxic Threat Detection and Countermeasure Development
The committee notes the growing threat that chemical
neurotoxic agents pose to military and civilian populations
with the potential capabilities for adversaries to develop and
weaponize these agents. Chemical neurological agents can cause
acute and long-lasting effects on the central nervous system,
and rapid intervention following exposure can prevent or
mitigate severe outcomes; however, current countermeasure
discovery methods rely heavily on animal models that are low-
throughput and time-intensive.
The committee recognizes that advances in biotechnology,
artificial intelligence, and generative chemistry present both
opportunities and risks. Generative models and automated
experimental platforms offer unprecedented speed and precision
in therapeutic discovery and threat identification. At the same
time, these technologies may be misused to design or synthesize
toxic compounds, lowering barriers to the development of
chemical agents by state and non-state actors. The committee is
aware of emerging efforts to address this challenge through
integrated approaches that combine artificial intelligence-
enabled threat analysis, safeguards within generative models to
prevent weaponization outputs, and rapid in-vivo screening
platforms to identify and develop medical countermeasures.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to develop a strategy to leverage artificial
intelligence-enabled and high-throughput biological screening
approaches in support of identifying and characterizing
potential chemical neurotoxic threat agents.
Detection of Chemical and Biological Threats in Operational
Environments
The committee notes the increasing threat of adversaries
using chemical and biological agents in strategic conflicts and
recognizes the critical importance of equipping United States
forces with advanced detection capabilities to address this
evolving threat. The committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to prioritize testing, procurement, and deployment of
commercial sensor technologies capable of rapidly and
concurrently detecting both known and unknown biological and
chemical agents across a range of operational environments. The
committee believes that leveraging modern commercial sensor
solutions can reduce deployment timelines and costs while
ensuring warfighters have access to state-of-the-art rapid-
detection capabilities that keep pace with adversary
developments and enable rapid protection for warfighters
service members against these threats.
Enhancing Preparedness for Biological Threats to the Warfighter
The committee is concerned about biological threats,
particularly anthrax, which remains the key biological agent
threat posed by malign actors to servicemembers. The committee
recognizes the need for a robust stockpile of medical
countermeasures to counter the effects of anthrax exposure,
including both antitoxins for post-exposure treatment and
prophylactic measures for prevention.
Investing in the sustainable stockpiling of anthrax
countermeasures provides protection for warfighters and
civilians while maintaining deterrence capabilities against
biological threats. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2027,
on:
(1) current status of anthrax medical countermeasure
stockpiles within the Department of Defense;
(2) strategic implementation plans to ensure adequate
stockpiling, sustainability, and forward-deployment of anthrax
countermeasures;
(3) coordination mechanisms with interagency partners to
maintain required stockpile levels;
(4) plans for replenishment of current stocks to meet
requirements; and
(5) steps being taken to preserve domestic production
capacity for anthrax medical countermeasures.
Fast Burst Reactor Testing Capacity
The committee recognizes the longstanding concerns about
the capacity of the radiation test facility industrial base,
and its ability to meet the competing demands of nuclear
modernization and missile defense programs. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than February 5, 2027, summarizing all
Department of Defense requirements for Fast Burst Reactor (FBR)
test capabilities, and assessing the sufficiency of current FBR
test capabilities to meet such requirements. The briefing shall
also include an assessment of the feasibility and advisability
of establishing a second FBR facility.
Fusion for Naval Superiority
The committee recognizes the Naval Reactors program's
history of excellence and innovation that has enabled more than
75 years of United States naval superiority. The committee
further notes that fusion energy systems and enabling
technologies, including materials testing capabilities such as
volumetric neutron sources (VNS), remain early-stage, pre-
program technologies that may nonetheless hold revolutionary
potential across a range of future naval applications,
including propulsion. The committee believes that realizing
this potential will require sustained early-stage research,
science and technology investment, and a deliberate approach to
technology maturation and transition within the naval research
enterprise. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Navy to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the Navy's science
and technology efforts and posture with respect to fusion
capabilities. The report shall include the following:
(1) an analysis of how fusion energy systems, including
fusion-enabling technologies such as VNS, could be used to
support and advance future naval capabilities, including but
not limited to propulsion;
(2) an assessment of the personnel, funding, and
organizational placement of nuclear fusion-related research and
development efforts currently underway within the Department of
the Navy;
(3) an assessment of opportunities for the Department to
leverage existing fusion research and development efforts
across the Department of Energy, the national laboratories,
other Federal agencies, allied partners, and the private
sector, including means of avoiding duplication of effort;
(4) an evaluation of whether the Department is sufficiently
structured to mature early-stage fusion technologies and
transition them to the warfighter;
(5) a recommendation as to whether a dedicated focal point
or office for fusion science and technology would better
position the Department to accelerate the maturation and
transition of fusion technologies, including, at a conceptual
level, the functions such an entity would perform and how it
would coordinate across the naval research enterprise, other
military departments, interagency partners, and industry;
(6) an assessment of current domestic VNS technology
readiness levels, together with VNS technology programs and
developments by adversaries or strategic competitors of the
United States; and
(7) an assessment of supply chain resilience for fusion-
related components, including high-temperature superconducting
(HTS) materials (wire, tape, and magnets), critical isotope
generation, and the refinement of necessary critical minerals
such as lithium.
Hypersonic Program Progression
The committee recognizes the imperative of maintaining
United States leadership in advanced weapons capabilities and
notes the substantial investments made by Congress to support
innovation across the hypersonics industrial base. These
investments reflect congressional intent to accelerate the
maturation of this critical capability, expand and stabilize
the industrial base, and ensure the Department of Defense can
transition promising innovations into operational capabilities
at scale. The committee emphasizes that hypersonic systems
represent a priority area where congressional support has been
directed toward enabling rapid development, robust testing, and
a resilient domestic supply chain capable of meeting long-term
national security requirements.
However, the committee notes that the Department of Defense
has not yet completed transition of hypersonic weapon
technologies from science and technology, prototyping and
middle-tier acquisition efforts into major acquisition
capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's plan to
transition hypersonic weapon technologies from science and
technology, prototyping and middle-tier acquisition efforts
into major acquisition capabilities. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum:
(1) the Department's overarching strategy for hypersonic
weapons development, fielding, and sustainment, including how
current Service-specific and joint hypersonic efforts align
with that strategy;
(2) the anticipated acquisition pathway and timeline for
transitioning existing hypersonic technologies, prototypes, or
experiments into major acquisition capabilities;
(3) the roles and responsibilities of the Military
Departments, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and any
applicable defense agencies in managing and executing
hypersonics programs;
(4) projected funding requirements across the Future Years
Defense Program, including research, development, test, and
evaluation; procurement; and operations and sustainment;
(5) the Department's approach to mitigating technical,
manufacturing, and supply chain risks, including those related
to propulsion systems, energetics, materials, test
infrastructure, and workforce capacity;
(6) how the Department intends to ensure interoperability,
commonality, and affordability across hypersonic systems where
practicable;
(7) how the Department intends to ensure that fielded
hypersonic systems will be able to adapt to advancing adversary
air defenses and other threats; and
(8) any areas the Secretary deems necessary to include.
Independent Assessment of Bone Marrow Radiation Shielding for Nuclear
Survivability
The committee notes that the Department of Defense outlined
to the committee in a briefing on Selective Shielding for Gamma
Radiation Exposure in March 2025 that there is no specific
requirement or plans for a wider acquisition and distribution
of selective shielding technology at the time but continues to
address requirement to enhance resilience for the Joint Force
to prevail in a Chemical, Biological, Radiological or Nuclear
(CBRN) contaminated environment. The committee believes the
protection and safeguarding of our servicemembers should be the
highest priority. The committee understands there may be
innovative commercially available selective shielding
technology that may safeguard individuals in gamma radiation-
contaminated environments, on the battlefield and in recovery
efforts, specifically to protect bone marrow from radiation.
The committee believes this should be further assessed and
encourages the Secretary of Defense to seek an independent
scientific assessment on whether preserving the viability of
bone marrow using partial body radiation shielding can improve
the survivability of an individual exposed to gamma radiation
as compared to an individual without such protection.
Proliferated Ground-Based Surveillance Radar
The committee is interested in the applicability of
deploying proliferated Ground-Based Surveillance Radars to
address critical gaps in domain awareness to support homeland
defense. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, describing benefits and
feasibility of proliferating Ground-Based Surveillance Radars
to contribute to domain awareness for defense of the homeland.
The briefing should include:
(1) a description of how Ground-Based Surveillance radars
could contribute to domain awareness to support future; and
(2) anticipated funding and schedule profile to deploy a
scalable architecture of Ground-Based Surveillance Radars.
Solid Rocket Motor Second Source
The committee remains committed to working with the
Department of Defense to broaden the Defense Industrial Base,
specifically with regards to solid rocket motors. To that end,
the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to obligate
and expend funding that has been appropriated by Congress for
this explicit effort. The committee also remains concerned with
the use of equity investments into one of the existing SRM
providers, and its impact on efforts of new entrants to
develop, qualify, and expand the current production capacities
across multiple munitions.
In addition to obligating and expending the already
appropriated funding, the committee notes there should be a
whole of Department effort to establish a strategy and
implementation plan for the qualification and fielding of
second-source solid rocket motor providers to meet growing
demand, increase production resilience, and mitigate supply-
chain risk. In carrying out this effort, the Department should
leverage existing authorities, including Defense Production Act
authorities, multi-year procurement contracts, and other
acquisition tools, to accelerate qualification timelines and
reduce barriers to entry for additional providers.
Further, the committee notes the continuing importance of
hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) to munitions and space
launch systems. HTPB acts as a binding agent in solid rocket
motors and is thus critical to the sustainment of the munitions
industrial base. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 1, 2026, on future plans for
the procurement of HTPB, including:
(1) HTPB demand projections for the next 12-24 months,
incorporating data available from the Munitions Acceleration
Council;
(2) an assessment of the current domestic production
capabilities for HTPB, including announced private investments
into HTPB production;
(3) any end user requests for an updated specification for
HTPB; and
(4) an assessment of the business case for the
establishment of a second source of HTPB using government funds
and any technical risks that would need to be managed.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Space Activities
Sec. 1601--Reorganization of Acquisition Responsibilities of the Space
Force
This section would repeal certain statues to allow for the
Department of the Air Force to reorganize its acquisition
structure and other confirming changes.
Sec. 1602--Reorganization of Oversight of the Department of Defense
Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Enterprise
This section would repeal the requirement for the Council
on Oversight of the Department of Defense Positioning,
Navigation, and Timing (PNT) Enterprise, and instead require
the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to designate a single official from
the Department of Defense as the principal official with
responsibility for the oversight of the Department of Defense
position, navigation, and timing enterprise to include
alternative position, navigation, and timing efforts and report
directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense.
The committee recognizes that despite previous efforts to
improve oversight and execution of the PNT programs of the
department, there remains a concerning lack of clear direction
and sense of urgency to address existing gaps and plan for both
near term and future requirements. Position, navigation, and
timing is foundational to everything the joint force does, but
despite this it continues to be plagued by a lack of senior
oversight. User equipment is consistently out of phase with the
space segment because of lack of prioritization by the
services. The Next-Generation Operational Control System (OCX),
slated to be the new ground system, was recently canceled after
decades of mismanagement by both the program office and the
contractor. The space segment has only recently gotten past a
backlog of unlaunched vehicles due to launch vehicle delays.
The committee also notes that there has been no updated
strategy from the Department of Defense on how it plans to
posture the PNT enterprise to deal with increasing threats to
the space segments and exponential increase in jamming
experienced by the joint force. There are many proposals to
include multi-orbit constellations, commercial services, and
non-space based alternative PNT solutions that the committee
believes should be considered.
The committee notes that the Department needs a single
individual who can be responsible and accountable for this
vital mission. This section would also require the lead
official to certify annually that the service budgets are fully
funding user equipment and ground control systems for the PNT
enterprise.
Sec. 1603--Space Launch Support Services and Alternative Launch
Procurement Process
This section would extend the indirect launch cost caps for
5 years and would make changes to the alternative launch
procurement notifications.
Sec. 1604--Spaceport of the Future Initiative
This section would require the Department of the Air Force
to report back to the committee the status of any policy
recommendations made previously, require the creation a single
program to manage the Spaceport of the Future Initiative that
reports to the Program Acquisition Executive for Space Access,
and requires with the budget each year a list of prioritized
investments for the Spaceport of the Future infrastructure
efforts.
Sec. 1605--Procurement of Commercial Space-Based Data and to Support
Wildfire Resilience
This section would require the Space Force to procure
commercial space-based data and end products to support
Northern Command's wildfire mission.
Sec. 1606--Continuation of Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared
Polar Program of the Department of the Air Force
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to continue procuring the Next-Generation Overhead Persistent
Infrared Polar program through launch of space vehicles one and
two.
Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities
Sec. 1611--Expenditure of Funds Across Fiscal Years for Department of
Defense Intelligence and Counterintelligence Activities
This section would amend section 429a of title 10, United
States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense to expend a
limited amount of funds for intelligence and
counterintelligence activities over the course of 2 fiscal
years and require additional reporting requirements for the use
of these funds.
Sec. 1612--Permanent Authority for Military Intelligence Collection and
Analysis Partnerships
This section would codify and make permanent the authority
for the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency to accept
and expend funds from foreign partners for the purpose of joint
and combined military intelligence collection and analysis
activities.
Sec. 1613--Repeal of Certain Reporting and Briefing Requirements
This section would repeal section 1622 of Public Law 117-
81, requiring the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy
and plan to implement certain defense intelligence reforms, and
section 1560 of Public Law 117-263 requiring a briefing on the
Department's plan to deter and counter adversaries in the
information environment. These sections are now outdated and no
longer necessary to keep in law.
Sec. 1614--Modification of Authority of Army Counterintelligence Agents
to Execute Warrants and Make Arrests
This section would amend section 7377(b)(2) of title 10,
United States Code, by striking the 4-year period, thereby
making the underlying authority for certain special agents of
the Army Counterintelligence Command to execute warrants and
make arrests permanent.
Sec. 1615--Periodic Strategy and Assessment of Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Capabilities to Meet Intelligence
Collection Priorities
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security to periodically develop an
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
capabilities assessment and strategy evaluating the ability of
the Department of Defense's ISR capabilities to meet Department
of Defense intelligence collection requirements. The reports
shall be issued every 2 years until 2037 and include an
assessment of the ISR landscape and a strategy to improve the
capabilities. The strategy will be submitted to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees.
Sec. 1616--Integration of Open-Source Intelligence Training and
Tradecraft into All-Source Intelligence Analysis Curricula
This section would require the Secretaries of the military
department to ensure that training for all-source intelligence
analysts includes instruction in open-source intelligence
tradecraft. This section would also require the Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence and Security to issue guidance to
standardize open-source intelligence training requirements and
establish minimum open-source intelligence tradecraft
standards.
Sec. 1617--Object-Based Generative Artificial Intelligence for Open-
Source Intelligence
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) to assess the
capabilities of the Defense Intelligence Enterprise that
support the application of artificial intelligence, including
generative artificial intelligence, to open-source
intelligence. This section would also direct the USD(I&S) to
establish a pilot program to develop, acquire, or use
commercial and other technologies to develop and support an
object-based generative artificial intelligence capability for
open-source intelligence activities.
Sec. 1618--Report on Protection From Disclosure of Members of the Armed
Forces Under Cover
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report not later than November 1, 2027, on efforts
within the Department of Defense to update military personnel
systems to protect certain individuals and activities from
unauthorized disclosure.
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces
Sec. 1631--Matters Relating to Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles
This section would provide additional transfer authority to
enhance efforts to modernize the land-based intercontinental
ballistic missile force. Additionally, this section would also
authorize certain procurements related to the land-based
intercontinental ballistic missile force, and amend section
2244a of title 10, United States Code, to increase the
threshold of permitted modifications for strategic delivery
systems.
Sec. 1632--Designation of Air Force Global Strike Command as National
Center for Conventional-Nuclear Integration
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to designate Air Force Global Strike Command as the National
Center for Conventional-Nuclear Integration for the Department
of the Air Force and specify certain associated
responsibilities.
Sec. 1633--Quadrennial Report on the Plan for the Nuclear Weapons
Stockpile, Nuclear Weapons Complex, Nuclear Weapons Delivery Systems,
and Nuclear Weapons Command and Control System
This section would amend section 492a of title 10, United
States Code, to require a report on modernizing the nuclear
enterprise be submitted quadrennially.
Sec. 1634--Prohibition on Reduction of Intercontinental Ballistic
Missiles of the United States
This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized for
fiscal year 2027 from being used to reduce the number of
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) of the United
States below 400 or reduce the alert level of the ICBM force.
Sec. 1635--Limitation on Reallocation of Funds for Ronald Reagan Space
and Missile Test Range and United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll
This section would limit the reallocation of funds
authorized to be appropriated for activities at the Ronald
Reagan Space and Missile Test Range or United States Army
Garrison Kwajalein Atoll, with an exception.
Sec. 1636--Feasibility Assessment for Potential Designation of Joint
Global Strike Operations Center as Global Operations Center--Alternate
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to carry out a feasibility assessment with respect to
designating the Joint Global Strike Operations Center as an
alternate command post to the U.S. Strategic Command's Global
Operations Center.
Sec. 1637--Space Launch Complex 46
This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Air Force
from taking any action to reduce or modify the United States
Navy's use of Space Launch Complex 46 until the Chief of Naval
Operations submits to the congressional defense committees a
notification that certain conditions have been met, consistent
with the Memorandum of Agreement between the Director,
Strategic Systems Programs and the United States Space Force
for the development and acceptance of replacement facilities
for Space Launch Complex 46 (SLC-46), dated April 2, 2026.
Sec. 1638--Modification of Report Requirement for Certain Decisions
Relating to Nuclear Weapons Employment Strategy of the United States
This section would modify section 491 of title 10, United
States Code, relating to oversight of changes to nuclear
weapons employment strategy, guidance, plans, or options.
Sec. 1639--Independent Assessment of Bone Marrow Radiation Shielding
for Nuclear Survivability
This section would require an independent assessment of
bone barrow radiation shielding for nuclear survivability.
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs
Sec. 1651--Prohibition of Unauthorized Use of Name or Seal of the
Missile Defense Agency
This section would prohibit the unauthorized use of the
name or seal of the Missile Defense Agency.
Sec. 1652--Removal of Duplicative Missile Defense Agency Testing
Requirement
This section would repeal section 5534 of title 10, United
States Code.
Sec. 1653--Updated Middle East Integrated Air and Missile Defense
Strategy
This section would require an update to the Middle East
integrated air and missile defense strategy required by section
1658 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2023 (Public Law 117-263).
Sec. 1654--Next-Generation Integrated Air and Missile Defense System
Munitions Strategy
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to a plan to the congressional defense committees for
the acquisition of munitions for the next-generation air and
missile defense architecture being developed pursuant to
Executive Order 14186 (90 Fed. Reg. 8767).
Sec. 1655--Space-Based Interceptors
This section would establish certain requirements related
to life-cycle cost estimates and affordability controls for
space-based interceptors. Additionally, this section would
require an operationally relevant flight test of the space-
based interceptor prior to a decision with respect to full-rate
production.
Sec. 1656--Low-Cost Exo-Atmospheric Interceptor Development
This section would require the Missile Defense Agency to
carry out a program to develop low-cost exo-atmospheric
interceptors, and provide to the congressional defense
committees a briefing and a report on such development
activities.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 1661--Briefings and Reports on Cross-Functional Team for Anomalous
Health Incidents
This section would codify the Anomalous Health Incidents
(AHI) Cross-Functional Team (CFT); require quarterly briefings
on CFT activities through March 1, 2028; extend the semi-annual
briefings through 2030; and require an annual report on CFT
activities.
Sec. 1662--Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds
This section would allocate specific funding amounts for
each program under the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) Program from the overall $221.3 million that
the committee would authorize for the CTR Program. The
allocation under this section reflects the amount of the budget
request for fiscal year 2027.
This section would also specify that funds authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Defense for the CTR Program,
established under the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat
Reduction Act (50 U.S.C. 3711), would be available for
obligation for fiscal years 2027-2029.
Sec. 1663--Solid Rocket Motor Industrial Base
This section would establish a solid rocket motor
qualification working group and would require that certain
covered munitions have more than one solid rocket motor
supplier. The committee remains committed to working with the
Department of Defense to broaden the Defense Industrial Base,
specifically with regards to solid rocket motors. To that end,
the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to obligate
and expend funding that has been appropriated by Congress for
this explicit effort. The committee also remains concerned with
the sole use of equity investments with regards to expanding
solid rocket motor industrial base when there are other tools
that could be used in a more expeditious manner given the
importance of increasing munition production.
In addition to obligating and expending the already
appropriated funding, the committee believes there should be a
whole of Department effort to establish a strategy and
implementation plan for the qualification and fielding of
second-source solid rocket motor providers to meet growing
demand, increase production resilience, and mitigate supply-
chain risk. In carrying out this effort, the Department should
leverage existing authorities, including Defense Production Act
authorities, multi-year procurement contracts, and other
acquisition tools, to accelerate qualification timelines and
reduce barriers to entry for additional providers.
TITLE XVII--OTHER DEFENSE MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Comptroller General Review of the Stars and Stripes Media Organization
The Stars and Stripes media organization, founded in 1861,
provides news and information on a range of topics related to
the United States Armed Forces. The publication operates under
the Department of Defense (DOD) but maintains editorial
independence. While the publication receives partial funding
from DOD, it also relies on advertising and subscriptions.
Until recently, Stars and Stripes was governed by 32 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part 246. The regulations set forth
the policy, responsibilities, and procedures for Stars and
Stripes and its business operations. However, in January 2026,
the Department of Defense published a final rule to remove 32
CFR part 246 in the Federal Register. Several months later, the
Department of Defense issued interim policy and procedural
guidance significantly altering the operations of Stars and
Stripes, and in April 2026, the Department fired the Stars and
Stripes ombudsman--a role designed to monitor and protect the
paper's independence.
The committee is concerned about the ability of Stars and
Stripes to maintain its independence in light of recent
changes. As such, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to assess the following:
(1) the impact of recent changes on the ability of Stars
and Stripes to independently achieve its overall mission;
(2) challenges associated with the prohibition on
contracted services and content;
(3) workforce changes and adjustments to publication
oversight; and
(4) any other matters that the Comptroller General deems
appropriate.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
February 1, 2027, with the results of the review to follow in a
mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Military Pilot Shortage and Aviation Pipeline Development
The committee recognizes that the United States faces a
persistent and growing military pilot shortage across the Armed
Forces that threatens long term readiness and national
security. The committee finds that early exposure to aviation,
beginning at the secondary education level through existing
Department of Defense youth programs, represents a high-return
and underutilized opportunity to inspire the next generation of
military aviators. The committee further finds that current
Department of Defense programs engaging high school students,
including Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps units with
aviation pathways, require updated assessment, expanded
resources, and stronger coordination to maximize their impact
on the military aviation talent pipeline.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2027, on the current and projected military
pilot shortage across the Armed Forces. The report should
include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current military pilot shortage by
military service, including projected shortfalls over the next
5 years and 10 years;
(2) an identification of the primary factors driving pilot
shortfalls across the pilot development pipeline, including
recruitment, undergraduate pilot training, advanced
qualification, and operational assignment;
(3) a review of existing Department of Defense programs
that engage secondary school students in aviation, including
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps aviation curriculum
programs, Civil Air Patrol partnerships, and Department-
sponsored aviation academies;
(4) an assessment of the geographic reach, enrollment
levels, capacity limitations, and demonstrated effectiveness of
such programs in generating military aviation accessions;
(5) an identification of gaps in current secondary-level
aviation engagement programs, with particular attention to
underserved, rural, and economically disadvantaged communities;
and
(6) recommendations for expanding and modernizing such
programs, including estimated resource requirements, proposed
program metrics, and any legislative authorities required to
implement such expansion.
The committee further directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Secretaries of the other
military departments, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
efforts to leverage and expand existing pilot training
innovation programs to accelerate pilot production, improve
training throughput, and reduce time-to-winging across the
Armed Forces. The briefing should include the following:
(1) an assessment of the effectiveness of the T-6 Vmax
program and other advanced pilot training technologies;
(2) a description of current and planned efforts to improve
capacity across undergraduate pilot training, advanced
qualification courses, and fleet replacement training;
(3) an identification of major constraints affecting pilot
training throughput across the military services; and
(4) estimated costs associated with implementing proposed
pilot training modernization and expansion efforts.
Tobacco Products Sold on Military Installations
The committee commends the Marine Corps Exchange (MCX) for
conducting a comprehensive compliance review of all electronic
nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) products supplied at MCX
locations. Pursuant to Federal tobacco regulations, including
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301), in
order to legally market a new tobacco product, a company must
receive a written marketing order from the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). Companies may receive marketing
authorization through one of three pathways: a Premarket
Tobacco Product Application (PMTA), a determination of
substantial equivalence, or an exemption from substantial
equivalence requests. The committee is aware that to legally
market a new tobacco product through the PMTA pathway, a
company must receive a written Marketing Granted Order (MGO)
from the FDA.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to submit a report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027. The report should include:
(1) the process to determine which tobacco products,
particularly ENDS products, are sold on military installations,
to include any coordination with the FDA;
(2) any review process to ensure that tobacco products
currently available for sale on military installations comply
with federal regulations; and
(3) a list of any tobacco products removed from sale due to
noncompliance, disaggregated by installation.
Veteran-Led Participation in POW/MIA Recovery Missions
The committee acknowledges the Department of Defense's
enduring obligation to account for service members missing from
past conflicts, noting that successful recovery operations
demand both technical operational capacity and a depth of
mission-specific expertise. The committee notes that veteran-
led nonprofits possess core competencies that align directly
with Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) requirements, to
include specialized research and accounting, small-unit field
execution, and risk management in austere environments. The
committee recognizes that integrating veteran-led organizations
could expand recovery capacity, improve operational
flexibility, and enhance interoperability with DPAA personnel
without requiring significant additional departmental force
structure or prohibitive cost.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on efforts to increase the utilization of veteran-led nonprofit
organizations in POW/MIA recovery missions. The briefing shall
include, but is not limited to:
(1) an assessment of the current integration of veteran-led
nonprofit organizations in DPAA recovery missions;
(2) a performance evaluation of veteran-led nonprofit
organizations in land-based missions associated with Missing
Air Crew Reports (MACR);
(3) the criteria and procurement processes used to evaluate
and select such organizations for participation;
(4) identification of any legal, policy, or administrative
barriers limiting expanded participation of such organizations;
(5) recommendations to improve the vetting and onboarding
of qualified veteran-led nonprofit organizations for such
missions; and
(6) an evaluation of how expanded veteran-led nonprofit
organization partnerships could enhance recovery capacity and
complement existing DPAA partnerships.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Sec. 1701--Availability of Funds for Department of Defense State
Partnership Program
This section would authorize funds for the Department of
Defense State Partnership Program that begin in one fiscal year
and conclude in the following fiscal year.
Sec. 1702--Inclusion of Members of Special Operations Forces in
Preseparation Counseling
This section would include special operations forces
members in preseparation counseling.
Sec. 1703--Copyright to a Literary Work Produced by a Civilian Faculty
Member of a Space Force Professional Military Education Program in the
Course of Employment: Free Use by the Federal Government
This section would provide protection for the Government to
use certain works produced by the civilian faculty of Space
Force Professional Military Education.
Sec. 1704--Inapplicability of Defense Base Act to Guam
This section would modify worker's compensation regulations
related to Guam.
Sec. 1705--Extension of Admission for Certain Nonimmigrant H-2B Workers
This section would provide an extension of admission for
certain non-immigrant H-2B workers.
Sec. 1706--Reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Act of 2015
This section would reauthorize and update the Cybersecurity
Act of 2015, section 1501 of title 6, United States Code.
Sec. 1707--United States-Abraham Accords Defense Cooperation Initiative
This section would establish a United States-Abraham
Accords Defense Cooperation Initiative to bolster defense
cooperation between the United States and the militaries of the
Abraham Accords countries.
Sec. 1708--Establishment of the Atomic Civilians Commemorative Service
Medal
This section would establish a commemorative service medal
for U.S. Government civilian and contract employees who helped
develop U.S. atomic weapons or participated in the cleanup of
radioactive material.
Sec. 1709--Establishment of the Blast Overpressure Task Force of the
Department of Veterans Affairs
This section would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
to establish a Blast Overpressure Task Force through the
Department of Veterans Affairs-Department of Defense Joint
Executive Committee.
Sec. 1710--Authorization of Transfer of Certain Land Near Dayton
National Cemetery to Department of Veterans Affairs
This section would authorize the transfer of land near
Dayton National Cemetery to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Subtitle B--Other Matters
Sec. 1721--Technical and Conforming Amendments
This section would make technical and conforming amendments
to existing law.
Sec. 1722--Countering China's Control of the Caucasus
This section would require a report from the Secretary of
Defense on Chinese and Russian intelligence assets in Georgia.
Sec. 1723--Comptroller General Study on Skillbridge Programs
This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a study of the Skillbridge program.
TITLE XVIII--REVITALIZATION OF THE DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Advanced Manufacturing of High-Temperature Composites
The committee recognizes the importance of high-temperature
composites, including ceramic matrix composites, to hypersonic
systems and other advanced defense applications. The committee
further recognizes the potential for advanced manufacturing
techniques to reduce production timelines, improve yields, and
strengthen the defense industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Director of the Joint Hypersonics
Transition Office and the Director of the Manufacturing
Technology Program, to provide a report to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
opportunities to accelerate the production of high-temperature
composites through advanced manufacturing techniques. The
report shall include:
(1) current Department efforts to improve the production of
high-temperature composites, including ceramic matrix
composites;
(2) opportunities to reduce production timelines and
improve manufacturing yields through advanced manufacturing
techniques;
(3) barriers to adoption of such techniques across the
defense industrial base; and
(4) recommendations for future Department actions,
including any pilot activities, demonstrations, or investments
that may be warranted.
An Enduring Acquisition Policy Experimentation Laboratory to Model,
Simulate, and Analyze the Impact of Acquisition and Industrial Base
Policies
The committee notes that over the past decade, a series of
policy test labs have been developed through engagement with
diverse stakeholder groups, modeling and analyzing complex
trade-offs in medical care infrastructure, transportation,
higher education, and the defense budget to inform and improve
decisions. Policy test labs can model, simulate, and analyze
proposed acquisition and sustainment policies in a multi-domain
environment to include consideration of financial implications,
market reactions, supply chain availability, technological
capabilities, and effects on national security. The committee
believes these policy test labs would be a valuable tool to
model the defense industrial base and experiment with policy
proposals to evaluate what incentivizes contractors of the
Department of Defense to maintain and invest in surge
capabilities and capacities, as well as what policies influence
a resilient, responsive defense industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, leveraging the
Acquisition Innovation Research Center (AIRC) established under
section 4142 of title 10, United States Code, to develop an
initial but enduring Acquisition Policy Experimentation
Laboratory (APEL) not later than January 15, 2027. The initial
APEL efforts should seek to model, simulate, and analyze
proposed acquisition policy options to:
(1) create the right industrial structure;
(2) incentivize contractors of the Department to maintain
and invest in increasing the capability and capacity of the
industrial base; and
(3) remove barriers to entry, reduce burden on contractors,
and increase defense industrial base capability and capacity.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Under Secretary,
leveraging the AIRC, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2026, on the
progress in developing the APEL, to include:
(1) designation of a research team;
(2) initial policies or policy proposals to model;
(3) timelines for the iterative development and enhancement
of the APEL to evaluate proposed acquisition policies in a
timely manner; and
(4) estimated annual funding requirements to support the
APEL.
Berry Amendment and Buy American Requirements for Defense Textiles
The committee reaffirms the critical importance of the
Berry Amendment (section 4862 of title 10, United States Code)
and Buy American requirements in sustaining a secure and
resilient domestic defense textile and apparel industrial base.
The committee recognizes that Berry-compliant manufacturers are
foundational to military readiness and that the Defense
Logistics Agency Troop Support (DLA-TS) serves as the
Department of Defense's primary procuring activity for
uniforms, protective equipment, and other mission-essential
organizational clothing and individual equipment items.
The committee notes that DLA-TS contracting practices play
a central role in compliance with domestic sourcing
requirements and providing predictable demand signals to
domestic manufacturers. Accordingly, the committee expects DLA-
TS to rigorously enforce Berry Amendment and Buy American
requirements for all covered textile and apparel procurements
to protect the domestic industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 31, 2027, on efforts to strengthen compliance with
the Berry Amendment and Buy American requirements for textile
and apparel items. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of waiver usage;
(2) an evaluation of supplier verification and auditing
practices;
(3) steps taken to improve transparency and traceability
across the textile supply chain; and
(4) actions to align contracting strategies with the long-
term health of the domestic defense textile industrial base.
Briefing on the Pilot Program to Analyze and Monitor Certain Supply
Chains
The committee supports section 856 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31).
Section 856 directed the Department to establish a pilot
program focused on supply chain scrutiny. It requires the
Department to employ government and commercial tools to
continuously analyze and identify vulnerabilities within the
supply chains of up to five major weapons platforms.
The committee notes that the authority to carry out the
pilot program terminates on January 1, 2028. In order to inform
timely decisions on whether to extend or make permanent the
authorities provided in the pilot program, the committee
directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services no later than December 1, 2026, on the
development and implementation of the policies, procedures, and
tools under section 856. This briefing shall include, but is
not limited to:
(1) an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pilot program
under section 856 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024;
(2) an assessment of the data analysis capabilities,
including the use of artificial intelligence and machine
learning tools, employed by the Department of Defense under the
pilot;
(3) an evaluation of the extent to which the findings of
the pilot have been translated into actual mitigation of supply
chain vulnerabilities;
(4) recommendations for any legislative or administrative
action, including recommendations on whether to extend the
pilot program's authority beyond January 1, 2028.
Clarification of Commercial Solicitation Restrictions During Basic
Combat Training
The committee is aware that the Army has applied the
commercial solicitation restrictions of Army Regulation 210-7
and 32 C.F.R. 552.60(d) in a manner that may prevent trainees
in Basic Combat Training (BCT) and One Station Unit Training
(OSUT) from obtaining cycle-commemorative merchandise, that the
trainees have organized and arranged. The committee is
concerned this may prevent Soldiers from exercising their own
initiative to produce merchandise commemorating their service
and unit identity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on current Army policies
governing commercial solicitation during BCT and OSUT and the
implementation of such policies. The briefing should include
the following:
(1) the current interpretation and application of Army
Regulation 210-7 and 32 C.F.R. 552.60(d) with respect to cycle-
commemorative and unit-branded merchandise transactions
initiated by trainees or their families during BCT and the
first half of the OSUT cycle;
(2) an assessment of whether the current interpretation of
the commercial solicitation prohibition is consistent with the
original intent of such restrictions and any unintended effects
on trainee morale, unit identity, and recruiting; and
(3) any recommendations based on the findings of this
briefing. for any clarifications to implementing guidance that
would distinguish between predatory outside commercial
solicitation and merchandise transactions organized at the
initiative of trainees or their families.
Comptroller General Review of Certain Contracts and Awards to Small
Business Concerns
The committee is concerned by Department of Defense
reporting that contracts awarded by the Department to non-small
businesses accounted for more than a quarter of Department
spending below the simplified acquisition threshold. Therefore,
the committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a review of Department contracts awarded with
a value at or below the simplified acquisition threshold (as
defined in section 3015 of title 10, United States Code) to
determine if the Department is ensuring full consideration and
application of requirements relating to small business concerns
(as defined in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
632)). The review should include:
(1) the total dollar amount of contracts awarded with a
value at or below the simplified acquisition threshold during
the 5-year period preceding the date of the report, including
the percentage of such contracts and the aggregate dollar
amount of such contracts awarded to small business concerns;
(2) an overview of the types of contracts with a value at
or below the simplified acquisition threshold, and a
description of the products or services, that were not awarded
to small business concerns; and
(3) an overview of the reasons why a contract with a value
at or below the simplified acquisition threshold may not be set
aside for small business concerns.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1,
2027, on the following:
(1) any trends, themes, or patterns of contracts with a
value at or below the simplified acquisition threshold that
were awarded to entities that are not small business concerns
when such contracts should have been subject to a requirement
to be set aside for small business concerns; and
(2) any recommendations for changes to statute, regulation,
policy, or guidance that would ensure full consideration and
application of requirements to set aside contracts for small
business concerns, particularly contracts with a value at or
below the simplified acquisition threshold.
Copper-Free Antifouling Coatings Supply Assurance
The committee recognizes the increasing reliance of the
Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the
Department of Commerce, and the Department of Transportation on
copper-free antifouling coatings to meet environmental
compliance requirements, sustain ship readiness, and support
domestic shipbuilding and repair activities.
The committee notes that the manufacture of copper-free
antifouling coatings relies on a limited number of specialized
precursor chemicals, binders, resins, and performance
additives, many of which are sourced from fragile domestic or
international supply chains that may be vulnerable to
disruption. The availability of these manufacturing inputs is
essential to meeting fleet maintenance schedules, new ship
construction timelines, and lifecycle sustainment requirements
across multiple Federal maritime stakeholders.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Secretary of Transportation, to provide a briefing to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on
the sufficiency, resilience, and domestic availability of key
manufacturing inputs required for copper-free antifouling
coatings used by vessels operated, owned, chartered, or
procured by the Federal Government. The briefing shall include
the following:
(1) the critical manufacturing inputs necessary to produce
copper-free antifouling coatings that meet military,
transportation, and environmental specifications, with special
consideration for coatings that have been vetted for efficacy
and are used by the United States Navy, the United States Coast
Guard, Military Sealift Command (MSC), Maritime Administration
(MARAD), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), the United States Army, the United States Marine Corps,
and the Environmental Protection Agency;
(2) current domestic and foreign sourcing of such inputs,
including production capacity, lead times, single-point-of-
failure risks, and dependency on adversarial or high-risk
supply chains;
(3) whether current market conditions can reliably support
a minimum of five years of supply of such inputs sufficient to
meet projected shipbuilding, repair, and sustainment
requirements across the Department of Defense, Department of
Commerce, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of
Transportation;
(4) the feasibility and cost of strategies to ensure
sustainable supply continuity, including domestic manufacturing
expansion, long-term contracting mechanisms, strategic material
reserves, demand signal aggregation, or public-private
partnerships; and
(5) any statutory, regulatory, or acquisition barriers that
may impede the establishment or maintenance of assured access
to these inputs.
The committee emphasizes that ensuring predictable access
to these materials is critical to fleet readiness,
environmental compliance, shipyard workload stability, and the
long-term health of the domestic maritime industrial base.
Critical Chemistries in Supporting the Defense Industrial Base
The committee recognizes the vital role that critical
chemistries play in supporting the defense industrial base and
underscores the importance of maintaining a resilient domestic
supply of chemicals used in products and applications essential
to national security. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Chemical and
Material Risk Management Program, and the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment to submit a brief to the House
Committee on Armed Services no later than June 30, 2027, that
assesses the supply chain resiliency and vulnerabilities
associated with chemical substances currently undergoing risk
evaluation or risk management by the Environmental Protection
Agency under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Such
brief shall specifically include an analysis of the potential
impacts on supply chains for critical chemistries, critical
applications, and national security, including effects on the
defense industrial base, associated with each type of
regulatory restriction on the chemical substance authorized
under section 6(a) of TSCA.
Critical Minerals Workforce Development and Mining Education
The committee welcomes the Department of Defense's efforts
to expand domestic critical mineral production capacity. These
efforts are essential to strengthening the defense industrial
base and reducing reliance on foreign sources. However, the
committee is aware that workforce shortages in mining
engineering, metallurgy, and other specialized fields may limit
the Department's ability to effectively execute and sustain
these investments.
The committee notes that workforce development has not been
consistently integrated into these investments and believes
that greater alignment, including through targeted partnerships
with accredited mining schools and work-based learning
opportunities, is necessary to ensure that production capacity
expansion is supported by a qualified workforce.
Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a
provision that would direct the Secretary of Defense to ensure
that workforce development initiatives support the mining
industry and to assess opportunities to better integrate
workforce development into critical mineral production
investments.
Defense Industrial Base AI-Enabled Risk Response and Manufacturing
Readiness
The committee remains concerned that persistent
manufacturing supply chain disruptions, single-point failures,
and foreign vulnerabilities and dependencies continue to pose
unacceptable risks to the national security of the United
States. The committee notes that section 1841 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) requires the Secretary of Defense to develop
recommendations for the establishment and operation of a Civil
Reserve Manufacturing Network, including the creation of a
National Manufacturing Registry to inventory the manufacturing
capabilities of the United States, and the development of a
Materiel Compatibility Index to identify where existing
equipment, capabilities, and skill sets of commercial
manufacturing could be converted to support requirements of the
Department of Defense.
The committee believes that the use of available digital
and artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities can aid the
Department in implementing the requirements of section 1841.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the Chief
Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the Department's efforts establish and
execute an AI-enabled manufacturing risk response capability.
The briefing should include the following:
(1) an update on progress made in identifying,
prioritizing, and responding to manufacturing supply chain
vulnerabilities, including improving discoverability of small
and mid-sized domestic manufacturers;
(2) an update on progress made in the assessment of
critical readiness items of supply that could be produced by
advanced manufacturing required by section 1842(a) of Public
Law 119-60;
(3) an assessment of commercially available digital
marketplace platforms that improve discoverability of and
access to U.S.-manufactured products; and
(4) an assessment of existing AI-enabled platforms capable
of assisting the Department's manufacturing risk response
capability by mapping domestic manufacturing capacity,
interpreting technical data packages and part schematics, and
matching identified capability and capacity with Department
needs.
Department of Defense Scrap Feedstock to Private Sector Process
The committee believes it is essential to accelerate
domestic commercial-scale recycling of rare earth element
containing and other strategic materials and to retain value
from Department of Defense scrap assets within the United
States. The committee believes that the Department should take
the steps to establish public-private partnerships that provide
scrap feedstock to qualified domestic processors and recyclers
and advance commercial-scale recovery, separation, and
refinement.
Domestic Manufacturing Capability for ISO Containers
The committee is concerned by the Department of Defense's
reliance on foreign-sourced International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) intermodal shipping containers and
related components critical to military logistics and
sustainment operations. The committee notes that the United
States currently lacks sufficient domestic manufacturing
capability for ISO containers and key structural components,
with supply chains heavily dependent on foreign sources,
including the People's Republic of China.
The committee is further concerned that current procurement
practices may complicate oversight of compliance with domestic
sourcing requirements under Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement 252.225-7001 and related statutes. The
committee believes continued reliance on foreign sources for
critical logistics infrastructure presents risks to supply
chain resilience and operational readiness.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the Director
of the Defense Logistics Agency, to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on the Department's reliance on foreign-sourced ISO containers
and related components. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of the Department's reliance on foreign-
sourced ISO containers and related components;
(2) an assessment of compliance with Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.225-7001 and related
domestic sourcing requirements;
(3) an assessment of risks associated with reliance on
foreign-manufactured ISO containers and related components;
(4) an assessment of the feasibility of establishing
domestic manufacturing capability for ISO containers and
critical components; and
(5) a description of actions the Department is taking, or
plans to take, to strengthen the domestic industrial base and
reduce reliance on foreign sources.
Domestic Network-Enabled Systems and Supply Chain Risk Assessment
The committee recognizes that Department of Defense retail
systems, including Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities such
as the Army and Air Force Exchange Service, Navy Exchange
Service Command, and Marine Corps Exchange, sell network-
enabled consumer technology products to servicemembers and
their families on U.S. military installations worldwide. The
committee is concerned that certain consumer electronics
products manufactured by entities headquartered in or subject
to the jurisdiction, direction, or control of foreign
adversaries may present cybersecurity, data exfiltration,
supply chain, or counterintelligence risks, particularly when
sold in proximity to U.S. military personnel and installations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security, to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than May 1, 2027, on
such risks. The report should include:
(1) an identification of network-enabled consumer
technology products sold through retail systems operated by the
Department of Defense that are manufactured by entities
headquartered in countries of concern;
(2) an assessment of cybersecurity and data security risks
associated with such products;
(3) an evaluation of the applicability of existing federal
restrictions, including the Commerce Entity List, the
Department's Chinese Military Companies list, and the Federal
Communications Commission's Covered Equipment list; and
(4) recommendations on whether statutory prohibition or
mitigation measures are necessary to protect servicemembers and
installation security.
Domestic Preference for Critical Mineral Alloy Powder Furnace Equipment
The committee recognizes the importance of powder alloy
materials derived from critical minerals for mission-critical
applications across the Department of Defense, including the
development and advancement of hypersonic capabilities. The
committee is concerned that reliance on foreign suppliers for
highly specialized furnace equipment used in the production of
such materials presents significant supply chain risks and
potential security vulnerabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than February 1, 2027, on the Department's use of
foreign-produced furnace equipment for the production of metal
alloy powders derived from critical minerals. The briefing
should include:
(1) an assessment of current domestic production
capabilities for such furnace equipment;
(2) risks associated with reliance on foreign suppliers;
and
(3) recommendations to increase the use of domestically
produced furnace equipment within the defense industrial base.
Domestic Production of Short-Wave Infrared Quantum Dot Materials
The committee recognizes that short-wave infrared sensor
systems are increasingly important to maintaining battlefield
awareness and information superiority in contested
environments. Such systems can enhance visibility in low-light
conditions, improve performance through smoke, dust, haze, and
other obscurants, and support detection of certain laser
designators and rangefinders. The committee further recognizes
that infrared-absorbing quantum dot materials may be a critical
enabling technology for next-generation short-wave infrared
photodetectors and sensor systems.
The committee is concerned that the domestic supply chain
for photodetector-grade infrared-absorbing quantum dot
materials may be insufficient to meet projected defense
industrial base demand, and that the Department may lack
adequate visibility into domestic production capacity, supplier
ownership, qualification requirements, and scale-up timelines
for such materials.
Therefore, the committee directs the Principal Director,
Microelectronics, in coordination with the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, to
submit to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than
March 31, 2027, a report on the domestic supply chain for
infrared-absorbing quantum dot materials used, or anticipated
for use, in short-wave infrared sensor systems for defense
applications. The report shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of current and projected Department of
Defense demand for photodetector-grade infrared-absorbing
quantum dot materials through fiscal year 2030;
(2) an assessment of the domestic supply base for such
materials, including supplier ownership, production capacity,
manufacturing readiness, qualification and testing
requirements, and scale-up timelines;
(3) an identification of supply chain risks and
opportunities to expand domestically owned production,
including through existing authorities and programs such as the
Defense Production Act, the Industrial Base Analysis and
Sustainment program, the Small Business Innovation Research
program, and the Small Business Technology Transfer program;
and
(4) a recommended course of action for establishing a
sufficient domestically owned and domestically produced supply
of infrared-absorbing quantum dot materials to meet projected
defense demand by fiscal year 2030.
Domestic Rare-Earth-Free Permanent Magnet Manufacturing Capability
The committee recognizes the substantial investments that
the Department of Defense has made in establishing a reliable
domestic supply chain for rare earth permanent magnets. The
committee continues to believe these efforts are crucial to
national security, but the committee remains concerned that the
demand for rare earth magnets still far exceeds the domestic
capacity that may be brought online with the success of
initiatives to date. The Committee believes that a
comprehensive approach, including the integration of rare
earth-free permanent magnets, is needed. Therefore, the
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing and plan to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on the integration of permanent
magnets, which are composed of materials such as iron nitride,
iron-nickel, or manganese bismuth. The plan shall include the
following information:
(1) an update on progress being made by the Manufacturing
Technology Program in the Defense Logistics Agency related to
nanostructured iron nitride permanent magnets;
(2) an overview of the planned investment in these rare-
earth-free technologies;
(3) an overview of the impediments to integrating such
magnets into the supply chains of the Department; and
(4) planned and recommended additional investments the
Department will make in rare-earth-free permanent magnet
technology, including the domestic sourcing of essential
component materials like high-purity iron.
Ensuring Mature-node Semiconductor Availability
The committee is concerned that domestic fabrication of
mature-node semiconductors remains limited, as U.S. Government
investments in semiconductors have been primarily focused on
resourcing next-generation semiconductor production. Mature-
node semiconductors are, and will remain, essential components
in weapon systems procured by the Department of Defense, yet
little has been done to ensure that the Department and
companies across the defense industrial base have assured
access to these essential components.
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is
investing in stockpiling critical components, such as mature-
node semiconductors, expanding trusted foundry partnerships,
and developing alternatives through reverse-engineering.
However, sustaining military readiness in an era of shrinking
mature-node semiconductor availability will require long-term
policy and funding commitments to ensure secure and reliable
semiconductor access.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, in coordination with the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 1, 2027, on efforts to address risk in the
availability of mature-node semiconductors to support the
sustainment of military equipment in the inventory of the
Department of Defense. The committee is specifically interested
in the Department's efforts related to semiconductors for use
in anti-drone, anti-armor, anti-missile, and anti-mortar
munitions.
Expanding the Defense Industrial Base through Balanced Compliance
The committee remains concerned that compliance burdens are
a significant barrier to entry for potential defense
contractors, particularly small- and medium-sized businesses.
Companies are increasingly forced to choose between investing
in innovation and maintaining compliance, contributing to
attrition from the defense industrial base and reduced
resilience across defense supply chains. At the same time, the
committee emphasizes that the expansion of the defense
industrial base must not come at the expense of security,
accountability, or oversight.
The committee further notes that many compliance frameworks
rely on episodic audits and point-in-time certifications that
do not provide continuous insight into contractor readiness or
supply chain risk. The committee encourages the Department to
evaluate the use of qualified and trusted third-party
commercial solutions to support continuous assessment and
monitoring of contractor compliance, improve portfolio-level
visibility into supply chain health, and enable more efficient
attainment and maintenance of cybersecurity, workforce
security, and cloud accreditation requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Principal Director,
Defense Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition Policy, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on the Department's approach to
expanding and sustaining the defense industrial base while
maintaining strong compliance and accountability standards. The
briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of how current compliance regimes impact
innovation, sustainment, and the long-term viability of small-
and medium-sized businesses, including an evaluation of the
extent to which companies exit the defense ecosystem due to
compliance requirements, security requirements, or other
administrative burdens unique to participation in the defense
industrial base;
(2) a description of steps the Department is taking to
encourage and sustain affordable compliance across prime
contractors, subcontractors, and lower-tier suppliers; and
(3) options for improving visibility into contractor and
supply chain readiness without creating duplicative
administrative burdens.
Expansion of Domestic Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene
Production Capacity
The committee remains concerned about documented capacity
shortfalls in the domestic ultra-high molecular weight
polyethylene (UHMWPE) fiber industrial base. There are concerns
that domestic UHMWPE production may be insufficient to meet
national security requirements under surge conditions. There is
also the possibility that facility utilization may exceed 100
percent as early as fiscal year 2026. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on the Department's strategy to address UHMWPE fiber capacity
shortfalls. The briefing shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of current and projected UHMWPE fiber
requirements across all services for soft armor vests, hard
armor plates, ballistic helmets, and vehicle protection systems
through fiscal year 2030;
(2) an evaluation of domestic manufacturing capacity gaps
and the Department's plan to achieve capacity sufficient to
meet 100 percent of requirements plus 30 percent surge
capacity;
(3) the advisability of designating UHMWPE fiber as a
critical material under Defense Production Act Title I
authorities;
(4) the status of Berry Amendment compliance among domestic
UHMWPE suppliers and the availability of PFAS-free armor
solutions; and
(5) any legislative authorities required to achieve
capacity targets or address industrial base vulnerabilities.
Flame Resistant Textile Industrial Base
The committee notes that maintaining a stabilized flame-
resistant technical textile industrial base is critical to the
Department of the Army's ability to support overseas
operations, Large Scale Combat Operations (LCSO), and Defense
Support of Civil Authorities.
Additionally, the committee recognizes the 2024 Defense
Logistics Agency CAMOLAND Clothing and Textile Industrial Base
Wargame Report concluded that any disruption to the supply
chain that supports the production of combat uniforms would
compromise the already weakened clothing and textile industrial
base's ability to produce flame-resistant military uniforms
during surge conditions. As such, the committee considers
rapidly improving the resilience and production capacity of
this segment of the defense industrial base as imperative.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 31, 2027, that includes the following:
(1) a 5-year notional budget to stabilize the flame-
resistant textile industrial base;
(2) an assessment of wider distribution of the flame-
resistant military uniform to soldiers exposed to enhanced
thermal risk both domestically and overseas; and
(3) estimated flame resistant uniform procurement costs,
usage rates, and surge requirements needed to support LCSO.
Foreign Entity of Concern Evaluation of Processing and Production
Machinery for Critical Technologies
The committee emphasizes that U.S. national security
depends not only on access to critical materials and
components, but also on the processing and production machinery
required to manufacture defense-relevant products. Advanced
equipment used in semiconductor fabrication, critical mineral
processing and refining, and battery materials and cell
production increasingly rely on embedded electronics, software,
sensors, and remote servicing. The committee is concerned that
machinery manufactured by, serviced by, or otherwise dependent
upon foreign entities of concern (FEOCs), including Chinese
companies operating in the U.S. that are linked to the People's
Republic of China's (PRC) Military-Civil Fusion strategy, may
introduce unacceptable risk to the defense industrial base
through cyber and data exploitation, operational disruption via
proprietary software and service dependencies, quality
manipulation affecting yield and reliability, and loss of
sensitive process know-how. The committee also notes that the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
recently revised the list of critical technology areas.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 2027, on
the Department's strategy to monitor and mitigate supply chain
risk associated with processing and production machinery for
critical technologies. The report should include:
(1) Critical technology areas where FEOCs pose the greatest
risk to the Department's supply chain security;
(2) Specific types of equipment at higher risk of
dependency on FEOCs; and
(3) Steps taken by the Department to mitigate such risks in
manufacturing associated with critical technology areas.
Foreign-Made Small Arms and Light Weapons
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
March 15, 2027, on small arms and light weapons that are used
by members of the Armed Forces in performance of official
duties. The report should include:
(1) the prevalence of Government-issued small arms and
light weapons that are used by members of the Armed Forces in
performance of official duties, and parts for such small arms
and light weapons that were manufactured outside of the United
States;
(2) the prevalence of Government-issued small arms and
light weapons that are used by members of the Armed Forces in
performance of official duties, and parts for such small arms
and light weapons that were manufactured in the United States
by a subsidiary of a foreign-owned entity; and
(3) any recommendations the Secretary has to change
policies related to domestic sourcing preferences for the
procurement of Government-issued small arms and light weapons.
Imported Army Uniforms
The committee reaffirms its long-term support for the
Department of Defense's commitment to giving preference in
procurement to domestically produced fabrics, including
American-made military uniforms, as required by the Berry
Amendment. The committee notes that it has received reports of
Army Green Service Uniforms (AGSU) being offered to Active Duty
soldiers and Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC)
cadets for use in official military duties that are not Berry
Amendment compliant and have not been certified by the U.S.
Army Natick Soldier Systems Center as required by AR 670-1. The
committee is concerned that, if these reports are accurate,
future officers may begin their service wearing uncertified,
unauthorized, and visibly different uniforms from those
produced under the Army's Uniform Quality Control Program. The
committee is also concerned that the importation of
uncertified, foreign-made uniforms could undermine authorized
manufacturers and erode the domestic industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with Army Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1
(Personnel) and the Natick Soldier Systems Center, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than June 1, 2027, on:
(1) the prevalence and scope of imported, uncertified AGSU
uniforms being offered by outside vendors on military
installations and ROTC programs;
(2) current requirements for Berry Amendment certification
of Army uniforms;
(3) the current process for inspecting and ensuring
soldier-owned uniforms are Berry-compliant and authorized for
official use; and
(4) any recommendations for additional instructions or
guidance, such as an All Army Activities or similar directive,
to ensure that only certified uniform items are authorized.
Industrial Workforce for Composite Materials Manufacturing
The committee recognizes the importance of the Department
of Defense's ongoing efforts to expand production capacity for
precision-guided munitions and stresses that sustaining these
efforts will require a sufficient pipeline of skilled
industrial workers. The committee notes that advanced composite
materials are a critical component of many precision-guided
munition systems and is concerned that current workforce
pipelines may not be producing enough technicians with the
specialized skills required for modern composite fabrication.
The committee further notes that the Department has
undertaken workforce development efforts through existing
authorities, including within the Industrial Base Analysis and
Sustainment program, to strengthen critical manufacturing
skills. The committee underscores that the joint explanatory
material accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2025 (Committee Print No. 2) encouraged the
Department to assess the advisability and feasibility of
establishing advanced technology centers at community colleges
to support training in critical skills, including advanced
composite material layup.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Industrial Base Policy to provide a briefing to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than December
31, 2027, on the Department's efforts to address workforce
shortages in advanced composite materials manufacturing
relevant to precision-guided munition production. The briefing
shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of current workforce gaps in advanced
composite materials manufacturing relevant to precision-guided
munition production;
(2) a description of existing Department of Defense
programs, partnerships, and authorities being used to address
such gaps;
(3) an assessment of the effectiveness of those efforts to
date; and
(4) any additional actions the Department considers
necessary to strengthen the pipeline of qualified technicians
needed to support production requirements.
Leveraging Regional STEM Ecosystems
The committee recognizes that U.S. national security
depends on a robust, clearable STEM workforce. Yet attracting
and retaining qualified talent remains a challenge for both the
Department of Defense and the defense industrial base.
The committee is aware that regional STEM ecosystems exist
across the United States and bring together education,
industry, government, and community partners to develop talent
pipelines aligned with regional workforce needs. The committee
believes these ecosystems may provide a scalable model to
support coordinated workforce development efforts aligned with
defense industrial base requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 31, 2027, on a strategic approach to leveraging
regional STEM ecosystems to support defense workforce needs.
The briefing shall include:
(1) an identification of regional STEM ecosystems that
could be leveraged to support the Department of Defense and
defense industrial base workforce requirements;
(2) an assessment of how such regional STEM ecosystems
could be leveraged to support the Department of Defense and
defense industrial base workforce requirements; and
(3) recommendations for a pilot effort to leverage and
scale regional STEM ecosystems, including potential
implementation approaches and resource considerations.
Manufacturing Analytics for Industrial Surge Readiness
The committee recognizes ongoing Department of Defense
efforts to strengthen industrial base resilience, supply chain
risk assessment, and surge production readiness, including
related activities referred to elsewhere in this Act. The
committee further recognizes the importance of manufacturing-
oriented analytic capabilities that can support identification
of production bottlenecks, throughput constraints, and
industrial dependencies affecting readiness for priority
defense systems.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
pursue targeted pilot or demonstration activities focused on
manufacturing analytics and industrial surge planning
capabilities that leverage existing Department data, tools,
interoperable analytic environments, commercially available
capabilities, and industrial base initiatives, including
opportunities for participation by small businesses and
nontraditional defense contractors with demonstrated experience
in manufacturing analytics and industrial surge planning.
In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of ongoing efforts to support
manufacturing-oriented industrial surge analysis;
(2) recommendations to improve identification of production
bottlenecks, supplier dependencies, and manufacturing
constraints affecting surge readiness;
(3) identification of opportunities to leverage existing
industrial base, logistics, and manufacturing data environments
to support industrial resilience analysis; and
(4) recommendations regarding potential pilot activities or
implementation approaches that could improve surge production
planning and sustainment readiness for priority defense
systems.
Military Service Trademark Royalty Waiver Feasibility Study
The committee is aware that small businesses partnering
with military exchanges to produce branded merchandise, are
subject to trademark royalty payments to the Military
Departments under the general licensing authority of section
2260 of title 10, United States Code. The committee has
questions about whether the current royalty structure may
impose costs that are prohibitive for small businesses
operating in this space, with downstream effects on the
affordability and accessibility of military-branded merchandise
for servicemembers and their families.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to submit a report to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027, regarding the feasibility and
advisability of establishing a reduced-royalty or fee-waiver
mechanism for small businesses that produce military-branded
merchandise sold exclusively through military exchanges. The
report shall include the following:
(1) an assessment of the current royalty fee structures
applicable to small businesses licensing military trademarks
under section 2260 of title 10, United States Code, including
the range of fees charged, the basis for fee determinations,
and an estimate on the price increase caused by the royalty fee
structure on the typical small business's wares (expressed in
both monetary value and a percentage);
(2) an analysis of the feasibility of a reduced-fee or
waiver category for small businesses, as defined under the
Small Business Act (section 632 of title 15, United States
Code), whose licensed products are sold exclusively through
military exchanges;
(3) an evaluation of the potential impact of such a
mechanism on royalty revenue currently flowing to Morale,
Welfare, and Recreation programs, and options for offsetting
any revenue reduction;
(4) an assessment of the potential recruiting and community
engagement benefits associated with increased civilian access
to affordable military-branded merchandise; and
(5) any legislative or regulatory changes necessary to
implement such a mechanism.
Photovoltaic Modules from Foreign Entities of Concern
The committee is concerned that the Department has issued
Buy America waivers to purchase photovoltaic modules from
foreign sources when domestic supplies exist. The committee
continues to support the purchase of energy infrastructure,
including photovoltaic modules with domestically made cells and
inverters, from domestic sources that are not foreign entities
of concern (FEOC). The Build America, Buy America Act requires
these systems to be procured domestically, and section 847 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026
(Public Law 119-60) further prohibits the Department from
purchasing photovoltaic modules and inverters from any foreign
entity of concern. The committee further recognizes the
national security benefits of using non-FEOC and domestic
energy infrastructure when it acquires electricity through
power purchase agreements and energy savings contracts.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by December 31, 2026, that includes the following elements:
(1) the Buy America and FEOC waivers that have been granted
in the last two calendar years for photovoltaic modules and
inverters;
(2) the steps the Department has taken to assess the
availability of domestic sources of modules with domestically
made cells and inverters;
(3) the Department's progress in implementing section 847
of Public Law 119-60; and
(4) the steps the Department is taking to ensure third-
party sourced energy is not reliant upon FEOC energy
infrastructure, including photovoltaic modules and inverters.
Practical Application of Authorities Related to Certain Critical
Minerals
The committee commends investments by the Department of
Defense in the mining and processing of critical minerals in
order to diversify sourcing and shore up the availability of
critical minerals for the defense industrial base. To help
mitigate the impact of China's current ban and restrictions on
exports of critical minerals, the committee believes the
Secretary of Defense must take additional steps to secure
available heavy rare earth elements, particularly samarium.
Through recent amendments to section 4872 of title 10,
United States Code, Congress provided the Secretary the
flexibility to grant waivers to certain statutory sourcing
restrictions when necessary for the national security interest
of the United States or to exercise an exception when
satisfactory quality and quantity of a covered material are not
available. With respect to samarium, the committee believes
current circumstances and availability of the material from an
allied nation justify either a waiver or that an exception be
exercised to acquire samarium.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services,
not later than December 1, 2026, on the status of a national
security waiver or the non-availability determination related
to samarium.
Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program
The committee supports the APEX Accelerator Program as a
critical tool to foster innovation, strengthen and revitalize
the defense industrial base, and advance efforts to place the
acquisition system and industrial base on a wartime footing.
APEX Accelerators provide confidential, no-cost technical
assistance to businesses seeking to participate in defense and
other government contracting.
The committee is aware of, and supports, current efforts by
the APEX Accelerator Program to focus on key technology areas,
improve cybersecurity, increase awareness of foreign ownership,
control, or influence (FOCI) risk, and strengthen defense
supply chains. The committee also encourages the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
identify ways to improve operational efficiency and program
effectiveness of the APEX Accelerator Program, including
consideration of multiyear contracting mechanisms where
appropriate. The committee further encourages the Under
Secretary to work with an association identified in section
4954e of title 10, United States Code, to identify strategies
to facilitate consistent services and continuous improvement
for the APEX Accelerator Program.
Production-Readiness Option Contracts for sUAS Manufacturing
The committee recognizes that demand for sUAS for
reconnaissance, logistics, and strike missions has become an
enduring operational requirement across multiple theaters. The
committee further recognizes that meeting future operational
demand will require continuing private-sector investment in
resilient industrial capacity and scalable production
infrastructure. A clear and credible demand signal from the
Department of Defense. Effective and efficient acquisition
approaches are also needed to support this desired investment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a report to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than December
1, 2026 on options to establish an approach to contracting that
recognizes private-sector investment in technology development
and provides a production-readiness option that would provide
the Department the right, but not the obligation, to procure
domestically produced sUAS at pre-negotiated prices within a
defined multi-year period. The report shall include:
(1) an evaluation of existing barriers within the
Department's requirements and budget processes that impede
clear and credible demand signals for domestic sUAS production;
(2) options for acquisition strategies that enable pre-
negotiated options to support a contractor's production-
readiness or other incentive mechanisms to support private-
sector investment in domestic design and production capacity;
(3) an assessment of how such mechanisms could improve
affordability, surge production capacity, and supply chain
resilience; and
(4) recommendations for legislative or policy changes
needed to enable rapid implementation of such authorities
across the military departments.
Promoting American-made Textiles
The committee recognizes that untangling American supply
chains from adversarial nations is a priority of Congress and
the Department of Defense, specifically in the domain of goods
used for the U.S. military. In service of supporting the
domestic textile industrial base and leveraging partnerships
with allied nations, section 865 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (P.L. 119-60) provides
allowable investments for the Textile Automation to Enhance
Domestic Military Production program and directly supports the
domestic military production and industrial base for textiles
and footwear.
To further expand efforts aimed at securing domestic supply
chains and revitalizing American industries essential to
national security and economic growth, the committee directs
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than January 1, 2027, which includes the following:
(1) an assessment of the feasibility of narrowing the
exception for Berry Amendment small purchases from $150,000 to
$20,000, both broadly and specifically for textiles;
(2) a status update on efforts by the Department of Defense
to implement Section 865 of Public Law 119-60; and
(3) any proposed strategies for strengthening the Berry
Amendment and countering malign actors, including the People's
Republic of China, as they seek to contaminate textile supply
chains for U.S. military uniforms.
Reducing Facility Access Barriers for Small and New-Entrant Defense
Manufacturers
The committee is concerned that small and new-entrant
manufacturers face significant barriers to accessing qualified
facilities necessary to support defense industrial base
production requirements. Unlike established prime contractors,
smaller manufacturers often lack the financial standing to
independently secure leases on facilities that meet applicable
security, environmental, and operational standards, limiting
their ability to scale production capacity in support of
defense needs. The committee notes that existing Federal loan
and guarantee programs are generally structured to assist
manufacturers that already occupy qualified facilities and do
not adequately address the barrier of securing such a facility
in the first place.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees not later than April 1,
2027, on existing barriers to facility access for small and
new-entrant defense manufacturers and potential mechanisms to
address those barriers. The report should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of the extent to which facility access
constraints limit the ability of small and new-entrant
manufacturers to enter or expand within the defense industrial
base, including an identification of sectors and supply chains
most affected;
(2) a review of existing Federal loan, grant, and guarantee
programs and their adequacy in addressing facility access
barriers for manufacturers that have not yet secured a
qualified facility, including an identification of gaps not
addressed by current authorities;
(3) an evaluation of potential mechanisms, including lease
guarantee structures, credit instruments, and public-private
partnership authorities, that could reduce facility access
barriers in a fiscally sound manner consistent with the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990; and
(4) recommendations for any legislative or administrative
actions necessary to implement the preferred mechanism,
including identification of existing authorities that could be
leveraged and any additional authority that may be required.
Rulemaking Progress for Elimination of Reliance on Chinese-Made Printed
Circuit Boards
The committee is concerned by the delays and lack of
progress in establishing Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) rulemaking for section 841 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) and section 851 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-
81). Congress directed the Department of Defense to largely
eliminate the use of Chinese-made printed circuit boards (PCBs)
and substrates in military systems by 2027. The statute sets
deadlines of not later than January 1, 2026, for minimum
security requirements, and January 1, 2027, for broader
elimination. Absent issuance of the associated DFARS changes,
implementation of the policy will continue to be stymied. This
is of concern to the committee as continued use of and reliance
on Chinese PCBs in defense systems pose risks to U.S. national
security.
Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a
provision that would require the Principal Director, Defense
Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition Policy, not later than 30
days after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a
team of experts to address the backlog of open cases related to
the DFARS. That provision would also require the Principal
Director to provide a monthly briefing to the congressional
defense committees on progress made in reducing the backlog.
Secure Manufacturing and Integration Capability
The committee notes that the Department of Defense faces
persistent challenges transitioning advanced technologies into
production due to limited access to secure manufacturing
environments and a shortage of clearance-ready manufacturing
personnel. As modernization efforts increasingly require
classified production settings, secure facilities remain
limited and concentrated among a small number of prime
contractors.
The committee also recognizes the critical role of land-
grant universities in advancing applied research, technology
maturation, and workforce development in support of national
security. However, many land-grant institutions lack access to
secure, production-relevant infrastructure necessary to
accelerate transition and integration of defense capabilities.
The committee encourages the Department to prioritize
public-private partnership models that leverage private-sector
investment to establish secure, program-agnostic manufacturing
space in collaboration with land-grant universities. Such
efforts would reduce Federal capital costs, expand domestic
production capacity, strengthen the defense industrial base,
and grow a clearance-ready workforce to support long-term
defense modernization priorities.
Securing Strategic Radioisotope Supply Chains
The committee is aware that radioisotopes are key material
components for several critical national security technologies,
including radioisotope power systems, radiation detection
equipment, and non-destructive material analysis. Therefore,
the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, in consultation with the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 15, 2027. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of strategic radioisotope supply chains,
including domestic production and availability across the full
lifecycle from feedstock access through recovery, purification,
processing, and preparation of radioisotopes, and an
identification of existing vulnerabilities in such supply
chains;
(2) a description of the development and deployment of
radioisotope technologies by foreign adversaries, including an
assessment of the strategic radioisotope supply chains that
support such technologies;
(3) an evaluation of projected Department of Defense demand
for strategic radioisotopes necessary to sustain existing
capabilities and enable advanced energy and power technologies
to support operations in austere environments; and
(4) recommendations to strengthen domestic strategic
radioisotope supply chains, including recommendations regarding
the use of existing authorities, investments (including through
the Defense Industrial Base Fund), and legislative actions
necessary to strengthen the supply chains of strategic
radioisotopes for defense needs.
Short-Wave Infrared Quantum Dot Materials for Defense Applications
The committee is concerned that the dominant commercial
suppliers of short-wave infrared (SWIR) quantum dot materials
are entities physically located in or owned by the People's
Republic of China, and that the committee is not aware of any
domestically owned producer operating at a scale sufficient to
meet defense industrial base demand. The committee encourages
the Secretary of Defense to prioritize U.S.-owned entities that
have demonstrated synthesis and characterization capability for
SWIR photodetector-grade infrared-absorbing quantum dot
materials and have active or proposed manufacturing scale-up
toward commercial production volumes. The committee directs the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in
coordination with the Principal Director, Microelectronics, to
submit a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than March 31, 2027, on the domestic supply chain for
infrared-absorbing quantum dot materials used, or anticipated
for use, in short-wave infrared sensor systems for defense
applications. The briefing shall include a recommended course
of action for establishing sufficient domestically owned and
domestically produced supply of infrared-absorbing quantum dot
materials to meet projected demand by fiscal year 2030.
Small Turbojet Engine Industrial Base
The committee remains concerned that the domestic
industrial base for small turbojet engines lacks the capacity,
supplier depth, and production scale required to support the
Department of Defense's growing demand for cruise missiles,
one-way attack unmanned aircraft systems, autonomous systems,
and other long-range precision strike capabilities. The
committee notes that only a limited number of domestic
manufacturers currently produce these engines and that critical
portions of the supply chain remain dependent on foreign
sources, including sources located in adversarial nations.
The committee further recognizes that small turbojet
engines are a critical enabling technology for attritable,
mass-produced weapon systems and distributed long-range strike
operations. Given the increasing operational reliance on these
capabilities, the committee believes the Department must take
additional steps to strengthen and expand the domestic small
turbojet engine industrial base to meet anticipated scale and
surge requirements in future conflicts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the congressional defense committees by March 1,
2027, a report that includes:
(1) an assessment of current and projected Department of
Defense programs, weapon systems, and operational requirements
that depend upon small turbojet engine technology;
(2) ongoing and planned contracting, investment, and
acquisition efforts intended to increase production capacity
and achieve greater manufacturing scale; and
(3) a strategy to increase the capacity of domestic
suppliers of small turbojet engines and critical subcomponents.
Supply Chain Visibility for Industrial Surge Readiness
The committee notes that Congress established the
Manufacturing Technology Program (ManTech) in 1965 to advance
American manufacturing technology. Revised and eventually
codified in section 4841 of title 10, United States Code,
ManTech's purpose today is ``to further the national security
objectives through the development and application of advanced
manufacturing technologies and processes that will reduce the
acquisition and supportability costs of defense weapon systems
and reduce manufacturing and repair cycle times across the life
cycles of such systems.''
The committee also notes that the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60)
included several provisions to further efforts to improve and
expand manufacturing capabilities across all aspects of the
defense industrial base (DIB), including section 1833, which
requires the establishment of a Civil Reserve Manufacturing
Network; section 1844, which requires the establishment of a
collaborative forum to address challenges to and limitations of
the DIB; section 1846, which makes improvements to several
existing sections of public law related to advanced
manufacturing; and section 1847, which requires analysis
related to surge capacity in the DIB. The committee views the
ManTech program as having an essential role in all these
efforts. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on ManTech program
activities supporting the implementation of the sections of
Public Law 119-60 related to supply chain visibility for
industrial surge readiness.
Support for Aircraft Propulsion Industrial Base
The committee is concerned over supply chain constraints in
the aircraft propulsion industrial base that risk impacting
aircraft cost and delivery. The committee recognizes numerous
causes, including raw material availability, training and
retention issues, and challenges posed by the defense
acquisition system particularly on small- and medium-sized
businesses. The committee is further concerned that an
increasingly consolidated supply chain for aircraft propulsion
drives up the price of products, limits competition, and
reduces industrial capacity to surge in times of need.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy to conduct a comprehensive
assessment of the state of the aircraft propulsion industrial
base, including suppliers at all tiers that support such
industrial base. The assessment should identify risks such as
access to needed materials, availability of a certified
workforce, reliance on single sources of supply, and obstacles
in qualification of additional suppliers due to unique aspects
of aerospace certification. The committee directs the Assistant
Secretary to provide a report to congressional defense
committees by April 1, 2027, on the findings of the assessment
along with any actions taken or recommended to be taken to
address aircraft propulsion supply chain challenges that could
threaten the long-term viability of the aircraft propulsion
industrial base in the United States. The report should
specifically identify near-term solutions, including allocation
of funds from the Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment
(IBAS) program or amounts available under the Defense
Production Act and the Industrial Base Fund, to reduce supply
chain risk in areas that would have the greatest impact on
aircraft engine cost and delivery such as raw metals
availability, castings, forgings, advanced machining, and
special process houses.
Trusted Microelectronics Supply Chains
The committee remains concerned about keeping the defense
microelectronics supply chains secure and protected from
adversarial influence, particularly as a significant portion of
global semiconductor foundry production is located outside the
United States. The committee notes the important role of the
Defense Microelectronics Activity (DMEA) and the Trusted Access
Program in accrediting secure suppliers and ensuring access to
trusted microelectronics for mission-critical defense
applications. These efforts help ensure the Department of
Defense maintains access to cutting-edge microelectronics and
trusted suppliers, even as portions of the global
microelectronics industry have increasingly relied on low-cost
Chinese products and supply chains that may lack trusted and
assured verification.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide an
unclassified briefing to the House Armed Services Committee no
later than December 1, 2026, on the use of trusted foundries.
The briefing should include:
(1) How DMEA will continue validating requirements for
trusted semiconductors;
(2) How the Department will continue to maintain and
resource DMEA and Trusted Foundries in future years;
(3) How the Department will expand access to, and research
and development opportunities associated with the Trusted
Access Program;
(4) How access to suppliers participating in the Trusted
Access Program can be broadened to include adjacent markets
requiring secure and assured supply chains;
(5) How the Department will invest in their ability to
source trusted legacy semiconductors to support the sustainment
of anti-drone, anti-armor (tank), anti-missile, and anti-mortar
munitions; and
(6) How the Department will leverage broad scale, readily
available, commercial applications that bring a new and
reconfigurable source of trusted legacy semiconductors to the
Department.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Provisions to Protect and Strengthen Supply Chains
Sec. 1801--Requirements for Information Relating to Supply Chain Risk
This section would amend section 3252 of title 10, United
States Code, by requiring the head of a covered agency to
establish certain notification procedures in cases where a non-
FOCI entity (defined as a domestic source, or entity that has
not been identified to be operating under foreign ownership,
control, or influence pursuant to a Defense Counterintelligence
and Security Agency review) is being considered for a covered
action. This section would also provide an exception to the
required procedures if the head of agency determines that an
imminent national security threat requires immediate action.
Sec. 1802--Oversight of Specialty Metals Procurements Under Exception
Relating to Agreements with Foreign Governments
This section would amend section 4863 of title 10, United
States Code, by including a new subsection to limit the total
value of specialty metals acquired under the exception relating
to agreements with foreign governments to not more than 30
percent of the total value of specialty metals procured by the
Department of Defense during a fiscal year.
Sec. 1803--Critical Materials: Tiered Sourcing Restrictions and
Requirements
This section would amend section 4872 of title 10, United
States Code, to comprehensively restructure restrictions
related to the sourcing of certain critical materials. This
section would establish a tiered framework for sourcing
restrictions and implementation timelines based on the
availability of supply from sources not subject to restriction.
This section would also streamline and enhance waiver
authorities, provide for expedited qualification of new
domestic and allied-nation sources, and establish a preferred
status for contractors that manufacture covered materials in
the United States or that meet certain criteria related to
compliance with the requirements of this section. This section
would also add niobium oxides, metals, and alloys as covered
materials.
Sec. 1804--Changes with Respect to the Federal Acquisition Security
Council
This section would make amendments to chapter 13 of title
41, United States Code, to strengthen the organization,
function, and authorities of the Federal Acquisition Security
Council. This section would also require the Secretary of
Defense, not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, to notify the congressional defense committees of the
designation of the Department of Defense officials who will
serve on the Council pursuant to section 1322(b)(1)(C)(ii) of
title 41, United States Code. This section would further
require the Secretary to ensure such officials regularly
participate in Council activities and provide requested
information to the Council in a timely manner. In addition,
this section would require the Secretary to establish
procedures to ensure appropriate Department of Defense
officials are informed of Council activities in a timely
manner, including the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff in the role as Chair of the Joint Requirements
Oversight Council, and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Industrial Base Policy.
Sec. 1805--Modifications to Strategy to Eliminate Sourcing of Computer
Displays from Certain Nations
This section would amend section 835 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) by requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit
certifications related to the implementation of such section.
Sec. 1806--Extension of Comptroller General Assessments and Reports on
Compliance with Procurement Requirements Relating to Rare Earth
Elements and Strategic and Critical Materials
This section would amend section 857 of the James M. Inhofe
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263) by requiring the Comptroller General to provide
recommendations in the mandated report on compliance with
contracting requirements of such section, and to extend the
periodic reporting requirement to 12 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 1807--Requirements Related to Detection and Avoidance of
Counterfeit Electronic Parts
This section would amend section 818 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81), as amended, to require that certain electronic parts
purchases made below the simplified acquisition threshold or
the micro-purchase threshold be procured exclusively from the
original manufacturer or an authorized dealer.
Sec. 1808--Analysis and Report on Sourcing of Certain Items
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct additional analyses and take actions to address
sourcing and industrial capacity for high-priority goods and
services needed by the Department of Defense. Such actions may
include increasing domestic production, diversifying sources of
supply, restricting purchases from certain countries, expanding
stockpiles, and promoting recycling or reuse to improve supply
chain resilience. This section would also make a conforming
repeal of section 849 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Sec. 1809--Assessment and Implementation Plan for Sourcing of Synthetic
Diamond and Super Abrasive Materials Used in Defense Applications
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct an assessment of the extent to which the Department of
Defense relies on foreign sources for synthetic diamond
materials and related super abrasive materials used in defense-
critical applications, and to provide to the congressional
defense committees an implementation plan to increase the use
of capable domestic sources of such materials.
Sec. 1810--Defense Supply Chain Intelligence and Risk Response Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, acting
through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base
Policy, not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, to establish a Department of Defense-wide program
to provide a coordinated, holistic framework to enhance the
Department's ability to illuminate, assess, anticipate, and
respond to risks across the defense industrial base supply
chain.
Sec. 1811--Identification of Supply Chain Dependencies
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees an annual report
on the extent to which supply chains of the Department of
Defense for biotechnology equipment and services contain
certain dependencies. This section would require a report not
later than March 1, 2028, and annually thereafter until 2032.
Sec. 1812--Federal Acquisition Security Council Exclusion Orders for
Chinese Military Company Designees
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
transmit a written referral to the Federal Acquisition Security
Council recommending the Council issue an exclusion order for
covered articles produced or provided by an entity named to the
list of Chinese military companies operating in the United
States required by section 1260H of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283). Such a referral would be required
within 90 days of the Secretary making the determination to add
an entity to such list. This section would also address
entities already appearing on the list for which no exclusion
order is in effect.
Sec. 1813--Domestic Preference in the Procurement of Professional
Services
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
revise the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation to provide that contracting officers
give preference to offerors that are United States companies
for contracts for professional services. This preference could
be waived in limited circumstances as determined by the
Secretary of Defense and supported by a documented
justification.
Sec. 1814--Prohibition on the Use of Chinese-Manufactured Optical Fiber
by the Department of Defense
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
procuring or obtaining optical fiber and optical fiber cable
produced, manufactured, or assembled by an entity that is owned
by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction
of the People's Republic of China for use in Department of
Defense information networks or communications systems. This
section would also require the Secretary of Defense, not later
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
formally recommend that the Federal Acquisition Security
Council evaluate optical fiber and optical fiber cable
sourcing, and determine whether to issue a recommended order
with respect to a source of concern or any covered article
sold, produced, or developed by a source of concern.
Sec. 1815--Report on Primary Aluminum Sector Industrial Base Assessment
This section would require the Department of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees the Defense
Contract Management Agency Industrial Analysis Division's 2025
report titled ``Primary Aluminum Sector Industrial Base
Assessment Report'' and to provide a briefing on aluminum
supply chain security.
Sec. 1816--Assessment of Risk Related to Adversarial Capital in the
Defense Industrial Base
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
designate an office within the Office of Industrial Base Policy
with primary responsibility for assessing and mitigating risks
related to adversarial capital in the national technology and
industrial base (NTIB). This section would also require the
designated office to establish and maintain an Economic
Security Risk Assurance capability to consolidate and analyze
information related to adversarial capital flows to entities in
the NTIB and support risk analysis and visualization for
program managers, acquisition officials, and other appropriate
Department of Defense personnel.
Sec. 1817--Integration of Demand for Foreign Military Sales into
Industrial Base Planning
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
include demand for foreign military sales into industrial base
planning.
Sec. 1818--Report on the Feasibility of Requiring Bills of Materials
for Defense Acquisition
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the
feasibility of adjusting existing Department of Defense policy
to include requirements for Bills of Materials, the expected
value of information gained through Bills of Materials, and the
necessity of establishing a new or existing system to house
such Bills of Materials.
Subtitle B--Provisions Relating to Defense Industrial Base
Manufacturing
Sec. 1831--Clarification of Eligible Uses of Defense Industrial Base
Fund
This section would amend section 4817 of title 10, United
States Code, to clarify that the Industrial Base Fund can be
used for private-sector drydock and ship repair infrastructure
components and systems, as well as for advanced
microelectronics packaging.
Sec. 1832--Inclusion of Biotechnology in Uses of the Industrial Base
Fund
This section would amend section 4817g of title 10, United
States Code, to include biotechnology and biomanufacturing as
an eligible use of authority of the Industrial Base Fund.
Sec. 1833--Development and Application of Alternative Material Sources
This section expands the purpose of the Defense
Modernization Account to include the development of alternative
material technologies including reverse engineering and
advanced manufacturing to meet operational requirements. This
section also expands the life cycle planning of a covered
system to include a consideration as to alternative methods to
support sustainment including reverse engineering and advanced
manufacturing.
Sec. 1834--Report and Implementation of Plan for Advanced Manufacturing
for Certain Critical Readiness Items of Supply
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment to submit the plan for advanced
manufacturing of critical readiness items of supply required by
section 1842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) to the collaborative forum
established under section 1844 of such Act and to the Defense
Logistics Agency. This section would also require the
collaborative forum to use the plan to develop or identify
advanced manufacturing solutions to increase the production of
critical readiness items of supply. In addition, this section
would require the Defense Logistics Agency to update the No Bid
Solicitation List to identify items on the list designated as
critical readiness items of supply.
Sec. 1835--Additional Guidance Related to Advanced Manufacturing
This section would amend section 1846 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) by ensuring required guidance on the use of advanced
manufacturing capabilities addresses risk-based policies and
best practices to prevent the dissemination of information or
capabilities that enable adversarial foreign influence over the
production of defense parts, including a preference for the use
of parts produced through secure domestic additive
manufacturing in the United States.
Sec. 1836--Modifications to Advanced Manufacturing Policy Review and
Guidance
This section would amend section 1846 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) by changing the deadline for issuance of required guidance
related to advanced manufacturing policy from September 30,
2027, to February 28, 2027, and inserting additional matters to
be included in such guidance.
Sec. 1837--Enhanced Domestic Content Requirement for Shipbuilding
Programs
This section would amend section 835(b) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) to exclude shipbuilding programs from major defense
acquisition programs that can consider articles from a country
with a reciprocal defense agreement as domestically produced.
Sec. 1838--Triennial Review of Merger and Acquisition Activity
Associated with Major Defense Suppliers
This section would require the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy, not later than December 31,
2027, and triennially thereafter, to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees on merger and acquisition
activity associated with major defense suppliers.
Sec. 1839--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Certain Munitions
This section would provide multiyear procurement authority
for certain munitions.
Sec. 1840--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Platforms and Components
Systems
This section would provide multiyear procurement authority
for certain platforms, components, and systems.
Sec. 1841--Managing and Mitigating Risks in Major Munitions Programs
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
consider alternative designs, including designs such as low-
cost, mass-produced munitions or other capabilities that could
complement existing munitions capabilities in meeting the
Department's requirements for major munitions programs.
Sec. 1842--Comptroller General Assessment on Improving Weapon Systems
and Technology Procurement
This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to assess how the Department of Defense can
improve procurement of weapon systems and technologies,
including whether the acquisition workforce has the skills,
data, and tools needed to negotiate favorable outcomes, oversee
contractor performance, manage data rights, monitor industrial
base trends, and address supply chain risks.
Subtitle C--Organic Industrial Base
Sec. 1861--Modification to Annual Report on Depot-Level Maintenance and
Repair Workloads by Public and Private Sectors
This provision modifies section 2466 of title 10, United
States Code, and requires a workload assessment at each covered
depot.
Sec. 1862--Authority to Write Off Capital Expenditures for Certain
Depots of Department of Defense
This section authorizes the Secretary of Defense to adjust
the Working Capital Fund for a covered depot that generates
debt as a result of a Government-directed mission change.
Sec. 1863--Reforms Relating to Army Organic Industrial Base
This section requires the Secretary of the Army to take
certain steps to accelerate the modernization of the organic
industrial base of the Army. Additionally, this section limits
the Secretary of the Army from decreasing workload at an Army
depot by more than 10% unless the Secretary provides notice to
the congressional defense committees as to a plan to shift
other workload requirements of the Army to the Army depot.
Sec. 1864--Exclusion of Manufacturing Arsenal Workload from Depot
Carryover Calculation
This section requires the Secretary of Defense to
specifically exclude manufacturing arsenal workload from the
Army's carryover calculation.
Sec. 1865--Temporary Authority for Use of Operation and Maintenance
Funds to Provide Training for Certain Employees Performing Services or
Work Funded by Working-Capital Funds
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense and
the service secretaries to use operations and maintenance
appropriations to train prevailing rate employees who perform
working capital fund services.
Sec. 1866--Demonstration and Prototyping Program for Qualification of
Organic Industrial Base as Alternate Source for Manufacture of Casts
and Forged Components for Legacy Aircraft
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a program to develop, test, and qualify the organic
industrial base as an alternate source for the manufacture of
casts and forged components for fixed wing or rotary wing
legacy aircraft.
Sec. 1867--Briefing and Report on Defense Industrial Base Chokepoints
and Organic Industrial Base Modernization
This section would require the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy to provide a briefing and
report to the congressional defense committees on supply chain
chokepoints.
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters
Sec. 1871--Exception to Contract Price Requirement Relating to Use of
Test and Evaluation Installations by Commercial Entities
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
allow a small business or a covered non-traditional defense
contractor to reimburse the Department of Defense for a cost
that is less than the amount of all direct costs to the United
States associated with the test and evaluation activities
conducted by such contractor using a Major Range and Test
Facility Installation. This section would require the Secretary
to determine and certify in writing that the activities are for
a promising science and technology concept with a low
technology readiness level; the contract is expected to yield
to the Department of Defense a significant, long-term
technological benefit or benefit relating to the defense
industrial base; and that such test and evaluation activities
will not delay or displace previously scheduled test activities
associated with an existing program of record.
Sec. 1872--Amendments to the Procurement Technical Assistance
Cooperative Agreement Program
This section would amend chapter 388 of title 10, United
States Code, to improve the Procurement Technical Assistance
Cooperative Agreement Program by ensuring client
confidentiality and providing program centers with more
flexibility in funding limits so they can better meet growing
demand from small and nontraditional businesses seeking
technical assistance with Department of Defense contracts.
Sec. 1873--Pilot Program on Digital Engineering and Advanced
Manufacturing to Address No-Bid Solicitations
This section would require the Director of the Defense
Logistics Agency, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment and the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy, not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a pilot
program to leverage small businesses to address supply chain
gaps associated with certain parts, products, and components
listed on the Defense Logistics Agency No Bid Solicitation
List.
Sec. 1874--Pilot Program to Improve Participation by Small Business
Concerns in Certain Department of Defense Contracts
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a pilot program to improve participation by small
business concerns seeking to submit offers for Department of
Defense contracts relating to artificial intelligence, software
modernization, cybersecurity, quantum technologies, autonomous
systems, advanced software development, and related dual-use
technologies.
Sec. 1875--Guidance to Ensure Protection of Covered Information During
Covered Preaward Engagements
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, to establish a process to provide timely guidance to small
businesses and nontraditional defense contractors to ensure
protection of covered information during discussions where
sensitive technical, operational, or security information may
be shared prior to the award of a contract, grant, or
agreement.
Subtitle E--Defense Industrial Base Workforce Matters
Sec. 1881--Skills-Based Requirements for Department of Defense
Contractor Personnel
This section would establish a new section in chapter 223
of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit the Department of
Defense from stipulating minimum education requirements for
contractor personnel in a solicitation unless the contracting
officer provides written justification that the needs of the
Department cannot be met without such requirements. This
section would also require the Secretary of Defense to consider
encouraging the use of alternatives to education requirements,
such as skills, work experience, certifications,
apprenticeships, and demonstrated abilities when revising the
Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition
Regulation to carry out the new section. This section would
also make a conforming repeal of section 813 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398), as this section would update the
requirements for the Department to justify minimum education
requirements for contractor personnel currently established in
section 813.
Sec. 1882--Modification of Working Group on the Advanced Manufacturing
Workforce
This section would amend section 1843 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-
60) to expand the responsibilities of the Department of Defense
working group on the advanced manufacturing workforce to
include identifying barriers to recruiting, developing,
training, and certifying a sufficient workforce. This section
would also require a report assessing the success of related
pilot programs and initiatives, such as the Accelerated
Training in Defense Manufacturing program, among other things.
Sec. 1883--Workforce Development Initiatives to Support Mining of
Critical Minerals
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to use
authorities under title III of the Defense Production Act of
1950 (50 U.S.C. 4531) and section 4817 of title 10, United
States Code, to support workforce development initiatives for
the mining, processing, refining, recycling, and production of
critical minerals. Eligible initiatives may consist of
partnerships with institutions of higher education,
scholarships or tuition assistance, and work-based learning
opportunities aligned to defense industrial base workforce
needs. The section would also require an assessment of the
feasibility of conditioning certain related awards on
participation in one or more eligible workforce development
initiatives.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Sec. 1891--Exemption from Trademark Licensing Fees for Certain Military
Exchange Contractors
This section would exempt certain military exchange
contractors from trademark licensing fees.
Sec. 1892--Major System Cost Growth Oversight
This section would amend section 4374 of title 10, United
States Code, to require a notification to Congress of a breach
of a significant cost growth threshold or a critical cost
growth threshold to be provided not later than 30 days after
the relevant unit cost report was submitted to the service
acquisition executive. This section would also amend section
4203 of title 10, United States Code, by requiring the
Secretary of Defense to designate an end item as a major
subprogram for the purposes of acquisition reporting if the
eventual total expenditure for the end item is estimated to
exceed $500,000,000.
This section would also amend section 4214 of title 10,
United States Code, to require the baseline cost estimate to
apply to the lifecycle of major defense acquisition programs or
designated major subprograms. In addition, this section would
amend section 4376 of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from delegating authority and
responsibility for the termination of a program and to expand
the matters that must be considered when developing a
termination plan for a terminated program.
Sec. 1893--Inapplicability of Berry Amendment Exceptions to Certain
Seafood Purchases
This section would amend section 4862 of title 10, United
States Code, to eliminate existing exceptions to the Berry
Amendment for seafood purchases within the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 1894--Clarification of Commercial Solicitation Restrictions during
Initial Entry Training for Memorabilia and Photography
This section would clarify commercial solicitation
restrictions during initial entry training for memorabilia and
photography.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
PURPOSE
Division B provides military construction, family housing,
and related authorities in support of the military departments
during fiscal year 2027. As recommended by the committee,
division B would authorize appropriations in the amount of
$28,565,682,000 for construction in support of the Active
Forces, Reserve Components, defense agencies, and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program for
fiscal year 2027.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW
The Department of Defense requested $25,450,959,000 for
military construction, $372,317,000 for Base Realignment and
Closure activities and $2,129,724,000 for military housing for
fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends authorization of
appropriations of $25,459,959,000 for military construction,
$422,317,000 for Base Realignment and Closure activities, and
$2,070,724,000 for military housing in fiscal year 2027.
Sec. 2001--Short Title
This section would cite division B of this Act as the
``Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027.''
Sec. 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be
Specified by Law
This section would ensure that the authorizations provided
in titles XXI through XXVII of this Act shall expire on October
1, 2029, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing
funds for military construction for fiscal year 2030, whichever
is later.
Sec. 2003--Effective Date
This section would provide that titles XXI through XXVII of
this Act would take effect on October 1, 2026, or the date of
the enactment of this Act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,931,638,000 for Department
of the Army military construction and $708,902,000 for family
housing for fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends
authorization of appropriations of $2,002,978,000 for military
construction and $649,902,000 for family housing for the Army
in fiscal year 2027.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Feasibility Study on Establishing Technology Integration Complex at the
United States Military Academy
The committee recognizes the significant and ongoing
efforts at the United States Military Academy to integrate
emerging technologies into cadet education, applied research,
and operational experimentation. The committee also recognizes
the importance of ensuring that the facilities and
infrastructure of the United States Military Academy keep pace
with evolving educational, operational, and technological
requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Installations, Energy, and Environment, to conduct a
feasibility study on opportunities to expand the physical test
and evaluation infrastructure for emerging technologies at the
United States Military Academy and to submit a report to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than December 1,
2026. The report shall include, but not be limited to:
(1) an evaluation of available land suitable for
development within and around the Academy;
(2) a review of existing infrastructure capacity, including
utilities, transportation networks, communications systems,
energy resilience, and range control authorities, and
identification of upgrades necessary to support expansion;
(3) a concept of operations for the development of a
technology proving ground; and
(4) a time-phased plan and funding profile required across
the Future Years Defense Program to support potential
developments.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2027.
Sec. 2102--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2027.
Sec. 2103--Authorization of Appropriations, Army
This section would authorize appropriations for Army
military construction levels identified in section 4601 of
division D of this Act.
Sec. 2104--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2021 Project
at Fort Gillem, Georgia
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2021 project until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2105--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2022
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2022 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2022
Project at Fort Stewart, Georgia
This section would modify the authorization for a fiscal
year 2022 project.
Sec. 2107--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2023
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2023 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2108--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2024
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2024 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2109--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2025
Project at Grafenwoehr, Germany
This section would modify the authorization for a fiscal
year 2025 project.
Sec. 2110--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2026
Project at Joint Region Marianas, Guam
This section would modify an authorization for a fiscal
year 2026 project.
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $8,266,703,000 for Department
of the Navy military construction and $747,479,000 for family
housing for fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends
authorization of appropriations of $8,107,873,000 for military
construction and $747,479,000 for family housing for the
Department of the Navy in fiscal year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of Department of the
Navy construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2202--Family Housing
This section would authorize planning and design of family
housing units for the Department of the Navy for fiscal year
2026.
Sec. 2203--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy
This section would authorize appropriations for Department
of Navy military construction levels identified in section 4601
of division D of this Act.
Sec. 2204--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2023
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2023 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2205--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2024
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2024 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2206--Extension and Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2024 Project at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia
This section would extend and modify the authorization of
certain fiscal year 2024 project until October 1, 2027, or the
date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2207--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2026
Project at Pacific Missile Range Facility Barking Sands, Hawaii
This section would modify the authorization for a fiscal
year 2026 project.
Sec. 2208--Transfer of Amounts for Mitigation for Projects Located at
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
transfer authorized funds to a mitigation account for the
Multi-Mission Drydock and Pier 2 projects at Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard within 1 year of enactment.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $10,601,180,000 for Department
of the Air Force military construction and $609,778,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends
authorization of appropriations of $10,298,050,000 for military
construction and $609,778,000 for family housing for the
Department of the Air Force in fiscal year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section would authorize a list of Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2302--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Department of the
Air Force for fiscal year 2027.
Sec. 2303--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force
This section would authorize appropriations for Air Force
military construction levels identified in section 4601 of
division D of this Act.
Sec. 2304--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2019
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2019 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2305--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2020
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2020 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2306--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2023
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2023 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2307--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2024
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2024 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2308--Authority to Carry Out Project at Eglin Air Force Base,
Florida
This section would provide authorization to use funds
available for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation to
execute a certain project at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $3,402,951,000 for defense
agency military construction and $63,064,000 for family housing
for fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends authorization of
appropriations of $3,278,671,000 for military construction and
$63,064,000 for family housing for defense agencies in fiscal
year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of defense agency
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2402--Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment
Program Projects
This section would contain a list of authorized energy
resilience and conservation investment projects for fiscal year
2027. The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The State list contained in this Act is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Sec. 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies
This section would authorize appropriations for defense
agencies' military construction at the levels identified in
section 4601 of division D of this Act.
Sec. 2404--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2023
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2023 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2405--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2024
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2024 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $604,270,000 for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP)
for fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends authorization of
appropriations of $604,270,000 NSIP for fiscal year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program
Sec. 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
make contributions to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
construction and land acquisition projects using amounts
appropriated in the funding table in section 4601 and any
reimbursements from NATO for prior United States-funded
construction.
Sec. 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO
This section would authorize appropriations for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program at the
levels identified in section 4601 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions
Sec. 2511--Republic of Korea Funded Construction Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
accept seven military construction projects totaling $416.5
million pursuant to agreement with the Republic of Korea for
required in-kind contributions.
Sec. 2512--Republic of Poland Funded Construction Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
accept two military construction projects totaling $134.0
million pursuant to agreement with the Republic of Poland for
required in-kind contributions.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,248,487,000 for National
Guard and Reserve facilities military construction for fiscal
year 2027. The committee recommends authorization of
appropriations of $1,772,387,000 for National Guard and Reserve
facilities military construction for fiscal year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of Army National Guard
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section would authorize a list of Army Reserve
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
Construction and Land Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of Navy Reserve and
Marine Corps Reserve construction projects for fiscal year
2027. The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The State list contained in this Act is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Sec. 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of Air National Guard
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize a list of Air Force Reserve
construction projects for fiscal year 2027. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The State list contained in this Act is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National Guard and Reserve
This section would authorize appropriations for National
Guard and Reserve military construction at the levels
identified in section 4601 of division D of this Act.
Sec. 2607--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2023
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2023 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2608--Extension of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2024
Projects
This section would extend the authorization of certain
fiscal year 2024 projects until October 1, 2027, or the date of
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2028, whichever is later.
Sec. 2609--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2026
Project at Colonie, New York
This section would modify the authorization for a fiscal
year 2026 project.
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $372,317,000 for activities
related to Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) activities in
fiscal year 2027. The committee recommends authorization of
appropriations of $422,317,000 for BRAC activities in fiscal
year 2027.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base Realignment and
Closure Activities Funded through Department of Defense Base Closure
Account
This section would authorize appropriations for ongoing
activities that are required to implement the Base Realignment
and Closure activities authorized by the Defense Base Closure
and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law
101-510), at the levels identified in section 4601 of division
D of this Act.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Access to Military Installation Fitness Facilities for Veterans with
Service-Connected Disabilities
The committee recognizes the physical rehabilitation needs
of veterans with service-connected disabilities. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on the feasibility of expanding access to non-specialized
fitness facilities on military installations to veterans with a
disability rating of 20 percent or higher as determined by the
Department of Veterans Affairs. The briefing should include the
following:
(1) an assessment of current policies governing veteran
access to non-specialized fitness facilities on military
installations;
(2) identification of any legal, operational, or resource
constraints that would affect implementation;
(3) an estimate of the number of veterans who would be
eligible under such an expansion; and
(4) recommendations for implementation, including any pilot
programs or phased approach.
Air Force Base Security
The committee understands the increasing security risks
facing domestic military installations from the ground, air,
and sea. As the United States Air Force continues to emphasize
Agile Combat Employment, homeland defense, Integrated Base
Defense Security Systems modernization, and Joint All-Domain
Command and Control (JADC2), the committee notes that many Air
Force installations continue to rely upon fragmented, legacy
emergency response systems that lack modern geolocation, real-
time situational awareness, and integrated multimedia reporting
capabilities.
The committee further notes the nature of domestic
installation threats, including unauthorized drone incursions,
insider threats, active shooter incidents, and coordinated
disruptions targeting critical infrastructure and military
personnel. These evolving security risks require modernized
installation-level command-and-control capabilities capable of
rapidly fusing data from multiple sources and improving
decision-making for security forces personnel and installation
leadership.
The committee notes the Air Force Installation and Mission
Support Center (AFIMSC) has piloted real-time, geolocated
incident reporting and situational awareness capabilities at
Joint Base Andrews, Maxwell Air Force Base (AFB), Tinker AFB
and Joint Base Anacostia Bolling to enhance installation
situational awareness for Base Defense Operations Centers. The
committee understands that such capabilities are designed to
integrate with existing Air Force systems and contribute to
installation resiliency, emergency response modernization, and
Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) operations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Chief of Staff of
the Air Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027, on:
(1) The role base security technologies may play in
supporting counter-UAS detection using a ``whole-of-
installation'' approach to reporting and response at Air Force
installations;
(2) the Air Force's assessment of installation-level
modernization efforts of this nature to address current and
emerging threats against military installations and the
families who reside on them; and
(3) the Air Force's plan for integrating JADC2 capabilities
at the installation level into existing platforms, including
the strategy for programming and expanding such capabilities
across the Future Years Defense Plan.
Alternative Construction Methods for Indo-Pacific Infrastructure
The committee notes that U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
(USINDOPACOM) faces urgent infrastructure requirements that may
not be met within operationally relevant timelines through
traditional military construction processes. The committee is
aware that alternative construction methods, including pre-
engineered modular facilities, tension fabric structures, and
factory-manufactured buildings, can deliver operational
infrastructure faster than traditional construction. The
committee notes that alternative construction solutions are
widely available in the commercial marketplace, yet their
utilization by the Department remains limited.
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Energy, Installations, and Environment to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the use of alternative construction
methods to address USINDOPACOM infrastructure requirements. The
briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of USINDOPACOM critical infrastructure
requirements that could be met through alternative construction
methods;
(2) identification of policy, regulatory, or statutory
barriers that limit the procurement of alternative construction
solutions;
(3) a comparison of acquisition timelines and projected
costs between traditional military construction and alternative
construction approaches;
(4) an evaluation of whether existing authorities,
including the unspecified minor military construction
threshold, adequately support the integration of site
preparation and foundation work with alternative construction
equipment procurement; and
(5) recommendations for policy changes that would
streamline the procurement of alternative construction
solutions and address barriers related to associated site
preparation and construction work.
Apra Harbor Port Infrastructure in Guam
Apra Harbor in Guam serves as a critical logistics hub for
military operations in the western Pacific. The committee is
concerned that deteriorating waterfront infrastructure at Apra
Harbor poses a risk to military readiness and the ability of
the Department of Defense to sustain operations in the region.
Sustained investment in port infrastructure is essential to
ensuring the United States maintains a credible and capable
forward presence in the Indo-Pacific.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on ways the Department of Defense
can support port infrastructure in Guam. The briefing shall
include:
(1) an assessment of using Defense Community Infrastructure
Program grants and other authorities to support the replacement
of aging gantry cranes in Guam;
(2) a description of technical challenges facing local
partners in applying for Federal funds to support port
infrastructure;
(3) the timeline and funding required to address the most
critical waterfront infrastructure deficiencies at Apra Harbor;
(4) coordination efforts between the Department of Defense
and other Federal agencies to support port infrastructure
investment in Guam; and
(5) other matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Comptroller General Review of Military Barracks Policies, Funding, and
Conditions
Hundreds of thousands of servicemembers live in military
barracks and concerns about living conditions and how the
Department of Defense is managing the barracks go back decades.
In September 2023, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
found that barracks were in poor condition, including safety
risks, and some barracks buildings did not meet the Department
requirements for privacy or amenities (GAO-23-105797). GAO made
31 recommendations to improve the Department and military
service management of barracks programs.
The Department and the military services have taken steps
to address many of GAO's recommendations from its 2023 report.
However, important recommendations from GAO's 2023 report still
remain open and unimplemented, such as the need for the
Department to develop a method to track and report complete
funding information for barracks housing programs.
Additionally, full implementation of strengthened policies
across the Department's large portfolio of barracks facilities
will require continued oversight and focus of senior leaders.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to reassess the Department's efforts to
address the conditions of the barracks across the military
services. The assessment should include an evaluation of:
(1) the extent to which the military services have
implemented improvements regarding health and safety as well as
privacy and configuration in the barracks across their
respective installations;
(2) the extent to which the Department has taken steps to
better identify funding needs for barracks programs; and
(3) the extent to which the Department has increased its
oversight of the military services' barracks programs.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing by March 31, 2027, to the House Committee on
Armed Services, with the results of the review to follow in a
mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General Review of Military Housing Privatization Initiative
Financial Stability
Private-sector companies own and operate about 99 percent
of homes at U.S. military installations. The committee is
concerned about the Department of Defense's oversight of the
financial sustainability of these military housing
privatization initiative (MHPI) projects, which are critical
for providing safe and quality housing for servicemembers and
their families. Since the mid-1990s, private real estate
companies have entered into over 70 business agreements with
the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. These
agreements outline the project funding structures and ownership
responsibilities for these projects. Since 2018, questions have
been raised about the Department's oversight of MHPI project
finances. While the Department has recently made some
improvements to its oversight and reporting of project
finances, in some instances project revenues have not kept pace
with expenses such as rising maintenance and property insurance
costs. This has resulted in the financial restructuring of some
projects and raised concerns about the overall financial
sustainability of MHPI in the long-term.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to evaluate the extent to which the
Department has:
(1) identified factors, such as private insurance rates,
that have contributed to changes in the revenue and expenses of
MHPI projects;
(2) assessed the future financial sustainability of the
privatized housing program and identified projects at risk of
financial failure; and
(3) taken steps to financially restructure or modify MHPI
projects to address these risks.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives by April 30, 2027, with the
results of the review to follow in a mutually agreed upon
format and timeframe.
Construction Project Management Software Utilization and Cost
Transparency
The committee recognizes the importance of maximizing
taxpayer dollars when it comes to construction and facility
projects managed by the Department of Defense, which help to
realize operational and national defense priorities of the
United States. The committee is aware that inconsistent data
capture and a lack of enterprise-wide standardization across
Department of Defense construction programs may contribute to
project delays, cost overruns, and reduced accountability. The
committee encourages the Department to evaluate commercially
available construction management systems that standardize data
capture enterprise-wide and increase transparency, efficiency,
and accountability so that projects are completed on-time and
the risk of unforeseen cost increases is mitigated.
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Energy, Installations, and Environment, to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the feasibility of utilizing
commercially available construction management systems
enterprise-wide. The briefing shall include, at a minimum:
(1) an assessment of connected construction management
systems that facilitate the seamless flow of information
between project phases and disparate teams, including the
extent to which updates to field data, financial records, and
project schedules can be synchronized in real-time; and
(2) an evaluation of how such systems can establish the
necessary ``digital thread'' to support the integration of
emerging technologies essential to modernizing defense
infrastructure, including the implementation of artificial
intelligence for risk mitigation.
Defense Access Roads Flood Mitigation
The committee recognizes the Defense Access Roads program
as an important tool for sustaining military readiness and
community relations in Guam. The committee is aware that Guam's
unique geography and weather make its road infrastructure
particularly vulnerable to flooding and storm damage, which can
disrupt military access and logistics during severe weather
events. The committee is concerned that flood vulnerability
along key corridors such as Marine Corps Drive on the western
side of Guam may undermine the long-term effectiveness of
Defense Access Roads investments in the region.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on ways ongoing and future
Defense Access Roads projects in Guam can incorporate flood
mitigation measures. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of Defense Access Roads corridors in Guam
most vulnerable to flooding and the operational impact of
flood-related disruptions on military access and readiness;
(2) existing or planned flood mitigation measures being
incorporated into current Defense Access Roads projects and any
gaps in authority or funding that limit such efforts; and
(3) recommendations for incorporating flood resilience
standards into future Defense Access Roads project planning and
design in Guam.
Department of Defense Identification of and Mitigation for Critical
Housing Areas
The committee notes that a 2024 Government Accountability
Office (GAO) report found that the Department of Defense has
not used its housing assessments to identify areas where
service members and their families are most severely affected
by housing supply or affordability challenges--or critical
housing areas. The committee further notes GAO's recommendation
that the Department develop a comprehensive list of critical
housing areas that accounts for unique market conditions,
including high-cost and seasonal rental markets. While the
Department has initiated corrective actions, including a
structured analysis to develop a comprehensive list of critical
housing areas and development of guidance to support
servicemembers and families moving to challenging markets, the
committee is concerned about impacts in the interim.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on the status of efforts to
identify areas with constrained housing markets. The briefing
shall include:
(1) the methodology and criteria used to identify critical
housing areas, including consideration of unique market
conditions;
(2) the current status and timeline for completion of the
Department's analysis;
(3) any preliminary list of installations or areas
identified as having constrained housing markets;
(4) mitigation measures in place or planned for affected
areas or installations; and
(5) any challenges affecting completion of the analysis.
Digital Twin Modeling for Civilian Infrastructure Vulnerability at
Military Installations
The committee notes that military installations depend on
surrounding civilian infrastructure to sustain day-to-day
operations and support mission readiness. The committee
understands that disruptions to such civilian infrastructure
can produce cascading effects on installation systems that are
difficult to anticipate using traditional planning tools. The
committee notes that emerging artificial intelligence-enabled
digital twin technologies offer a potential means of simulating
disruption scenarios before they occur.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 1, 2027, on the feasibility of using
artificial intelligence-enabled digital twin models to assess
civilian infrastructure vulnerabilities affecting military
installation operations. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of whether existing tools and
methodologies are sufficient to identify risks arising from
disruptions to civilian infrastructure supporting installation
operations;
(2) the feasibility of developing artificial intelligence-
enabled digital twin models to simulate interdependencies
between installation systems and surrounding civilian
infrastructure, including estimated costs and technical
requirements;
(3) whether a pilot program applying such modeling at a
limited number of installations would provide sufficient data
to evaluate the approach's utility for broader adoption; and
(4) any ongoing efforts within the Department to apply
digital twin or similar modeling methodologies to installation
resilience planning.
Dining Facility Health and Performance Transparency
The committee is concerned that servicemembers often lack
access to clear, timely information regarding the health,
safety, and performance of dining facilities on military
installations, including facilities operated by contractors.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments, to submit a report to
the House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 5,
2027, on the Department of Defense plan to require
servicemember-accessible disclosure of health, safety, and
performance inspection ratings for all dining facilities
located on military installations. The report shall include the
following information:
(1) a description of the policy framework for public,
proactive disclosure of inspection ratings for both Department-
operated and contractor-operated dining facilities;
(2) the methods by which inspection ratings will be
displayed at dining facilities and published on a publicly
accessible Department website;
(3) a timeline for implementation and compliance across all
military installations; and
(4) identification of any statutory, regulatory, or
contractual barriers to implementation, along with
recommendations to address such barriers.
Economic Adjustment Committee in Guam
The committee supports activities undertaken by the
Department of Defense in preparation for an Economic Adjustment
Committee in Guam and encourages further Department of Defense
collaboration with local partners. The committee is aware that
the significant military buildup on Guam presents both
opportunities and challenges for the local economy, workforce,
and infrastructure, and that meaningful coordination with the
Government of Guam and local stakeholders is essential to
ensuring that defense-related growth benefits the broader
community. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than April 1, 2027, on the status of activities
supporting an Economic Adjustment Committee in Guam. The
briefing should include the following information:
(1) the current status of Department of Defense planning
and coordination efforts in support of establishing an Economic
Adjustment Committee in Guam, including any interagency or
intergovernmental coordination undertaken to date;
(2) an assessment of the anticipated economic impacts of
the military buildup in Guam on local employment, housing, and
infrastructure, and the extent to which those impacts have been
communicated to the Government of Guam and local stakeholders;
and
(3) a description of planned or ongoing efforts to partner
with local Guamanian businesses, workforce development
programs, and community organizations to maximize economic
benefit from defense-related construction and basing
activities.
Enhancing Speed and Efficiency in Military Construction Delivery
The committee recognizes that timely delivery of military
construction projects is critical to readiness, force posture,
and mission success, particularly as the Department of Defense
strengthens infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific and advances
nuclear and homeland defense modernization. However, the
committee is concerned that traditional design-bid-build
approaches often produce delays, fragmented accountability, and
higher costs for mission-critical infrastructure.
The committee supports the Department's efforts to
modernize project delivery processes to emphasize speed,
flexibility, mission-focused outcomes, and improved cost
certainty. The committee believes military construction
presents a key opportunity to advance these objectives through
broader adoption of innovative delivery methods, including
design-build, progressive design-build, early contractor
involvement, and integrated project delivery, which have
demonstrated the ability to compress schedules, improve
constructability, and better align delivery with mission
requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than December 1, 2026, on the Department's plan to
accelerate military construction delivery through innovative
project delivery methods, including:
(1) current use of innovative delivery methods and barriers
to broader adoption;
(2) opportunities to expand these methods for complex,
high-security, or time-sensitive projects;
(3) whether additional statutory authorities or policy
changes are needed to enable wider use of such approaches;
(4) plans to incorporate early contractor involvement to
improve constructability and cost and schedule performance;
(5) efforts to build acquisition workforce capability,
including the role of the Defense Acquisition University in
developing relevant competencies;
(6) the role of formal partnering practices with industry
and whether additional authorities or guidance are needed to
institutionalize such practices;
(7) Department goals, performance measures, or benchmarks
for the use of innovative project delivery strategies in
military construction;
(8) the organization and oversight of contracting officers,
including whether current structures align with mission
urgency, risk acceptance, and operational outcomes; and
(9) any other matters the Secretary deems relevant.
Evaluation of Standards for Electromagnetic Pulse Protection
The Department of Defense has established standards for
protection against high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP)
attacks and geomagnetic disturbances (GMD) through MIL-STD-188-
125-1. The committee recognizes the importance of hardening
military installations against these threats but notes
uncertainty regarding the current state of compliance with
existing standards and the costs and feasibility of achieving
full compliance within a defined timeframe.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on the Department of Defense's
compliance with MIL-STD-188-125-1. The briefing should include:
(1) a description of current efforts to harden military
installations and infrastructure assets against HEMP attacks
and GMD;
(2) an assessment of compliance with MIL-STD-188-125-1,
including identification of known gaps and challenges; and
(3) an assessment of the feasibility of achieving full
compliance across all military installations within 5 years.
Feasibility of Expanding Army Real Estate Pilot Program
The Department of the Army has developed an online real
estate inventory tool to identify existing space available at
Army installations, with the goal of reducing unnecessary
military construction and off-post lease agreements. The
committee recognizes the potential value of this tool as a
model for broader Department-wide application and seeks to
assess whether expansion to the remaining military departments
is operationally and technically feasible.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the feasibility of expanding the
Army's online real estate inventory tool to Air Force, Navy,
Marine Corps, and Space Force installations. The briefing
should address the following:
(1) an assessment of the Army pilot program's performance
to date, including utilization rates and reductions in military
construction or lease activity;
(2) the technical and administrative feasibility of
adapting the Army's tool for use across the remaining military
departments, including any interoperability or data
standardization challenges;
(3) estimated resources required to develop and sustain an
expanded tool across all military departments; and
(4) the Secretary's recommendation on whether the Army tool
should be adopted department-wide, modified for service-
specific use, or developed as a unified platform.
Feasibility of Expanding Description of Window Fall Devices in Military
Family Housing Units
The committee is aware that window opening control devices
(WOCDs) represent a category of window fall prevention
technology designed to limit the distance a window can open,
reducing the risk of falls among children. Section 2857(a)(3)
of title 10, United States Code, currently requires the
installation of window fall prevention devices in military
family housing units upon request by a housing occupant with a
child under the age of six, but references only ``a window
screen or guard'' as an eligible device.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than February 1, 2027, on window fall prevention devices in
military family housing. The briefing should include the
following information:
(1) an assessment of the comparative safety efficacy of
WOCDs relative to other window safety devices, including window
screens and guards;
(2) a legal assessment of whether WOCDs are compliant with
section 2857(a)(3) of title 10, United States Code;
(3) an inventory of window fall prevention devices
currently installed across military family housing units,
disaggregated by device type and installation component;
(4) an assessment of the cost differential between WOCDs
and other window safety devices, including any lifecycle
maintenance cost considerations; and
(5) an assessment of whether current Department of Defense
policy and installation-level guidance adequately address
window fall prevention in military family housing, and any
recommendations for policy updates.
Feasibility of Expanding for Broadband Access at Middle East
Installations
The committee is concerned that military personnel
stationed at some overseas installations may lack reliable
access to high-speed, secure, and resilient internet services,
either due to the absence of commercial options or inadequacy
of available services for servicemembers' basic connectivity
needs. This connectivity gap could create a meaningful quality
of life disparity between servicemembers stationed overseas and
those at installations in the continental United States. The
committee notes that section 651 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159)
authorized the Secretary of a military department to provide
no-cost broadband internet access to servicemembers residing in
unaccompanied housing within the United States, and believes
that servicemembers stationed overseas deserve the same
consideration.
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Energy, Installations, and Environment to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than January 1, 2027, on the state of broadband internet access
at installations outside the continental United States and the
feasibility of expanding no-cost broadband access to such
installations. The briefing should include the following
information:
(1) an assessment of current broadband connectivity at
overseas installations, including where access is adequate and
those where access is insufficient or nonexistent;
(2) the feasibility of expanding the no-cost broadband
program authorized under section 651 of Public Law 118-159 to
overseas installations;
(3) potential security risks associated with expanding
commercial broadband access at overseas installations and how
the Department would mitigate those risks;
(4) candidate installations that would be prioritized for
expanded access and the criteria used to identify them; and
(5) how such an expansion would be funded and the cost of
extending broadband access at overseas installations where
connectivity is currently inadequate.
Governance and Integration of AI-Enabled Shipyard Modernization Tools
The committee recognizes the Department of the Navy's
increasing use of artificial intelligence, digital engineering,
data analytics, and digital workflow tools to improve shipyard
planning, maintenance execution, and infrastructure
modernization activities associated with public and private
shipyard operations.
The committee further recognizes that effective
implementation of digital modernization capabilities requires
disciplined engineering integration, cybersecurity compliance,
interoperability, and government control of technical baselines
and operational data in order to translate digital
recommendations into measurable fleet readiness outcomes.
The committee is concerned that rapid adoption of
enterprise digital platforms absent clear governance and
integration discipline may increase cybersecurity risks, reduce
transparency into decision processes, complicate sustainment
activities, and create vendor lock-in that limits future
competition and government oversight.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than March 1, 2027, on the Department's governance
and integration framework supporting AI-enabled shipyard
modernization initiatives.
The briefing shall include:
(1) the Department's approach to maintaining government
control of data rights, interfaces, and technical baselines
associated with shipyard modernization efforts;
(2) efforts to ensure interoperability and modular open
systems approaches across shipyard digital modernization
initiatives;
(3) cybersecurity and Risk Management Framework
considerations associated with AI-enabled shipyard tools
integrated into shipyard, shipboard, and fleet sustainment
networks;
(4) measures being taken to mitigate vendor lock-in and
preserve future competition for digital shipyard capabilities;
(5) methods used to ensure traceability between AI-assisted
recommendations and certified engineering actions; and
(6) metrics used to assess the contribution of digital
modernization initiatives to fleet readiness, maintenance
performance, and ship availability outcomes.
Housing Capacity for Junior Enlisted Personnel in High Cost Areas
The committee remains concerned about military
installations where the number of junior enlisted personnel
exceeds available unaccompanied housing capacity, particularly
in high cost-of-living areas. The committee notes that enlisted
members in the grade of E-4 and below are disproportionately
affected by housing shortages and rising rental costs in
surrounding communities. Improved visibility into installation-
level unaccompanied housing capacity shortfalls and mitigation
strategies is necessary to support servicemember financial
readiness and quality of life.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than December 1, 2026, on military installations
located where the number of enlisted members in the grade of E-
4 and below assigned to the installation exceeds available
unaccompanied housing capacity by 1,000 or more members. The
briefing shall include the following:
(1) identification of each affected installation and the
total number of enlisted members in the grade of E-4 and below
assigned to the installation, the available unaccompanied
housing capacity, and the resulting shortfall;
(2) the duration of the housing capacity shortfall for each
affected installation;
(3) an assessment of the availability and affordability of
housing in the surrounding civilian community;
(4) a description of mitigation measures currently in place
to address unaccompanied housing shortfalls; and
(5) a plan to address identified shortfalls, including
projected timelines and any required military construction,
facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization
investments, privatized housing expansion, or other
infrastructure solutions.
Improvement of Military Unaccompanied Housing
The committee notes that the quality and availability of
military unaccompanied housing remains a significant concern,
with many facilities failing to meet acceptable standards of
habitability and capacity. The committee notes ongoing
Department of Defense efforts to improve the quality,
condition, and availability of military unaccompanied housing,
including the Barracks Task Force. The committee further notes
that section 2827 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119-60) and section 2001(c) of
``An act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of
H. Con. Res. 14'' (Public Law 119-21) have established new
tools and requirements intended to improve the Department's
management and modernization of unaccompanied housing. The
committee believes it is important to understand how the
military departments intend to use these authorities and
resources to address outstanding deficiencies in a systematic
and prioritized manner.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to each submit a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than January 1, 2027, on
progress to improve military unaccompanied housing under their
respective jurisdictions, including:
(1) an estimate of the total number of beds that will be
required for military unaccompanied housing at each
installation under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned
through the year 2035;
(2) a ranking of the status of military unaccompanied
housing facilities for all installations under the jurisdiction
of the Secretary concerned, utilizing the facility assessment
calculations required under section 2827(b)(2) of Public Law
119-60;
(3) a description of actions taken to improve military
unaccompanied housing under the jurisdiction of the Secretary
concerned, including the amount of Basic Allowance for Housing
funds available for such improvements pursuant to section
2827(c)(2) of Public Law 119-60, and the amount of appropriated
funds required to execute such actions, including for long-term
sustainment;
(4) a plan for utilizing the temporary authorities for the
acquisition or construction of privatized military
unaccompanied housing granted under section 2001(c) of Public
Law 119-21 to address capacity and condition deficiencies
identified under paragraphs (1) and (2);
(5) any identified challenges or barriers to execution of
barracks improvements due to staffing shortages and a detailed
list of resources required to resolve such challenges or
barriers; and
(6) any additional legislative or budgetary authorities the
Secretary concerned believes are necessary to fully execute the
improvements described under paragraph (3).
Indoor Air Quality in Unaccompanied Housing
The committee recognizes that indoor air quality is a
critical component of servicemember health, biosecurity
resilience, facility habitability, and operational readiness.
The committee notes that persistent deficiencies in aging
infrastructure, particularly in military barracks, have
resulted in mold contamination, inadequate ventilation, and
failing heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems that
negatively affect quality of life and force readiness.
The committee supports the Department of Defense's ongoing
barracks repair and modernization efforts and expects indoor
air quality considerations, including ventilation performance,
filtration standards, moisture control, and air disinfection
capabilities, to be fully integrated into such investments.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than December 1, 2026, on:
(1) the current state of indoor air quality in military
barracks;
(2) standards and metrics used to assess ventilation and
environmental health conditions;
(3) the extent to which modernization funding addresses
identified deficiencies; and
(4) actions being taken to improve habitability, mitigate
health risks, and strengthen biosecurity across installations.
Infrastructure and Security Modernization at Joint-Use Arizona Military
Airfields
The committee recognizes the importance of joint-use
military airfields in Arizona, including Marine Corps Air
Station Yuma and Libby Army Airfield at Fort Huachuca, in
supporting military aviation training, unmanned aircraft
systems operations, border support activities, emergency
response, general aviation, and other current and emerging
mission requirements. The committee is concerned that aging
airfield infrastructure, including air traffic control,
aircraft rescue and firefighting, perimeter security, and
electronic monitoring systems, may not be sufficient to support
current operational tempo, shared-use airfield activity, and
projected mission growth at joint-use installations closest to
the southern border.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary
of the Navy, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than January 15, 2027, on airfield
infrastructure and security modernization requirements at
joint-use military airfields in Arizona. The briefing should
include:
(1) an assessment of airfield infrastructure deficiencies
at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma and Libby Army Airfield,
including air traffic control facilities, aircraft rescue and
firefighting facilities, perimeter fencing, vehicle denial
measures, and electronic monitoring systems;
(2) an assessment of the impact of such deficiencies on
military aviation operations, joint-use airfield operations,
emergency response, unmanned aircraft systems operations,
installation security, and projected mission growth;
(3) a description of planned, programmed, or proposed
projects to modernize airfield security and infrastructure at
such installations;
(4) an assessment of barriers to timely execution,
including funding, approval processes, environmental review,
contractor availability, material transportation, and
construction phasing; and
(5) a prioritized plan to address airfield infrastructure
and security modernization requirements, including estimated
cost, schedule, funding source, and sequencing.
Installation Access Control Point Traffic Congestion and Defense Access
Roads Review
The committee recognizes that traffic congestion at access
control points (ACPs) and installation entry gates may degrade
mission readiness, delay training and deployment timelines, and
create force protection vulnerabilities. In several instances,
roadway infrastructure outside military installations has not
kept pace with installation growth, resulting in chokepoints
that impair operational flexibility. While the Defense Access
Roads (DAR) program provides a mechanism to address certain
off-installation transportation deficiencies, the committee
understands that not all qualifying projects are currently
prioritized in a systematic, Department-wide manner. The
committee believes improved visibility into installation-
related traffic bottlenecks would assist in identifying
readiness risks and informing infrastructure planning.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 1, 2026, on traffic
congestion and infrastructure deficiencies affecting access to
military installations. The report shall include:
(1) identification of military installations where traffic
congestion at or near installation ACPs adversely affects
mission readiness, mobilization timelines, or force protection;
(2) an assessment of current and projected impacts of such
congestion on operational capability;
(3) a prioritized list of infrastructure projects,
including roadway expansion, intersection improvements, bridge
construction, or other mitigation measures, necessary to
address identified bottlenecks;
(4) estimated cost ranges and projected timelines for each
identified project; and
(5) an evaluation of the applicability of the DAR program
or other Department authorities to address such deficiencies.
Installation Tornado Warning Dissemination and Emergency Notification
Readiness
The committee is concerned by failures in tornado warning
dissemination and emergency notification at Department of
Defense installations located in high-risk severe weather
corridors, including instances of delayed notification and
human error that pose risks to personnel safety, aircraft
survivability, and mission continuity. The committee notes that
installation emergency notification systems should be
consistently integrated, maintained, and evaluated across the
Department.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not
later than February 1, 2027, on the status of installation
tornado warning dissemination and emergency notification
readiness, including:
(1) an assessment of the reliability, coverage, redundancy,
and activation procedures of installation siren systems and
mass notification platforms, including backup power and
communications resilience;
(2) vulnerabilities related to manual activation
requirements, staffing gaps, training deficiencies, unclear
command authorities, and inconsistent alerting thresholds;
(3) instances of delayed, degraded, or failed warning
dissemination during severe weather events within the past 18
months, including root-cause analysis and corrective actions
taken;
(4) the extent to which National Weather Service warnings
and Integrated Public Alert and Warning System-enabled alerts
are integrated into installation emergency operations centers
and mass notification systems, including any technical, policy,
or cybersecurity barriers;
(5) an assessment of the impacts of warning failures on
personnel accountability, aircraft and critical asset
protection, continuity of operations, and recovery time,
including any resulting operational disruptions or material
losses;
(6) opportunities to automate alerting, reduce reliance on
manual processes, and standardize performance expectations
across the military departments; and
(7) recommendations to improve coordination and
interoperability with State, local, Tribal, and territorial
emergency management systems, particularly for installations
sharing geography or response responsibilities with surrounding
jurisdictions.
Intergovernmental Support Agreements for PFAS Remediation and Clean-up
The committee is aware that Intergovernmental Support
Agreements (IGSAs) strengthen the relationship between
installations and the surrounding communities, support mission
readiness, and generate cost savings. The committee also
recognizes the use of IGSAs between the Department of Defense
and relevant government agencies could assist in efficiently
performing environmental remediation associated with
contamination caused by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS). The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments
to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services not later than
December 31, 2026, on the use of intergovernmental support
agreements for PFAS remediation and restoration activities. The
report should include the following information:
(1) documented use of IGSAs between the Department and
state, regional, or local government agencies to assess and
conduct PFAS remediation and restoration at and around
Department of Defense installations;
(2) the number of existing such agreements, including a
listing of the parties to each agreement;
(3) the cost of such agreements, including projected
departmental cost savings;
(4) any identified limitations of the arrangements,
including policy limitations or legal authorities; and
(5) potential opportunities for using such agreements at
and around additional Department of Defense
Land Procurement in Guam
The committee notes that land procurement by the Department
of Defense in Guam is of particular interest to local
stakeholders and can affect community relations across the
Indo-Pacific. The committee is concerned that adequate
information has not been provided to Congress in support of
planned land procurements in Guam for fiscal year 2027. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on land procurement activities in Guam. The
briefing should include the following information:
(1) a description of any military construction projects
requested for fiscal year 2027 that involve land procurement in
Guam, including the acreage, location, proposed use, and
estimated cost of each parcel;
(2) a description of activities conducted by the Department
of Defense to inform the Government of Guam of planned land
procurements intended for fiscal year 2027, including any
consultations with local elected officials or community
representatives; and
(3) the Department of Defense's procedures for notifying
Congress and local stakeholders of future land procurement
activities in Guam, and any planned improvements to those
procedures.
Mapping Foreign Entities of Concern Owned Property Near Military
Installations
Foreign ownership of real property near U.S. military
installations presents potential risks to operational security,
force protection, and critical infrastructure resilience. The
Department of Defense currently lacks a comprehensive,
standardized, and continuously updated geospatial capability to
identify ownership patterns linked to foreign entities of
concern (FEOC) and assess associated national security risk
indicators.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on the development of a geospatial mapping
and analytic capability that integrates property ownership
records, corporate affiliation data, and proximity analysis for
U.S. military installations, ranges, and critical supporting
infrastructure to identify FEOC-linked ownership and associated
national security risk indicators. The briefing should include
the following information:
(1) the current state of the Department's ability to
identify and track foreign ownership of real property in
proximity to military installations;
(2) a plan and timeline for developing or acquiring a
standardized, authoritative geospatial capability to support
this mission;
(3) the roles and responsibilities of relevant offices,
combatant commands, and interagency partners in producing and
consuming such products;
(4) any legal, regulatory, or resource constraints that
affect the Department's ability to develop or operationalize
this capability; and
(5) an assessment of whether an organic or commercial-based
capability would best support this mission, to include a review
of current commercial capabilities available to obtain the
relevant data.
Military Construction and Facility Maintenance Backlogs at Fort Bragg
The committee is aware of degraded infrastructure and
facilities maintenance and military construction (MILCON)
backlogs at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The committee is
concerned this backlog may affect operational readiness of
tenant commands and units on the installation and their ability
to conduct critical mission sets aligned with national
strategic interests.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Installations, Energy, and Environment, to provide a briefing
to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than
December 1, 2026, detailing Sustainment, Restoration, and
Modernization requirements at Fort Bragg. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum, the following information:
(1) regulatory, statutory, and funding barriers impeding
the Army's and installations' ability to meet infrastructure
and facility requirements;
(2) operational impacts of infrastructure and facilities
maintenance backlogs, to include safety, readiness, and
operational risks;
(3) an assessment of long-term effects on both readiness
and cost growth associated with continued deferral of
maintenance and MILCON projects; and
(4) recommendations for addressing these deficiencies,
including how the Army can prioritize MILCON projects and
deferred maintenance for operations-related facilities through
its Unfunded Priorities List and Future Years Defense Program.
Military Construction in Joint Region Marianas
The committee notes the importance of military construction
within the Joint Region Marianas area of responsibility, and
notes that specific unaddressed needs exist to support
readiness. The committee has authorized design funding for grid
resiliency, medical readiness, family housing, and Defense
Access Roads projects.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Commander of Joint Region Marianas and
the Commander of Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command
Marianas, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than February 1, 2027, on possible project
proposals. The briefing shall include:
(1) an assessment of potential military construction
projects executed using authorities under section 2815 of title
10, United States Code, to support power grid resilience;
(2) a list of power grid infrastructure owned by the
Department of Defense leased to or operated by Guam Power
Authority, and potential projects to improve this
infrastructure using operation and maintenance or military
construction funds;
(3) identification of possible military construction
projects for servicemember and family housing within the Joint
Region Marianas area of responsibility not previously
identified in the Future Years Defense Program;
(4) identification of future projects under the Defense
Access Roads program;
(5) possible projects to support warehousing for U.S. Naval
Hospital Guam; and
(6) other matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Military Housing Office Staffing Assessment
The committee is concerned that Military Housing Offices
(MHO) at the installation-level are under-resourced for their
level of responsibility. MHOs are responsible for providing
housing services for servicemembers and their families and are
a key component in ensuring quality of life. MHOs have
oversight over barracks and dormitories, including Certificate
of Non-Availability processing, Military Housing Privatization
Initiative partners, and quality assurance of on-base housing.
MHOs further serve as a primary advocate for servicemembers and
their families, providing support for off-base housing
searches, mediation of landlord-tenant disputes, and counseling
on lease terms.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on
Armed Services not later than December 1, 2026, on the
following:
(1) an assessment of staffing requirements at MHOs at each
installation to meet the mission requirements;
(2) for the last five fiscal years, a list of installations
that have not met the MHO staffing requirements;
(3) identified barriers to resolving staffing shortages;
(4) an assessment of which billets are under-resourced by
job category; and
(5) a plan, including budgetary requirements, to fully
staff MHOs at each installation.
Naval Surface Warfare Center--Corona Potential Encroachment
The Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC)--Corona provides
warfighting readiness through data analytics and assessment,
engineering the Fleet's Live-Virtual-Constructive training
environment, and assuring the accuracy of measurements. With
over 1,800 civilian personnel, a small contingent of Sailors
and more than 2,000 contractors executing several different
disciplines in support of the warfighter, NSWC Corona is a
leader in data, analytics, visualizations, digital
environments, engineering, and leveraging technology to bridge
and integrate the Navy's data silos, enabling informed
decision-making by the warfighter.
The committee notes that approximately 84 acres of previous
Federal Government land is currently owned by the State of
California and hosts the California Rehabilitation Center
(CRC). The State recently announced that they are closing the
CRC and are considering land development which could lead to
encroachment issues with the activities at NSWC.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
by December 1, 2026, as to the Secretary's plans to prevent
encroachment at NSWC Corona. The briefing shall include:
(1) incompatible development adjoining NSWC Corona and
efforts the Secretary is seeking to ensure compatible
development; and
(2) a specific assessment as to options that are available
to the Secretary to ensure compatible development with the NSWC
Corona mission and local community.
Other Transaction Authority for Advanced Technology Facilities
The committee is aware of the Department of the Navy's
efforts to use Other Transaction Authority for the construction
of an advanced shielded anechoic chamber to provide increased
capacity for secure indoor range testing, installed systems
testing, classified modeling and simulation, and advanced
interoperability testing for next-generation mission systems.
The committee is encouraged that the Navy is considering use of
this authority for a technologically advanced and complex test
and evaluation facility, but notes the limited response to the
Broad Agency Announcement and indications that the Navy may be
pursuing the project in a manner more consistent with
traditional military construction processes.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services, not later
than December 1, 2026, on the Navy's plan to use Other
Transaction Authority for the construction of advanced test and
evaluation facilities, including:
(1) an assessment of the Navy's current business plan for
the advanced shielded anechoic chamber;
(2) an evaluation of why the Broad Agency Announcement
received limited responses from potential bidders;
(3) options to improve industry participation and reduce
cost, schedule, and performance risk for similar facilities;
(4) an assessment of alternative business models, including
leaseback arrangements or the use of existing funds to reduce
project risk; and
(5) recommendations for using this authority as a roadmap
for future construction of advanced test and evaluation
facilities that do not fit well within the traditional military
construction process.
Pacific Islands Military Construction Capability Threshold Study
The committee notes the Department of Defense is planning
and executing a significant portfolio of military construction
projects across Guam and other Pacific island locations,
including Tinian, Rota, Saipan, Palau, Yap, and Kwajalein. The
committee understands that Joint Region Marianas currently uses
the Guam Construction and Capacity Synchronization tool (GCAPS)
to evaluate construction demand and capacity on Guam. However,
many of the constraints affecting military construction in the
region, including limited contractor availability, reliance on
imported labor and materials, shipping constraints, and
logistics limitations, apply across multiple Pacific island
locations that may draw from the same industrial base and
supply chains.
The committee believes it is important to understand
whether the Department is assessing construction capacity
across the broader Indo-Pacific island ecosystem when planning
and sequencing major military construction investments.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command,
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 1, 2027, on:
(1) how the Department determines the amount of military
construction that is realistically executable each year across
Pacific island locations;
(2) whether current planning tools account for shared labor
pools, contractors, shipping capacity, and supply chains across
Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the
Freely Associated States, and other Pacific island locations;
(3) whether GCAPS could be expanded to incorporate
construction demand across the broader Indo-Pacific island
network;
(4) the availability of construction contractors, skilled
labor, and logistics capacity to support planned military
construction investments across these locations;
(5) key risks to construction execution across Pacific
island locations, including labor, port capacity, and material
supply constraints; and
(6) any steps the Department is taking to improve
coordination and sequencing of military construction projects
across the Indo-Pacific theater.
Pavement Rehabilitation at Yuma Proving Ground
The committee notes that Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona,
presents unique construction challenges due to its remote and
geographically isolated location, limited contractor base, and
elevated mobilization and material transportation costs, which
may significantly increase the cost and schedule of traditional
pavement rehabilitation and replacement projects.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 15, 2027, on options to accelerate durable and cost-
effective pavement rehabilitation at Yuma Proving Ground,
including Pole Line Road. The briefing should include:
(1) an assessment of pavement conditions, structural
deficiencies, recurring failure modes, and operational impacts
on Pole Line Road;
(2) an evaluation of conventional and alternative pavement
rehabilitation approaches, including full-depth reclamation,
in-place pavement recycling, rubber-modified asphalt surface
courses, mill-and overlay, and remove-and-replace methods,
consistent with applicable Unified Facilities Criteria;
(3) a comparative life-cycle cost, schedule, durability,
and maintenance assessment of such approaches, including costs
associated with mobilization, material transportation,
contractor availability, and execution at remote installations;
(4) an assessment of any statutory, regulatory,
environmental, funding, contracting, or approval process
barriers to executing alternative methods compared with
traditional methods;
(5) an assessment of the minimum project scale, segment
aggregation, or phased execution needed to attract competitive
industry participation and achieve cost-effective mobilization;
and
(6) recommendations, including a preferred technical
approach, proposed funding source, approval pathway, and
timeline for execution to address recurring pavement failures
on Pole Line Road and whether similar techniques may be
applicable to other arid installations in the Southwestern
United States with primary roads subject to heavy vehicle
traffic and repeated base failure.
Quality of Life Assessment at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base New
Orleans
The committee is aware of quality-of-life and
infrastructure challenges at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve
Base New Orleans (NAS JRB New Orleans) that could affect the
readiness and well-being of permanent, temporary, and Reserve
personnel assigned to or supported by the installation. The
committee recognizes the critical role NAS JRB New Orleans
plays in supporting the readiness of the total force and is
committed to ensuring the installation has the resources
necessary to support its mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than January 1, 2027, assessing quality of life issues at
NAS JRB New Orleans. The report shall include, at a minimum:
(1) the adequacy and availability of on-installation dining
facilities and food vendors for permanent, temporary, and
Reserve personnel, including identification of service gaps and
corrective actions;
(2) the condition, capacity, and resiliency of potable
water systems, including required repairs to elevated water
storage infrastructure, mitigation of single points of failure,
cost estimates, and recommended funding mechanisms;
(3) the scope, cost, and timeline for repair of the Aquatic
Recreation and Training Facility that sustained structural
damage in 2023 due to soil subsidence, including identification
of funding sources;
(4) the status of disaster recovery funding for Navy
Reserve facilities at the installation, including an assessment
of any disparities in the distribution of such funding between
Operations and Maintenance, Navy and Operations and
Maintenance, Navy Reserve accounts, and recommended corrective
actions; and
(5) the status of Flight Surgeon staffing, impacts on
readiness, costs associated with off-installation medical
travel, and a plan to address any vacancies.
Repair by Replacement Authority for Unaccompanied Housing Assessment
The committee recognizes that section 2835 of title 10,
United States Code, provides the military departments authority
to carry out repair by replacement projects for certain
facilities, including unaccompanied housing, when such projects
are determined to be more cost-effective than traditional
repair approaches. The committee further recognizes that the
military departments have begun utilizing this authority to
address aging barracks infrastructure. The committee directs
the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries
of the military departments, to submit a report to the House
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 5, 2027,
regarding implementation and use of the repair by replacement
authority under section 2835 of title 10, United States Code,
for unaccompanied housing projects. The report shall include
the following elements:
(1) identification of unaccompanied housing projects
carried out, underway, or planned to utilize the repair by
replacement authority under section 2835 of title 10, United
States Code, including project locations, project scope, and
military department responsible for execution;
(2) an assessment of the extent to which use of the
authority has improved project delivery timelines, facility
condition and habitability improvements, or cost effectiveness
compared to traditional repair or military construction
approaches;
(3) identification of any cost savings or efficiencies
associated with projects executed using the authority, where
practicable;
(4) identification of any legal, budgetary, planning,
contracting, design, or execution challenges associated with
implementation of the authority;
(5) identification of any best practices or lessons learned
associated with use of the authority;
(6) an assessment of the effectiveness of the authority in
supporting unaccompanied housing modernization and quality-of-
life improvement efforts; and
(7) recommendations regarding whether Congress should
clarify, modify, expand, or otherwise revise the authority.
Report on Intergovernmental Support Agreements
The committee recognizes that Intergovernmental Support
Agreements (IGSAs) strengthen the relationship between
installations and the surrounding communities, support mission
readiness, and generate cost savings.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 31, 2026, on evaluating the use of IGSAs between
state, regional, and local government entities to meet demand
for military unaccompanied housing at installations identified
as operating at greater than 100 percent of unaccompanied
housing capacity and having limited off-base housing supply for
unaccompanied servicemembers within a 50 mile radius of the
installation.
Report on Modernization of Major Range and Test Facility Bases
The committee recognizes that Major Range and Test Facility
Bases (MRTFBs) serve to develop, test, and validate defense
technologies critical to national security. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to continue modernizing
and remediating infrastructure at MRTFBs to ensure that the
Department is able to continually advance effective defense
technologies. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 31, 2026, on the following:
(1) a description of modernization efforts currently
planned or underway at MRTFB, including the status of each
effort;
(2) an identification of MRTFBs that require upgrades or
repairs to maintain proficient operability;
(3) a prioritized list of upgrades or repairs that need to
be completed at each MRTFBs, including its impact on testing
and evaluation operations and the military department
responsible for execution; and
(4) a plan to address required upgrades or repairs at each
MRTFB, including estimated timeline, cost, and the extent to
which such requirements are reflected in the Future Years
Defense Program and supported by sufficient funding to address
identified deficiencies within a reasonable timeframe.
Report on Use of Military Family Housing
The committee notes that several administration officials
were moved into military housing in late 2025. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than May 1,
2027, on any political appointees residing in military housing
during the period of January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2026. The
report should include the following:
(1) the number of senior political appointees authorized to
live in military housing;
(2) the factual justification for such individuals to
reside in military housing, broken out by each individual
authorized to reside in military housing;
(3) how long each such individual resided in military
housing;
(4) the legal authority relied upon to permit each such
individual to reside in military housing;
(5) a description of the credible threats to the
individuals listed under (1) that necessitated housing with
enhanced security;
(6) historical average monthly costs in the last five years
paid by law enforcement agencies to provide security at senior
political appointees' private residences due to credible
threats;
(7) whether each such individual was subject to a lease
consistent with the one required for the Secretary of Defense
pursuant to section 2838 of title 10, United States Code; and
(8) whether each such individual was subject to the same
rental rate as the one imposed upon the Secretary of Defense
pursuant to section 2838 of title 10, United States Code, and
if not, details regarding the variance in rental rate and the
justification for such a variance.
Rivanna Station Infrastructure Improvements
The committee recognizes the role of Rivanna Station in
supporting intelligence and defense missions across the
national security enterprise. The committee notes that the
installation hosts sensitive analytic, technical, and
operational capabilities that require secure, modern, and
resilient infrastructure. The committee further notes that
projected mission growth at Rivanna Station includes work
aligned with AUKUS Pillar II, such as advanced data
integration, artificial intelligence, cyber capabilities, and
other enabling technologies that support deeper cooperation
with allied partners.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on planned and ongoing infrastructure
improvements at Rivanna Station. The briefing shall include:
(1) a description of current and planned facility
modernization efforts and associated timelines;
(2) an assessment of secure and resilient utilities,
digital infrastructure, and mission-support requirements
associated with projected mission growth, including activities
related to AUKUS Pillar II; and
(3) any identified gaps, risks, or resource constraints
that could affect the installation's ability to support current
and future mission demands.
SAOC Transitional Facilities
The committee is aware of the Department's plan to acquire
the Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) to replace the
legacy National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC). However,
given that this will include a transition period between the
NAOC and SAOC becoming mission-qualified, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than June 1, 2027,
including the following:
(1) any interim, temporary, or transitional basing
requirements necessary to ensure uninterrupted operational
capability of airborne strategic command and control aircraft
during the reconstruction or modernization of facilities at
Offutt Air Force Base (AFB);
(2) an assessment of locations outside of Offutt AFB that
supports the construction of these facilities;
(3) an assessment of public-private partnerships that can
accelerate delivery timelines and ensure uninterrupted mission
capability; and
(4) the cost and security requirements of the temporary
options.
Severe Weather Threats and Early Warning Capabilities at Military
Installations
The committee notes that severe weather events--including
extreme heat, wildfires, high winds, and flash flooding--pose
acute risks to Department of Defense installations, personnel,
families, and civilian employees. Such events can threaten
personnel safety, disrupt training and testing, and damage
equipment, buildings, and critical base infrastructure. The
committee believes that the Department should assess the
benefits of investing in more comprehensive severe weather
detection, early warning, forecasting, and alerting systems to
improve preparedness, reduce risk to personnel and property,
and strengthen mission resilience.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services
not later than January 1, 2027, on the feasibility and value of
enhanced severe weather early warning capabilities at military
installations, including:
(1) an assessment of installations that face elevated risk
from severe weather, wildfire, or flooding--particularly those
hosting critical mission capabilities, high-value
infrastructure, or significant population concentrations whose
loss would have disproportionate national security impact;
(2) an assessment of desired core capabilities of such
systems, including real-time multi-hazard detection using
onsite sensors and commercial and federal data streams,
advanced short- and medium-range forecasting, and automated
role-based alerting to installation commanders, emergency
managers, and first responders;
(3) available commercial solutions and estimated costs for
implementing such capabilities, including hardened
communications, cybersecurity protections, and redundancy
appropriate to defense installation standards;
(4) an assessment of whether enhanced non-operational
detection and alerting capabilities would indirectly strengthen
existing operationally-focused forecasting and warning systems;
and
(5) an assessment of the workforce and resources required
to implement and sustain enhanced severe weather detection and
early warning capabilities across the Department, including an
identification of costs by funding line and any gaps between
current resourcing and investment levels required.
Support for Innovative Water and Power Solutions
The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts
to ensure operational and installation resilience. The
committee is aware that water and power solutions are critical
to readiness and that not all installations have readily
available, reliable, or resilient sources. The committee is
also aware that achieving space dominance and securing a
readiness posture in the Indo-Pacific theater requires water
and power solutions that are protected from natural disasters,
geopolitical disruption, and intentional acts. The committee
believes that innovative technologies, such as sub-sea
desalination, can provide this security for operational and
installation water and power needs.
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Energy, Installations, and Environment to provide a
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than March 1, 2027, on innovative water and power solutions for
operational and installation resilience. The briefing should
include the following information:
(1) an identification of installations in the Indo-Pacific
theater that lack readily available, reliable, or resilient
sources of water or power, including an assessment of their
vulnerability to natural disasters, geopolitical disruption,
and intentional acts;
(2) an assessment of innovative water and power
technologies, including subsea desalination, that could improve
installation and operational resilience, and the feasibility of
deploying such technologies at prioritized installations;
(3) a description of any existing programs or funding
mechanisms within the Department of Defense that could be used
to advance the deployment of such technologies.
Trainee Barracks Complex at Fort Jackson
The committee is concerned by reports of substandard living
conditions in trainee barracks at Fort Jackson, South Carolina,
including deficiencies affecting habitability, sanitation, and
the basic quality of life of soldiers undergoing initial entry
training. Fort Jackson serves as the Army's largest initial
entry training installation, and the committee finds it
unacceptable that soldiers beginning their military service are
housed in facilities that fail to meet basic standards. The
condition of barracks at Fort Jackson reflects broader
deficiencies in the Army's management of its facilities
sustainment, restoration, and modernization requirements, and
the committee expects the Army to treat this as a matter of
urgency.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later
than December 1, 2026, on the current condition of trainee
barracks at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and the Army's plan
to address identified deficiencies. The briefing should include
the following information:
(1) an assessment of current barracks conditions at Fort
Jackson, including any deficiencies affecting habitability,
safety, or training readiness;
(2) the Army's near- and long-term plan to address barracks
deficiencies at the installation, including funding sources,
projected timelines, and milestones; and
(3) any obstacles or resource constraints affecting the
Army's ability to execute planned improvements, including any
congressional assistance required to address them.
Unexploded Ordnance and Munitions and Explosives of Concern Remediation
on Guam
The committee recognizes the ongoing costs associated with
unexploded ordnance (UXO) and munitions and explosives of
concern (MEC) remediation activities on Guam. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027,
on Department of Defense expenditures related to UXO and MEC
identification, remediation, disposal, and environmental
restoration activities on Guam during fiscal years 2020 through
2026. The briefing should include the following information:
(1) annual obligations and expenditures for UXO and MEC
activities on Guam, by military department and Defense Agency;
(2) projected future UXO and MEC remediation requirements
and associated costs on Guam; and
(3) any additional challenges or impediments affecting the
pace or cost of UXO and MEC remediation on Guam, including
issues related to land access, detection technology, or
interagency coordination.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Programs
Sec. 2801--Execution of Projects Under the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program
This section would provide for execution of projects under
the NATO Security Investment Program.
Sec. 2802--Inclusion of Tribal Governments in Defense Community
Infrastructure Program
This section would add Indian tribes as eligible entities
to apply for and receive Defense Community Infrastructure
Program grants.
Sec. 2803--Briefing Required for Certain Basing Actions of the
Department of the Air Force
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to provide a briefing to Congress on any basing action that is
not approved by the strategic basing panel and strategic basing
executive steering group.
Sec. 2804--Unspecified Minor Military Construction Dollar Thresholds
This section would raise the unspecified minor military
construction dollar thresholds under section 2805 of title 10,
United States Code.
Sec. 2805--Repeal of Limitation on Available Funds for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation Military Construction Projects
This section would remove the cap on funding for the
Defense Lab Modernization Program.
Sec. 2806--Modification of Approval and Notification Thresholds for
Repair Projects on Military Facilities
This section would modify the approval and notification
thresholds for repair projects on military facilities.
Sec. 2807--Department of Defense Military Installation Stormwater
Project Acceleration Program
This section would establish a program to accelerate
planning for military construction projects addressing
stormwater management, installation resilience, and defense
access road preservation.
Sec. 2808--Expansion of Annual Report on Unfunded Requirements for
Certain Military Construction Projects
This section would modify annual reporting requirements for
unfunded laboratory construction projects, including additional
justification, risk assessment, and certification requirements.
Subtitle B--Military Housing Reforms
Sec. 2811--Congressional Notification of Window Fall Incidents in
Certain Privatized Military Housing
This section would amend section 2857 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to notify
Congress within 72 hours of any window fall incident in covered
military housing and provide basic details regarding the date,
location, circumstances, and resulting harm.
Sec. 2812--Expansion of Protections Against Reprisal or Retaliation For
Certain Tenants of Privatized Military Housing
This section would expand whistleblower protections for
tenants of privatized military housing who report housing
related issues.
Sec. 2813--Treatment of Nondisclosure Agreements with Respect to
Privatized Military Housing
This section would prohibit a landlord from asking a
tenant, former tenant, or prospective tenant of a military
housing unit to sign a nondisclosure agreement.
Sec. 2814--Expansion of Pilot Program to Include Authority to Replace
Certain Department of Defense Laboratories
This section would expand an existing replacement pilot
program to cover Department of Defense laboratories conducting
science and technology research or test and evaluation
activities, in addition to military unaccompanied housing
facilities.
Sec. 2815--Modification to Pilot Program for Military Construction
Projects to Replace Certain Military Unaccompanied Housing Facilities
This section would broaden the Army's ``Repair by
Replacement'' pilot program to also cover facilities in the
Army's Organic Industrial Base.
Sec. 2816--Establishment of Timeliness Standards With Respect to
Maintenance Work Orders for Covered Military Unaccompanied Housing;
Annual Report
This section would require the Department of Defense to
establish timeliness standards for resolution of work orders
for unaccompanied housing and expand the annual report on
unaccompanied housing to include data on compliance with work
order timeliness standards.
Sec. 2817--Expansion of Elements Included in Annual Reports on the
Condition of Covered Military Unaccompanied Housing
This section would expand the annual report on
unaccompanied housing to include data on compliance with the
Department of Defense's minimum habitability standards, the
cost to meet standards, and a 5-year plan for carrying out such
improvements.
Sec. 2818--Modification to Required Investments in Improving Military
Unaccompanied Housing
This section would extend and expand the minimum facility
sustainment spending requirement for improvements to
unaccompanied housing, establish Department-wide standard for
tracking use of facilities sustainment for barracks, and
require the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on
compliance.
Subtitle C--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Sec. 2821--Authorization for Certain Planning, Design, and Construction
Contracts in Support of Military Service Academies
This section would authorize Service Academy
superintendents to contract with affiliated nonprofit
organizations for campus modernization projects.
Sec. 2822--Exemption of Certain Military Installations from Guidance
with Respect to Aggregate Square Footage Requirements
This section would allow for an exclusion of the 1-to-1
square footage provision for installations undergoing mission
transition.
Sec. 2823--Matching Requirement for the Public Schools on Military
Installations
This section would limit the required matching contribution
for certain federally supported school projects on military
installations to no more than 20 percent of total project costs
and require the implementing agency to update relevant
regulations.
Sec. 2824--Improvement to Procedures for Processing Visitors to
Department of Defense Military Installations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
implement certain procedures regarding the processing of
visitors to Department of Defense military installations.
Sec. 2825--Restrictions on Data Facility Equipment Placed on Facilities
Leased from the Department of Defense
This section would restrict equipment for data facilities
on land leased from the Department of Defense.
Sec. 2826--Name of Department of the Army Military Installation,
Augusta, Georgia
This section would require a military installation located
in Augusta, Georgia to be known as Fort Shughart Gordon.
Sec. 2827--Name of the Department of the Army Military Installation
Located in Muscogee County and Chattahoochee County, Georgia
This section would designate a military installation
located in Muscogee County and Chattahoochee County, Georgia to
be known as Fort Moore.
Sec. 2828--Military Installation Renamings
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
rename certain military installations.
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances and Withdrawals
Sec. 2831--Report on Land Withdrawal at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona
This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
report on the land withdrawal at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona.
Sec. 2832--Land Conveyance, State Armory Board, Utah National Guard,
Camp Williams State Military Reservation, Lehi, Utah
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
transfer unused Federal land inside Camp Williams in Lehi,
Utah, to the Utah National Guard.
Sec. 2833--Land Conveyance, Milan Army Ammunition Plant, Tennessee
This section would provide for a land conveyance, Milan
Army Ammunition Plant, Tennessee.
Subtitle E--Pilot Programs
Sec. 2841--Digital Twin Models at Certain Military Installations
This section would establish a pilot program to develop and
implement ``digital twin'' models at not fewer than five
military installations.
Sec. 2842--Pilot Program on Wastewater Monitoring and Pathogen-Agnostic
Monitoring System of Certain Military Installations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a pilot program to develop and implement a wastewater
monitoring system at not fewer than four military installations
to identify the prevalence of infectious diseases among members
of the Armed Forces at the installation.
Sec. 2843--Department of Defense Pilot Program for Development and Use
of Online Real Estate Inventory Tool
This section would create a pilot program to expand the
Army's online real estate inventory tool pilot program to all
military service branches.
Sec. 2844--Pilot Program to Provide Integrated Connectivity Service
This section would authorize a pilot program for accessible
Wi-Fi at bases in the Middle East.
Subtitle F--Miscellaneous Authorities
Sec. 2851--Authority for the Secretary of Defense to Acquire Real
Property and Facilities in the National Capital Region and to
Administer Such Property as Part of the Pentagon Reservation
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
acquire certain real property and facilities in the National
Capital Region for Department of Defense components and treat
such property as part of the Pentagon Reservation.
Sec. 2852--Establishment of a Dashboard for Military Construction
Projects for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Facilities
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering, in coordination with each
Secretary of a military department, to establish a central
dashboard to monitor and track research, development, test, and
evaluation facility data related to military construction.
Sec. 2853--Additional Authority for Defense Site Reimbursement in the
Federated States of Micronesia
This section would provide additional authority for Defense
Site Reimbursement in the Federated States of Micronesia.
Sec. 2854--Recognition of Certain Aspects of the National Navy UDT-Seal
Museum in Fort Pierce, Florida, as a National Memorial, National
Memorial Garden, and National K9 Memorial
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
recognize the National Navy UDT-SEAL Museum in Fort Pierce,
Florida, as a National Memorial, National Memorial Garden, and
National K9 Memorial as a national memorial, national memorial
garden, and national K9 memorial, respectively, of the Navy
SEALs.
Subtitle G--Reports and Other Matters
Sec. 2861--Annual Report on Supervision, Inspection, and Overhead Costs
for Military Construction Projects
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit annual reports to Congress on supervision, inspection,
and overhead costs for military construction projects,
disaggregated by military department and construction agent.
Sec. 2862--Requirements Relating to the Multi-Mission Dry Dock Military
Construction Project at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Washington
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
designate the Multi-Mission Dry Dock at Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Washington, as a subprogram of a major defense
acquisition program and require the Secretary to establish a
baseline estimate and include quarterly Selected Acquisition
Reports on this effort.
Sec. 2863--Comptroller General Review of Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Program
This section would require the Comptroller General to
annually review the costs, progress, and project status of the
Navy's Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program.
Sec. 2864--Conditions on Transfer of Department of Defense Power Grid
Infrastructure in Guam
This section would condition any Department of Defense
transfer of power generation and transmission infrastructure in
Guam to the Guam Power Authority.
Sec. 2865--Annual Report on Military Construction Projects Supporting
Readiness and Public Interest in Guam
This section would require the Commander of Joint Region
Marianas to submit annual report for 5 years on military
construction projects in Guam that support readiness and public
interests.
Sec. 2866--Annual Report on Effects of Extreme Weather on Department of
Defense Military Installations and Combatant Commander Requirements
This section would require an annual report from the
Department of Defense on vulnerabilities to military
installations and combatant commander requirements resulting
from extreme weather.
Sec. 2867--Reports to Census Bureau with Respect to Military and
Civilian Personnel on Military Installations
This section would direct the Department of Defense to
report to the U.S. Census Bureau the number of military and
civilian personnel residing on military installations to
support efficient and accurate counting for congressional
apportionment and community representation.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Cost Growth Notifications for National Nuclear Security Administration
Projects
The committee directs the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than March 1, 2027, on the status of the
National Nuclear Security Administration's efforts to improve
processes and establish guidance for reporting cost growth and
conducting root cause analyses, to include actions taken in
response to recommendation from the September 2025 Report from
the Government Accountability Office on the cost growth
notification process. The briefing should also include any
recommended statutory or process changes that could promote
timelier reporting of cost growth in the future.
Material Staging Capability
The committee notes that the budget request included $22.5
million to support preliminary design activities for the
Material Staging Capability project at the Pantex Plant. The
committee supports the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) renewed focus on this project, which
will address documented mission needs to improve security and
operations for stockpile modernization, surveillance, and
dismantlement activities at the site. While the committee
appreciates that the NNSA continues to refine its conceptual
design, in support of establishing a cost and schedule baseline
for the project, the committee is concerned by the absence of
resources for this effort in the Future Years Nuclear Security
Program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than April 15, 2027, on the status
of the Material Staging Capability project, including a
finalized conceptual design and initial cost estimate.
National Nuclear Security Administration Operational Area at Rick
Husband International Airport
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and the City of Amarillo have had a
successful partnership for the use of Rick Husband Amarillo
International Airport (AMA) since 1967. The committee
understands that changes in NNSA's security posture and
operational tempo continue to evolve and appreciates NNSA's
ongoing engagement with local officials to consider options to
keep pace with these changes and further enhance the strong
partnership between the Amarillo community and the Pantex
Plant.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than November 1, 2026, on options
to improve security and operational flexibility of NNSA
activities at AMA, including the potential relocation of NNSA
operations within the AMA boundary. The briefing shall also
include an assessment of whether additional authorities, if
any, are necessary in connection with the options under
consideration, as well as a discussion of any interagency
coordination or approval that may be required.
Next-Generation Pulsed Power Capabilities
The committee recognizes the ongoing cooperation between
the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and
commercial industry with respect to next-generation fusion
technologies and high-yield experimentation capabilities. The
committee encourages NNSA to continue to look for opportunities
to increase this collaboration as it works to define technical
requirements related to future high-yield experimentation
needs. Accordingly, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security to provide a briefing to the House Committee
on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2027, on NNSA's long-
term experimentation requirements in high-yield physics regimes
and related partnership opportunities with commercial industry.
Procurement of U.S.-Origin Uranium
The committee remains concerned about domestic capacity to
supply unobligated and unencumbered uranium to meet national
security mission needs. Therefore, the committee directs the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to provide a briefing to the
House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2027, on the
National Nuclear Security Administration's plans with respect
to the availability and procurement of U.S.-origin unobligated
and unencumbered uranium for defense mission needs. The
briefing shall include the following:
(1) a summary of current and projected domestic uranium
mining and conversion capacity;
(2) an analysis of projected requirements for unobligated,
unencumbered, domestic uranium to meet national security
missions;
(3) an assessment of how projected increases in domestic
and global commercial demand for mined uranium and conversion
services may affect availability of U.S.-origin uranium;
(4) an overview of NNSA's ongoing coordination with other
relevant government stakeholders on domestic uranium
availability; and
(5) options and recommendations for procurement of U.S.-
origin uranium and conversion services, including consideration
of a strategic uranium reserve concept.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations
Sec. 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration
This section would authorize appropriations for the
National Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of
Energy for fiscal year 2027 at the levels specified in the
funding table in division D of this Act and authorize a new
plant project.
Sec. 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup
This section would authorize appropriations for defense
environmental cleanup for the Department of Energy for fiscal
year 2027 at the levels specified in the funding table in
division D of this Act.
Sec. 3103--Other Defense Activities
This section would authorize appropriations for other
defense activities for the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2027 at the levels specified in the funding table in division D
of this Act.
Sec. 3104--Nuclear Energy
This section would authorize appropriations for nuclear
energy for the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2027 at the
levels specified in the funding table in division D of this
Act.
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations
Sec. 3111--Modifications to Requirements for Plutonium Pit Production
Capacity
This section would amend section 6128 of title 10, United
States Code, to update long-term production goals for plutonium
pits.
Sec. 3112--Modification to Implementation of Programs for Acceleration
of Replacement of Cesium Blood Irradiation Sources
This section would amend section 6156 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the Cesium Irradiator Replacement
Project to pay the full cost of replacing blood irradiation
devices covered by the program.
Sec. 3113--Other Transaction Authority
This section would authorize the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to utilize other transaction authority available
elsewhere in title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 3114--Extension of Alternative Personnel System of the National
Nuclear Security Administration
This section would extend the National Nuclear Security
Administration's current Pay Banding and Performance-Based Pay
Adjustment Demonstration Project in use since 2007, and codify
the project as section 3242 of title 50, United States Code.
Sec. 3115--Deadline for Commencement of High Explosive Synthesis,
Formulation, and Production Facility
This section would amend section 3127 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) to accelerate the deadline for commencement of operations
for Project 21-D-510, the High Explosive Synthesis,
Formulation, and Production facility.
Sec. 3116--Contracting Authority to Acquire Commercial Testing Services
for Effects of Radiation
This section would authorize the Administrator for Nuclear
Security, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, to
seek to enter into agreements for radiation effects testing.
Sec. 3117--Prohibition Relating to Reclassification of High-Level Waste
This section would limit funds from being used to
reclassify certain radioactive waste.
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters
Sec. 3121--Technical and Conforming Amendments Relating to Codification
of Atomic Energy Defense Provisions
This section would make certain technical corrections to
chapter XX of title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 3122--Modification of Submission Deadline for Certain Selected
Acquisition Reports
This section would amend section 6125 of title 10, United
States Code, to require certain acquisition reports be
submitted within 30 days after the date on which the President
transmits the budget to Congress.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 3201--Authorization
This section would authorize $45.0 million for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 3401--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize $13.0 million for fiscal year
2027 for operation and maintenance of the Naval Petroleum
Reserves.
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
State Maritime Academy Training Infrastructure
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
resilient maritime logistics, sealift readiness, and mariner
workforce development, especially in support of future
operations in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM). The
committee notes that state maritime academies play a critical
role in training licensed mariners, engineers, and maritime
professionals who support both commercial and defense maritime
requirements, including surge sealift and contested logistics.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy, in
coordination with the Secretary of Transportation and the
Maritime Administrator, to prioritize investments that enhance
training infrastructure, vessel access, simulator capacity,
pier and waterfront facilities, and instructional capabilities
at state maritime academies. Such investments should be aligned
with anticipated operational demands in the Indo-Pacific region
and support increased throughput, modernized training, and
interoperability with the Navy, Military Sealift Command, and
commercial maritime operators.
The committee further encourages the Department of Defense
to ensure that these efforts are coordinated, where
appropriate, with existing maritime industrial base
initiatives, sealift recapitalization efforts, and workforce
development programs, in order to strengthen the maritime
ecosystem aligned with USINDOPACOM interests.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Maritime Administration
Sec. 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime Administration
This section would authorize funds for the Maritime
Administration.
Subtitle B--Merchant Marine Academy
Sec. 3511--Transferring the Administration of the United States
Merchant Marine Academy to the Department
This section would amend chapter 513 of title 46, United
States Code, to transfer responsibility for direction of the
United States Merchant Marine Academy from the Maritime
Administrator to the Secretary of Transportation.
Sec. 3512--Establishment of the United States Merchant Marine Academy
as an Office Within the Office in the Department
This section would establish the United States Merchant
Marine Academy as an office within the Department of
Transportation with the Superintendent as head of Office and
reporting directly to the Secretary of Transportation.
Sec. 3513--Support for Athletic Programs of the United States Merchant
Marine Academy
This section would authorize the Secretary of
Transportation to establish a nonprofit corporation to support
the athletic programs of the United States Merchant Marine
Academy.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Sec. 3521--Limitation on Waiver of Navigation and Vessel-Inspection
Laws to Address Foreign Entities of Concern
This section would amend section 501 of title 46, United
States Code, to limit the operation of a vessel under a waiver
until the owner or operator submits to the Maritime
Administrator, and the Maritime Administrator confirms,
sufficient proof that the vessel is not owned, operated, or
crewed by a foreign entity of concern as defined in section
10612 of the CHIPS Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-62).
Sec. 3522--Financing of Fishing Vessels
This section would improve and update the Federal Ship
Financing Program by making construction of new commercial
fishing vessels in the United States eligible under the statute
in chapter 537 of title 46, United States Code.
Sec. 3523--Cranes; Shore Power
This section would amend the Port Infrastructure
Development Program to make upgrading cranes at U.S. port
facilities, including updating associated software, eligible
for funding under the statute. Port cranes and associated
software made in the Peoples Republic of China are a security
risk and amending section 54301 of title 46, United States
Code, will help expedite addressing a critical supply chain
vulnerability. This section also makes shore power
infrastructure projects that support cargo and passenger
vessels eligible for funding under the program.
Sec. 3524--Cargoes Procured, Furnished, or Financed by United States
Government
This section would support the commercial U.S. flag fleet
by expanding the pool of government cargoes subject to
requirements stipulated in section 55305 of title 46, United
States Code.
Sec. 3525--Assistance for Small Shipyards
This section would amend section 54101 of title 46, United
States Code, to clarify that commercially available digital
manufacturing hardware and software products used in the
design, construction, and maintenance of, and digital tools and
platforms that can train workers in shipbuilding skills, are
eligible for funding under the Assistance for Small Shipyards
program.
Sec. 3526--Committee on the Marine Transportation System
This section would amend existing statute by redesignating
and transferring authorities in section 50401 of title 46,
United States Code, to section 102(j) of title 49, United
States Code. This redesignation would make clear that the
Executive Director of the Committee on the Marine
Transportation System shall report to the Deputy Secretary of
Transportation. This section would also establish a requirement
for an annual work plan and an Executive Secretariat to support
the Executive Director.
Sec. 3527--Assessment of Channel Depths and Placement of Aids to
Navigation
This section would require the President to provide the
relevant committees with a plan detailing how the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and the U.S. Coast Guard will improve
coordination amongst each other in making available information
on depths, real time physical oceanographic data, and timely
marking of navigation channels.
Sec. 3528--Waiver
This section would amend section 501 of title 46, United
States Code, to make clear the Secretary of Defense shall
provide as part of a Submittal of Explanation to Congress the
waiver issued using this authority.
Sec. 3529--National Maritime Workforce Advisory Committee
This section would amend chapter 151 of title 46, United
States Code, to establish a National Workforce Advisory
Committee comprised of not more than 25 representatives of the
maritime industrial base workforce. The Committee would advise
the Secretary of Transportation on matters related to the
skills, training, and numbers of workers necessary to maintain
the U.S. maritime industrial base workforce ashore and afloat.
This section would also identify the categories of experience
and expertise that shall be represented on National Maritime
Workforce Advisory Committee.
Sec. 3530--Enhancing United States Maritime Workforce
This section would require the President to submit to
relevant committees proposals to implement workforce provisions
from the Maritime Action Plan issued by the White House.
Sec. 3531--Enhancing United States Shipyards and Shipbuilding
This section would require the President to submit
proposals to the relevant congressional committees to implement
recommendations related to domestic shipbuilding included in
the Maritime Action Plan issued by the White House.
TITLE XXXVI--SHIPS FOR AMERICA
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 3601--Report on Privilege
This section would require the Secretary of Transportation,
in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, Chair of the
Federal Maritime Commission, and the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, to submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees on ways to ensure vessels of the
United States operating in foreign commerce are privileged in
regulation, taxation, fees, insurance, and policy compared to
foreign vessels conducting trade with a United States domiciled
entity.
Sec. 3602--Fleet Testing and Briefing Requirement
This section would require the Commander of United States
Transportation Command, in coordination with the Secretary of
the Navy and Maritime Administrator, to devise a tabletop
exercise to test the effective control of the Maritime Security
Fleet and Tanker Security Fleet. This section would also
require a briefing after completion of the exercise and to
conduct that exercise annually.
Sec. 3603--Assessment of the Use of Commercial Best Practices for Navy
Shipbuilding
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy in
coordination with the Secretary of Transportation and the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating to conduct an assessment of best practices for ship
construction and repair as well as identify opportunities for
the Navy and Coast Guard to leverage those best practices.
Sec. 3604--Military Sealift Command
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
offer Government merchant mariners employed by Military Sealift
Command paid leave accrual at a faster rate than provided
pursuant to the standard General Schedule system. Additionally,
this section would require a report from the Secretary of the
Navy on recruiting and retention efforts for government
civilian mariners.
Sec. 3605--Assessment on Maritime Infrastructure Readiness
This section would require the Maritime Administrator to
submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees on
the status, resources, and authorities needed to complete
maritime infrastructure improvements in the interest of
national security and the commerce of the United States.
Sec. 3606--United States Merchant Marine Academy Infrastructure and
Facilities Modernization
This section would express findings that the United States
Merchant Marine Academy, as one of the five Federal service
academies, plays a critical role in training service-obligated
licensed merchant mariners needed for national security and
economic interests of the United States. It would further
express a finding that the infrastructure at the United States
Merchant Marine Academy has not been modernized and
rehabilitating the campus infrastructure is necessary to
support current and future generations of Midshipmen.
Sec. 3607--United States Merchant Marine Academy
This section would express the sense of Congress about the
importance of the United States Merchant Marine Academy, the
need for sufficient funding for campus infrastructure
modernization, and the importance of rotational presidential
attendance at graduation. Additionally, this section would
require a report on the resources required to increase
enrollment at the United States Merchant Marine Academy.
Sec. 3608--State Maritime Academies
This section would require the Maritime Administrator to
submit a report to Congress detailing the additional resources
required to support increased enrollment at the State maritime
academies. The required report would also assess whether there
is a need for additional State maritime academies.
Sec. 3609--Enforcement of Service Obligation Requirements
This section would require the Maritime Administrator to
ensure that each cadet that signs a commitment agreement at the
United States Merchant Marine Academy and each individual that
signs a student incentive payment agreement at a State maritime
academy meets service obligation requirements of those
agreements. Additionally, this section would require the
Maritime Administrator to establish an electronic system to
support individuals meeting their service obligations and
notify individuals if they are in violation. Not later than 180
days after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually
thereafter, the Maritime Administrator would be required to
submit a report to Congress on the status of all service-
obligated mariners.
Sec. 3610--State Maritime Academy Sea Term Scholarship Programs
This section would amend chapter 515 of title 46, United
States Code, to add a new section that would require the
Maritime Administrator to work with private entities in the
maritime industry to establish a sea term scholarship program.
Sec. 3611--Implementation Plan
This section would require the Maritime Administrator and
the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating to each submit an implementation plan of the sections
in this title and provide a briefing to the appropriate
congressional committees on the implementation plans.
Additionally, this section would require biannual updates on
the implementation of such plans and a comptroller general
review of the efforts carried out pursuant to this title.
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES
Sec. 4001--Authorization of Amounts in Funding Tables
This section would provide for the allocation of funds
among programs, projects, and activities in accordance with the
tables in division D of this Act, subject to reprogramming
guidance in accordance with established procedures.
Consistent with the previously expressed views of the
committee, this section would also require that a decision by
an agency head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on
merit-based selection procedures in accordance with the
requirements of sections 3201 and 4024 of title 10, United
States Code, and other applicable provisions of law.
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House
FY 2027 Request House Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................ ............... ................
National Defense Funding, Base Budget Request
................ ............... ................
Function 051, Department of Defense-Military
................ ............... ................
Division A: Department of Defense Authorizations................................................................
................ ............... ................
Title I--Procurement............................................................................................
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................. 1,933,769 523,783 2,457,552
Missile Procurement, Army.................................. 12,130,430 -70,000 12,060,430
Weapons & Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 3,728,159 186,000 3,914,159
Procurement of Ammunition, Army............................ 5,469,588 150,000 5,619,588
Other Procurement, Army.................................... 12,667,053 -745,000 11,922,053
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................. 26,947,023 -173,394 26,773,629
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................. 11,769,111 -64,000 11,705,111
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps............. 1,958,597 -10,000 1,948,597
Shipbuilding & Conversion, Navy............................ 60,176,117 285,000 60,461,117
Other Procurement, Navy.................................... 18,866,679 93,000 18,959,679
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................. 6,288,905 -5,000 6,283,905
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force............................ 26,985,236 582,144 27,567,380
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................. 6,811,174 ............... 6,811,174
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force....................... 910,116 ............... 910,116
Other Procurement, Air Force............................... 39,199,963 -141,500 39,058,463
Procurement, Space Force................................... 9,645,353 ............... 9,645,353
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................. 10,354,868 568,279 10,923,147
National Guard & Reserve Equipment......................... 1,000,000 ............... 1,000,000
Defense Strategic Capital Credit Program................... 216,000 ............... 216,000
Subtotal, Title I--Procurement............................. 257,058,141 1,179,312 258,237,453
................ ............... ................
Title II--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation............................................................
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army............. 18,708,826 493,017 19,201,843
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Navy............. 32,386,619 318,350 32,704,969
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force........ 73,075,614 -480,895 72,594,719
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Space Force...... 38,373,489 -201,400 38,172,089
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide..... 55,736,724 334,356 56,071,080
Golden Dome for America Fund............................... 397,971 ............... 397,971
Operational Test & Evaluation, Defense..................... 112,365 223,778 336,143
Subtotal, Title II--Research, Development, Test and 218,791,608 687,206 219,478,814
Evaluation................................................
................ ............... ................
Title III--Operation and Maintenance............................................................................
Operation & Maintenance, Army.............................. 64,114,683 -353,800 63,760,883
Operation & Maintenance, Army Reserve...................... 3,112,634 -3,700 3,108,934
Operation & Maintenance, Army National Guard............... 8,703,824 -68,500 8,635,324
Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund.......................... 303,099 -50,000 253,099
Operation & Maintenance, Navy.............................. 82,568,546 -130,667 82,437,879
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps...................... 15,988,817 -80,300 15,908,517
Operation & Maintenance, Navy Reserve...................... 1,477,216 -20,600 1,456,616
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve.............. 404,680 -7,000 397,680
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force......................... 74,039,636 -425,800 73,613,836
Operation & Maintenance, Space Force....................... 9,265,917 -54,400 9,211,517
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force Reserve................. 4,748,987 -48,100 4,700,887
Operation & Maintenance, Air National Guard................ 8,130,689 -50,800 8,079,889
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide...................... 64,251,581 236,401 64,487,982
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces........ 21,698 ............... 21,698
DOD Acquisition Workforce Development Fund................. 37,478 60,000 97,478
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid............. 78,187 37,148 115,335
Cooperative Threat Reduction Account....................... 221,332 ............... 221,332
Environmental Restoration, Army............................ 282,444 ............... 282,444
Environmental Restoration, Navy............................ 305,246 ............... 305,246
Environmental Restoration, Air Force....................... 320,060 ............... 320,060
Environmental Restoration, Defense......................... 8,957 ............... 8,957
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Sites............. 238,927 8,000 246,927
Subtotal, Title III--Operation and Maintenance............. 338,624,638 -952,118 337,672,520
................ ............... ................
Title IV--Military Personnel....................................................................................
Military Personnel Appropriations.......................... 190,771,931 -750,000 190,021,931
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Fund Contributions........ 14,349,269 ............... 14,349,269
Subtotal, Title IV--Military Personnel..................... 205,121,200 -750,000 204,371,200
................ ............... ................
Title XIV--Other Authorizations.................................................................................
Working Capital Fund, Army................................. 20,563 ............... 20,563
Working Capital Fund, Navy................................. 266,212 ............... 266,212
Working Capital Fund, Air Force............................ 4,440,414 ............... 4,440,414
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund................ 5,700 ............... 5,700
Working Capital Fund, Defense-Wide......................... 1,273,760 -400,000 873,760
Working Capital Fund, DECA................................. 1,501,344 ............... 1,501,344
Chemical Agents & Munitions Destruction.................... 55,972 ............... 55,972
Drug Interdiction and Counter Drug Activities.............. 918,002 3,000 921,002
Office of the Inspector General............................ 506,343 ............... 506,343
Combat and Operational Medicine Program.................... 20,341,643 249,600 20,591,243
Private Sector Care Program................................ 22,175,472 ............... 22,175,472
Subtotal, Title XIV--Other Authorizations.................. 51,505,425 -147,400 51,358,025
................ ............... ................
Total, Division A: Department of Defense Authorizations.... 1,071,101,012 17,000 1,071,118,012
................ ............... ................
Division B: Military Construction Authorizations................................................................
................ ............... ................
Military Construction...........................................................................................
Army....................................................... 1,931,638 71,340 2,002,978
Navy....................................................... 8,266,703 -158,830 8,107,873
Air Force.................................................. 10,601,180 -303,130 10,298,050
Defense-Wide............................................... 3,402,951 -124,280 3,278,671
Army National Guard........................................ 358,909 116,500 475,409
Army Reserve............................................... 209,913 ............... 209,913
Navy and Marine Corps Reserve.............................. 132,272 ............... 132,272
Air National Guard......................................... 525,221 407,400 932,621
Air Force Reserve.......................................... 22,172 ............... 22,172
NATO Security Investment Program........................... 604,270 ............... 604,270
Subtotal, Military Construction............................ 26,055,229 9,000 26,064,229
................ ............... ................
Family Housing..................................................................................................
Construction, Army......................................... 240,495 -59,000 181,495
Operation & Maintenance, Army.............................. 468,407 ............... 468,407
Construction, Navy and Marine Corps........................ 361,870 ............... 361,870
Operation & Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps............. 385,609 ............... 385,609
Construction, Air Force.................................... 243,022 ............... 243,022
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force......................... 366,756 ............... 366,756
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide...................... 63,064 ............... 63,064
Family Housing Improvement Fund............................ 8,412 ............... 8,412
Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund..................... 501 ............... 501
Subtotal, Family Housing................................... 2,138,136 -59,000 2,079,136
................ ............... ................
Base Realignment and Closure....................................................................................
Base Realignment and Closure--Army......................... 151,293 ............... 151,293
Base Realignment and Closure--Navy......................... 108,325 50,000 158,325
Base Realignment and Closure--Air Force.................... 111,381 ............... 111,381
Base Realignment and Closure--Defense-wide................. 1,318 ............... 1,318
Subtotal, Base Realignment and Closure..................... 372,317 50,000 422,317
................ ............... ................
Total, Division B: Military Construction Authorizations.... 28,565,682 0 28,565,682
................ ............... ................
Total, 051, Department of Defense-Military................. 1,099,666,694 17,000 1,099,683,694
................ ............... ................
Division C: Department of Energy National Security Authorization and Other Authorizations.......................
................ ............... ................
Function 053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities
................ ............... ................
Environmental and Other Defense Activities......................................................................
Nuclear Energy............................................. 160,000 ............... 160,000
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D............................. 253,000 -253,000 0
Weapons Activities......................................... 27,441,159 145,000 27,586,159
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation........................... 2,389,595 ............... 2,389,595
Naval Reactors............................................. 2,393,692 -150,000 2,243,692
Federal Salaries and Expenses.............................. 577,097 ............... 577,097
Defense Environmental Cleanup.............................. 6,983,318 211,000 7,194,318
Other Defense Activities................................... 1,184,721 ............... 1,184,721
Subtotal, Environmental and Other Defense Activities....... 41,382,582 -47,000 41,335,582
................ ............... ................
Independent Federal Agency Authorization........................................................................
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.................... 45,000 ............... 45,000
Subtotal, Independent Federal Agency Authorization......... 45,000 0 45,000
................ ............... ................
Subtotal, 053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities............ 41,427,582 -47,000 41,380,582
................ ............... ................
Function 054, Defense-Related Activities
................ ............... ................
Other Agency Authorizations.....................................................................................
Maritime Security Program.................................. 400,500 ............... 400,500
Tanker Security Program.................................... 167,600 ............... 167,600
Cable Security Fleet....................................... ................ 30,000 30,000
Subtotal, Other Agency Authorizations...................... 568,100 30,000 598,100
................ ............... ................
Subtotal, 054, Defense-Related Activities.................. 568,100 30,000 598,100
................ ............... ................
Subtotal, Division C: Department of Energy National 41,995,682 -17,000 41,978,682
Security Authorization and Other Authorizations...........
................ ............... ................
Total, National Defense.................................... 1,141,662,376 0 1,141,662,376
................ ............... ................
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS..................... 675,960 1,516,400 2,192,360
Title XIV--Armed Forces Retirement Home (Function 700)..... 77,000 ............... 77,000
Title XXXIV--Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves 13,000 ............... 13,000
(Function 270)............................................
Title XXXV--Maritime Administration (Function 400)......... 585,960 1,516,400 2,102,360
................ ............... ................
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADD)......................................................................
Title X--General Transfer Authority........................ [10,000,000] [-4,000,000] [6,000,000]
................ ............... ................
MEMORANDUM: DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS NOT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE (NON-ADD).........
Defense Production Act..................................... 477,287 ............... 477,287
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House
FY 2027 Request House Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (051)..................... 1,099,666,694 17,000 1,099,683,694
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE PROGRAMS (053)............ 41,427,582 -47,000 41,380,582
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)................ 568,100 30,000 598,100
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE................................... 1,141,662,376 ................ 1,141,662,376
................ ................ ................
Scoring adjustments.............................................................................................
Transfers to non-Defense budget functions (051)........... -189,000 ................ -189,000
Subtotal, Scoring Adjustments............................. -189,000 ................ -189,000
................ ................ ................
National Defense Discretionary Programs not In the Jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee or Do Not
Require Additional Authorization...............................................................................
Defense Production Act Purchases.......................... 477,287 ................ 477,287
Indefinite Account: Disposal of DOD Real Property......... 7,799 ................ 7,799
Indefinite Account: Lease of DOD Real Property............ 37,220 ................ 37,220
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 051......................... 522,306 ................ 522,306
................ ................ ................
Corps of Engineers--Civil Works, Formerly Utilized Sites 200,000 ................ 200,000
Remedial Action Program..................................
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 053......................... 200,000 ................ 200,000
................ ................ ................
Other Discretionary Programs.............................. 11,347,900 ................ 11,347,900
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 054......................... 11,347,900 ................ 11,347,900
................ ................ ................
Total Defense Discretionary Adjustments (050)............. 11,881,206 ................ 11,881,206
................ ................ ................
Budget Authority Implication, National Defense Discretionary....................................................
Department of Defense--Military (051)..................... 1,100,000,000 17,000 1,100,017,000
Atomic Energy Defense Activities (053).................... 41,627,582 -47,000 41,580,582
Defense-Related Activities (054).......................... 11,916,000 30,000 11,946,000
Total BA Implication, National Defense Discretionary...... 1,153,543,582 ................ 1,153,543,582
................ ................ ................
National Defense Mandatory Programs, Current Law (CBO Baseline).................................................
Concurrent receipt accrual payments to the Military 34,344,000 ................ 34,344,000
Retirement Fund..........................................
Revolving, trust and other DOD Mandatory.................. 1,756,000 ................ 1,756,000
Offsetting receipts....................................... -1,802,000 ................ -1,802,000
Mandatory sequestration estimate.......................... -5,585,000 ................ -5,585,000
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 051......................... 28,713,000 ................ 28,713,000
Energy employees occupational illness compensation 4,188,000 ................ 4,188,000
programs.................................................
CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support................... 91,000 ................ 91,000
Mandatory sequestration estimate.......................... -55,000 ................ -55,000
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 053......................... 4,224,000 ................ 4,224,000
Payment to CIA retirement fund............................ 514,000 ................ 514,000
Payment to Radiation exposure compensation trust fund..... 950,000 ................ 950,000
Submarine Security Activities............................. 22,000 ................ 22,000
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function 054......................... 1,486,000 ................ 1,486,000
................ ................ ................
Total National Defense Mandatory (050).................... 34,423,000 ................ 34,423,000
................ ................ ................
Budget Authority Implication, National Defense Discretionary and Mandatory......................................
Department of Defense--Military (051)..................... 1,128,713,000 17,000 1,128,730,000
Atomic Energy Defense Activities (053).................... 45,851,582 -47,000 45,804,582
Defense-Related Activities (054).......................... 13,402,000 30,000 13,432,000
Total BA Implication, National Defense Discretionary and 1,187,966,582 ................ 1,187,966,582
Mandatory................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 Request House Change House Authorized
Line Item ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Cost Qty Cost Qty Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
ARMY.
FIXED WING..... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
003 SMALL UNMANNED ......... 291,472 ......... 15,000 ......... 306,472
AIRCRAFT
SYSTEMS.
Fiber Optic ......... .............. ......... [5,000] ......... ..............
Drone
Procurement.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-5,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
Solid Oxide ......... .............. ......... [15,000] ......... ..............
Powered
Long Range
Reconnaissa
nce
Aircraft
Procurement.
004 UNMANNED ......... 52,398 ......... ............... ......... 52,398
AIRCRAFT
SYSTEMS (UAS).
005 HADES PLATFORM, ......... 227,569 ......... ............... ......... 227,569
PAYLOADS/PED,
AND
INTEGRATION.
ROTARY......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
007 AH-64 APACHE ......... 1,552 ......... ............... ......... 1,552
BLOCK IIIA
REMAN.
009 FUTURE VERTICAL ......... 127,217 ......... -127,217 ......... 0
LIFT FAMILY OF
SYSTEMS AP.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-127,217] ......... ..............
realignment
for
operational
test
aircraft.
010 UH-60 BLACKHAWK 1 39,257 6 250,000 7 289,257
M MODEL (MYP).
6 ......... .............. [6] [250,000] ......... ..............
additional
aircraft.
012 CH-47 5 210,645 7 381,000 12 591,645
HELICOPTER.
7 ......... .............. [7] [381,000] ......... ..............
additional
aircraft.
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
015 MQ-1 PAYLOAD... ......... 53,190 ......... ............... ......... 53,190
016 GRAY EAGLE ......... 2,556 ......... ............... ......... 2,556
MODS2.
017 AH-64 MODS..... ......... 251,645 ......... ............... ......... 251,645
018 SCALABLE ......... 2,061 ......... ............... ......... 2,061
CONTROL
INTERFACE
(SCI).
019 CH-47 CARGO ......... 108,408 ......... ............... ......... 108,408
HELICOPTER
MODS (MYP).
020 UTILITY ......... 120,013 ......... 5,000 ......... 125,013
HELICOPTER
MODS.
UH-72 ......... .............. ......... [5,000] ......... ..............
Limited
User Test
for ARNG
helicopters.
021 NETWORK AND ......... 29,235 ......... ............... ......... 29,235
MISSION PLAN.
022 COMMS, NAV ......... 14,384 ......... ............... ......... 14,384
SURVEILLANCE.
024 AVIATION ......... 55,055 ......... ............... ......... 55,055
ASSURED PNT.
GROUND SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AVIONICS.
027 AIRCRAFT ......... 125,050 ......... ............... ......... 125,050
SURVIVABILITY
EQUIPMENT.
028 CMWS........... ......... 21,511 ......... ............... ......... 21,511
029 COMMON INFRARED 36 140,636 ......... ............... 36 140,636
COUNTERMEASURE
S (CIRCM).
OTHER SUPPORT.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
030 COMMON GROUND ......... 29,778 ......... ............... ......... 29,778
EQUIPMENT.
031 AIRCREW ......... 15,229 ......... ............... ......... 15,229
INTEGRATED
SYSTEMS.
032 AIR TRAFFIC ......... 11,044 ......... ............... ......... 11,044
CONTROL.
033 LAUNCHER, 2.75 ......... 3,864 ......... ............... ......... 3,864
ROCKET.
TOTAL 42 1,933,769 13 523,783 55 2,457,552
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMEN
T, ARMY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
ARMY.
SURFACE-TO-AIR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILE SYSTEM.
001 LOWER TIER AIR ......... 2,036,358 ......... ............... ......... 2,036,358
AND MISSILE
DEFENSE (AMD)
SEN.
002 TERMINAL HIGH 27 907,162 ......... ............... 27 907,162
ALTITUDE AREA
DEFENSE
(THAAD).
003 M-SHORAD-- 14 712,690 ......... ............... 14 712,690
PROCUREMENT.
004 MSE MISSILE.... 244 1,297,528 ......... ............... 244 1,297,528
005 PRECISION 680 1,226,526 ......... ............... 680 1,226,526
STRIKE MISSILE
(PRSM).
006 INDIRECT FIRE ......... 1,626,004 ......... -70,000 ......... 1,556,004
PROTECTION
CAPABILITY INC
2-I.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-70,000] ......... ..............
growth.
007 MID-RANGE ......... 370,351 ......... ............... ......... 370,351
CAPABILITY
(MRC).
AIR-TO-SURFACE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILE SYSTEM.
009 JOINT AIR-TO- 269 104,059 ......... ............... 269 104,059
GROUND MSLS
(JAGM).
011 LONG-RANGE ......... 301,777 ......... ............... ......... 301,777
HYPERSONIC
WEAPON.
ANTI-TANK/ ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ASSAULT
MISSILE SYS.
012 JAVELIN (AAWS- 1,316 417,031 ......... ............... 1,316 417,031
M) SYSTEM
SUMMARY.
014 GUIDED MLRS ......... 1,014,937 ......... ............... ......... 1,014,937
ROCKET (GMLRS).
015 GUIDED MLRS ......... 49,106 ......... ............... ......... 49,106
ROCKET (GMLRS)
AP.
016 MLRS REDUCED 600 7,412 ......... ............... 600 7,412
RANGE PRACTICE
ROCKETS (RRPR).
017 HIGH MOBILITY 96 745,682 ......... ............... 96 745,682
ARTILLERY
ROCKET SYSTEM
(HIMARS.
020 FAMILY OF LOW ......... 139,191 ......... ............... ......... 139,191
ALTITUDE
UNMANNED
SYSTEMS.
MODIFICATIONS.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
021 PATRIOT MODS... ......... 796,837 ......... ............... ......... 796,837
022 STINGER MODS... ......... 10,786 ......... ............... ......... 10,786
023 AVENGER MODS... ......... 6,823 ......... ............... ......... 6,823
024 MLRS MODS...... ......... 289,496 ......... ............... ......... 289,496
025 HIMARS ......... 54,363 ......... ............... ......... 54,363
MODIFICATIONS.
SPARES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPAIR PARTS.
026 SPARES AND ......... 6,698 ......... ............... ......... 6,698
REPAIR PARTS.
SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT &
FACILITIES.
027 AIR DEFENSE ......... 9,613 ......... ............... ......... 9,613
TARGETS.
TOTAL 3,246 12,130,430 ......... -70,000 3,246 12,060,430
MISSILE
PROCUREMEN
T, ARMY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
WEAPONS AND
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES, ARMY.
TRACKED COMBAT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
001 ARMORED MULTI 196 1,150,759 ......... ............... 196 1,150,759
PURPOSE
VEHICLE (AMPV).
003 ASSAULT ......... 17,807 ......... ............... ......... 17,807
BREACHER
VEHICLE (ABV).
005 XM30 MECHANIZED 19 546,990 ......... ............... 19 546,990
INFANTRY
COMBAT VEHICLE
(MICV.
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES.
007 STRYKER UPGRADE ......... 45,725 ......... ............... ......... 45,725
008 BRADLEY FIRE ......... 4,863 ......... ............... ......... 4,863
SUPPORT TEAM
(BFIST)
VEHICLE.
009 BRADLEY PROGRAM ......... 161,979 ......... ............... ......... 161,979
(MOD).
010 M109 FOV ......... 74,070 ......... ............... ......... 74,070
MODIFICATIONS.
011 PALADIN ......... 84,193 ......... 176,000 ......... 260,193
INTEGRATED
MANAGEMENT
(PIM).
Program ......... .............. ......... [176,000] ......... ..............
increase.
012 IMPROVED 10 106,036 ......... ............... 10 106,036
RECOVERY
VEHICLE (M88
HERCULES).
013 JOINT ASSAULT 18 163,354 ......... ............... 18 163,354
BRIDGE.
014 ABRAMS UPGRADE 22 654,969 ......... ............... 22 654,969
PROGRAM.
015 VEHICLE ......... 16,134 ......... ............... ......... 16,134
PROTECTION
SYSTEMS (VPS).
WEAPONS & OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMBAT
VEHICLES.
019 MORTAR SYSTEMS. ......... 3,575 ......... 10,000 ......... 13,575
Modular ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
Turreted
Mortar
System.
020 LOCATION & ......... 10,420 ......... ............... ......... 10,420
AZIMUTH
DETERMINATION
SYSTEM (LADS.
024 NEXT GENERATION ......... 372,641 ......... ............... ......... 372,641
SQUAD WEAPON.
MOD OF WEAPONS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND OTHER
COMBAT VEH.
028 M777 MODS...... ......... 1,569 ......... ............... ......... 1,569
030 M119 ......... 4,453 ......... ............... ......... 4,453
MODIFICATIONS.
SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT &
FACILITIES.
031 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 512 ......... ............... ......... 512
$5.0M (WOCV-
WTCV).
032 PRODUCTION BASE ......... 308,110 ......... ............... ......... 308,110
SUPPORT (WOCV-
WTCV).
TOTAL 265 3,728,159 ......... 186,000 265 3,914,159
PROCUREMEN
T OF
WEAPONS
AND
TRACKED
COMBAT
VEHICLES,
ARMY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION,
ARMY.
SMALL/MEDIUM ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
CAL AMMUNITION.
001 CTG, 5.56MM, ......... 114,418 ......... 20,000 ......... 134,418
ALL TYPES.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-30,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
Program ......... .............. ......... [50,000] ......... ..............
increase.
002 CTG, 7.62MM, ......... 41,356 ......... 25,000 ......... 66,356
ALL TYPES.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-15,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
Program ......... .............. ......... [40,000] ......... ..............
increase.
003 NEXT GENERATION ......... 536,695 ......... 20,000 ......... 556,695
SQUAD WEAPON
AMMUNITION.
6.8mm...... ......... .............. ......... [20,000] ......... ..............
004 CTG, HANDGUN, ......... 6,719 ......... ............... ......... 6,719
ALL TYPES.
005 CTG, .50 CAL, ......... 50,861 ......... 65,000 ......... 115,861
ALL TYPES.
Program ......... .............. ......... [65,000] ......... ..............
increase.
006 CTG, 20MM, ALL ......... 9,427 ......... ............... ......... 9,427
TYPES.
007 CTG, 25MM, ALL ......... 34,038 ......... ............... ......... 34,038
TYPES.
008 CTG, 30MM, ALL ......... 164,116 ......... ............... ......... 164,116
TYPES.
009 CTG, 40MM, ALL ......... 146,105 ......... ............... ......... 146,105
TYPES.
010 CTG, 50MM, ALL ......... 58,221 ......... ............... ......... 58,221
TYPES.
MORTAR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION.
011 60MM MORTAR, ......... 67,727 ......... ............... ......... 67,727
ALL TYPES.
012 81MM MORTAR, ......... 123,745 ......... ............... ......... 123,745
ALL TYPES.
013 120MM MORTAR, ......... 192,826 ......... ............... ......... 192,826
ALL TYPES.
TANK AMMUNITION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
014 CARTRIDGES, ......... 421,735 ......... ............... ......... 421,735
TANK, 105MM
AND 120MM, ALL
TYPES.
ARTILLERY ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION.
015 ARTILLERY ......... 48,841 ......... ............... ......... 48,841
CARTRIDGES,
75MM & 105MM,
ALL TYPES.
016 ARTILLERY ......... 120,703 ......... ............... ......... 120,703
PROJECTILE,
155MM, ALL
TYPES.
018 ARTILLERY ......... 431,328 ......... ............... ......... 431,328
PROPELLANTS,
FUZES AND
PRIMERS, ALL.
MINES.......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
019 MINES & ......... 47,012 ......... ............... ......... 47,012
CLEARING
CHARGES, ALL
TYPES.
021 MINE, AT, ......... 4,026 ......... ............... ......... 4,026
VOLCANO, ALL
TYPES.
ROCKETS........ ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
022 SHOULDER ......... 50,235 ......... ............... ......... 50,235
LAUNCHED
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES.
023 ROCKET, HYDRA ......... 92,772 ......... ............... ......... 92,772
70, ALL TYPES.
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION.
024 CAD/PAD, ALL ......... 11,615 ......... ............... ......... 11,615
TYPES.
025 DEMOLITION ......... 21,691 ......... ............... ......... 21,691
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES.
026 GRENADES, ALL ......... 66,845 ......... ............... ......... 66,845
TYPES.
027 SIGNALS, ALL ......... 44,927 ......... ............... ......... 44,927
TYPES.
028 SIMULATORS, ALL ......... 11,508 ......... ............... ......... 11,508
TYPES.
MISCELLANEOUS.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
030 AMMO ......... 4,109 ......... ............... ......... 4,109
COMPONENTS,
ALL TYPES.
031 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 16,290 ......... ............... ......... 16,290
$5 MILLION
(AMMO).
032 AMMUNITION ......... 14,007 ......... ............... ......... 14,007
PECULIAR
EQUIPMENT.
033 FIRST ......... 18,712 ......... ............... ......... 18,712
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION
(AMMO).
034 CLOSEOUT ......... 101 ......... ............... ......... 101
LIABILITIES.
PRODUCTION BASE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT.
035 INDUSTRIAL ......... 2,331,763 ......... 20,000 ......... 2,351,763
FACILITIES.
6.8mm ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
equipping
support.
6.8mm ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
facilities.
036 CONVENTIONAL ......... 161,179 ......... ............... ......... 161,179
MUNITIONS
DEMILITARIZATI
ON.
037 ARMS INITIATIVE ......... 3,935 ......... ............... ......... 3,935
TOTAL ......... 5,469,588 ......... 150,000 ......... 5,619,588
PROCUREMEN
T OF
AMMUNITION
, ARMY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
ARMY.
TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
001 FAMILY OF ......... 129,602 ......... ............... ......... 129,602
SEMITRAILERS.
003 GROUND MOBILITY ......... 526,796 ......... ............... ......... 526,796
VEHICLES (GMV).
004 ARNG HMMWV ......... .............. ......... 100,000 ......... 100,000
MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM.
HMMWV ABS/ ......... .............. ......... [100,000] ......... ..............
ESC
Rollover
Mitigation.
006 TRUCK, DUMP, ......... 17,030 ......... 18,000 ......... 35,030
20T (CCE).
M917A3 ......... .............. ......... [18,000] ......... ..............
Heavy Dump
Truck for
the ARNG.
007 FAMILY OF ......... 283,344 ......... ............... ......... 283,344
MEDIUM
TACTICAL VEH
(FMTV).
008 FAMILY OF COLD ......... 38,294 ......... ............... ......... 38,294
WEATHER ALL-
TERRAIN
VEHICLE (C.
009 FIRETRUCKS & ......... 40,203 ......... ............... ......... 40,203
ASSOCIATED
FIREFIGHTING
EQUIP.
010 FAMILY OF HEAVY ......... 169,404 ......... ............... ......... 169,404
TACTICAL
VEHICLES
(FHTV).
011 FAMILY OF ......... 80,187 ......... ............... ......... 80,187
COMMON
TACTICAL
TRUCKS.
013 MODIFICATION OF ......... 28,583 ......... 60,000 ......... 88,583
IN SVC EQUIP.
Ground ......... .............. ......... [60,000] ......... ..............
combat
vehicle
Organic
Industrial
Base.
NON-TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
014 NONTACTICAL ......... 12,029 ......... ............... ......... 12,029
VEHICLES,
OTHER.
COMM--JOINT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
016 C2 ......... 1,293,203 ......... -360,000 ......... 933,203
INFRASTRUCTURE.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-360,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
017 C2 TRANSPORT... ......... 1,581,863 ......... -460,000 ......... 1,121,863
Program ......... .............. ......... [-460,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
018 JCSE EQUIPMENT ......... 39 ......... ............... ......... 39
(USRDECOM).
COMM--SATELLITE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
021 DEFENSE ......... 73,959 ......... ............... ......... 73,959
ENTERPRISE
WIDEBAND
SATCOM SYSTEMS.
022 ASSURED ......... 243,303 ......... ............... ......... 243,303
POSITIONING,
NAVIGATION AND
TIMING.
COMM--COMBAT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
025 HANDHELD ......... 516,045 ......... ............... ......... 516,045
MANPACK SMALL
FORM FIT (HMS).
026 ARMY LINK 16 ......... 33,711 ......... ............... ......... 33,711
SYSTEMS.
027 UNIFIED COMMAND ......... 20,187 ......... ............... ......... 20,187
SUITE.
028 COTS ......... 5,188 ......... ............... ......... 5,188
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIPMENT.
030 ARMY ......... 54,428 ......... ............... ......... 54,428
COMMUNICATIONS
& ELECTRONICS.
COMM--INTELLIGE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
NCE COMM.
031 CI AUTOMATION ......... 16,382 ......... ............... ......... 16,382
ARCHITECTURE-
INTEL.
032 MULTI-DOMAIN ......... 243,732 ......... -35,000 ......... 208,732
INTELLIGENCE.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-35,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
INFORMATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SECURITY.
033 INFORMATION ......... 853 ......... ............... ......... 853
SYSTEM
SECURITY
PROGRAM-ISSP.
034 COMMUNICATIONS ......... 145,507 ......... ............... ......... 145,507
SECURITY
(COMSEC).
035 BIOMETRIC ......... 65 ......... ............... ......... 65
ENABLING
CAPABILITY
(BEC).
COMM--BASE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
036 INFORMATION ......... 133,046 ......... -6,000 ......... 127,046
SYSTEMS.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-6,000] ......... ..............
growth.
037 BASE EMERGENCY ......... 50,644 ......... ............... ......... 50,644
COMMUNICATION.
038 INSTALLATION ......... 335,050 ......... -9,000 ......... 326,050
INFO
INFRASTRUCTURE
MOD PROGRAM.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-9,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
ELECT EQUIP-- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TACT INT REL
ACT (TIARA).
042 TITAN.......... ......... 368,672 ......... -10,000 ......... 358,672
Program ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
043 TERRESTRIAL ......... 172,558 ......... -25,000 ......... 147,558
LAYER SYSTEMS
(TLS).
Program ......... .............. ......... [-25,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
044 COLLECTION ......... 5,914 ......... ............... ......... 5,914
CAPABILITY.
046 DCGS-A-INTEL... ......... 1,075 ......... ............... ......... 1,075
047 TROJAN......... ......... 48,885 ......... ............... ......... 48,885
048 MOD OF IN-SVC ......... 12,441 ......... ............... ......... 12,441
EQUIP (INTEL
SPT).
ELECT EQUIP-- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONIC
WARFARE (EW).
050 AIR VIGILANCE ......... 106,497 ......... ............... ......... 106,497
(AV).
052 ELECTRONIC ......... 46,570 ......... ............... ......... 46,570
WARFARE
PLANNING &
MGMT TOOLS
(EWP.
053 FAMILY OF ......... 163 ......... ............... ......... 163
PERSISTENT
SURVEILLANCE
CAP..
054 COUNTERINTELLIG ......... 8,427 ......... ............... ......... 8,427
ENCE/SECURITY
COUNTERMEASURE
S.
ELECT EQUIP-- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TACTICAL SURV.
(TAC SURV).
056 SENTINEL MODS.. ......... 485,840 ......... ............... ......... 485,840
059 BASE ......... 1,818 ......... ............... ......... 1,818
EXPEDITIARY
TARGETING AND
SURV SYS.
060 INDIRECT FIRE ......... 18,000 ......... ............... ......... 18,000
PROTECTION
FAMILY OF
SYSTEMS.
061 FAMILY OF ......... 15,340 ......... ............... ......... 15,340
WEAPON SIGHTS
(FWS).
062 ENHANCED ......... 13,228 ......... ............... ......... 13,228
PORTABLE
INDUCTIVE
ARTILLERY FUZE
SE.
063 SURVEILLANCE ......... 9,848 ......... ............... ......... 9,848
SYSTEMS.
064 FORWARD LOOKING ......... 84,134 ......... ............... ......... 84,134
INFRARED
(IFLIR).
065 COUNTER SMALL ......... 994,127 ......... 15,000 ......... 1,009,127
UNMANNED
AERIAL SYSTEM
(C-SUAS).
Non-kinetic ......... .............. ......... [15,000] ......... ..............
c-UAS swarm
solutions.
067 JOINT EFFECTS ......... 7,663 ......... ............... ......... 7,663
TARGETING
SYSTEM (JETS).
068 COMPUTER ......... 6,382 ......... ............... ......... 6,382
BALLISTICS:
LHMBC XM32.
069 MORTAR FIRE ......... 2,391 ......... ............... ......... 2,391
CONTROL SYSTEM.
070 MORTAR FIRE ......... 7,139 ......... ............... ......... 7,139
CONTROL
SYSTEMS
MODIFICATIONS.
071 COUNTERFIRE ......... 196,522 ......... -20,000 ......... 176,522
RADARS.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
growth.
072 ADVANCED ......... 397,286 ......... ............... ......... 397,286
SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS
SYSTEMS.
ELECT EQUIP-- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TACTICAL C2
SYSTEMS.
074 FIRE SUPPORT C2 ......... 3,559 ......... ............... ......... 3,559
FAMILY.
075 AIR & MSL ......... 61,127 ......... ............... ......... 61,127
DEFENSE
PLANNING &
CONTROL SYS.
076 IAMD BATTLE ......... 1,052,868 ......... -70,000 ......... 982,868
COMMAND SYSTEM.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-70,000] ......... ..............
growth.
077 AIAMD FAMILY OF ......... 16,446 ......... ............... ......... 16,446
SYSTEMS (FOS)
COMPONENTS.
078 LIFE CYCLE ......... 5,265 ......... ............... ......... 5,265
SOFTWARE
SUPPORT (LCSS).
082 MOD OF IN-SVC ......... 16,673 ......... ............... ......... 16,673
EQUIPMENT
(ENFIRE).
ELECT EQUIP-- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AUTOMATION.
083 ARMY TRAINING ......... 4,303 ......... ............... ......... 4,303
MODERNIZATION.
084 AUTOMATED DATA ......... 99,039 ......... ............... ......... 99,039
PROCESSING
EQUIP.
086 HIGH PERF ......... 75,004 ......... ............... ......... 75,004
COMPUTING MOD
PGM (HPCMP).
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
087A CLASSIFIED ......... 1,577 ......... ............... ......... 1,577
PROGRAMS.
CHEMICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
DEFENSIVE
EQUIPMENT.
088 BASE DEFENSE ......... 143 ......... ............... ......... 143
SYSTEMS (BDS).
089 CBRN DEFENSE... ......... 65,020 ......... ............... ......... 65,020
BRIDGING ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
090 TACTICAL ......... 35,806 ......... ............... ......... 35,806
BRIDGE, FLOAT-
RIBBON.
ENGINEER (NON- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
CONSTRUCTION)
EQUIPMENT.
092 ROBOTICS AND ......... 84,303 ......... -15,000 ......... 69,303
APPLIQUE
SYSTEMS.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-15,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
093 RENDER SAFE ......... 12,461 ......... ............... ......... 12,461
SETS KITS
OUTFITS.
094 FAMILY OF BOATS ......... 8,028 ......... ............... ......... 8,028
AND MOTORS.
COMBAT SERVICE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
095 HEATERS AND ......... 15,021 ......... ............... ......... 15,021
ECU'S.
097 GROUND SOLDIER ......... 193,491 ......... ............... ......... 193,491
SYSTEM.
101 CARGO AERIAL ......... 39,505 ......... ............... ......... 39,505
DEL &
PERSONNEL
PARACHUTE
SYSTEM.
103 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 4,129 ......... ............... ......... 4,129
$5M (ENG SPT).
PETROLEUM ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
104 DISTRIBUTION ......... 133,881 ......... ............... ......... 133,881
SYSTEMS,
PETROLEUM &
WATER.
MEDICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
105 COMBAT SUPPORT ......... 93,705 ......... 10,000 ......... 103,705
MEDICAL.
Modernizati ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
on of field
deployed
mobile X-
rays.
MAINTENANCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
106 MOBILE ......... 58,997 ......... ............... ......... 58,997
MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT
SYSTEMS.
CONSTRUCTION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
107 CONSTRUCTION ......... 72,582 ......... ............... ......... 72,582
EQUIPMENT.
RAIL FLOAT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
CONTAINERIZATI
ON EQUIPMENT.
108 ARMY WATERCRAFT ......... 75,717 ......... ............... ......... 75,717
ESP.
109 MANEUVER ......... 104,705 ......... 62,000 ......... 166,705
SUPPORT VESSEL
(MSV).
Army ......... .............. ......... [62,000] ......... ..............
Autonomous
Resupply
Vessel.
110 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 22,021 ......... ............... ......... 22,021
$5.0M (FLOAT/
RAIL).
GENERATORS..... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
111 GENERATORS AND ......... 79,456 ......... ............... ......... 79,456
ASSOCIATED
EQUIP.
MATERIAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
HANDLING
EQUIPMENT.
112 FAMILY OF ......... 6,238 ......... ............... ......... 6,238
FORKLIFTS.
TRAINING ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
113 COMBAT TRAINING ......... 141,848 ......... ............... ......... 141,848
CENTERS
SUPPORT.
114 TRAINING ......... 140,860 ......... ............... ......... 140,860
DEVICES,
NONSYSTEM.
115 SYNTHETIC ......... 115,535 ......... ............... ......... 115,535
TRAINING
ENVIRONMENT
(STE).
116 GAMING ......... 4,180 ......... ............... ......... 4,180
TECHNOLOGY IN
SUPPORT OF
ARMY TRAINING.
TEST MEASURE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND DIG
EQUIPMENT
(TMD).
117 INTEGRATED ......... 18,570 ......... ............... ......... 18,570
FAMILY OF TEST
EQUIPMENT
(IFTE).
118 TEST EQUIPMENT ......... 53,597 ......... ............... ......... 53,597
MODERNIZATION
(TEMOD).
OTHER SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
119 PHYSICAL ......... 137,271 ......... ............... ......... 137,271
SECURITY
SYSTEMS (OPA3).
120 BASE LEVEL ......... 19,889 ......... ............... ......... 19,889
COMMON
EQUIPMENT.
121 MODIFICATION OF ......... 41,358 ......... ............... ......... 41,358
IN-SVC
EQUIPMENT (OPA-
3).
122 PRODUCTION BASE ......... 362,356 ......... ............... ......... 362,356
SUPPORT (OTH).
123 BUILDING, PRE- ......... 10,878 ......... ............... ......... 10,878
FAB,
RELOCATABLE.
124 SPECIAL ......... 88,721 ......... ............... ......... 88,721
EQUIPMENT FOR
TEST AND
EVALUATION.
OPA2........... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
126 INITIAL SPARES-- ......... 7,323 ......... ............... ......... 7,323
C&E.
TOTAL ......... 12,667,053 ......... -745,000 ......... 11,922,053
OTHER
PROCUREMEN
T, ARMY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
NAVY.
COMBAT AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
001 F/A-18E/F ......... 49,088 ......... ............... ......... 49,088
(FIGHTER)
HORNET.
002 JOINT STRIKE 8 995,707 ......... ............... 8 995,707
FIGHTER CV.
003 JOINT STRIKE ......... 651,081 ......... ............... ......... 651,081
FIGHTER CV AP.
004 JSF STOVL...... ......... 62,363 ......... ............... ......... 62,363
005 JSF STOVL AP... ......... 77,963 ......... ............... ......... 77,963
006 CH-53K (HEAVY 22 3,044,450 ......... ............... 22 3,044,450
LIFT).
007 CH-53K (HEAVY ......... 429,295 ......... ............... ......... 429,295
LIFT) AP.
009 H-1 UPGRADES ......... 5,974 ......... ............... ......... 5,974
(UH-1Y/AH-1Z).
010 P-8A POSEIDON.. 12 4,227,350 ......... ............... 12 4,227,350
011 E-2D ADV 6 2,075,025 ......... -350,000 6 1,725,025
HAWKEYE.
E-2D Multi- ......... .............. ......... [-350,000] ......... ..............
Year
Procurement
Cost
Savings.
012 E-2D ADV ......... 550,000 ......... -55,000 ......... 495,000
HAWKEYE AP.
Excess to ......... .............. ......... [-55,000] ......... ..............
need.
OTHER AIRCRAFT. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
015 KC-130J........ 11 1,601,906 ......... ............... 11 1,601,906
016 MQ-4 TRITON.... ......... 104,326 ......... ............... ......... 104,326
017 MQ-25.......... 3 771,177 ......... ............... 3 771,177
018 MQ-25 AP....... ......... 80,965 ......... ............... ......... 80,965
019 MARINE GROUP 5 5 118,600 ......... ............... 5 118,600
UAS.
020 OTHER SUPPORT 10 204,476 ......... ............... 10 204,476
AIRCRAFT.
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
021 F-18 A-D UNIQUE ......... 36,951 ......... ............... ......... 36,951
022 F-18E/F AND EA- ......... 563,832 ......... ............... ......... 563,832
18G
MODERNIZATION
AND SUSTAINM.
023 MARINE GROUP 5 ......... 179,603 ......... ............... ......... 179,603
UAS SERIES.
024 AEA SYSTEMS.... ......... 37,125 ......... ............... ......... 37,125
026 INFRARED SEARCH ......... 171,345 ......... ............... ......... 171,345
AND TRACK
(IRST).
027 ADVERSARY...... ......... 24,732 ......... ............... ......... 24,732
028 F-18 SERIES.... ......... 858,716 ......... ............... ......... 858,716
029 H-53 SERIES.... ......... 91,903 ......... ............... ......... 91,903
030 MH-60 SERIES... ......... 236,555 ......... ............... ......... 236,555
031 H-1 SERIES..... ......... 304,267 ......... ............... ......... 304,267
032 E-2 SERIES..... ......... 96,428 ......... ............... ......... 96,428
033 TRAINER A/C ......... 12,359 ......... ............... ......... 12,359
SERIES.
034 C-130 SERIES... ......... 185,266 ......... ............... ......... 185,266
036 CARGO/TRANSPORT ......... 20,100 ......... ............... ......... 20,100
A/C SERIES.
037 E-6 SERIES..... ......... 270,832 ......... ............... ......... 270,832
038 EXECUTIVE ......... 57,319 ......... ............... ......... 57,319
HELICOPTERS
SERIES.
039 T-45 SERIES.... ......... 191,139 ......... ............... ......... 191,139
040 POWER PLANT ......... 23,765 ......... ............... ......... 23,765
CHANGES.
041 JPATS SERIES... ......... 28,059 ......... ............... ......... 28,059
043 COMMON ECM ......... 365,990 ......... ............... ......... 365,990
EQUIPMENT.
044 COMMON AVIONICS ......... 246,728 ......... -24,672 ......... 222,056
CHANGES.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-24,672] ......... ..............
decrease.
045 COMMON ......... 11,028 ......... ............... ......... 11,028
DEFENSIVE
WEAPON SYSTEM.
046 ID SYSTEMS..... ......... 3,199 ......... ............... ......... 3,199
047 P-8 SERIES..... ......... 381,014 ......... ............... ......... 381,014
048 MAGTF EW FOR ......... 20,686 ......... ............... ......... 20,686
AVIATION.
049 V-22 (TILT/ ......... 641,715 ......... ............... ......... 641,715
ROTOR ACFT)
OSPREY.
050 NEXT GENERATION ......... 458,658 ......... ............... ......... 458,658
JAMMER (NGJ).
051 F-35 STOVL ......... 428,881 ......... ............... ......... 428,881
SERIES.
052 F-35 CV SERIES. ......... 135,612 ......... ............... ......... 135,612
053 QRC............ ......... 27,686 ......... ............... ......... 27,686
054 MQ-4 SERIES.... ......... 157,849 ......... ............... ......... 157,849
AIRCRAFT SPARES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND REPAIR
PARTS.
058 SPARES AND ......... 4,511,417 ......... 300,000 ......... 4,811,417
REPAIR PARTS.
F-35B Spare ......... .............. ......... [150,000] ......... ..............
Parts.
F-35C Spare ......... .............. ......... [150,000] ......... ..............
Parts.
AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT EQUIP
& FACILITIES.
059 COMMON GROUND ......... 666,140 ......... -33,307 ......... 632,833
EQUIPMENT.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-33,307] ......... ..............
decrease.
060 AIRCRAFT ......... 113,513 ......... ............... ......... 113,513
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES.
061 WAR CONSUMABLES ......... 56,577 ......... ............... ......... 56,577
062 OTHER ......... 61,970 ......... ............... ......... 61,970
PRODUCTION
CHARGES.
063 SPECIAL SUPPORT ......... 218,318 ......... -10,415 ......... 207,903
EQUIPMENT.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-10,415] ......... ..............
decrease.
TOTAL 77 26,947,023 ......... -173,394 77 26,773,629
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMEN
T, NAVY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
WEAPONS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
NAVY.
BALLISTIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
001 CONVENTIONAL 12 750,387 ......... ............... 12 750,387
PROMPT STRIKE.
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
002 TRIDENT II MODS ......... 3,912,267 ......... ............... ......... 3,912,267
STRATEGIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
004 TOMAHAWK....... 58 1,015,106 ......... ............... 58 1,015,106
TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
005 AMRAAM......... 106 167,439 ......... ............... 106 167,439
006 SIDEWINDER..... 306 174,750 ......... ............... 306 174,750
007 JOINT ADVANCE ......... 557,806 ......... ............... ......... 557,806
TACTICAL
MISSILE (JATM).
008 STANDARD 106 733,159 ......... ............... 106 733,159
MISSILE.
010 SMALL DIAMETER 512 166,688 ......... ............... 512 166,688
BOMB II.
011 RAM............ 116 119,166 ......... ............... 116 119,166
012 MSE MISSILE.... 23 97,835 ......... ............... 23 97,835
013 JOINT AIR 282 73,226 ......... ............... 282 73,226
GROUND MISSILE
(JAGM).
015 AERIAL TARGETS. ......... 179,931 ......... ............... ......... 179,931
016 OTHER MISSILE ......... 3,877 ......... ............... ......... 3,877
SUPPORT.
017 LRASM.......... 129 670,456 ......... -64,000 129 606,456
Transfer to ......... .............. ......... [-64,000] ......... ..............
RDN-95.
018 NAVAL STRIKE 32 75,972 ......... ............... 32 75,972
MISSILE (NSM).
019 NAVAL STRIKE ......... 2,103 ......... ............... ......... 2,103
MISSILE (NSM)
AP.
021 PRECISION 4 4,019 ......... ............... 4 4,019
ATTACK STRIKE
MUNITION
(PASM).
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
022 TOMAHAWK MODS.. ......... 799,139 ......... ............... ......... 799,139
023 ESSM........... 290 521,006 ......... ............... 290 521,006
024 AARGM-ER....... ......... 20 ......... ............... ......... 20
025 AARGM-ER AP.... ......... 5,210 ......... ............... ......... 5,210
026 STANDARD ......... 69,579 ......... ............... ......... 69,579
MISSILES MODS.
SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT &
FACILITIES.
027 WEAPONS ......... 62,403 ......... ............... ......... 62,403
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES.
028 INDUSTRIAL ......... 640 ......... ............... ......... 640
PREPAREDNESS.
ORDNANCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
029 ORDNANCE ......... 43,261 ......... ............... ......... 43,261
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
TORPEDOES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
RELATED EQUIP.
030 SSTD........... ......... 3,969 ......... ............... ......... 3,969
031 MK-48 TORPEDO.. 141 571,274 ......... ............... 141 571,274
032 ASW TARGETS.... ......... 47,277 ......... ............... ......... 47,277
MOD OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TORPEDOES AND
RELATED EQUIP.
033 MK-54 TORPEDO ......... 112,126 ......... ............... ......... 112,126
MODS.
034 MK-48 TORPEDO ......... 67,279 ......... ............... ......... 67,279
ADCAP MODS.
035 MARITIME MINES. ......... 251,724 ......... ............... ......... 251,724
SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
036 TORPEDO SUPPORT ......... 160,445 ......... ............... ......... 160,445
EQUIPMENT.
037 ASW RANGE ......... 4,438 ......... ............... ......... 4,438
SUPPORT.
DESTINATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TRANSPORTATION.
038 FIRST ......... 6,011 ......... ............... ......... 6,011
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION.
GUNS AND GUN ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MOUNTS.
039 SMALL ARMS AND ......... 13,946 ......... ............... ......... 13,946
WEAPONS.
MODIFICATION OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS.
040 CIWS MODS...... ......... 7,939 ......... ............... ......... 7,939
041 COAST GUARD ......... 49,537 ......... ............... ......... 49,537
WEAPONS.
042 GUN MOUNT MODS. ......... 84,004 ......... ............... ......... 84,004
043 LCS MODULE 10 2,190 ......... ............... 10 2,190
WEAPONS.
044 AIRBORNE MINE ......... 14,265 ......... ............... ......... 14,265
NEUTRALIZATION
SYSTEMS.
SPARES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPAIR PARTS.
046 SPARES AND ......... 167,242 ......... ............... ......... 167,242
REPAIR PARTS.
TOTAL 2,127 11,769,111 ......... -64,000 2,127 11,705,111
WEAPONS
PROCUREMEN
T, NAVY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION,
NAVY AND
MARINE CORPS.
NAVY AMMUNITION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
001 GENERAL PURPOSE ......... 45,607 ......... ............... ......... 45,607
BOMBS.
002 JDAM........... 1,292 96,935 ......... ............... 1,292 96,935
003 AIRBORNE ......... 92,145 ......... ............... ......... 92,145
ROCKETS, ALL
TYPES.
004 MACHINE GUN ......... 14,832 ......... ............... ......... 14,832
AMMUNITION.
005 PRACTICE BOMBS. ......... 46,782 ......... ............... ......... 46,782
006 CARTRIDGES & ......... 63,064 ......... ............... ......... 63,064
CART ACTUATED
DEVICES.
007 AIR EXPENDABLE ......... 121,059 ......... ............... ......... 121,059
COUNTERMEASURE
S.
008 JATOS.......... ......... 8,179 ......... ............... ......... 8,179
009 5 INCH/54 GUN ......... 44,136 ......... ............... ......... 44,136
AMMUNITION.
010 INTERMEDIATE ......... 40,095 ......... ............... ......... 40,095
CALIBER GUN
AMMUNITION.
011 OTHER SHIP GUN ......... 43,106 ......... ............... ......... 43,106
AMMUNITION.
012 SMALL ARMS & ......... 48,801 ......... ............... ......... 48,801
LANDING PARTY
AMMO.
013 PYROTECHNIC AND ......... 9,510 ......... ............... ......... 9,510
DEMOLITION.
015 AMMUNITION LESS ......... 1,692 ......... ............... ......... 1,692
THAN $5
MILLION.
016 EXPEDITIONARY ......... 165,662 ......... ............... ......... 165,662
LOITERING
MUNITIONS.
MARINE CORPS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION.
017 MORTARS........ ......... 181,464 ......... ............... ......... 181,464
018 DIRECT SUPPORT ......... 29,715 ......... ............... ......... 29,715
MUNITIONS.
019 INFANTRY ......... 142,179 ......... ............... ......... 142,179
WEAPONS
AMMUNITION.
020 COMBAT SUPPORT ......... 12,510 ......... ............... ......... 12,510
MUNITIONS.
021 AMMO ......... 19,009 ......... ............... ......... 19,009
MODERNIZATION.
022 ARTILLERY ......... 723,278 ......... -10,000 ......... 713,278
MUNITIONS.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
growth.
023 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 8,837 ......... ............... ......... 8,837
$5 MILLION.
TOTAL 1,292 1,958,597 ......... -10,000 1,292 1,948,597
PROCUREMEN
T OF
AMMUNITION
, NAVY AND
MARINE
CORPS.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SHIPBUILDING ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND
CONVERSION,
NAVY.
FLEET BALLISTIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILE SHIPS.
001 COLUMBIA CLASS 1 10,233,832 ......... ............... 1 10,233,832
SUBMARINE.
002 COLUMBIA CLASS ......... 4,763,342 ......... 125,000 ......... 4,888,342
SUBMARINE AP.
Additive ......... .............. ......... [45,000] ......... ..............
manufacturi
ng planning
for
submarine
industrial
base
resilience.
Scaling of ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
Low-Cost
Titanum
Manufacturi
ng for
Submarine
Constructio
n.
Submarine ......... .............. ......... [70,000] ......... ..............
Workforce
Pipeline.
OTHER WARSHIPS. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
003 CARRIER ......... 641,907 ......... ............... ......... 641,907
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM.
004 CARRIER ......... 1,940,566 ......... ............... ......... 1,940,566
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM AP.
005 CVN-81......... ......... 1,447,882 ......... ............... ......... 1,447,882
006 VIRGINIA CLASS 2 8,402,316 ......... ............... 2 8,402,316
SUBMARINE.
007 VIRGINIA CLASS ......... 4,143,618 ......... ............... ......... 4,143,618
SUBMARINE AP.
009 BBG(X) AP...... ......... 1,000,000 ......... ............... ......... 1,000,000
010 CVN REFUELING ......... 4,418,902 ......... ............... ......... 4,418,902
OVERHAULS.
011 CVN REFUELING ......... 53,070 ......... ............... ......... 53,070
OVERHAULS AP.
012 DDG 1000....... ......... 66,516 ......... ............... ......... 66,516
013 DDG-51......... 1 2,954,238 1 1,000,000 2 3,954,238
Incremental ......... .............. [1] [1,000,000] ......... ..............
funding for
an
additional
DDG-51.
017 FF(X).......... 1 1,429,000 ......... ............... 1 1,429,000
AMPHIBIOUS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SHIPS.
018 LPD FLIGHT II.. 1 2,188,700 ......... ............... 1 2,188,700
019 LPD FLIGHT II ......... 355,950 ......... ............... ......... 355,950
AP.
021 LHA REPLACEMENT 1 3,850,319 ......... ............... 1 3,850,319
AUXILIARIES, ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
CRAFT AND
PRIOR YR
PROGRAM COST.
026 AS SUBMARINE 2 4,444,000 ......... -880,000 2 3,564,000
TENDER.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-380,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
Reduction ......... .............. ......... [-500,000] ......... ..............
for
incremental
funding of
submarine
tender
contract.
028 TAO FLEET OILER 2 1,946,063 ......... ............... 2 1,946,063
031 TAGOS SURTASS 1 610,664 ......... -30,000 1 580,664
SHIPS.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-30,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
035 STRATEGIC 1 450,000 ......... ............... 1 450,000
SEALIFT.
036 OUTFITTING..... ......... 741,270 ......... ............... ......... 741,270
037 SHIP TO SHORE 4 733,895 ......... ............... 4 733,895
CONNECTOR.
038 SERVICE CRAFT.. ......... 177,079 2 82,000 2 259,079
Additional ......... .............. [2] [82,000] ......... ..............
Yard,
Repair,
Berthing
and Messing
Barges.
039 AUXILIARY ......... 83,000 ......... ............... ......... 83,000
PERSONNEL
LIGHTER.
040 BULK FUEL 1 450,000 ......... ............... 1 450,000
VESSEL.
043 LCAC SLEP...... 2 37,998 ......... ............... 2 37,998
045 COMPLETION OF ......... 2,611,990 ......... -12,000 ......... 2,599,990
PY
SHIPBUILDING
PROGRAMS.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-12,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
TOTAL 20 60,176,117 3 285,000 23 60,461,117
SHIPBUILDI
NG AND
CONVERSION
, NAVY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
NAVY.
SHIP PROPULSION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
001 SURFACE POWER ......... 22,668 ......... ............... ......... 22,668
EQUIPMENT.
GENERATORS..... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
002 SURFACE ......... 103,871 ......... ............... ......... 103,871
COMBATANT HM&E.
NAVIGATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
003 OTHER ......... 83,510 ......... ............... ......... 83,510
NAVIGATION
EQUIPMENT.
OTHER SHIPBOARD ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
004 SUB PERISCOPE, ......... 344,885 ......... ............... ......... 344,885
IMAGING AND
SUPT EQUIP
PROG.
005 DDG MOD........ ......... 1,000,278 ......... ............... ......... 1,000,278
006 FIREFIGHTING ......... 177,708 ......... ............... ......... 177,708
EQUIPMENT.
007 COMMAND AND ......... 2,259 ......... ............... ......... 2,259
CONTROL
SWITCHBOARD.
008 LHA/LHD MIDLIFE ......... 131,315 ......... ............... ......... 131,315
009 LCC 19/20 ......... 766 ......... ............... ......... 766
EXTENDED
SERVICE LIFE
PROGRAM.
010 POLLUTION ......... 22,506 ......... ............... ......... 22,506
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT.
011 SUBMARINE ......... 330,951 ......... ............... ......... 330,951
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
012 VIRGINIA CLASS ......... 83,297 ......... ............... ......... 83,297
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
013 LCS CLASS ......... 15,815 ......... ............... ......... 15,815
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
014 SUBMARINE ......... 26,211 ......... ............... ......... 26,211
BATTERIES.
015 LPD CLASS ......... 213,723 ......... ............... ......... 213,723
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
016 DDG 1000 CLASS ......... 58,284 ......... ............... ......... 58,284
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
017 STRATEGIC ......... 72,163 ......... ............... ......... 72,163
PLATFORM
SUPPORT EQUIP.
018 DSSP EQUIPMENT. ......... 7,440 ......... ............... ......... 7,440
019 SMALL UNMANNED ......... 585 ......... ............... ......... 585
SURFACE
VEHICLES.
020 LCAC........... ......... 22,515 ......... ............... ......... 22,515
021 UNDERWATER EOD ......... 20,575 ......... ............... ......... 20,575
EQUIPMENT.
022 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 69,425 ......... ............... ......... 69,425
$5 MILLION.
023 CHEMICAL ......... 2,425 ......... ............... ......... 2,425
WARFARE
DETECTORS.
REACTOR PLANT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
024 SHIP ......... 2,737,140 ......... ............... ......... 2,737,140
MAINTENANCE,
REPAIR AND
MODERNIZATION.
025 REACTOR ......... 519,821 ......... ............... ......... 519,821
COMPONENTS.
OCEAN ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ENGINEERING.
026 DIVING AND ......... 33,013 ......... ............... ......... 33,013
SALVAGE
EQUIPMENT.
SMALL BOATS.... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
027 MEDIUM UNMANNED ......... 121,130 ......... ............... ......... 121,130
SURFACE
VEHICLE
(MUSVS).
028 STANDARD BOATS. ......... 97,746 12 55,000 12 152,746
Additional ......... .............. [12] [55,000] ......... ..............
40ft Patrol
Boats.
PRODUCTION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
FACILITIES
EQUIPMENT.
029 OPERATING ......... 492,100 ......... ............... ......... 492,100
FORCES IPE.
OTHER SHIP ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT.
030 LCS COMMON ......... 30,565 ......... ............... ......... 30,565
MISSION
MODULES
EQUIPMENT.
031 LCS MCM MISSION ......... 65,113 ......... ............... ......... 65,113
MODULES.
032 LCS SUW MISSION ......... 1,719 ......... ............... ......... 1,719
MODULES.
033 LCS IN-SERVICE ......... 315,272 ......... -190,000 ......... 125,272
MODERNIZATION.
Insufficien ......... .............. ......... [-35,000] ......... ..............
t
justificati
on.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-155,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
034 SMALL & MEDIUM ......... 110,955 ......... ............... ......... 110,955
UUV.
035 LARGE UUV...... ......... 222,998 ......... 34,000 ......... 256,998
Procurement ......... .............. ......... [34,000] ......... ..............
of dual
modality
large
displacemen
t unmanned
undersea
vehicles.
036 EXTRA LARGE UUV ......... 135,802 ......... ............... ......... 135,802
LOGISTIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT.
037 LSD MIDLIFE & ......... 240 ......... ............... ......... 240
MODERNIZATION.
SHIP SONARS.... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
039 AN/SQQ-89 SURF ......... 142,355 ......... ............... ......... 142,355
ASW COMBAT
SYSTEM.
040 SSN ACOUSTIC ......... 454,161 ......... ............... ......... 454,161
EQUIPMENT.
ASW ELECTRONIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
042 SUBMARINE ......... 68,881 ......... ............... ......... 68,881
ACOUSTIC
WARFARE SYSTEM.
043 SSTD........... ......... 14,857 ......... ............... ......... 14,857
044 FIXED ......... 490,548 ......... ............... ......... 490,548
SURVEILLANCE
SYSTEM.
045 SURTASS........ ......... 72,190 ......... ............... ......... 72,190
ELECTRONIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
WARFARE
EQUIPMENT.
046 AN/SLQ-32...... ......... 653,483 ......... ............... ......... 653,483
RECONNAISSANCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
047 SHIPBOARD IW ......... 701,667 ......... ............... ......... 701,667
EXPLOIT.
048 MARITIME ......... 8,652 ......... ............... ......... 8,652
BATTLESPACE
AWARENESS.
OTHER SHIP ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT.
049 COOPERATIVE ......... 33,932 ......... ............... ......... 33,932
ENGAGEMENT
CAPABILITY.
050 NAVAL TACTICAL ......... 10,108 ......... ............... ......... 10,108
COMMAND
SUPPORT SYSTEM
(NTCSS).
051 ATDLS.......... ......... 52,758 ......... ............... ......... 52,758
052 NAVY COMMAND ......... 16,167 ......... ............... ......... 16,167
AND CONTROL
SYSTEM (NCCS).
053 MINESWEEPING ......... 14,879 ......... ............... ......... 14,879
SYSTEM
REPLACEMENT.
054 NAVSTAR GPS ......... 43,097 ......... ............... ......... 43,097
RECEIVERS
(SPACE).
055 AMERICAN FORCES ......... 289 ......... ............... ......... 289
RADIO AND TV
SERVICE.
AVIATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT.
056 ASHORE ATC ......... 83,057 ......... ............... ......... 83,057
EQUIPMENT.
057 AFLOAT ATC ......... 62,581 ......... ............... ......... 62,581
EQUIPMENT.
058 ID SYSTEMS..... ......... 35,620 ......... ............... ......... 35,620
059 JOINT PRECISION ......... 2,976 ......... ............... ......... 2,976
APPROACH AND
LANDING SYSTEM
(.
060 NAVAL MISSION ......... 54,487 ......... ............... ......... 54,487
PLANNING
SYSTEMS.
OTHER SHORE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT.
062 TACTICAL/MOBILE ......... 48,262 ......... ............... ......... 48,262
C4I SYSTEMS.
063 INTELLIGENCE ......... 11,824 ......... ............... ......... 11,824
SURVEILLANCE
AND
RECONNAISSANCE
(ISR).
064 CANES.......... ......... 493,046 ......... -7,000 ......... 486,046
Program ......... .............. ......... [-7,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
065 RADIAC......... ......... 38,000 ......... ............... ......... 38,000
066 CANES-INTELL... ......... 43,028 ......... ............... ......... 43,028
067 GPETE.......... ......... 31,462 ......... ............... ......... 31,462
068 MASF........... ......... 5,822 ......... ............... ......... 5,822
069 INTEG COMBAT ......... 6,454 ......... ............... ......... 6,454
SYSTEM TEST
FACILITY.
070 EMI CONTROL ......... 3,435 ......... ............... ......... 3,435
INSTRUMENTATIO
N.
071 IN-SERVICE ......... 338,946 ......... ............... ......... 338,946
RADARS AND
SENSORS.
SHIPBOARD ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
072 BATTLE FORCE ......... 125,661 ......... ............... ......... 125,661
TACTICAL
NETWORK.
073 SHIPBOARD ......... 50,350 ......... ............... ......... 50,350
TACTICAL
COMMUNICATIONS.
074 SHIP ......... 156,605 ......... ............... ......... 156,605
COMMUNICATIONS
AUTOMATION.
075 COMMUNICATIONS ......... 15,097 ......... ............... ......... 15,097
ITEMS UNDER
$5M.
SUBMARINE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
076 SUBMARINE ......... 173,069 ......... ............... ......... 173,069
BROADCAST
SUPPORT.
077 SUBMARINE ......... 88,071 ......... ............... ......... 88,071
COMMUNICATION
EQUIPMENT.
SATELLITE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
078 SATELLITE ......... 57,961 ......... ............... ......... 57,961
COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEMS.
079 NAVY MULTIBAND ......... 57,768 ......... ............... ......... 57,768
TERMINAL (NMT).
080 MOBILE ADVANCED ......... 202,305 ......... ............... ......... 202,305
EHF TERMINAL
(MAT).
CRYPTOGRAPHIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
082 INFO SYSTEMS ......... 349,099 ......... ............... ......... 349,099
SECURITY
PROGRAM (ISSP).
083 MIO INTEL ......... 1,063 ......... ............... ......... 1,063
EXPLOITATION
TEAM.
CRYPTOLOGIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
084 CRYPTOLOGIC ......... 7,419 ......... ............... ......... 7,419
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIP.
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONIC
SUPPORT.
091 COAST GUARD ......... 67,106 ......... ............... ......... 67,106
EQUIPMENT.
DRUG ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
INTERDICTION
SUPPORT.
092 OTHER DRUG ......... 57,568 ......... ............... ......... 57,568
INTERDICTION
SUPPORT.
SONOBUOYS...... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
093 SONOBUOYS--ALL ......... 300,151 ......... 250,000 ......... 550,151
TYPES.
Additional ......... .............. ......... [250,000] ......... ..............
Procurement
of
Sonobuoys.
AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
094 MINOTAUR....... ......... 4,831 ......... ............... ......... 4,831
095 WEAPONS RANGE ......... 119,900 ......... ............... ......... 119,900
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
096 AIRCRAFT ......... 69,065 ......... ............... ......... 69,065
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
097 ADVANCED ......... 23,551 ......... ............... ......... 23,551
ARRESTING GEAR
(AAG).
098 ELECTROMAGNETIC ......... 36,908 ......... ............... ......... 36,908
AIRCRAFT
LAUNCH SYSTEM
(EMALS.
099 METEOROLOGICAL ......... 7,477 ......... ............... ......... 7,477
EQUIPMENT.
100 AIRBORNE MCM... ......... 9,507 ......... ............... ......... 9,507
101 AVIATION ......... 116,873 ......... ............... ......... 116,873
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
102 UMCS-UNMAN ......... 211,216 ......... ............... ......... 211,216
CARRIER
AVIATION(UCA)M
ISSION CNTRL.
SHIP GUN SYSTEM ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
103 SHIP GUN ......... 6,962 ......... ............... ......... 6,962
SYSTEMS
EQUIPMENT.
SHIP MISSILE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SYSTEMS
EQUIPMENT.
104 HARPOON SUPPORT ......... 195 ......... ............... ......... 195
EQUIPMENT.
105 SHIP MISSILE ......... 431,069 ......... -15,000 ......... 416,069
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
Insufficien ......... .............. ......... [-15,000] ......... ..............
t
justificati
on.
106 TOMAHAWK ......... 116,208 ......... ............... ......... 116,208
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
FBM SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
107 CPS SUPPORT ......... 188,430 ......... ............... ......... 188,430
EQUIPMENT.
108 STRATEGIC ......... 327,941 ......... ............... ......... 327,941
MISSILE
SYSTEMS EQUIP.
ASW SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
109 SSN COMBAT ......... 165,416 ......... ............... ......... 165,416
CONTROL
SYSTEMS.
110 ASW SUPPORT ......... 25,105 ......... ............... ......... 25,105
EQUIPMENT.
OTHER ORDNANCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
111 EXPLOSIVE ......... 48,252 ......... ............... ......... 48,252
ORDNANCE
DISPOSAL EQUIP.
113 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 2,592 ......... ............... ......... 2,592
$5 MILLION.
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EXPENDABLE
ORDNANCE.
114 ANTI-SHIP ......... 606,241 ......... ............... ......... 606,241
MISSILE DECOY
SYSTEM.
115 SUBMARINE ......... 73,681 ......... ............... ......... 73,681
TRAINING
DEVICE MODS.
116 SURFACE ......... 218,181 ......... ............... ......... 218,181
TRAINING
EQUIPMENT.
CIVIL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ENGINEERING
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
117 PASSENGER ......... 3,567 ......... ............... ......... 3,567
CARRYING
VEHICLES.
118 GENERAL PURPOSE ......... 4,801 ......... ............... ......... 4,801
TRUCKS.
120 CONSTRUCTION & ......... 91,269 ......... ............... ......... 91,269
MAINTENANCE
EQUIP.
121 FIRE FIGHTING ......... 17,107 ......... ............... ......... 17,107
EQUIPMENT.
122 TACTICAL ......... 46,796 ......... ............... ......... 46,796
VEHICLES.
123 AMPHIBIOUS ......... 53,916 ......... ............... ......... 53,916
EQUIPMENT.
124 POLLUTION ......... 3,586 ......... ............... ......... 3,586
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT.
125 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 131,449 ......... ............... ......... 131,449
$5 MILLION.
126 PHYSICAL ......... 998 ......... ............... ......... 998
SECURITY
VEHICLES.
SUPPLY SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
127 SUPPLY ......... 67,828 ......... ............... ......... 67,828
EQUIPMENT.
128 FIRST ......... 4,732 ......... ............... ......... 4,732
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION.
129 SPECIAL PURPOSE ......... 323,644 ......... ............... ......... 323,644
SUPPLY SYSTEMS.
TRAINING ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
DEVICES.
130 TRAINING ......... 10,608 ......... ............... ......... 10,608
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
131 TRAINING AND ......... 331,016 ......... ............... ......... 331,016
EDUCATION
EQUIPMENT.
COMMAND SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
132 COMMAND SUPPORT ......... 55,202 ......... ............... ......... 55,202
EQUIPMENT.
133 MEDICAL SUPPORT ......... 54,862 ......... ............... ......... 54,862
EQUIPMENT.
135 NAVAL MIP ......... 5,213 ......... ............... ......... 5,213
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
136 OPERATING ......... 15,107 ......... ............... ......... 15,107
FORCES SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
137 C4ISR EQUIPMENT ......... 33,975 ......... ............... ......... 33,975
138 ENVIRONMENTAL ......... 60,467 ......... ............... ......... 60,467
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
139 PHYSICAL ......... 218,037 ......... -27,000 ......... 191,037
SECURITY
EQUIPMENT.
Insufficien ......... .............. ......... [-27,000] ......... ..............
t
justificati
on.
140 ENTERPRISE ......... 40,490 ......... ............... ......... 40,490
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
OTHER.......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
142 NEXT GENERATION ......... 223,647 ......... -7,000 ......... 216,647
ENTERPRISE
SERVICE.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-7,000] ......... ..............
growth.
143 CYBERSPACE ......... 7,131 ......... ............... ......... 7,131
ACTIVITIES.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
143A CLASSIFIED ......... 42,813 ......... ............... ......... 42,813
PROGRAMS.
SPARES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPAIR PARTS.
144 SPARES AND ......... 765,711 ......... ............... ......... 765,711
REPAIR PARTS.
TOTAL ......... 18,866,679 12 93,000 12 18,959,679
OTHER
PROCUREMEN
T, NAVY.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT, ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MARINE CORPS.
TRACKED COMBAT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
002 AMPHIBIOUS ......... 237,336 ......... ............... ......... 237,336
COMBAT VEHICLE
FAMILY OF
VEHICLES.
003 LAV PIP........ ......... 68,825 ......... ............... ......... 68,825
ARTILLERY AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OTHER WEAPONS.
004 155MM ......... 5,709 ......... ............... ......... 5,709
LIGHTWEIGHT
TOWED HOWITZER.
005 ARTILLERY ......... 341,085 ......... ............... ......... 341,085
WEAPONS SYSTEM.
006 WEAPONS AND ......... 50,299 ......... ............... ......... 50,299
COMBAT
VEHICLES UNDER
$5 MILLION.
GUIDED MISSILES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
008 NAVAL STRIKE 103 204,639 ......... ............... 103 204,639
MISSILE (NSM).
009 NAVAL STRIKE ......... 14,391 ......... ............... ......... 14,391
MISSILE (NSM)
AP.
010 GROUND BASED ......... 1,274,446 ......... -20,000 ......... 1,254,446
AIR DEFENSE.
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-20,000] ......... ..............
growth.
011 ANTI-ARMOR 193 63,020 ......... ............... 193 63,020
MISSILE-
JAVELIN.
012 FAMILY ANTI- ......... 808 ......... ............... ......... 808
ARMOR WEAPON
SYSTEMS
(FOAAWS).
013 ANTI-ARMOR ......... 1,265 ......... ............... ......... 1,265
MISSILE-TOW.
014 GUIDED MLRS ......... 61,355 ......... ............... ......... 61,355
ROCKET (GMLRS).
REPAIR AND TEST ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
016 REPAIR AND TEST ......... 65,665 ......... ............... ......... 65,665
EQUIPMENT.
OTHER SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
(TEL).
017 MODIFICATION ......... 1,047 ......... ............... ......... 1,047
KITS.
COMMAND AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NON-TEL).
018 ITEMS UNDER $5 ......... 140,929 ......... ............... ......... 140,929
MILLION (COMM
& ELEC).
RADAR + ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL).
020 GROUND/AIR TASK ......... 55,622 ......... 5,000 ......... 60,622
ORIENTED RADAR
(G/ATOR).
Program ......... .............. ......... [5,000] ......... ..............
increase.
INTELL/COMM ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL).
021 ELECTRO ......... 79,269 ......... ............... ......... 79,269
MAGNETIC
SPECTRUM
OPERATIONS
(EMSO).
022 GCSS-MC........ ......... 3,435 ......... ............... ......... 3,435
023 FIRE SUPPORT ......... 136,070 ......... 10,000 ......... 146,070
SYSTEM.
Fiber Optic ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
Drone
Procurement.
024 INTELLIGENCE ......... 395,854 ......... ............... ......... 395,854
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
026 UNMANNED AIR ......... 262,815 ......... ............... ......... 262,815
SYSTEMS
(INTEL).
028 UAS PAYLOADS... ......... 14,834 ......... ............... ......... 14,834
OTHER SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
(NON-TEL).
029 MARINE CORPS ......... 190,282 ......... ............... ......... 190,282
ENTERPRISE
NETWORK (MCEN).
030 COMMON COMPUTER ......... 15,950 ......... ............... ......... 15,950
RESOURCES.
031 COMMAND POST ......... 442,308 ......... ............... ......... 442,308
SYSTEMS.
032 RADIO SYSTEMS.. ......... 764,001 ......... ............... ......... 764,001
034 COMM & ELEC ......... 37,640 ......... ............... ......... 37,640
INFRASTRUCTURE
SUPPORT.
035 CYBERSPACE ......... 19,854 ......... ............... ......... 19,854
ACTIVITIES.
036 UNMANNED ......... 1,001 ......... ............... ......... 1,001
EXPEDITIONARY
SYSTEMS.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
039A CLASSIFIED ......... 2,029 ......... ............... ......... 2,029
PROGRAMS.
ADMINISTRATIVE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
040 COMMERCIAL ......... 27,582 ......... ............... ......... 27,582
CARGO VEHICLES.
TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
041 MOTOR TRANSPORT ......... 22,460 ......... ............... ......... 22,460
MODIFICATIONS.
042 JOINT LIGHT 341 244,941 ......... ............... 341 244,941
TACTICAL
VEHICLE.
043 TRAILERS....... ......... 136,438 ......... ............... ......... 136,438
ENGINEER AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OTHER
EQUIPMENT.
044 TACTICAL FUEL ......... 112,197 ......... ............... ......... 112,197
SYSTEMS.
045 POWER EQUIPMENT ......... 34,219 ......... ............... ......... 34,219
ASSORTED.
046 AMPHIBIOUS ......... 29,042 ......... ............... ......... 29,042
SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
047 EOD SYSTEMS.... ......... 24,297 ......... ............... ......... 24,297
MATERIALS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
HANDLING
EQUIPMENT.
048 PHYSICAL ......... 151,740 ......... ............... ......... 151,740
SECURITY
EQUIPMENT.
GENERAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROPERTY.
049 FIELD MEDICAL ......... 227,761 ......... ............... ......... 227,761
EQUIPMENT.
050 TRAINING ......... 136,639 ......... ............... ......... 136,639
DEVICES.
051 FAMILY OF ......... 115,681 ......... ............... ......... 115,681
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT.
052 ULTRA-LIGHT ......... 972 ......... ............... ......... 972
TACTICAL
VEHICLE (ULTV).
OTHER SUPPORT.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
053 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 54,228 ......... ............... ......... 54,228
$5 MILLION.
SPARES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPAIR PARTS.
054 SPARES AND ......... 18,925 ......... ............... ......... 18,925
REPAIR PARTS.
TOTAL 637 6,288,905 ......... -5,000 637 6,283,905
PROCUREMEN
T, MARINE
CORPS.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE.
STRATEGIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OFFENSIVE.
001 B-21 RAIDER.... ......... 2,230,615 ......... ............... ......... 2,230,615
002 B-21 RAIDER AP. ......... 1,005,667 ......... ............... ......... 1,005,667
TACTICAL FORCES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
003 F-35........... 24 2,393,723 ......... ............... 24 2,393,723
004 F-35 AP........ ......... 738,103 ......... ............... ......... 738,103
005 COLLABORATIVE ......... 996,528 ......... ............... ......... 996,528
COMBAT
AIRCRAFT.
006 COLLABORATIVE ......... 150,500 ......... ............... ......... 150,500
COMBAT
AIRCRAFT AP.
007 F-15EX......... 24 2,656,716 ......... ............... 24 2,656,716
009 JOINT ......... 52,695 ......... ............... ......... 52,695
SIMULATION
ENVIRONMENT.
TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRLIFT.
010 KC-46A MDAP.... 15 3,520,530 ......... -50,000 15 3,470,530
BTAR early ......... .............. ......... [-50,000] ......... ..............
to need.
OTHER AIRLIFT.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
011 C-130J......... ......... 636,680 2 280,000 ......... 916,680
Additional ......... .............. ......... [20,000] ......... ..............
C-130J
weapon
system
trainer.
Two ......... .............. [2] [260,000] ......... ..............
additional
aircraft.
UPT TRAINERS... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
012 ADVANCED PILOT 23 529,464 ......... ............... 23 529,464
TRAINING T-7A.
013 ADVANCED PILOT ......... 69,690 ......... ............... ......... 69,690
TRAINING T-7A
AP.
HELICOPTERS.... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
014 MH-139A........ 4 252,949 4 127,629 8 380,578
Four ......... .............. [4] [127,629] ......... ..............
additional
aircraft.
015 COMBAT RESCUE ......... 69,395 ......... ............... ......... 69,395
HELICOPTER.
MISSION SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
016 C-37A.......... 1 208,000 ......... ............... 1 208,000
018 CIVIL AIR ......... 3,219 ......... ............... ......... 3,219
PATROL A/C.
OTHER AIRCRAFT. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
020 TARGET DRONES.. 10 31,912 ......... ............... 10 31,912
021 COMPASS CALL... 3 660,000 ......... ............... 3 660,000
024 RQ-20B PUMA.... 6 15,513 ......... ............... 6 15,513
STRATEGIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
025 B-2A........... ......... 178,668 ......... ............... ......... 178,668
026 B-1B........... ......... 146,862 ......... -40,000 ......... 106,862
Excessive ......... .............. ......... [-40,000] ......... ..............
growth.
027 B-52........... ......... 422,399 ......... ............... ......... 422,399
028 LARGE AIRCRAFT ......... 66,638 ......... ............... ......... 66,638
INFRARED
COUNTERMEASURE
S.
TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
029 COLLABORATIVE ......... 822 ......... ............... ......... 822
COMBAT
AIRCRAFT MODS.
031 F-15........... ......... 140,204 ......... ............... ......... 140,204
032 F-15EX......... ......... 214,176 ......... ............... ......... 214,176
033 F-16 ......... 946,747 ......... ............... ......... 946,747
MODIFICATIONS.
034 F-22A.......... ......... 1,052,088 ......... ............... ......... 1,052,088
035 F-35 ......... 335,973 ......... ............... ......... 335,973
MODIFICATIONS.
036 F-15 EPAW...... ......... 141,233 ......... ............... ......... 141,233
037 KC-46A MDAP.... ......... 85,515 ......... ............... ......... 85,515
AIRLIFT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
038 C-5............ ......... 10,308 ......... ............... ......... 10,308
039 C-17A.......... ......... 59,867 ......... ............... ......... 59,867
042 OSA-EA ......... 136,786 ......... ............... ......... 136,786
MODIFICATIONS.
TRAINER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AIRCRAFT.
043 GLIDER MODS.... ......... 164 ......... ............... ......... 164
044 T-6............ ......... 131,747 ......... ............... ......... 131,747
046 T-38........... ......... 84,452 ......... ............... ......... 84,452
OTHER AIRCRAFT. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
047 U-2 MODS....... ......... 297 ......... 10,000 ......... 10,297
Program ......... .............. ......... [10,000] ......... ..............
increase.
050 C-130.......... ......... 23,546 ......... ............... ......... 23,546
051 C-130J MODS.... ......... 315,308 ......... ............... ......... 315,308
052 C-135.......... ......... 158,715 ......... -10,000 ......... 148,715
Slow ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
execution.
053 COMPASS CALL... ......... 506,265 ......... ............... ......... 506,265
054 CVR (CONNON ULF ......... 18 ......... ............... ......... 18
RECEIVER) INC
2.
055 RC-135......... ......... 252,846 ......... ............... ......... 252,846
056 E-3............ ......... 841 ......... ............... ......... 841
057 E-4............ ......... 30,779 ......... ............... ......... 30,779
058 H-1............ ......... 17,872 ......... ............... ......... 17,872
059 MH-139A MOD.... ......... 5,021 ......... ............... ......... 5,021
061 HH60W ......... 46,662 ......... ............... ......... 46,662
MODIFICATIONS.
062 HC/MC-130 ......... 257,742 ......... ............... ......... 257,742
MODIFICATIONS.
063 OTHER AIRCRAFT. ......... 102,052 ......... -10,205 ......... 91,847
Program ......... .............. ......... [-10,205] ......... ..............
decrease.
064 MQ-9 MODS...... ......... 105,966 ......... ............... ......... 105,966
065 SOFTWARE ......... 25,847 ......... ............... ......... 25,847
DEFINED USER
EQUIPMENT.
066 SENIOR LEADER ......... 32,654 ......... ............... ......... 32,654
C3 SYSTEM--
AIRCRAFT.
067 CV-22 MODS..... ......... 168,042 ......... ............... ......... 168,042
AIRCRAFT SPARES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND REPAIR
PARTS.
068 INITIAL SPARES/ ......... 1,441,052 ......... 300,000 ......... 1,741,052
REPAIR PARTS.
F-35A Spare ......... .............. ......... [300,000] ......... ..............
Parts.
COMMON SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
071 AIRCRAFT ......... 252,808 ......... -25,280 ......... 227,528
REPLACEMENT
SUPPORT EQUIP.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-25,280] ......... ..............
decrease.
POST PRODUCTION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SUPPORT.
073 B-2B........... ......... 95,457 ......... ............... ......... 95,457
074 B-52........... ......... 114 ......... ............... ......... 114
075 C-17A.......... ......... 3,027 ......... ............... ......... 3,027
076 CV-22 POST ......... 5,088 ......... ............... ......... 5,088
PRODUCTION
SUPPORT.
079 F-15EX......... ......... 16,930 ......... ............... ......... 16,930
080 F-16 POST ......... 57,781 ......... ............... ......... 57,781
PRODUCTION
SUPPORT.
081 HC/MC-130 POST ......... 20,415 ......... ............... ......... 20,415
PROD.
083 MQ-9 POST PROD. ......... 15,365 ......... ............... ......... 15,365
INDUSTRIAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PREPAREDNESS.
084 INDUSTRIAL ......... 20,590 ......... ............... ......... 20,590
RESPONSIVENESS.
WAR CONSUMABLES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
085 WAR CONSUMABLES ......... 85,387 ......... ............... ......... 85,387
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PRODUCTION
CHARGES.
086 OTHER ......... 2,528,401 ......... ............... ......... 2,528,401
PRODUCTION
CHARGES.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
088A CLASSIFIED ......... 15,800 ......... ............... ......... 15,800
PROGRAMS.
TOTAL 110 26,985,236 6 582,144 116 27,567,380
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMEN
T, AIR
FORCE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE.
MISSILE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPLACEMENT
EQUIPMENT--BAL
LISTIC.
001 MISSILE ......... 27,006 ......... ............... ......... 27,006
REPLACEMENT EQ-
BALLISTIC.
BALLISTIC ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
MISSILES.
003 GROUND BASED ......... 107,602 ......... ............... ......... 107,602
STRATEGIC
DETERRENT.
STRATEGIC...... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
005 LONG RANGE ......... 506,047 ......... ............... ......... 506,047
STAND-OFF
WEAPON.
006 LONG RANGE ......... 456,810 ......... ............... ......... 456,810
STAND-OFF
WEAPON AP.
TACTICAL....... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
007 REPLAC EQUIP & ......... 23,575 ......... ............... ......... 23,575
WAR
CONSUMABLES.
009 AGM-183A AIR- ......... 452,035 ......... ............... ......... 452,035
LAUNCHED RAPID
RESPONSE
WEAPON.
010 FAMILY OF ......... 55,000 ......... ............... ......... 55,000
AFFORDABLE
MASS MISSILE
(FAMM).
011 HYPERSONIC ......... 403,974 ......... ............... ......... 403,974
ATTACK CRUISE
MISSILE.
012 JOINT AIR- 491 967,866 ......... ............... 491 967,866
SURFACE
STANDOFF
MISSILE.
013 JOINT ADVANCED ......... 608,743 ......... ............... ......... 608,743
TACTICAL
MISSILE.
014 JOINT STRIKE 100 384,607 ......... ............... 100 384,607
MISSILE.
015 LRASM0......... 111 500,916 ......... ............... 111 500,916
016 SIDEWINDER (AIM- 648 419,238 ......... ............... 648 419,238
9X).
017 AMRAAM......... 38 115,856 ......... ............... 38 115,856
019 SMALL DIAMETER 220 44,596 ......... ............... 220 44,596
BOMB.
020 SMALL DIAMETER 373 194,509 ......... ............... 373 194,509
BOMB II.
021 STAND-IN ATTACK 155 401,607 ......... ............... 155 401,607
WEAPON (SIAW).
INDUSTRIAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
FACILITIES.
022 INDUSTRIAL ......... 931 ......... ............... ......... 931
PREPAREDNESS/
POL PREVENTION.
CLASS IV....... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
023 ICBM FUZE MOD.. ......... 169,747 ......... ............... ......... 169,747
025 MM III ......... 9,865 ......... ............... ......... 9,865
MODIFICATIONS.
026 AIR LAUNCH ......... 30,407 ......... ............... ......... 30,407
CRUISE MISSILE
(ALCM).
MISSILE SPARES ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND REPAIR
PARTS.
027 MSL SPRS/REPAIR ......... 15,621 ......... ............... ......... 15,621
PARTS
(INITIAL).
028 MSL SPRS/REPAIR ......... 123,224 ......... ............... ......... 123,224
PARTS (REPLEN).
SPECIAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
030 SPECIAL UPDATE ......... 168,578 ......... ............... ......... 168,578
PROGRAMS.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
030A CLASSIFIED ......... 622,814 ......... ............... ......... 622,814
PROGRAMS.
TOTAL 2,136 6,811,174 ......... ............... 2,136 6,811,174
MISSILE
PROCUREMEN
T, AIR
FORCE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT OF ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AMMUNITION,
AIR FORCE.
ROCKETS........ ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
001 ROCKETS........ ......... 102,059 ......... ............... ......... 102,059
CARTRIDGES..... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
002 CARTRIDGES..... ......... 157,508 ......... ............... ......... 157,508
BOMBS.......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
003 GENERAL PURPOSE ......... 168,469 ......... ............... ......... 168,469
BOMBS.
004 MASSIVE ......... 755 ......... ............... ......... 755
ORDNANCE
PENETRATOR
(MOP).
005 JOINT DIRECT 1,150 129,568 ......... ............... 1,150 129,568
ATTACK
MUNITION.
006 B61-12 TRAINER. ......... 24,226 ......... ............... ......... 24,226
OTHER ITEMS.... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
007 CAD/PAD........ ......... 45,448 ......... ............... ......... 45,448
008 EXPLOSIVE ......... 7,168 ......... ............... ......... 7,168
ORDNANCE
DISPOSAL (EOD).
009 SPARES AND ......... 626 ......... ............... ......... 626
REPAIR PARTS.
010 FIRST ......... 2,873 ......... ............... ......... 2,873
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION.
011 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 5,468 ......... ............... ......... 5,468
$5,000,000.
FLARES......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
013 EXPENDABLE ......... 99,180 ......... ............... ......... 99,180
COUNTERMEASURE
S.
FUZES.......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
014 FUZES.......... ......... 141,149 ......... ............... ......... 141,149
SMALL ARMS..... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
015 SMALL ARMS..... ......... 25,619 ......... ............... ......... 25,619
TOTAL 1,150 910,116 ......... ............... 1,150 910,116
PROCUREMEN
T OF
AMMUNITION
, AIR
FORCE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE.
SPECIAL PURPOSE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
005 JOINT LIGHT ......... 103,304 ......... ............... ......... 103,304
TACTICAL
VEHICLE.
MATERIALS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
HANDLING
EQUIPMENT.
009 MATERIALS ......... 2,132 ......... ............... ......... 2,132
HANDLING
VEHICLES.
MISSION SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
012 MISSION SUPPORT ......... 439,892 ......... ............... ......... 439,892
VEHICLES.
COMM SECURITY ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT(COMS
EC).
014 COMSEC ......... 374,613 ......... ............... ......... 374,613
EQUIPMENT.
INTELLIGENCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
016 INTERNATIONAL ......... 19,060 ......... ............... ......... 19,060
INTEL TECH &
ARCHITECTURES.
017 INTELLIGENCE ......... 5,531 ......... ............... ......... 5,531
TRAINING
EQUIPMENT.
018 INTELLIGENCE ......... 37,717 ......... ............... ......... 37,717
COMM EQUIPMENT.
ELECTRONICS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
019 AIR TRAFFIC ......... 58,313 ......... ............... ......... 58,313
CONTROL &
LANDING SYS.
021 BATTLE CONTROL ......... 3,391 ......... ............... ......... 3,391
SYSTEM--FIXED.
022 THEATER AIR ......... 11,640 ......... ............... ......... 11,640
CONTROL SYS
IMPROVEMEN.
023 3D ......... 430,607 ......... ............... ......... 430,607
EXPEDITIONARY
LONG-RANGE
RADAR.
024 WEATHER ......... 33,111 ......... ............... ......... 33,111
OBSERVATION
FORECAST.
025 STRATEGIC ......... 89,931 ......... ............... ......... 89,931
COMMAND AND
CONTROL.
026 CHEYENNE ......... 7,434 ......... ............... ......... 7,434
MOUNTAIN
COMPLEX.
027 MISSION ......... 23,927 ......... ............... ......... 23,927
PLANNING
SYSTEMS.
028 STRATEGIC ......... 9,435 ......... ............... ......... 9,435
MISSION
PLANNING &
EXECUTION
SYSTEM.
SPCL COMM- ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
ELECTRONICS
PROJECTS.
029 GENERAL ......... 234,417 ......... ............... ......... 234,417
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
033 AIR FORCE ......... 1,770,698 ......... -110,000 ......... 1,660,698
PHYSICAL
SECURITY
SYSTEM.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-110,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
034 SAMTEC ......... 17,641 ......... ............... ......... 17,641
COMMUNICATIONS.
035 COMBAT TRAINING ......... 94,378 ......... 1,500 ......... 95,878
RANGES.
BMGR LMR ......... .............. ......... [1,500] ......... ..............
Upgrades.
036 MINIMUM ......... 279,516 ......... ............... ......... 279,516
ESSENTIAL
EMERGENCY COMM
N.
037 WIDE AREA ......... 17,000 ......... ............... ......... 17,000
SURVEILLANCE
(WAS).
038 C3 ......... 163,127 ......... ............... ......... 163,127
COUNTERMEASURE
S.
040 THEATER BATTLE ......... 460 ......... ............... ......... 460
MGT C2 SYSTEM.
041 AIR & SPACE ......... 23,778 ......... ............... ......... 23,778
OPERATIONS
CENTER (AOC).
AIR FORCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
COMMUNICATIONS.
042 BASE ......... 125,702 ......... ............... ......... 125,702
INFORMATION
TRANSPT
INFRAST (BITI)
WIRED.
043 AFNET.......... ......... 325,839 ......... -3,000 ......... 322,839
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-3,000] ......... ..............
growth.
044 JOINT ......... 16,267 ......... ............... ......... 16,267
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT
ELEMENT (JCSE).
045 USCENTCOM...... ......... 15,328 ......... ............... ......... 15,328
046 USSTRATCOM..... ......... 5,013 ......... ............... ......... 5,013
047 USSPACECOM..... ......... 195,370 ......... ............... ......... 195,370
ORGANIZATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND BASE.
048 TACTICAL C-E ......... 162,835 ......... ............... ......... 162,835
EQUIPMENT.
049 NEXT GENERATION ......... 80,321 ......... ............... ......... 80,321
SURVIVAL RADIO
(NGSR).
051 RADIO EQUIPMENT ......... 36,874 ......... ............... ......... 36,874
052 BASE COMM ......... 158,113 ......... ............... ......... 158,113
INFRASTRUCTURE.
MODIFICATIONS.. ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
053 COMM ELECT MODS ......... 220,855 ......... ............... ......... 220,855
PERSONAL SAFETY ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
& RESCUE EQUIP.
054 PERSONAL SAFETY ......... 87,994 ......... ............... ......... 87,994
AND RESCUE
EQUIPMENT.
DEPOT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PLANT+MTRLS
HANDLING EQ.
055 POWER ......... 14,444 ......... ............... ......... 14,444
CONDITIONING
EQUIPMENT.
056 MECHANIZED ......... 24,594 ......... ............... ......... 24,594
MATERIAL
HANDLING EQUIP.
BASE SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
057 BASE PROCURED ......... 81,686 ......... ............... ......... 81,686
EQUIPMENT.
058 ENGINEERING AND ......... 247,989 ......... ............... ......... 247,989
EOD EQUIPMENT.
059 MOBILITY ......... 288,930 ......... -20,000 ......... 268,930
EQUIPMENT.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-20,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
060 FUELS SUPPORT ......... 81,066 ......... ............... ......... 81,066
EQUIPMENT
(FSE).
061 BASE ......... 68,127 ......... ............... ......... 68,127
MAINTENANCE
AND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT.
SPECIAL SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROJECTS.
063 DARP RC135..... ......... 31,496 ......... ............... ......... 31,496
064 DCGS-AF........ ......... 316,157 ......... -10,000 ......... 306,157
Unjustified ......... .............. ......... [-10,000] ......... ..............
growth.
066 SPECIAL UPDATE ......... 5,099,420 ......... ............... ......... 5,099,420
PROGRAM.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
066A CLASSIFIED ......... 27,241,704 ......... ............... ......... 27,241,704
PROGRAMS.
SPARES AND ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
REPAIR PARTS.
067 SPARES AND ......... 8,657 ......... ............... ......... 8,657
REPAIR PARTS
(CYBER).
068 SPARES AND ......... 14,129 ......... ............... ......... 14,129
REPAIR PARTS.
TOTAL ......... 39,199,963 ......... -141,500 ......... 39,058,463
OTHER
PROCUREMEN
T, AIR
FORCE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT, ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
SPACE FORCE.
SPACE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT,
SF.
001 AF SATELLITE ......... 54,391 ......... ............... ......... 54,391
COMM SYSTEM.
003 AUXILIARY ......... 241,076 ......... ............... ......... 241,076
PAYLOADS.
005 COUNTERSPACE ......... 459,466 ......... ............... ......... 459,466
SYSTEMS.
007 EVOLVED ......... 139,700 ......... ............... ......... 139,700
STRATEGIC
SATCOM (ESS)
AP.
011 GROUND MOVING ......... 1,016,612 ......... ............... ......... 1,016,612
TARGET
INDICATOR
(GMTI).
013 GENERAL ......... 14,895 ......... ............... ......... 14,895
INFORMATION
TECH--SPACE.
014 GPSIII FOLLOW 2 680,875 ......... ............... 2 680,875
ON.
017 SPACEBORNE ......... 95,061 ......... ............... ......... 95,061
EQUIP (COMSEC).
018 MILSATCOM...... ......... 38,067 ......... ............... ......... 38,067
020 SPECIAL SPACE ......... 2,021,299 ......... ............... ......... 2,021,299
ACTIVITIES.
021 MOBILE USER ......... 50,640 ......... ............... ......... 50,640
OBJECTIVE
SYSTEM.
022 NATIONAL 13 3,370,958 ......... ............... 13 3,370,958
SECURITY SPACE
LAUNCH.
024 PTES HUB....... ......... 12,046 ......... ............... ......... 12,046
025 SPACE 9 835,197 ......... ............... 9 835,197
DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY LAUNCH.
026 SPACE DIGITAL ......... 5,119 ......... ............... ......... 5,119
INTEGRATED
NETWORK (SDIN).
027 SPACE MODS..... ......... 448,674 ......... ............... ......... 448,674
028 SPACELIFT RANGE ......... 64,885 ......... ............... ......... 64,885
SYSTEM SPACE.
029 WIDEBAND SATCOM ......... 81,483 ......... ............... ......... 81,483
OPERATIONAL
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS.
SPARES......... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
030 SPARES AND ......... 971 ......... ............... ......... 971
REPAIR PARTS.
NON-TACTICAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
VEHICLES.
031 USSF VEHICLES.. ......... 6,032 ......... ............... ......... 6,032
SUPPORT ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT.
033 POWER ......... 7,906 ......... ............... ......... 7,906
CONDITIONING
EQUIPMENT.
TOTAL 24 9,645,353 ......... ............... 24 9,645,353
PROCUREMEN
T, SPACE
FORCE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT, ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
DEFENSE-WIDE.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT, OSD.
002 MAJOR ......... 213,031 ......... -5,000 ......... 208,031
EQUIPMENT, OSD.
Program ......... .............. ......... [-5,000] ......... ..............
decrease.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT, WHS.
006 MAJOR ......... 453 ......... ............... ......... 453
EQUIPMENT, WHS.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
DISA.
007 INFORMATION ......... 27,652 ......... ............... ......... 27,652
SYSTEMS
SECURITY.
008 TELEPORT ......... 93,512 ......... ............... ......... 93,512
PROGRAM.
009 ITEMS LESS THAN ......... 24,013 ......... ............... ......... 24,013
$5 MILLION.
010 DEFENSE ......... 392,650 ......... ............... ......... 392,650
INFORMATION
SYSTEM NETWORK.
012 WHITE HOUSE ......... 611,216 ......... ............... ......... 611,216
COMMUNICATION
AGENCY.
013 SENIOR ......... 81,584 ......... ............... ......... 81,584
LEADERSHIP
ENTERPRISE.
015 JOINT SERVICE ......... 53,596 ......... ............... ......... 53,596
PROVIDER.
016 FOURTH ESTATE ......... 60,808 ......... ............... ......... 60,808
NETWORK
OPTIMIZATION
(4ENO).
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT, DLA.
022 MAJOR EQUIPMENT ......... 19,707 ......... ............... ......... 19,707
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT, TJS.
024 MAJOR ......... 11,689 ......... ............... ......... 11,689
EQUIPMENT, TJS.
025 COUNTER-SMALL ......... 800,000 ......... ............... ......... 800,000
UNMANNED
AIRCRAFT
SYSTEMS.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
MISSILE
DEFENSE AGENCY.
029 BMDS AN/TPY-2 ......... 17,840 ......... ............... ......... 17,840
RADARS.
030 SM-3 IIAS...... 22 778,964 ......... ............... 22 778,964
031 ARROW 3 UPPER 1 150,000 ......... ............... 1 150,000
TIER SYSTEMS.
032 SHORT RANGE 1 30,000 ......... ............... 1 30,000
BALLISTIC
MISSILE
DEFENSE
(SRBMD).
035 IRON DOME...... 1 20,000 ......... ............... 1 20,000
036 AEGIS BMD ......... 39,256 ......... ............... ......... 39,256
HARDWARE AND
SOFTWARE.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
DHRA.
037 PERSONNEL ......... 82,438 ......... ............... ......... 82,438
ADMINISTRATION.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE THREAT
REDUCTION
AGENCY.
040 VEHICLES....... ......... 99 ......... ............... ......... 99
041 OTHER MAJOR ......... 8,963 ......... ............... ......... 8,963
EQUIPMENT.
042 DTRA CYBER ......... 900 ......... ............... ......... 900
ACTIVITIES.
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
DMACT.
044 MAJOR EQUIPMENT ......... 6,854 ......... ............... ......... 6,854
MAJOR ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
EQUIPMENT,
USCYBERCOM.
045 CYBERSPACE ......... 103,855 ......... ............... ......... 103,855
OPERATIONS.
CLASSIFIED ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
045A CLASSIFIED ......... 3,587,405 ......... ............... ......... 3,587,405
PROGRAMS.
AVIATION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
050 ROTARY WING ......... 185,930 ......... ............... ......... 185,930
UPGRADES AND
SUSTAINMENT.
051 SKYRAIDER II... 2 59,894 10 220,000 12 279,894
Program ......... .............. [10] [220,000] ......... ..............
increase.
053 NON-STANDARD ......... 72,650 2 37,640 ......... 110,290
AVIATION.
Non- ......... .............. [2] [37,640] ......... ..............
Standard
Aviations
(NSAv).
055 MH-47 CHINOOK.. ......... 168,411 ......... ............... ......... 168,411
056 CV-22 ......... 9,479 ......... ............... ......... 9,479
MODIFICATION.
057 MQ-9 UNMANNED ......... 75,841 ......... ............... ......... 75,841
AERIAL VEHICLE.
059 AC/MC-130J..... ......... 366,857 ......... ............... ......... 366,857
SHIPBUILDING... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
060 UNDERWATER ......... 76,879 ......... ............... ......... 76,879
SYSTEMS.
AMMUNITION ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROGRAMS.
061 ORDNANCE ITEMS ......... 237,153 ......... 143,530 ......... 380,683
<$5M.
Ground ......... .............. ......... [25,519] ......... ..............
Organic
Precision
Strike
Systems
(GOPSS).
Munitions ......... .............. ......... [118,011] ......... ..............
War
Reserves.
OTHER ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMS.
062 INTELLIGENCE ......... 319,241 ......... ............... ......... 319,241
SYSTEMS.
064 OTHER ITEMS ......... 119,047 ......... ............... ......... 119,047
<$5M.
065 COMBATANT CRAFT ......... 33,858 ......... ............... ......... 33,858
SYSTEMS.
066 SPECIAL ......... 130,462 ......... ............... ......... 130,462
PROGRAMS.
067 TACTICAL ......... 36,983 ......... ............... ......... 36,983
VEHICLES.
068 WARRIOR SYSTEMS ......... 511,016 ......... 124,109 ......... 635,125
<$5M.
Advanced ......... .............. ......... [5,000] ......... ..............
Tactical
Pants.
Electromagn ......... .............. ......... [79,945] ......... ..............
etic
Warfare
(EW) Family
of Systems.
Ground ......... .............. ......... [39,164] ......... ..............
Infil
Protection
Systems(GIP
S).
069 COMBAT MISSION ......... 4,988 ......... ............... ......... 4,988
REQUIREMENTS.
070 OPERATIONAL ......... 28,074 ......... ............... ......... 28,074
ENHANCEMENTS
INTELLIGENCE.
071 OPERATIONAL ......... 360,595 ......... 48,000 ......... 408,595
ENHANCEMENTS.
Accelerated ......... .............. ......... [36,000] ......... ..............
Fielding of
Group 3
Unmanned
Aerial
System
(UAS)
Capability.
Ground ......... .............. ......... [12,000] ......... ..............
Infil
Protection
Systems(GIP
S).
CBDP........... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
072 CHEMICAL ......... 223,166 ......... ............... ......... 223,166
BIOLOGICAL
SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS.
073 CB PROTECTION & ......... 117,859 ......... ............... ......... 117,859
HAZARD
MITIGATION.
TOTAL 27 10,354,868 12 568,279 39 10,923,147
PROCUREMEN
T, DEFENSE-
WIDE.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
NATIONAL GUARD ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
AND RESERVE
EQUIPMENT.
ARMY RESERVE... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
001 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 155,000 ......... ............... ......... 155,000
ARMY RESERVE.
NAVY RESERVE... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
002 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 57,000 ......... ............... ......... 57,000
NAVY RESERVE.
MARINE CORPS ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
RESERVE.
003 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 23,000 ......... ............... ......... 23,000
MARINE CORPS
RESERVE.
AIR FORCE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
RESERVE.
004 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 155,000 ......... ............... ......... 155,000
AF RESERVE.
ARMY NATIONAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
GUARD.
005 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 305,000 ......... ............... ......... 305,000
ARMY NATIONAL
GUARD.
AIR NATIONAL ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
GUARD.
006 MISC EQUIPMENT-- ......... 305,000 ......... ............... ......... 305,000
AIR FORCE
NATIONAL GUARD.
TOTAL ......... 1,000,000 ......... ............... ......... 1,000,000
NATIONAL
GUARD AND
RESERVE
EQUIPMENT.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
DEFENSE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
STRATEGIC
CAPITAL CREDIT
PROGRAM.
DEFENSE ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
STRATEGIC
CAPITAL CREDIT
PROGRAM.
001 OFFICE OF ......... 216,000 ......... ............... ......... 216,000
STRATEGIC
CAPITAL LOAN
PROGRAM.
TOTAL ......... 216,000 ......... ............... ......... 216,000
DEFENSE
STRATEGIC
CAPITAL
CREDIT
PROGRAM.
............... ......... .............. ......... ............... ......... ..............
TOTAL 11,153 257,058,141 46 1,179,312 11,199 258,237,453
PROCUREMEN
T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND
EVALUATION
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 House
Line Program Element Item Request House Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
........................ RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST .............. ............... ...............
AND EVALUATION, ARMY.
........................ BASIC RESEARCH............. .............. ............... ...............
001 0601102A DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.. 215,322 10,000 225,322
........................ Program increase....... .............. [10,000] ...............
002 0601103A UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 63,102 20,000 83,102
INITIATIVES.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [20,000] ...............
003 0601104A UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY 53,598 17,500 71,098
RESEARCH CENTERS.
........................ Foundational Research .............. [5,000] ...............
for biotechnology.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [10,000] ...............
........................ Research Center of .............. [2,500] ...............
Excellence Partnership.
005 0601275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE BASIC 64,031 ............... 64,031
RESEARCH.
006 0601601A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND .............. 2,500 2,500
MACHINE LEARNING BASIC
RESEARCH.
........................ Army AI Integration .............. [2,500] ...............
Center.
........................ SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH. 396,053 50,000 446,053
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ APPLIED RESEARCH........... .............. ............... ...............
009 0602135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED 26,523 2,500 29,023
AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS)
APPLIED RESEARCH.
........................ Enhanced Acoustic UAS .............. [2,500] ...............
Detection and Tracking.
010 0602141A LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY....... 232,046 7,500 ...............
........................ Applied Armaments Tech .............. [2,500] ...............
for Distributed
Lethality.
........................ Dynamic Digital .............. [2,500] ...............
Definition of Armaments
Systems.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,500] ...............
........................ Rapid Apt Processing .............. [5,000] ...............
Technologies for
Hypersonics.
011 0602143A SOLDIER LETHALITY 68,018 22,500 90,518
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Advance Medical .............. [15,000] ...............
Simulation Science and
Technologies for
Warfighters.
........................ Isostatic Pressure .............. [2,500] ...............
Advanced Armor
Development.
........................ Next Generation .............. [2,500] ...............
Ballistic Plate.
........................ Pathfinder Air Assault. .............. [2,500] ...............
012 0602144A GROUND TECHNOLOGY.......... 44,146 2,500 46,646
........................ Research on the Soil- .............. [2,500] ...............
Structure Interaction
of Buildings Subjected
to Blast Loading from
Hypersonic Strike
Vehicles.
013 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 70,540 5,000 75,540
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Standardized Army .............. [5,000] ...............
Battery for Enhanced
Performance and Safety.
014 0602146A NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY..... 53,373 17,500 70,873
........................ Autonomous EMS .............. [2,500] ...............
Dominance & Edge
Resilience.
........................ Distributed Aperture .............. [5,000] ...............
Spectrum Dominance.
........................ Enhancing Planning and .............. [5,000] ...............
Rehearsal for Large-
Scale Combat Operations.
........................ Group 3 autonomous .............. [5,000] ...............
operations in RF-
contested environments.
015 0602147A LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES 24,086 7,500 31,586
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Digital Arsenal for .............. [2,500] ...............
Solid Rocket Motors.
........................ PRESTO-Fires Testbed... .............. [5,000] ...............
016 0602148A FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT 17,727 2,500 20,227
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ UxS Platform Agnostic .............. [2,500] ...............
Intelligent Robotic
Core.
017 0602150A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 36,113 7,500 43,613
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ AI Integration and .............. [5,000] ...............
Security for IBCS.
........................ C-UAS Testing and .............. [2,500] ...............
Research Center.
021 0602183A AIR PLATFORM APPLIED 43,700 10,000 53,700
RESEARCH.
........................ Ion-trap quantum .............. [10,000] ...............
computing systems.
022 0602184A SOLDIER APPLIED RESEARCH... 2,429 ............... 2,429
023 0602213A C3I APPLIED CYBER.......... 63 ............... 63
024 0602275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE APPLIED 51,184 -5,000 46,184
RESEARCH.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-5,000] ...............
025 0602276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER 9,857 ............... 9,857
APPLIED RESEARCH.
026 0602345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 22,871 ............... 22,871
LAUNCHED EFFECTS APPLIED
RESEARCH.
027 0602386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 14,979 ............... 14,979
MATERIALS--APPLIED
RESEARCH.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,500] ...............
........................ Program increase....... .............. [2,500] ...............
029 0602785A MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/TRAINING 14,275 ............... 14,275
TECHNOLOGY.
030 0602787A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY......... 149,221 -7,000 142,221
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-7,000] ...............
030A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 32,883 ............... 32,883
........................ SUBTOTAL APPLIED 914,034 73,000 987,034
RESEARCH.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
031 0603002A MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 17,876 ............... 17,876
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-5,000] ...............
........................ Wearable Blast .............. [5,000] ...............
Overpressure Monitoring
System.
032 0603007A MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND 11,113 ............... 11,113
TRAINING ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
033 0603025A ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND 3,325 2,500 5,825
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ Army EW Sensing and .............. [2,500] ...............
Hunting UAS Payload.
035 0603041A ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE 3,575 ............... 3,575
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
036 0603042A C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.... 1,211 2,500 3,711
........................ Imaging Cold .............. [2,500] ...............
Environments using
Multispectral Airborne
Networks.
037 0603043A AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED 23,471 -3,000 20,471
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-3,000] ...............
038 0603044A SOLDIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 3,951 ............... 3,951
039 0603116A LETHALITY ADVANCED 31,812 7,500 39,312
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Drone Netting Enclosure .............. [2,500] ...............
System for Counter UAS
Testing.
........................ Future Armaments .............. [2,500] ...............
Scalable Technologies.
........................ Secure Hypersonic .............. [2,500] ...............
Prototype Manufacturing.
040 0603118A SOLDIER LETHALITY ADVANCED 125,121 -5,000 120,121
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Automated Paragliders .............. [5,000] ...............
for Paratroopers.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
041 0603119A GROUND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY. 25,043 15,000 40,043
........................ Fuel cell multi-modular .............. [10,000] ...............
use development.
........................ Intelligent Runway .............. [2,500] ...............
Technology Program.
........................ Next Generation Cracked .............. [2,500] ...............
Armor Laminated Patch
Repair Technology.
043 0603135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED 156,520 -2,500 154,020
AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS)
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,500] ...............
044 0603275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE ADVANCED 156,326 -7,000 149,326
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-7,000] ...............
045 0603276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER 15,278 ............... 15,278
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
046 0603345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 33,129 ............... 33,129
LAUNCHED EFFECTS ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
047 0603386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 22,402 ............... 22,402
MATERIALS--ADVANCED
RESEARCH.
048 0603457A C3I CYBER ADVANCED 8,509 ............... 8,509
DEVELOPMENT.
049 0603461A HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING 215,090 -5,000 210,090
MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
050 0603462A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 118,207 25,400 143,607
VEHICLE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Advanced Passive Fire .............. [5,400] ...............
Protection Technologies.
........................ Discontinuous .............. [10,000] ...............
thermoplastic materials.
........................ Ground Vehicle Systems .............. [10,000] ...............
Center.
051 0603463A NETWORK C3I ADVANCED 48,490 45,300 93,790
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Development and .............. [15,000] ...............
demonstration of
prototype
communications
solutions at overseas
installations.
........................ Modular Radio Frequency .............. [7,000] ...............
(RF) Communications
Technology.
........................ OTM SATCOM Terminals... .............. [23,300] ...............
052 0603464A LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES 422,590 7,500 430,090
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Missile Delivered .............. [7,500] ...............
Launched Effects-
Virtual Test Range.
053 0603465A FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 14,984 5,000 19,984
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [5,000] ...............
054 0603466A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 63,924 15,000 78,924
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
........................ CWS Enhanced Swarm .............. [15,000] ...............
Defeat Capability.
056 0603920A HUMANITARIAN DEMINING...... 7,619 ............... 7,619
056A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 80,717 ............... 80,717
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,610,283 103,200 1,713,483
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED COMPONENT .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES.
058 0603305A ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE SYSTEMS 8,367 4,000 12,367
INTEGRATION.
........................ High Power Microwave .............. [4,000] ...............
(HPM) Against Lethal
Threats (HALT).
059 0603308A ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS 59,573 32,000 91,573
INTEGRATION.
........................ Gliding Offensive .............. [32,000] ...............
Lightweight Unmanned
Munition (GOLUM).
061 0603619A LANDMINE WARFARE AND 31,374 ............... 31,374
BARRIER--ADV DEV.
062 0603627A SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND TARGET 5,596 ............... 5,596
DEFEATING SYS-ADV DEV.
063 0603639A TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER 277,248 -20,000 257,248
AMMUNITION.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-20,000] ...............
064 0603645A ARMORED SYSTEM 23,594 ............... 23,594
MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
065 0603747A SOLDIER SUPPORT AND 4,109 ............... 4,109
SURVIVABILITY.
066 0603766A TACTICAL ELECTRONIC 98,331 15,000 113,331
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
DEV.
........................ Harsh Environment .............. [15,000] ...............
Microelectronics
Innovation.
067 0603774A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS 5,310 ............... 5,310
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
068 0603779A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 19,499 ............... 19,499
TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
069 0603790A NATO RESEARCH AND 5,145 ............... 5,145
DEVELOPMENT.
071 0603804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 12,822 ............... 12,822
EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
072 0603807A MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV... 1,017 ............... 1,017
073 0603827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED 56,122 ............... 56,122
DEVELOPMENT.
074 0604017A ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT....... 20,290 ............... 20,290
075 0604019A EXPANDED MISSION AREA 235,593 -25,000 210,593
MISSILE (EMAM).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-25,000] ...............
077 0604035A LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) 319 ............... 319
SATELLITE CAPABILITY.
078 0604036A MULTI-DOMAIN SENSING SYSTEM 99,471 ............... 99,471
(MDSS) ADV DEV.
079 0604037A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 4,123 ............... 4,123
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) ADV
DEV.
080 0604100A ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES... 10,077 ............... 10,077
084 0604114A LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE 162,074 ............... 162,074
DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
085 0604115A TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 314,671 -10,400 304,271
INITIATIVES.
........................ 3D printed non- .............. [5,000] ...............
traditional battery
manufacturing.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-15,400] ...............
086 0604117A MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR 460,980 ............... 460,980
DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
087 0604120A ASSURED POSITIONING, 18,993 ............... 18,993
NAVIGATION AND TIMING
(PNT).
088 0604121A SYNTHETIC TRAINING 219,137 ............... 219,137
ENVIRONMENT REFINEMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
089 0604129A ADVANCED POWER APPLICATIONS 48,000 ............... 48,000
091 0604135A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE FIRES.. 211,848 ............... 211,848
092 0604182A HYPERSONICS................ 82,939 ............... 82,939
099 0305251A CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 22,889 -1,000 21,889
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-1,000] ...............
099A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 261,466 ............... 261,466
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 2,780,977 -5,400 2,775,577
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND .............. ............... ...............
DEMONSTRATION.
100 0604201A AIRCRAFT AVIONICS.......... 30,658 5,000 35,658
........................ Enhancing Cyber .............. [5,000] ...............
Resilience for Mission
Assurance and Supply
Chain Security.
101 0604270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 2,807 ............... 2,807
DEVELOPMENT.
102 0604601A INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS... 55,296 9,000 64,296
........................ Combat Aviation Aircrew .............. [4,000] ...............
Enhancement--Safety and
Lethality.
........................ Operational evaluation .............. [5,000] ...............
of an omnidirectional
tactical throwable
camera.
103 0604604A MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES... 23,763 ............... 23,763
104 0604611A JAVELIN.................... 10,217 ............... 10,217
105 0604622A FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL 43,003 ............... 43,003
VEHICLES.
108 0604642A LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED 6,142 ............... 6,142
VEHICLES.
110 0604710A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG 418,427 ............... 418,427
DEV.
111 0604713A COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, 6,701 ............... 6,701
AND EQUIPMENT.
112 0604715A NON-SYSTEM TRAINING 29,685 2,000 31,685
DEVICES--ENG DEV.
........................ AI-Enabled Weapon .............. [2,000] ...............
System Sensor
Integration for
Training.
113 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, 14,276 ............... 14,276
CONTROL AND INTELLIGENCE--
ENG DEV.
114 0604742A CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION 5,618 ............... 5,618
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
115 0604746A AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT 9,625 ............... 9,625
DEVELOPMENT.
116 0604760A DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE 7,883 ............... 7,883
SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG DEV.
117 0604798A BRIGADE ANALYSIS, 26,602 ............... 26,602
INTEGRATION AND EVALUATION.
118 0604802A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--ENG 124,881 50,000 174,881
DEV.
........................ Battalion Mortar System .............. [10,000] ...............
Modernization.
........................ Development of 120mm .............. [10,000] ...............
APFSDS Propellant.
........................ Medium Caliber .............. [5,000] ...............
Ammunition Fuzing.
........................ Solid Rocket Second .............. [25,000] ...............
Source Qualification
Increase.
119 0604804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 65,238 ............... 65,238
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
120 0604805A COMMAND, CONTROL, 5,541 ............... 5,541
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
121 0604807A MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL 9,744 ............... 9,744
BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
122 0604808A LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER-- 17,586 ............... 17,586
ENG DEV.
123 0604818A ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & 42,584 ............... 42,584
CONTROL HARDWARE &
SOFTWARE.
124 0604820A RADAR DEVELOPMENT.......... 58,260 ............... 58,260
126 0604827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR 5,663 ............... 5,663
DEM/VAL.
127 0604852A SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY 78,331 ............... 78,331
ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
128 0604854A ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD..... 709,192 -57,500 651,692
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-7,500] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-50,000] ...............
129 0605013A INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 121,525 -5,000 116,525
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
130 0605018A INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND 102,694 ............... 102,694
PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
131 0605030A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 21,561 ............... 21,561
CENTER (JTNC).
132 0605031A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 50,390 ............... 50,390
(JTN).
133 0605035A COMMON INFRARED 11,573 ............... 11,573
COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
134 0605036A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 5,605 ............... 5,605
DESTRUCTION (CWMD).
135 0605037A EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND 5,513 ............... 5,513
DETAINEE PROCESSING.
136 0605038A NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL 13,864 ............... 13,864
RECONNAISSANCE VEHICLE
(NBCRV) SENSOR SUITE.
137 0605041A DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL 3,519 ............... 3,519
DEVELOPMENT.
138 0605042A TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO 3,804 ............... 3,804
SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
139 0605047A CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM.... 4,777 ............... 4,777
141 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 106,621 -10,000 96,621
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
142 0605052A INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION 175,352 ............... 175,352
CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK 1.
143 0605053A GROUND ROBOTICS............ 192,185 -10,000 182,185
........................ Low expenditure rates.. .............. [-10,000] ...............
144 0605054A EMERGING TECHNOLOGY 147,881 17,000 164,881
INITIATIVES.
........................ Vertically integrated .............. [17,000] ...............
advanced processes.
145 0605058A TERMINAL HIGH ALTITUDE AREA 1,053,983 ............... 1,053,983
DEFENSE (THAAD) RDTE.
146 0605144A NEXT GENERATION LOAD 2,380 ............... 2,380
DEVICE--MEDIUM.
147 0605148A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 35,769 ............... 35,769
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) EMD.
151 0605224A MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE.. 49,594 ............... 49,594
152 0605231A PRECISION STRIKE MISSILE 288,304 ............... 288,304
(PRSM).
153 0605232A HYPERSONICS EMD............ 446,616 ............... 446,616
154 0605233A ACCESSIONS INFORMATION 33,770 ............... 33,770
ENVIRONMENT (AIE).
155 0605235A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE 82,550 ............... 82,550
CAPABILITY.
157 0605241A FUTURE LONG RANGE ASSAULT 2,140,569 127,217 2,267,786
AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program realignment for .............. [127,217] ...............
operational test
aircraft.
159 0605244A JOINT REDUCED RANGE ROCKET 16,014 ............... 16,014
(JR3).
161 0605275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS 99,691 ............... 99,691
DEVELOPMENT.
162 0605330A C2 TRANSPORT............... 45,370 ............... 45,370
163 0605331A C2 APPLICATIONS............ 488,401 ............... 488,401
164 0605332A C2 DATA.................... 306,019 ............... 306,019
165 0605333A C2 INFRASTRUCTURE.......... 64,849 ............... 64,849
166 0605345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 816,433 ............... 816,433
LAUNCHED EFFECTS SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
167 0605347A COUNTER UNMANNED AERIAL 359,182 ............... 359,182
SYSTEMS (UAS) DEVELOPMENT.
169 0605457A ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND 126,623 ............... 126,623
MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
170 0605531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 695 ............... 695
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS SYS DEV &
DEMONSTRATION.
172 0605625A MANNED GROUND VEHICLE...... 290,069 ............... 290,069
173 0605766A NATIONAL CAPABILITIES 17,211 ............... 17,211
INTEGRATION (MIP).
174 0605812A JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,749 ............... 2,749
VEHICLE (JLTV) ENGINEERING
AND MANUFACTURING
DEVELOPMENT PHASE (EMD).
175 0605830A AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT 951 ............... 951
EQUIPMENT.
176 0303032A TROJAN--RH12............... 3,946 ............... 3,946
178 0304270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 125,301 ............... 125,301
DEVELOPMENT.
178A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 89,121 ............... 89,121
........................ SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 9,760,747 127,717 9,888,464
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
179 0604256A THREAT SIMULATOR 60,233 ............... 60,233
DEVELOPMENT.
180 0604258A TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT. 16,488 ............... 16,488
181 0604759A MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT....... 106,140 ............... 106,140
182 0605103A RAND ARROYO CENTER......... 10,737 ............... 10,737
183 0605301A ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL....... 7,051 ............... 7,051
184 0605326A CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION 55,596 ............... 55,596
PROGRAM.
186 0605601A ARMY TEST RANGES AND 469,723 10,000 479,723
FACILITIES.
........................ Space Layer .............. [10,000] ...............
Representation to
Enhance Near-Peer
Readiness.
187 0605602A ARMY TECHNICAL TEST 62,303 ............... 62,303
INSTRUMENTATION AND
TARGETS.
188 0605604A SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY 31,283 ............... 31,283
ANALYSIS.
189 0605606A AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION..... 1,983 ............... 1,983
190 0605706A MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS.. 19,013 ............... 19,013
191 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN 10,481 ............... 10,481
ITEMS.
192 0605712A SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL 60,733 ............... 60,733
TESTING.
193 0605716A ARMY EVALUATION CENTER..... 65,565 ............... 65,565
194 0605718A ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD 15,608 ............... 15,608
COLLABORATION & INTEG.
195 0605801A PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES..... 52,978 ............... 52,978
196 0605803A TECHNICAL INFORMATION 27,004 ............... 27,004
ACTIVITIES.
197 0605805A MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION, 44,851 17,500 62,351
EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
........................ Demilitarization .............. [10,000] ...............
Process for White
Phosphorus Ammunition
Items.
........................ Production of Critical .............. [7,500] ...............
Chemicals in a Flexible
Manufacturing Facility.
198 0605857A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 3,256 ............... 3,256
TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
199 0605898A ARMY DIRECT REPORT 54,276 ............... 54,276
HEADQUARTERS--R&D--MHA.
200 0606002A RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC 118,585 ............... 118,585
MISSILE DEFENSE TEST SITE.
201 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN 5,802 ............... 5,802
INTEL MODERNIZATION.
202 0606118A AIAMD SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT 653,653 -7,000 646,653
& INTEGRATION.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-7,000] ...............
203 0606942A ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS 6,468 ............... 6,468
CYBER VULNERABILITIES.
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,959,810 20,500 1,980,310
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL SYSTEM .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
205 0603778A MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 17,780 ............... 17,780
PROGRAM.
206 0605024A ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 6,613 10,000 16,613
SUPPORT.
........................ Secure Microelectronics .............. [10,000] ...............
for Anti-Tamper and
Resilient Technology.
207 0607101A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 488 ............... 488
DESTRUCTION (CWMD) PRODUCT
IMPROVEMENT.
208 0607131A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS 21,553 ............... 21,553
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS.
209 0607136A BLACKHAWK PRODUCT 35,147 ............... 35,147
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
210 0607137A CHINOOK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 7,277 ............... 7,277
PROGRAM.
211 0607139A IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE .............. 100,000 100,000
PROGRAM.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [100,000] ...............
213 0607145A APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.. 30,759 ............... 30,759
214 0607148A AN/TPQ-53 COUNTERFIRE 90,981 -10,000 80,981
TARGET ACQUISITION RADAR
SYSTEM.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-10,000] ...............
215 0607150A INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT.... 13,694 ............... 13,694
216 0607212A TENCAP ENHANCEMENTS........ 20,982 ............... 20,982
219 0607665A FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS....... 1,640 ............... 1,640
220 0607865A PATRIOT PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 219,046 ............... 219,046
221 0203728A JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP 11,255 ............... 11,255
OPERATION COORDINATION
SYSTEM (JADOCS).
222 0203735A COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT 492,364 10,000 502,364
PROGRAMS.
........................ Development and .............. [10,000] ...............
qualification of
AGT1500 Abrams tank
engine parts.
224 0203752A AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 239 ............... 239
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
225 0203758A DIGITIZATION............... 1,615 ............... 1,615
226 0203801A MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE PRODUCT 2,054 ............... 2,054
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
229 0205778A GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH 73,639 ............... 73,639
ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
232 0303140A INFORMATION SYSTEMS 15,932 ............... 15,932
SECURITY PROGRAM.
234 0303142A SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT 4,870 ............... 4,870
(SPACE).
237 0305179A INTEGRATED BROADCAST 6,870 ............... 6,870
SERVICE (IBS).
238 0305219A MQ-1 GRAY EAGLE UAV........ 2,590 ............... 2,590
239 0708045A END ITEM INDUSTRIAL 68,097 17,000 85,097
PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
........................ Army depot directed .............. [5,000] ...............
energy readiness.
........................ Digital Forge.......... .............. [12,000] ...............
239A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 47,342 ............... 47,342
........................ SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 1,192,827 127,000 1,319,827
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL .............. ............... ...............
TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS.
240 0608041A DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE 94,095 -3,000 91,095
PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-3,000] ...............
........................ SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 94,095 -3,000 91,095
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RESEARCH, 18,708,826 493,017 19,201,843
DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND
EVALUATION, ARMY.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST .............. ............... ...............
AND EVALUATION, NAVY.
........................ BASIC RESEARCH............. .............. ............... ...............
001 0601103N UNIVERSITY RESEARCH .............. 47,500 47,500
INITIATIVES.
........................ Artificial Intelligence .............. [2,500] ...............
Maritime Maneuvering.
........................ Multi-Frequency .............. [5,000] ...............
Satellite Data
Reception and
Technological Upgrades.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [40,000] ...............
002 0601153N DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.. 525,399 2,500 527,899
........................ Physiological Stress .............. [2,500] ...............
Response Program.
........................ SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH. 525,399 50,000 575,399
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ APPLIED RESEARCH........... .............. ............... ...............
003 0602114N POWER PROJECTION APPLIED 38,838 5,000 43,838
RESEARCH.
........................ Hypersonics Correlation .............. [5,000] ...............
Modeling and Simulation.
004 0602123N FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED 137,779 7,500 145,279
RESEARCH.
........................ Arctic Unmanned .............. [5,000] ...............
Resilient Offshore
Reconnaissance Asset
(AURORA) USV Study.
........................ Talent and Technology .............. [2,500] ...............
for Navy Power Systems.
005 0602131M MARINE CORPS LANDING FORCE 57,567 2,500 60,067
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Unmanned Logistics..... .............. [2,500] ...............
006 0602235N COMMON PICTURE APPLIED 40,433 ............... 40,433
RESEARCH.
007 0602236N WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT 60,350 ............... 60,350
APPLIED RESEARCH.
008 0602271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 74,603 ............... 74,603
APPLIED RESEARCH.
009 0602435N OCEAN WARFIGHTING 64,693 ............... 64,693
ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
RESEARCH.
010 0602651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 4,105 ............... 4,105
APPLIED RESEARCH.
011 0602747N UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED 52,515 2,500 55,015
RESEARCH.
........................ Academic Partnerships .............. [2,500] ...............
for Submarine and
Undersea Vehicle
Research and
Manufacturing.
012 0602750N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 305,357 -5,000 300,357
APPLIED RESEARCH.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
013 0602782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 24,634 10,000 34,634
WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
........................ Procurement of undersea .............. [10,000] ...............
attritable systems.
015 0602861N SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 74,378 ............... 74,378
MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
ACITIVITIES.
........................ SUBTOTAL APPLIED 935,252 22,500 957,752
RESEARCH.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
016 0603123N FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED 50,869 ............... 50,869
TECHNOLOGY.
017 0603271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 8,635 ............... 8,635
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
018 0603273N SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR 114,767 ............... 114,767
NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS.
019 0603640M USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 287,897 5,000 292,897
DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
........................ Advanced Technology .............. [5,000] ...............
Demonstration.
020 0603651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 8,727 ............... 8,727
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
021 0603673N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 445,977 -5,000 440,977
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
022 0603680N MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 79,132 37,500 116,632
PROGRAM.
........................ Pilot Program for .............. [2,500] ...............
Adaptive Electronic
Warfare-Resilient and
Quantum-Secure Autonomy
small UAS Architecture
Testing.
........................ Solid Rocket Second .............. [25,000] ...............
Source Qualification
Increase.
........................ Trusted Radiation- .............. [10,000] ...............
hardened integrated
electronics.
024 0603758N NAVY WARFIGHTING 66,395 10,000 76,395
EXPERIMENTS AND
DEMONSTRATIONS.
........................ Deployable data centers .............. [10,000] ...............
that deliver remote and
resilient edge
computing.
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,062,399 47,500 1,109,899
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED COMPONENT .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES.
027 0603128N UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM..... 35,706 ............... 35,706
029 0603207N AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL 76,141 ............... 76,141
APPLICATIONS.
030 0603216N AVIATION SURVIVABILITY..... 20,010 ............... 20,010
031 0603239N NAVAL CONSTRUCTION FORCES.. 7,726 ............... 7,726
032 0603254N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.... 20,070 ............... 20,070
033 0603261N TACTICAL AIRBORNE 3,239 ............... 3,239
RECONNAISSANCE.
034 0603382N ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS 32,263 6,000 38,263
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ C-C Embedded .............. [6,000] ...............
Hypersonics Alternative
PNT.
035 0603502N SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER 32,451 ............... 32,451
MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
036 0603506N SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO 9,920 ............... 9,920
DEFENSE.
037 0603512N CARRIER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT 8,806 ............... 8,806
038 0603525N PILOT FISH................. 1,339,052 ............... 1,339,052
039 0603536N RETRACT JUNIPER............ 275,300 ............... 275,300
040 0603542N RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL....... 704 ............... 704
042 0603561N UNDERSEA WARFARE SYSTEM 132,885 6,000 138,885
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Automated System .............. [6,000] ...............
Operational
Verification Test
Capability for AN/BYG-1.
044 0603563N SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED 353,893 10,000 363,893
DESIGN.
........................ Hybrid Robotic .............. [10,000] ...............
Automation
Demonstration.
045 0603564N SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & 666,640 ............... 666,640
FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
046 0603570N ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER 392,426 ............... 392,426
SYSTEMS.
047 0603573N ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY 269,961 5,000 274,961
SYSTEMS.
........................ Integration of .............. [5,000] ...............
Insulated Bus Pipe
(IBP) Into Warship
Designs.
048 0603576N CHALK EAGLE................ 149,351 ............... 149,351
049 0603581N LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS). 12,576 -5,000 7,576
........................ Insufficient .............. [-5,000] ...............
justification.
050 0603582N COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION.. 18,819 ............... 18,819
051 0603595N OHIO REPLACEMENT........... 331,577 15,000 346,577
........................ Large-Scale .............. [15,000] ...............
Superstructures
Cooperative Processing.
052 0603596N LCS MISSION MODULES........ 46,239 -30,000 16,239
........................ Insufficient .............. [-30,000] ...............
justification.
053 0603597N AUTOMATED TEST AND RE-TEST 18,070 ............... 18,070
(ATRT).
054 0603598N ATRT ENTERPRISE RAPID 87,585 10,000 97,585
CAPABILITY.
........................ Digital Combat Console .............. [10,000] ...............
Capability for Aegis
Low Altitude Air
Defense Integration.
055 0603599N FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT........ 212,041 ............... 212,041
056 0603609N CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS..... 10,216 ............... 10,216
057 0603635M MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/ 521,995 -20,000 501,995
SUPPORT SYSTEM.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-20,000] ...............
058 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 43,568 ............... 43,568
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
059 0603713N OCEAN ENGINEERING 15,903 10,000 25,903
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Expeditionary Lock-Out .............. [10,000] ...............
Dive Trainer.
060 0603721N ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION... 19,347 ............... 19,347
061 0603724N NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM........ 59,591 97,000 156,591
........................ Program increase....... .............. [97,000] ...............
062 0603725N FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT..... 13,738 5,000 18,738
........................ Robotic Navy .............. [5,000] ...............
Firefighting.
063 0603734N CHALK CORAL................ 995,658 ............... 995,658
064 0603739N NAVY LOGISTIC PRODUCTIVITY. 929 ............... 929
065 0603746N RETRACT MAPLE.............. 655,551 ............... 655,551
066 0603748N LINK PLUMERIA.............. 498,853 ............... 498,853
067 0603751N RETRACT ELM................ 87,999 ............... 87,999
068 0603764M LINK EVERGREEN............. 593,835 ............... 593,835
069 0603790N NATO RESEARCH AND 5,513 ............... 5,513
DEVELOPMENT.
070 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY..... 985 ............... 985
071 0603851M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 14,152 ............... 14,152
TESTING.
072 0603860N JOINT PRECISION APPROACH 73,813 ............... 73,813
AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
VAL.
073 0603889N COUNTERDRUG RDT&E PROJECTS. 6,500 ............... 6,500
074 0603925N DIRECTED ENERGY AND 94,825 2,500 97,325
ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
........................ Containerized High .............. [5,000] ...............
Energy Laser with
Integrated Optical-
dazzler and
Surveillance.
........................ Containerized Maritime .............. [2,500] ...............
High Energy Laser
Weapon System.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-5,000] ...............
076 0604027N DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE..... 182,205 -6,000 176,205
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-6,000] ...............
077 0604028N SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED 24,598 ............... 24,598
UNDERSEA VEHICLES.
078 0604029N UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE 62,460 ............... 62,460
CORE TECHNOLOGIES.
081 0604112N GERALD R. FORD CLASS 111,241 ............... 111,241
NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
(CVN 78--80).
082 0604127N SURFACE MINE 17,762 ............... 17,762
COUNTERMEASURES.
083 0604272N TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL 14,974 ............... 14,974
INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
(TADIRCM).
084 0604286N NAVY ADVANCED MANUFACTURING 10,016 ............... 10,016
085 0604289M NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS.. 24 ............... 24
086 0604292N FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 5,314 ............... 5,314
(MARITIME STRIKE).
087 0604295M MARINE AVIATION 47,152 48,000 95,152
DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION.
........................ Vertical Takeoff and .............. [48,000] ...............
Landing Development for
autonomous logistics in
contested environments.
088 0604320M RAPID TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY 125,999 ............... 125,999
PROTOTYPE.
089 0604454N LX (R)..................... 18,574 ............... 18,574
090 0604536N ADVANCED UNDERSEA 164,512 ............... 164,512
PROTOTYPING.
091 0604545N ADVANCED SHIP BUILDING .............. 20,000 20,000
INDUSTRIAL BASE AND FUTURE
SHIP EXPERIMENTAL.
........................ Fielding of Uncrewed .............. [20,000] ...............
Surveillance Systems.
092 0604636N COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 20,833 ............... 20,833
SYSTEMS (C-UAS).
093 0604659N PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS 206,873 ............... 206,873
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
094 0604707N SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 8,657 ............... 8,657
WARFARE (SEW) ARCHITECTURE/
ENGINEERING SUPPORT.
095 0604786N OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE 104,527 64,000 168,527
WARFARE WEAPON DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Transfer from WPN-17... .............. [64,000] ...............
097 0605513N UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE 255,135 ............... 255,135
ENABLING CAPABILITIES.
098 0605514M GROUND BASED ANTI-SHIP 16,307 ............... 16,307
MISSILE.
100 0605518N CONVENTIONAL PROMPT STRIKE 1,341,416 ............... 1,341,416
(CPS).
101 0105519N NUCLEAR-ARMED SEA-LAUNCHED .............. 175,000 175,000
CRUISE MISSILE (SLCM-N)
SUPPORT.
........................ Program adjustment..... .............. [175,000] ...............
102 0207147M COLLABORATIVE COMBAT 213,934 ............... 213,934
AIRCRAFT.
104 0303354N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT-- 3,206 ............... 3,206
MIP.
105 0304240M ADVANCED TACTICAL UNMANNED 1,979 ............... 1,979
AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
107 0304797N UNDERSEA ARTIFICIAL 13,563 ............... 13,563
INTELLIGENCE / MACHINE
LEARNING (AI/ML).
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 11,237,683 412,500 11,650,183
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND .............. ............... ...............
DEMONSTRATION.
108 0603208N TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT... 80,617 ............... 80,617
109 0604038N MARITIME TARGETING CELL.... 216,514 ............... 216,514
110 0604212N OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT..... 976 ............... 976
112 0604215N STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT...... 4,399 ............... 4,399
113 0604216N MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER 88,855 ............... 88,855
UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
114 0604230N WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM..... 73,080 ............... 73,080
115 0604231N COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS 73,534 ............... 73,534
116 0604234N ADVANCED HAWKEYE........... 390,260 ............... 390,260
117 0604245M H-1 UPGRADES............... 66,446 ............... 66,446
118 0604261N ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS.... 48,875 ............... 48,875
119 0604262N V-22....................... 252,335 ............... 252,335
120 0604264N AIR CREW SYSTEMS 21,582 ............... 21,582
DEVELOPMENT.
121 0604269N EA-18...................... 131,683 ............... 131,683
122 0604270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 168,985 ............... 168,985
DEVELOPMENT.
123 0604273M EXECUTIVE HELO DEVELOPMENT. 69,438 ............... 69,438
124 0604274N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 50,332 ............... 50,332
(NGJ).
125 0604280N JOINT TACTICAL RADIO 409,318 3,000 412,318
SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
........................ TIMEly Undersea .............. [3,000] ...............
Communications Network.
126 0604282N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 497,011 -40,000 457,011
(NGJ) INCREMENT II.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-40,000] ...............
127 0604307N SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT 425,060 ............... 425,060
SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
128 0604329N SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB).. 64,428 ............... 64,428
129 0604366N STANDARD MISSILE 539,279 ............... 539,279
IMPROVEMENTS.
130 0604373N AIRBORNE MCM............... 8,567 ............... 8,567
131 0604378N NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE 42,177 ............... 42,177
CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
132 0604501N ADVANCED ABOVE WATER 67,900 ............... 67,900
SENSORS.
133 0604503N SUBMARINE SWFTS 195,361 ............... 195,361
MODERNIZATION.
134 0604504N AIR CONTROL................ 41,610 ............... 41,610
135 0604512N SHIPBOARD AVIATION SYSTEMS. 30,970 ............... 30,970
136 0604516N SHIP SURVIVABILITY......... 7,861 ............... 7,861
138 0604522N AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 96,642 ............... 96,642
RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
139 0604530N ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR 60,518 ............... 60,518
(AAG).
140 0604558N NEW DESIGN SSN............. 237,103 ............... 237,103
142 0604567N SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ LIVE 19,429 ............... 19,429
FIRE T&E.
143 0604574N NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER 3,415 ............... 3,415
RESOURCES.
144 0604601N MINE DEVELOPMENT........... 158,666 ............... 158,666
145 0604610N LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO 102,159 ............... 102,159
DEVELOPMENT.
146 0604654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 8,509 ............... 8,509
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
147 0604657M USMC GROUND COMBAT/ 69,478 ............... 69,478
SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
148 0604703N PERSONNEL, TRAINING, 8,316 ............... 8,316
SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
FACTORS.
149 0604727N JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON 1,447 ............... 1,447
SYSTEMS.
150 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT & 156,167 ............... 156,167
CONTROL).
151 0604756N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: 296,261 ............... 296,261
HARD KILL).
152 0604757N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: 196,761 ............... 196,761
SOFT KILL/EW).
153 0604761N INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING... 6,426 ............... 6,426
154 0604771N MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT........ 6,900 ............... 6,900
155 0604777N NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM....... 3,388 ............... 3,388
156 0604850N SSN(X)..................... 315,914 ............... 315,914
157 0605013M INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 14,380 ............... 14,380
DEVELOPMENT.
158 0605013N INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 149,089 ............... 149,089
DEVELOPMENT.
159 0605024N ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 3,459 ............... 3,459
SUPPORT.
160 0605180N TACAMO MODERNIZATION....... 1,662,723 -110,000 1,552,723
........................ Contract delay......... .............. [-110,000] ...............
161 0605212M CH-53K RDTE................ 139,273 ............... 139,273
162 0605215N MISSION PLANNING........... 82,618 ............... 82,618
163 0605217N COMMON AVIONICS............ 133,855 ............... 133,855
164 0605220N SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR 4,519 ............... 4,519
(SSC).
165 0605285N NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER.... 68,498 ............... 68,498
167 0605450M JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE 189,866 ............... 189,866
(JAGM).
168 0605500N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 87,173 ............... 87,173
AIRCRAFT (MMA).
169 0605504N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 52,951 ............... 52,951
(MMA) INCREMENT III.
170 0605516N LONG RANGE FIRES........... 186,735 ............... 186,735
171 0605611M MARINE CORPS ASSAULT 12,461 ............... 12,461
VEHICLES SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
172 0605813M JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,413 ............... 2,413
VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
173 0204202N DESTROYERS GUIDED MISSILE 50,166 ............... 50,166
(DDG-1000).
174 0301377N COUNTERING ADVANCED 15,563 ............... 15,563
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
(CACW).
175 0302315N NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE 23,146 ............... 23,146
SUPPORT.
181 0304785N ISR & INFO OPERATIONS...... 274,478 ............... 274,478
183 0306250M CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY 8,962 ............... 8,962
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 8,977,280 -147,000 8,830,280
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
184 0604256N THREAT SIMULATOR 16,453 ............... 16,453
DEVELOPMENT.
185 0604258N TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT. 22,653 -5,000 17,653
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-5,000] ...............
186 0604759N MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT....... 112,458 -8,000 104,458
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-8,000] ...............
187 0605152N STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 4,336 ............... 4,336
SUPPORT--NAVY.
188 0605154N CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES.. 28,310 ............... 28,310
191 0605853N MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 124,898 ............... 124,898
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
192 0605856N STRATEGIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT 4,260 ............... 4,260
193 0605863N RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT 170,699 ............... 170,699
SUPPORT.
194 0605864N TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT 470,492 ............... 470,492
195 0605865N OPERATIONAL TEST AND 31,902 ............... 31,902
EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
196 0605866N NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 21,498 ............... 21,498
WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
197 0605867N SEW SURVEILLANCE/ 25,144 ............... 25,144
RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
198 0605873M MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE 70,013 ............... 70,013
SUPPORT.
199 0605898N MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D......... 33,533 ............... 33,533
200 0606295M MARINE AVIATION 19,165 ............... 19,165
DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AND SUPPORT.
201 0606355N WARFARE INNOVATION 35,931 ............... 35,931
MANAGEMENT.
202 0606942N ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS 11,282 ............... 11,282
CYBER VULNERABILITIES.
203 0305327N INSIDER THREAT............. 2,214 ............... 2,214
204 0902498N MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS 2,054 ............... 2,054
(DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES).
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,207,295 -13,000 1,194,295
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL SYSTEM .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
208 0604840M F-35 C2D2.................. 469,779 ............... 469,779
209 0604840N F-35 C2D2.................. 428,545 ............... 428,545
210 0605520M MARINE CORPS AIR DEFENSE 133,041 ............... 133,041
WEAPONS SYSTEMS.
211 0607658N COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT 120,782 ............... 120,782
CAPABILITY (CEC).
212 0101221N STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS 1,051,736 ............... 1,051,736
SYSTEM SUPPORT.
213 0101224N SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY 65,856 ............... 65,856
PROGRAM.
214 0101226N SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC WARFARE 114,279 ............... 114,279
DEVELOPMENT.
215 0101402N NAVY STRATEGIC 88,572 ............... 88,572
COMMUNICATIONS.
216 0204136N F/A-18 SQUADRONS........... 271,429 7,000 278,429
........................ Spiking Neuromorphic .............. [7,000] ...............
Advanced Processing.
218 0204229N TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK 76,653 ............... 76,653
MISSION PLANNING CENTER
(TMPC).
219 0204311N INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE 71,901 ............... 71,901
SYSTEM.
220 0204313N SHIP-TOWED ARRAY 954 ............... 954
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS.
221 0204413N AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL SUPPORT 1,526 ............... 1,526
UNITS (DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
222 0204460M GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED 66,255 ............... 66,255
RADAR (G/ATOR).
223 0204571N CONSOLIDATED TRAINING 115,839 ............... 115,839
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
224 0204575N ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) 198,560 ............... 198,560
READINESS SUPPORT.
225 0205601N ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE 80,491 -8,049 72,442
IMPROVEMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-8,049] ...............
227 0205632N MK-48 ADCAP................ 123,011 ............... 123,011
228 0205633N AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS...... 108,505 -10,850 97,655
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,850] ...............
229 0205675N OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER 252,893 ............... 252,893
SYSTEMS.
230 0206313M MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS 268,983 -20,000 248,983
SYSTEMS.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-20,000] ...............
232 0206623M MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/ 79,031 ............... 79,031
SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS.
233 0206624M MARINE CORPS COMBAT 19,915 ............... 19,915
SERVICES SUPPORT.
234 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ 149,055 -10,000 139,055
ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
235 0207161N TACTICAL AIM MISSILES...... 122,518 -12,251 110,267
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-12,251] ...............
236 0207163N ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 24,675 ............... 24,675
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
237 0207255N MQ-25 STINGRAY............. 513,308 ............... 513,308
238 0208043N PLANNING AND DECISION AID 3,491 ............... 3,491
SYSTEM (PDAS).
242 0303138N AFLOAT NETWORKS............ 68,369 ............... 68,369
243 0303140N INFORMATION SYSTEMS 79,128 ............... 79,128
SECURITY PROGRAM.
244 0305192N MILITARY INTELLIGENCE 5,187 ............... 5,187
PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
247 0305220N MQ-4C TRITON............... 10,515 ............... 10,515
248 0305232M RQ-11 UAV.................. 19,842 ............... 19,842
249 0305241N MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR 49,898 ............... 49,898
DEVELOPMENT.
250 0305242M UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 20,750 ............... 20,750
(UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
251 0305421N MQ-4C TRITON MODERNIZATION. 344,890 ............... 344,890
252 0307577N INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 787 ............... 787
(IMD).
253 0308601N MODELING AND SIMULATION 16,401 ............... 16,401
SUPPORT.
254 0702207N DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF). 8,097 ............... 8,097
255 0708730N MARITIME TECHNOLOGY 1,710 ............... 1,710
(MARITECH).
255A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 2,755,838 ............... 2,755,838
........................ SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 8,402,995 -54,150 8,348,845
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL .............. ............... ...............
TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS.
256 0608013N RISK MANAGEMENT 13,017 ............... 13,017
INFORMATION--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
257 0608231N MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND 25,299 ............... 25,299
AND CONTROL (MTC2)--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
........................ SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 38,316 ............... 38,316
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RESEARCH, 32,386,619 318,350 32,704,969
DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND
EVALUATION, NAVY.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST .............. ............... ...............
AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE.
........................ BASIC RESEARCH............. .............. ............... ...............
001 0601102F DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.. 296,535 5,000 301,535
........................ Program increase....... .............. [5,000] ...............
002 0601103F UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 91,394 5,000 96,394
INITIATIVES.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [5,000] ...............
........................ SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH. 387,929 10,000 397,929
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ APPLIED RESEARCH........... .............. ............... ...............
003 0602020F FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES 44,029 ............... 44,029
APPLIED RESEARCH.
005 0602102F MATERIALS.................. 139,872 13,000 152,872
........................ Advanced Composites in .............. [10,000] ...............
Hypersonics and
Attritable Aircraft
Research.
........................ Metals Affordability .............. [3,000] ...............
Initiative.
007 0602202F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS APPLIED 103,170 ............... 103,170
RESEARCH.
008 0602203F AEROSPACE SYSTEMS 397,809 5,000 402,809
TECHNOLOGIES.
........................ Reusable Hypersonics .............. [5,000] ...............
Development and
Transition.
009 0602204F AEROSPACE SENSORS.......... 164,962 5,000 169,962
........................ Microelectronic .............. [5,000] ...............
manufacturing
development.
011 0602298F SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 10,285 ............... 10,285
MANAGEMENT--MAJOR
HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
012 0602336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS 27,031 ............... 27,031
TECH EXPLORATION.
013 0602602F CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS..... 130,146 -5,000 125,146
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
014 0602605F DIRECTED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY. 91,798 ............... 91,798
015 0602788F DOMINANT INFORMATION 149,174 25,000 174,174
SCIENCES AND METHODS.
........................ Autonomous Battle .............. [2,500] ...............
Management Across the
full Spectrum of
Conflict.
........................ Distributed Quantum .............. [2,500] ...............
Networking Testbed and
Quantum Cloud Computing
Environment.
........................ Future Flag Operational .............. [2,500] ...............
Experimentation Testbed.
........................ Ion-Trap Quantum .............. [5,000] ...............
Computer for Air
Platform Applied
Research activities.
........................ Photonic Quantum .............. [2,500] ...............
Computing.
........................ Quantum entanglement .............. [10,000] ...............
distribution research.
........................ SUBTOTAL APPLIED 1,258,276 43,000 1,301,276
RESEARCH.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
016 0603032F FUTURE AF INTEGRATED 282,004 ............... 282,004
TECHNOLOGY DEMOS.
017 0603112F ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR 32,808 5,000 37,808
WEAPON SYSTEMS.
........................ Hypersonics .............. [5,000] ...............
manufacturing
development.
018 0603199F SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND 13,277 ............... 13,277
TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
019 0603203F ADVANCED AEROSPACE SENSORS. 72,149 ............... 72,149
020 0603211F AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/ 260,212 52,500 312,712
DEMO.
........................ Advanced High Mach .............. [2,500] ...............
Turbine Engines Using
Additive Manufacturing.
........................ CCA Propulsion .............. [20,000] ...............
Integration.
........................ Hybrid Integrated .............. [2,500] ...............
Turret for Extended-
Capability High-Energy
Lasers.
........................ Solid Rocket Second .............. [25,000] ...............
Source Qualification
Increase.
........................ Turboelectric Adaptive .............. [2,500] ...............
Engine Demonstration.
022 0603273F SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR 165,949 7,000 172,949
NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS.
........................ Smart Thermal .............. [7,000] ...............
Protection Systems
(TPS) for Next-Gen
Systems.
023 0603456F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 20,338 ............... 20,338
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
024 0603601F CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS 131,397 -3,000 128,397
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-3,000] ...............
025 0603605F ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 13,744 ............... 13,744
026 0603680F MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 99,908 2,500 102,408
PROGRAM.
........................ Virtual, Augmented, and .............. [2,500] ...............
Mixed Reality Readiness.
027 0603788F BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE 31,938 15,000 46,938
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ Nationwide Integration .............. [2,500] ...............
of Time Resiliency for
Operations.
........................ Scalable Collaborative .............. [2,500] ...............
Autonomy for Unmanned
Systems.
........................ Secure Hardened .............. [10,000] ...............
Architecture for
Radiation Environments.
028 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 29,109 -5,000 24,109
ENTERPRISE R&D.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,152,833 74,000 1,226,833
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED COMPONENT .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES.
030 0603036F MODULAR ADVANCED MISSILE... 15,099 ............... 15,099
031 0603260F INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED 4,012 ............... 4,012
DEVELOPMENT.
033 0603742F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION 25,888 ............... 25,888
TECHNOLOGY.
034 0603790F NATO RESEARCH AND 2,320 ............... 2,320
DEVELOPMENT.
035 0603851F INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC 72,112 ............... 72,112
MISSILE--DEM/VAL.
036 0604001F NC3 ADVANCED CONCEPTS...... 14,394 ............... 14,394
037 0604003F ADVANCED BATTLE MANAGEMENT 1,040,945 -5,000 1,035,945
SYSTEM (ABMS).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
039 0604005F NC3 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 61,355 ............... 61,355
& PROTOTYPING.
041 0604009F AFWERX..................... 3,589 2,500 6,089
........................ Ultra-Short Takeoff and .............. [2,500] ...............
Landing Aircraft
Development.
042 0604010F NEXT GENERATION ADAPTIVE 513,681 -51,368 462,313
PROPULSION.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-51,368] ...............
043 0604015F LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER.. 2,862,677 ............... 2,862,677
046 0604033F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING.... 345,769 ............... 345,769
047 0604041F FAMILY OF AFFORDABLE MASS 525,223 -52,522 472,701
MISSILES (FAMM).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-52,522] ...............
048 0604060F NORAD & USNORTHCOM (N&NC) 39,257 ............... 39,257
EXPERIMENTATION.
049 0604183F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING-- 806,142 ............... 806,142
HYPERSONIC ATTACK CRUISE
MISSILE (HACM).
050 0604257F ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND 38,756 ............... 38,756
SENSORS.
052 0604317F TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER........ 2,196 ............... 2,196
053 0604327F HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED 186,385 ............... 186,385
TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
(HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
054 0604336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS 91,550 ............... 91,550
PROTOTYPING.
055 0604343F ADVANCED TANKER SYSTEMS.... 13,036 ............... 13,036
056 0604414F CYBER RESILIENCY OF WEAPON 44,377 ............... 44,377
SYSTEMS-ACS.
057 0604609F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS & 57,575 ............... 57,575
CONCEPT MATURATION.
058 0604668F JOINT TRANSPORTATION 57,802 ............... 57,802
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JTMS).
059 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 5,136 ............... 5,136
ENTERPRISE R&D.
060 0604858F TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM.... 166,061 -2,606 163,455
........................ AI Hardware and .............. [5,000] ...............
Software for Sensors
and Countermeasures.
........................ Critical Additive .............. [9,000] ...............
Advanced Manufacturing.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-16,606] ...............
061 0604860F OPERATIONAL ENERGY AND 61,000 122,000 183,000
INSTALLATION RESILIENCE.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [122,000] ...............
064 0606004F NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE RESEARCH 1,105 25,000 26,105
& DEVELOPMENT.
........................ B-52 Agile Pod Advanced .............. [25,000] ...............
Sensor Fusion Software
Development.
065 0606005F DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION 183,398 ............... 183,398
OFFICE.
067 0207147F COLLABORATIVE COMBAT 1,373,740 -137,374 1,236,366
AIRCRAFT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-137,374] ...............
068 0207179F AUTONOMOUS COLLABORATIVE 57,217 -5,721 51,496
PLATFORMS.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,721] ...............
069 0207420F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION...... 1,692 ............... 1,692
071 0207455F THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG- 22,335 ............... 22,335
RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
072 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS 85,305 ............... 85,305
(ABADS).
073 0207606F JOINT SIMULATION 302,801 ............... 302,801
ENVIRONMENT (JSE).
074 0208030F WAR RESERVE MATERIEL-- 14,663 ............... 14,663
AMMUNITION.
075 0302060F LOOKING GLASS NEXT......... 65,277 ............... 65,277
076 0303010F AF ISR DIGITAL 24,455 ............... 24,455
INFRASTRUCTURE.
077 0305236F COMMON DATA LINK EXECUTIVE 26,401 -2,640 23,761
AGENT (CDL EA).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,640] ...............
079 0305913F PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE.... 29,325 ............... 29,325
080 0701200F ENTERPRISE SELECT CLASS II. 949 ............... 949
081 0708051F RAPID SUSTAINMENT 27,475 ............... 27,475
MODERNIZATION (RSM).
082 0808736F SPECIAL VICTIM 1,652 ............... 1,652
ACCOUNTABILITY AND
INVESTIGATION.
083 0808737F INTEGRATED PRIMARY 4,271 ............... 4,271
PREVENTION.
084 0901410F CONTRACTING INFORMATION 25,815 ............... 25,815
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
085 1206415F U.S. SPACE COMMAND RESEARCH 34,719 ............... 34,719
AND DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT.
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 9,338,932 -107,731 9,231,201
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND .............. ............... ...............
DEMONSTRATION.
086 0604200F FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON 35,142 ............... 35,142
ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
087 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 710,780 ............... 710,780
IMPROVEMENTS.
088 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT.... 86,921 ............... 86,921
089 0604270F ELECTRONIC WARFARE 260,233 -40,000 220,233
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-40,000] ...............
090 0604281F TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS 110,151 ............... 110,151
ENTERPRISE.
091 0604287F PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT 8,743 ............... 8,743
092 0604288F SURVIVABLE AIRBORNE 2,218,921 ............... 2,218,921
OPERATIONS CENTER (SAOC).
093 0604602F ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE 96,762 -9,676 87,086
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-9,676] ...............
094 0604604F SUBMUNITIONS............... 3,599 ............... 3,599
095 0604617F AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT....... 19,348 ............... 19,348
096 0604706F LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS....... 21,328 ............... 21,328
097 0604735F COMBAT TRAINING RANGES..... 132,783 -13,278 119,505
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-13,278] ...............
098 0604932F LONG RANGE STANDOFF WEAPON. 565,679 ............... 565,679
100 0605056F OPEN ARCHITECTURE 43,482 -4,348 39,134
MANAGEMENT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-4,348] ...............
101 0605223F ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING.... 72,174 -7,217 64,957
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-7,217] ...............
102 0605238F GROUND BASED STRATEGIC 4,521,370 ............... 4,521,370
DETERRENT EMD.
103 0605296F MICROELECTRONICS SECURE 224,664 -4,000 220,664
ENCLAVE.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-4,000] ...............
104 0101125F NUCLEAR WEAPONS 23,066 ............... 23,066
MODERNIZATION.
105 0102417F OVER-THE-HORIZON 173,975 ............... 173,975
BACKSCATTER RADAR.
106 0207039F COGNITIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC 50,496 ............... 50,496
WARFARE.
107 0207110F F-47....................... 5,037,904 -66,379 4,971,525
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-66,379] ...............
108 0207279F ISOLATED PERSONNEL 16,001 ............... 16,001
SURVIVABILITY AND RECOVERY.
109 0207328F STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON..... 115,882 ............... 115,882
110 0207407F ELECTROMAGNETIC BATTLE 45,322 ............... 45,322
MANAGEMENT (EMBM).
111 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 6,501 ............... 6,501
TRAINING.
112 0303008F SATURN..................... 4,771 ............... 4,771
116 0305282F JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN).. 313,982 ............... 313,982
117 0401221F KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS.... 543,788 -228,000 315,788
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-228,000] ...............
118 0401319F VC-25B..................... 555,195 ............... 555,195
119 0401334F LARGE AIRCRAFT 17,996 ............... 17,996
SURVIVABILITY SYSTEMS
(LASS).
120 0701212F AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS..... 15,900 ............... 15,900
121 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS...... 4,947 ............... 4,947
........................ SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 16,057,806 -372,898 15,684,908
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
123 0604256F THREAT SIMULATOR 44,526 ............... 44,526
DEVELOPMENT.
124 0604759F MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT....... 235,405 -15,000 220,405
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-15,000] ...............
125 0605101F RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE..... 13,312 ............... 13,312
127 0605712F INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST & 13,562 ............... 13,562
EVALUATION.
128 0605807F TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT 1,802,502 -54,700 1,747,802
........................ Digital Knowledge Model .............. [5,300] ...............
Upgrades.
........................ Hypersonic Ground .............. [30,000] ...............
Testing Modernization.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-90,000] ...............
131 0605829F ACQ WORKFORCE--CYBER, 439,592 -2,000 437,592
NETWORK, & BUS SYS.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,000] ...............
132 0605831F ACQ WORKFORCE--CAPABILITY 1,206,669 ............... 1,206,669
INTEGRATION.
134 0605833F ACQ WORKFORCE--NUCLEAR 342,650 ............... 342,650
SYSTEMS.
135 0605898F MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D......... 6,209 ............... 6,209
136 0605976F FACILITIES RESTORATION AND 367,369 ............... 367,369
MODERNIZATION--TEST AND
EVALUATION SUPPORT.
137 0605978F FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT-- 298,924 ............... 298,924
TEST AND EVALUATION
SUPPORT.
138 0606017F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND 21,678 -2,167 19,511
MATURATION.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,167] ...............
139 0606398F MANAGEMENT HQ--T&E......... 7,507 ............... 7,507
140 0208201F OFFENSIVE SMALL UNMANNED 30,187 ............... 30,187
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (SUAS).
141 0303255F COMMAND, CONTROL, 18,068 ............... 18,068
COMMUNICATION, AND
COMPUTERS (C4)--STRATCOM.
142 0308602F ENTEPRISE INFORMATION 80,342 ............... 80,342
SERVICES (EIS).
143 0702806F ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT 12,132 -1,213 10,919
SUPPORT.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-1,213] ...............
144 0804776F ADVANCED DISTRIBUTED 238 ............... 238
LEARNING.
145 0901215F PRODUCTIVITY INVESTMENTS... 4,017 ............... 4,017
147 1001004F INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES... 4,514 ............... 4,514
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 4,949,403 -75,080 4,874,323
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL SYSTEM .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
148 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT.... 10,029 ............... 10,029
149 0604233F SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE 22,071 ............... 22,071
FLIGHT TRAINING.
150 0604283F BATTLE MGMT COM & CTRL 44,187 ............... 44,187
SENSOR DEVELOPMENT.
152 0604840F F-35 C2D2.................. 1,128,748 10,000 1,138,748
........................ Supply Chain Advanced .............. [10,000] ...............
Manufacturing.
153 0605018F AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND 31,777 ............... 31,777
PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
154 0605024F ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 130,610 -13,061 117,549
EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-13,061] ...............
155 0605117F FOREIGN MATERIEL 4,676 ............... 4,676
ACQUISITION AND
EXPLOITATION.
156 0605229F HH-60W..................... 87,881 ............... 87,881
157 0605278F HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E...... 34,932 ............... 34,932
158 0606018F NC3 INTEGRATION............ 36,521 ............... 36,521
159 0101113F B-52 SQUADRONS............. 1,478,648 ............... 1,478,648
160 0101122F AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE 570 ............... 570
(ALCM).
161 0101126F B-1B SQUADRONS............. 273,552 ............... 273,552
162 0101127F B-2 SQUADRONS.............. 418,178 -20,000 398,178
........................ Slow execution......... .............. [-20,000] ...............
163 0101213F MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS........ 79,313 ............... 79,313
164 0101316F WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC 44,424 ............... 44,424
COMMUNICATIONS.
165 0101318F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 56,203 ............... 56,203
STRATCOM--GLOBAL STRIKE.
166 0101328F ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES...... 733,182 ............... 733,182
168 0102110F MH-139A.................... 7,046 ............... 7,046
169 0102326F REGION/SECTOR OPERATION 709 ............... 709
CONTROL CENTER
MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
171 0202834F AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT-- 1,028 ............... 1,028
GENERAL.
172 0203345F OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC) 45,000 ............... 45,000
173 0205219F MQ-9 UAV................... 16,723 ............... 16,723
174 0205671F JOINT COUNTER RCIED 2,816 ............... 2,816
ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
176 0207133F F-16 SQUADRONS............. 527,739 ............... 527,739
177 0207134F F-15E SQUADRONS............ 322,889 ............... 322,889
178 0207136F MANNED DESTRUCTIVE 8,128 ............... 8,128
SUPPRESSION.
179 0207138F F-22A SQUADRONS............ 950,375 ............... 950,375
180 0207142F F-35 SQUADRONS............. 47,388 ............... 47,388
181 0207146F F-15EX..................... 133,274 ............... 133,274
182 0207161F TACTICAL AIM MISSILES...... 98,861 -4,886 93,975
........................ Dual Mode APKWS........ .............. [5,000] ...............
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-9,886] ...............
183 0207163F ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 53,277 ............... 53,277
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
184 0207172F JOINT ADVANCED TACTICAL 500,422 ............... 500,422
MISSILE (JATM).
187 0207242F SPECIAL PROGRAM 35,149 ............... 35,149
APPLICATIONS.
188 0207247F AF TENCAP.................. 50,913 ............... 50,913
189 0207249F PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS 14,602 ............... 14,602
PROCUREMENT.
190 0207253F COMPASS CALL............... 66,514 ............... 66,514
191 0207268F AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 205,938 ............... 205,938
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
192 0207325F JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE 133,092 ............... 133,092
STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
193 0207327F SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB).. 25,497 ............... 25,497
194 0207410F AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS 158,871 -15,887 142,984
CENTER (AOC).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-15,887] ...............
195 0207412F CONTROL AND REPORTING 18,137 ............... 18,137
CENTER (CRC).
196 0207418F AFSPECWAR--TACP............ 5,206 ............... 5,206
198 0207431F COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE 33,700 ............... 33,700
SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
199 0207438F THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT 7,014 ............... 7,014
(TBM) C4I.
200 0207439F ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE INT 73,523 ............... 73,523
REPROG (EWIR).
202 0207452F DCAPES..................... 5,254 ............... 5,254
203 0207457F AIR FORCE SPECIAL WARFARE 24,423 ............... 24,423
(SPECWAR).
204 0207461F FLIGHT OPERATIONS SYSTEMS.. 15,978 ............... 15,978
205 0207521F AIR FORCE CALIBRATION 2,220 ............... 2,220
PROGRAMS.
207 0207590F SEEK EAGLE................. 36,710 ............... 36,710
208 0207611F READINESS DECISION SUPPORT 6,823 ............... 6,823
ENTERPRISE.
209 0207697F DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND 83,659 -10,000 73,659
EXERCISES.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
210 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 6,644 22,000 28,644
TRAINING.
........................ AI-enabled maintenance .............. [22,000] ...............
intelligence platforms
across air education
and training command.
211 0208006F MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS... 122,175 -12,217 109,958
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-12,217] ...............
212 0208007F TACTICAL DECEPTION......... 48,857 -4,885 43,972
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-4,885] ...............
213 0208087F DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE 71,868 -2,000 69,868
OPERATIONS.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-2,000] ...............
214 0208088F AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE 76,758 ............... 76,758
OPERATIONS.
218 0208288F INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS.... 7,511 10,000 17,511
........................ FireFly algorithm .............. [10,000] ...............
development.
219 0301025F GEOBASE.................... 403 ............... 403
226 0301377F COUNTERING ADVANCED 1,343 ............... 1,343
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
(CACW).
228 0301401F AF MULTI-DOMAIN NON- 2,754 ............... 2,754
TRADITIONAL ISR
BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
229 0302015F E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE 50,873 ............... 50,873
OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
230 0302315F NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE 4,024 ............... 4,024
SUPPORT.
233 0303131F MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY 254,837 ............... 254,837
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
(MEECN).
234 0303133F HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO 33,215 ............... 33,215
SYSTEMS.
235 0303140F INFORMATION SYSTEMS 117,658 ............... 117,658
SECURITY PROGRAM.
236 0303248F ALL DOMAIN COMMON PLATFORM. 71,312 ............... 71,312
238 0304100F STRATEGIC MISSION PLANNING 89,663 ............... 89,663
& EXECUTION SYSTEM (SMPES).
239 0304109F THRESHER................... 109 ............... 109
242 0304260F AIRBORNE SIGINT ENTERPRISE. 98,319 ............... 98,319
243 0304310F COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC 1,713 ............... 1,713
ANALYSIS.
246 0304784F LONG ENDURANCE--AIRBORNE 16,570 ............... 16,570
ISR.
249 0305022F ISR MODERNIZATION & 16,188 ............... 16,188
AUTOMATION DVMT (IMAD).
250 0305099F GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC 4,210 ............... 4,210
MANAGEMENT (GATM).
251 0305103F CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE.. 318 ............... 318
252 0305111F WEATHER SERVICE............ 29,331 ............... 29,331
253 0305114F AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, 61,895 ............... 61,895
APPROACH, AND LANDING
SYSTEM (ATCALS).
254 0305116F AERIAL TARGETS............. 1,704 ............... 1,704
257 0305128F SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE 9,642 ............... 9,642
ACTIVITIES.
258 0305146F DEFENSE JOINT 2,469 ............... 2,469
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
259 0305155F THEATER NUCLEAR WEAPON 24,364 ............... 24,364
STORAGE & SECURITY SYSTEM.
261 0305179F INTEGRATED BROADCAST 18,266 ............... 18,266
SERVICE (IBS).
262 0305206F AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 34,273 ............... 34,273
SYSTEMS.
263 0305207F MANNED RECONNAISSANCE 17,114 ............... 17,114
SYSTEMS.
264 0305208F DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 85,365 ............... 85,365
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
266 0305221F NETWORK-CENTRIC 9,146 ............... 9,146
COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
268 0305240F ISR TRANSPORT AND 312,037 -35,000 277,037
PROCESSING.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-35,000] ...............
269 0305249F AF JWICS ENTERPRISE........ 19,324 ............... 19,324
270 0305600F INTERNATIONAL INTELLIGENCE 62,000 ............... 62,000
TECHNOLOGY AND
ARCHITECTURES.
271 0305836F C2IMERA.................... 11,393 ............... 11,393
272 0305903F COCOM MOBILE COMMAND AND 2,013 ............... 2,013
CONTROL CENTERS (MCCCS).
273 0305984F PERSONNEL RECOVERY COMMAND 1,783 ............... 1,783
& CTRL (PRC2).
274 0307577F INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 3,151 ............... 3,151
(IMD).
275 0401119F C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS (IF). 76,233 ............... 76,233
276 0401130F C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF)......... 178,130 20,000 198,130
........................ C-17 Mobility .............. [20,000] ...............
Connectivity increase.
277 0401132F C-130J PROGRAM............. 16,628 ............... 16,628
278 0401134F LARGE AIRCRAFT IR 12,323 ............... 12,323
COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
279 0401218F KC-135S.................... 121,742 20,000 141,742
........................ KC-135 Mobility .............. [20,000] ...............
Connectivity increase.
280 0401318F CV-22...................... 45,699 ............... 45,699
281 0401334F LARGE AIRCRAFT 50,111 ............... 50,111
SURVIVABILITY SYSTEMS
(LASS).
283 0708610F LOGISTICS INFORMATION 21,518 ............... 21,518
TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
284 0801380F AF LVC OPERATIONAL TRAINING 23,472 ............... 23,472
(LVC-OT).
285 0804743F OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING...... 1,950 ............... 1,950
286 0901202F JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,035 ............... 2,035
AGENCY.
287 0901218F CIVILIAN COMPENSATION 4,248 ............... 4,248
PROGRAM.
288 0901220F PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION... 2,678 ............... 2,678
289 0901226F AIR FORCE STUDIES AND 81,252 -16,250 65,002
ANALYSIS AGENCY.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-16,250] ...............
291 0901538F FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 3,316 ............... 3,316
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
292 0901554F DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACNTNG 38,301 ............... 38,301
AND MGT SYS (DEAMS).
293 1201921F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 700 ............... 700
STRATCOM--SPACE ACTIVITIES.
293A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 29,113,107 ............... 29,113,107
........................ SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 39,930,435 -52,186 39,878,249
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RESEARCH, 73,075,614 -480,895 72,594,719
DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND
EVALUATION, AIR FORCE.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, .............. ............... ...............
TEST, AND EVALUATION,
SPACE FORCE.
........................ BASIC RESEARCH............. .............. ............... ...............
001 0601102SF DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.. 20,833 ............... 20,833
002 0601103SF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 14,426 ............... 14,426
INITIATIVES.
........................ SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH. 35,259 ............... 35,259
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ APPLIED RESEARCH........... .............. ............... ...............
004 1206601SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY........... 234,190 22,500 256,690
........................ Hypersonic weapons .............. [2,500] ...............
advancement.
........................ In-Space Operational .............. [10,000] ...............
Technologies.
........................ Positioning, .............. [10,000] ...............
Navigation, and Timing
(PNT) Quantum System
demonstration.
........................ SUBTOTAL APPLIED 234,190 22,500 256,690
RESEARCH.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
005 1206310SF SPACE SCIENCE AND 313,738 ............... 313,738
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
006 1206616SF SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 126,427 13,500 139,927
DEVELOPMENT/DEMO.
........................ Operational Spacecraft .............. [13,500] ...............
Capability Bridge
Effort.
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 440,165 13,500 453,665
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED COMPONENT .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES.
007 0604002SF SPACE FORCE WEATHER 3,581 3,000 6,581
SERVICES RESEARCH.
........................ Enhancing U.S. Air .............. [3,000] ...............
Force Academy Rocket
Propulsion Curriculum.
008 1203010SF SPACE FORCE IT, DATA 45,971 ............... 45,971
ANALYTICS, DIGITAL
SOLUTIONS.
010 1203622SF SPACE WARFIGHTING ANALYSIS. 128,546 ............... 128,546
011 1203710SF EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS...... 144,434 ............... 144,434
012 1203955SF SPACE ACCESS, MOBILITY & 9,724 ............... 9,724
LOGISTICS (SAML).
013 1206410SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY 1,246,316 ............... 1,246,316
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPING.
014 1206427SF SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 87,730 ............... 87,730
TRANSITIONS (SSPT).
015 1206438SF SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY... 62,031 ............... 62,031
016 1206458SF TECH TRANSITION (SPACE).... 241,056 ............... 241,056
017 1206617SF OPERATIONAL TEST & TRAINING 265,215 ............... 265,215
INFRASTRUCTURE.
018 1206730SF SPACE SECURITY AND DEFENSE 102,140 ............... 102,140
PROGRAM.
019 1206760SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 155,885 ............... 155,885
ENTERPRISE SERVICE (PTES).
020 1206761SF PROTECTED TACTICAL SERVICE 449,434 ............... 449,434
(PTS).
022 1206857SF SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES 9,950 ............... 9,950
OFFICE.
023 1206862SF TACTICALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE 86,306 ............... 86,306
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 3,038,319 3,000 3,041,319
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND .............. ............... ...............
DEMONSTRATION.
024 1203269SF GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS 123,793 ............... 123,793
IIIF).
025 1206421SF COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS....... 43,702 ............... 43,702
026 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON... 34,756 ............... 34,756
027 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 1,317,841 ............... 1,317,841
SYSTEMS.
028 1206431SF ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM 10,157 ............... 10,157
(SPACE).
030 1206440SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GROUND...... 761,425 ............... 761,425
031 1206442SF NEXT GENERATION OPIR....... 209,851 ............... 209,851
032 1206443SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GEO......... 485,703 ............... 485,703
033 1206444SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--POLAR....... .............. 415,000 415,000
........................ Next Generation OPIR, .............. [415,000] ...............
Block 0 Polar.
034 1206445SF COMMERCIAL SATCOM 68,554 ............... 68,554
(COMSATCOM) INTEGRATION.
035 1206446SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING 3,564,176 ............... 3,564,176
MISSILE TRACKING--LOW
EARTH ORBIT (LEO).
036 1206447SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING 1,413,662 ............... 1,413,662
MISSILE TRACKING--MEDIUM
EARTH ORBIT (MEO).
037 1206771SF COMMERCIAL SERVICES........ 23,752 50,000 73,752
........................ Program increase....... .............. [50,000] ...............
038 1206853SF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE 2,748 ............... 2,748
LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)--
EMD.
039 1206855SF EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM 1,838,718 ............... 1,838,718
(ESS).
........................ SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 9,898,838 465,000 10,363,838
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
042 1206392SF ACQ WORKFORCE--SPACE & 260,731 ............... 260,731
MISSILE SYSTEMS.
043 1206398SF SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS 13,717 ............... 13,717
CENTER--MHA.
044 1206399SF SSC ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING 230,848 ............... 230,848
& INTEGRATION.
045 1206759SF MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT--SPACE 65,731 ............... 65,731
046 1206860SF ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH 19,965 ............... 19,965
PROGRAM (SPACE).
047 1206864SF SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP)... 29,598 ............... 29,598
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 620,590 ............... 620,590
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL SYSTEM .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
049 1201212SF SERVICE-WIDE SUPPORT (NOT 28,425 ............... 28,425
OTHERWISE ACCOUNTED FOR).
051 1203040SF DCO-SPACE.................. 481,251 ............... 481,251
052 1203109SF NARROWBAND SATELLITE 855,860 ............... 855,860
COMMUNICATIONS.
053 1203110SF SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK 92,537 ............... 92,537
(SPACE).
054 1203154SF LONG RANGE KILL CHAINS..... 1,392,025 ............... 1,392,025
055 1203155SF SPACE-BASED MOVING TARGET 253,355 ............... 253,355
INDICATOR.
056 1203156SF DATA TRANSPORT AND 164,974 ............... 164,974
NETWORKING.
057 1203165SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING 115,000 ............... 115,000
SYSTEM (SPACE AND CONTROL
SEGMENTS).
058 1203173SF SPACE AND MISSILE TEST AND 22,487 ............... 22,487
EVALUATION CENTER.
059 1203174SF SPACE INNOVATION, 10,538 ............... 10,538
INTEGRATION AND RAPID
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
060 1203182SF SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM 56,781 ............... 56,781
(SPACE).
061 1203330SF SPACE SUPERIORITY ISR...... 64,290 ............... 64,290
064 1203906SF NCMC--ITW/AA SYSTEM........ 25,092 ............... 25,092
065 1203909SF BALLISTIC MISSILE EARLY 128,630 ............... 128,630
WARNING SYSTEM (BMEWS).
066 1203913SF NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM 114,004 ............... 114,004
(SPACE).
067 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 294,902 ............... 294,902
OPERATIONS.
068 1206423SF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM 332,313 ............... 332,313
III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
SEGMENT.
072 1206772SF RAPID RESILIENT COMMAND AND 109,190 ............... 109,190
CONTROL (R2C2).
073 1207440SF AUTOMATE SAT C2............ 1,524,300 -719,400 804,900
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-719,400] ...............
074 1208053SF JOINT TACTICAL GROUND 92,731 ............... 92,731
SYSTEM.
074A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 17,330,381 ............... 17,330,381
........................ SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 23,489,066 -719,400 22,769,666
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL .............. ............... ...............
TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS.
075 1208248SF SPACE DOMAIN AWARENESS/ 617,062 14,000 631,062
PLANNING/TASKING SW.
........................ Expanded Commercial .............. [9,000] ...............
Space Domain Awareness.
........................ Space Command & .............. [5,000] ...............
Control--Software Pilot
Program.
........................ SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 617,062 14,000 631,062
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RESEARCH, 38,373,489 -201,400 38,172,089
DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND
EVALUATION, SPACE
FORCE.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST .............. ............... ...............
AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-
WIDE.
........................ BASIC RESEARCH............. .............. ............... ...............
001 0601000BR DTRA BASIC RESEARCH........ 15,070 ............... 15,070
003 0601108D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH 17,667 ............... 17,667
INITIATIVES.
004 0601110D8Z BASIC RESEARCH INITIATIVES. 87,091 10,000 97,091
........................ Program increase....... .............. [10,000] ...............
006 0601120D8Z NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION 165,488 50,000 215,488
PROGRAM.
........................ Pilot Program To .............. [50,000] ...............
Support Advanced
Technology Centers At
Community Colleges.
007 0601122E EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES..... 387,633 ............... 387,633
008 0601228D8Z HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES 99,706 26,000 125,706
AND UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
INSTITUTIONS.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [26,000] ...............
009 0601384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 27,425 ............... 27,425
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
........................ SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH. 800,080 86,000 886,080
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ APPLIED RESEARCH........... .............. ............... ...............
011 0602000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY. 32,145 ............... 32,145
012 0602023E ACCESS AND AWARENESS....... 110,096 ............... 110,096
013 0602024E WARFIGHTING PERFORMANCE.... 364,141 ............... 364,141
014 0602025E MAKING, MAINTAINING, SUPPLY 1,624,523 ............... 1,624,523
CHAIN AND LOGISTICS.
017 0602128D8Z PROMOTION AND PROTECTION 4,260 ............... 4,260
STRATEGIES.
018 0602230D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 43,405 ............... 43,405
INNOVATION.
019 0602234D8Z LINCOLN LABORATORY RESEARCH 10,045 8,000 18,045
PROGRAM.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [8,000] ...............
020 0602251D8Z APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE 59,560 ............... 59,560
ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
PRIORITIES.
022 0602384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 207,186 -10,000 197,186
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
023 0602668D8Z CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH.... 18,575 5,000 23,575
........................ Pacific Intelligence .............. [5,000] ...............
and Innovation
Initiative.
029 0602718BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 157,287 ............... 157,287
DESTRUCTION APPLIED
RESEARCH.
030 0602751D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 7,069 ............... 7,069
INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
031 0602890D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH. 50,408 ............... 50,408
032 0602891D8Z FSRM MODELLING............. 6,635 ............... 6,635
033 1160401BB SOF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT. 50,856 5,000 55,856
........................ Radio Consolidation and .............. [5,000] ...............
Procurement.
........................ SUBTOTAL APPLIED 2,746,191 8,000 2,754,191
RESEARCH.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
034 0603000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED 64,251 ............... 64,251
TECHNOLOGY.
036 0603055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 165,060 40,000 205,060
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [20,000] ...............
........................ TRISO development...... .............. [20,000] ...............
038 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM 73,618 250,000 323,618
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
........................ Emerging Tech .............. [50,000] ...............
Cooperation.
........................ Israel Counter UXS .............. [100,000] ...............
Program.
........................ Israel Subterranean .............. [100,000] ...............
Cooperation.
039 0603133D8Z FOREIGN COMPARATIVE TESTING 24,950 ............... 24,950
040 0603142D8Z MISSION ENGINEERING & 144,454 ............... 144,454
INTEGRATION (ME&I).
041 0603160BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 509,160 ............... 509,160
DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
043 0603180C ADVANCED RESEARCH.......... 482,573 63,000 545,573
........................ Hypersonic and counter- .............. [60,000] ...............
hypersonic testing from
unmanned surface
vessels.
........................ power source for .............. [3,000] ...............
directed energy missile
defense satellite
system.
044 0603183D8Z JOINT HYPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY 424,422 30,000 454,422
DEVELOPMENT &TRANSITION.
........................ Acceleration of .............. [10,000] ...............
hypersonic system
development.
........................ AI Enhanced Hypersonic .............. [10,000] ...............
Seeker.
........................ UCAH Classified AI/ML .............. [10,000] ...............
and Quantum Computing
Infrastructure Project.
045 0603225D8Z JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS 45,375 ............... 45,375
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
048 0603288D8Z ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS....... 36,917 ............... 36,917
049 0603289D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 51,960 ............... 51,960
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
050 0603330D8Z QUANTUM APPLICATION........ 60,333 ............... 60,333
051 0603331D8Z FUTURE GENERATION WIRELESS 5,000 ............... 5,000
TECHNOLOGIES.
052 0603342D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 522,559 18,000 540,559
(DIU).
........................ Off Grid Tactical Power .............. [10,000] ...............
Systems Pilot Program.
........................ ONRAMP expansion and .............. [3,000] ...............
innovation acceleration
activities.
........................ Operator Embedded .............. [5,000] ...............
National Security
Innovation Partnerships.
053 0603375D8Z TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION...... 982,694 -65,000 917,694
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-45,000] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-20,000] ...............
054 0603379D8Z ADVANCED TECHNICAL 79,268 ............... 79,268
INTEGRATION.
055 0603384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 310,308 ............... 310,308
DEFENSE PROGRAM--ADVANCED
DEVELOPMENT.
056 0603467E DARPA ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 1,568,124 ............... 1,568,124
DEVELOPMENT.
057 0603468E ADVANCED COMPLEX SYSTEMS... 540,362 ............... 540,362
058 0603469E ADVANCED ENABLING 331,007 ............... 331,007
TECHNOLOGIES.
059 0603618D8Z JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED 49,083 ............... 49,083
TECHNOLOGY.
060 0603662D8Z NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS 696,297 -35,000 661,297
CAPABILITIES.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-20,000] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-15,000] ...............
062 0603680D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE MANUFACTURING 581,847 17,500 599,347
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM.
........................ Advanced Robotics and .............. [10,000] ...............
Maintenance Automation.
........................ Manufacturing .............. [5,000] ...............
Advancement for Novel
Technology Innovation
and Sustainment.
........................ Manufacturing of .............. [2,500] ...............
advanced composites for
hypersonics aided by
digital engineering.
063 0603680S MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 49,787 2,500 52,287
PROGRAM.
........................ Domestic Tantalum .............. [2,500] ...............
processing capability.
064 0603712S GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D 18,791 ............... 18,791
TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS.
065 0603716D8Z STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL 60,774 ............... 60,774
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
066 0603720S MICROELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY 139,923 ............... 139,923
DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT.
072 0603781D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 10,227 ............... 10,227
INSTITUTE.
073 0603834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM 9,800 ............... 9,800
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
074 0603838D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION 310,977 -17,500 293,477
ACCELERATION (DIA).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-22,500] ...............
........................ UAS Affordable Domestic .............. [5,000] ...............
Propulsion.
075 0603924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED 201,125 5,000 206,125
TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
........................ Ultra-Short Pulsed .............. [5,000] ...............
Laser (USPL) Weapons.
076 0603941D8Z TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE & 3,834,080 -253,778 3,580,302
TECHNOLOGY.
........................ Common Enterprise Range .............. [5,000] ...............
Network.
........................ Hypersonics Testing and .............. [10,000] ...............
Evaluation Workforce
Development.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-233,778] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-35,000] ...............
077 0603945D8Z INTERNATIONAL INNOVATION 158,345 -4,000 154,345
INITIATIVES.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-4,000] ...............
080 1160402BB SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 126,085 ............... 126,085
DEVELOPMENT.
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 12,669,536 50,722 12,720,258
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ ADVANCED COMPONENT .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES.
081 0603161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS, ADVANCED 44,685 ............... 44,685
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
082 0603600D8Z WALKOFF.................... 227,158 ............... 227,158
083 0603851D8Z ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY 125,066 ............... 125,066
TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
PROGRAM.
085 0603882C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 1,360,611 ............... 1,360,611
MIDCOURSE DEFENSE SEGMENT.
086 0603884BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 391,307 ............... 391,307
DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
087 0603884C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 865,420 3,000 868,420
SENSORS.
........................ Deep Sentry............ .............. [3,000] ...............
088 0603890C BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS...... 1,457,437 -277,000 1,180,437
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-277,000] ...............
089 0603891C SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA...... 1,742,778 ............... 1,742,778
090 0603892C AEGIS BMD.................. 927,870 52,000 979,870
........................ Aegis Guam Weapon .............. [52,000] ...............
System (AGS) capability
enhancements, threat
sets.
091 0603896C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 939,987 ............... 939,987
COMMAND AND CONTROL,
BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
COMMUNICATIONS (C2BMC).
092 0603898C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 50,430 ............... 50,430
JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
093 0603904C MISSILE DEFENSE INTEGRATION 57,892 ............... 57,892
& OPERATIONS CENTER
(MDIOC).
094 0603906C REGARDING TRENCH........... 29,807 ............... 29,807
095 0603907C SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR 274,204 ............... 274,204
(SBX).
096 0603913C ISRAELI COOPERATIVE 300,000 ............... 300,000
PROGRAMS.
097 0603914C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 1,065,474 ............... 1,065,474
TEST.
098 0603915C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 518,506 20,000 538,506
TARGETS.
........................ Advanced Target Front .............. [10,000] ...............
End (ATFE)
Configuration 3 (C3)
Risk Reduction.
........................ Unmanned sea-based .............. [10,000] ...............
launch platforms.
099 0603923D8Z COALITION WARFARE.......... 10,082 ............... 10,082
101 0604016D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 2,675 ............... 2,675
CORROSION PROGRAM.
102 0604023D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS COMPONENT 7,893 ............... 7,893
PROTOTYPING.
103 0604102C GUAM DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT... 212,413 20,000 232,413
........................ Program acceleration... .............. [20,000] ...............
104 0604115C TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 59,700 25,000 84,700
INITIATIVES.
........................ Solid Rocket Second .............. [25,000] ...............
Source Qualification
Increase.
106 0604125D8Z ADVANCED MANUFACTURING 52,122 ............... 52,122
COMPONENTS AND PROTOTYPES.
107 0604162D8Z CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 945 ............... 945
WEAPONS ELIMINATION
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
108 0604181C HYPERSONIC DEFENSE......... 213,783 50,000 263,783
........................ GPI Acceleration....... .............. [50,000] ...............
109 0604250D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 2,626,130 ............... 2,626,130
TECHNOLOGIES.
110 0604294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 156,743 2,500 159,243
MICROELECTRONICS.
........................ Pilot Program on .............. [2,500] ...............
Semiconductor
Antitampering and
Authenticity Validation.
111 0604331D8Z RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM.. 238,800 70,000 308,800
........................ Multi-Mission .............. [70,000] ...............
Optionally Piloted
Vessel prototyping.
114 0604400D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) 2,024 ............... 2,024
UNMANNED SYSTEM COMMON
DEVELOPMENT.
115 0604539D8Z DEFENSE AUTONOMOUS WARFARE 1,000,000 ............... 1,000,000
GROUP.
116 0604551BR CATAPULT INFORMATION SYSTEM 7,500 ............... 7,500
117 0604555D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 53,505 40,000 93,505
PROTOTYPING--NON S&T.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [40,000] ...............
119 0604679D8Z OFFICE OF STRATEGIC CAPITAL 18,955 ............... 18,955
(OSC).
120 0604682D8Z SUPPORT FOR STRATEGIC 2,802 ............... 2,802
ANALYSIS.
122 0604791D8Z MULTI-DOMAIN JOINT 32,001 ............... 32,001
OPERATIONS (MDJO).
123 0604797D8Z JOINT ENERGETIC TRANSITION 6,278 ............... 6,278
OFFICE.
124 0604826J JOINT C5 CAPABILITY 28,314 ............... 28,314
DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
AND INTEROPERABILITY
ASSESSMENTS.
125 0604834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM 7,000 ............... 7,000
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPING.
126 0604873C LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION 125,074 ............... 125,074
RADAR (LRDR).
127 0604874C IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE 1,344,824 ............... 1,344,824
INTERCEPTORS.
129 0604878C AEGIS BMD TEST............. 61,969 ............... 61,969
130 0604879C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 52,919 ............... 52,919
SENSOR TEST.
131 0604880C LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3).... 25,102 ............... 25,102
132 0604887C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 53,761 ............... 53,761
MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
133 0604924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED 44,485 ............... 44,485
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPE.
134 0202057C SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.. 2,146 ............... 2,146
135 0208059JCY CYBERCOM ACTIVITIES........ 31,735 ............... 31,735
137 0208086JCY CYBER TRAINING ENVIRONMENT 120,814 -9,000 111,814
(CTE).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-9,000] ...............
139 0305103C CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE.. 2,160 ............... 2,160
140 0305245D8Z INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES 15,047 ............... 15,047
AND INNOVATION INVESTMENTS.
142 1206895C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 95,819 ............... 95,819
SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
........................ SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 17,094,152 -3,500 17,090,652
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND .............. ............... ...............
DEMONSTRATION.
144 0604123D8Z CHIEF DIGITAL AND 11,197 ............... 11,197
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
OFFICER (CDAO)--DEM/VAL
ACTIVITIES.
145 0604133D8Z ALPHA-1 DEVELOPMENT 969,825 -40,000 929,825
ACTIVITIES.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-10,000] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-30,000] ...............
146 0604161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS, SYSTEM 14,919 ............... 14,919
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
147 0604384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 261,947 -27,500 234,447
DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-27,500] ...............
148 0604771D8Z JOINT TACTICAL INFORMATION 10,200 ............... 10,200
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
(JTIDS).
149 0605000BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 16,713 ............... 16,713
DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
150 0605013BL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 13,620 ............... 13,620
DEVELOPMENT.
151 0605021SE HOMELAND PERSONNEL SECURITY 9,334 ............... 9,334
INITIATIVE.
152 0605022D8Z DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY 5,943 ............... 5,943
PROGRAM.
153 0605027D8Z OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT 273,253 -5,000 268,253
INITIATIVES.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-5,000] ...............
154 0605080S DEFENSE AGENCY INITIATIVES 51,265 ............... 51,265
(DAI)--FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
156 0605210D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC 7,918 ............... 7,918
PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
157 0605294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 51,202 ............... 51,202
MICROELECTRONICS.
158 0605310D8Z MILITARY AVIATION AND 4,072 ............... 4,072
INSTALLATION ASSURANCE
SITING CLEARINGHOUSE.
159 0605649D8Z ACQUISITION INTEGRATION AND 92,689 ............... 92,689
INTEROPERABILITY (AI2).
160 0605755D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR 3,090 ............... 3,090
DEFENSE MODERNIZATION
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
161 0605772D8Z NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, & 2,985 ............... 2,985
COMMUNICATIONS.
162 0205401JCA COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 580,348 ............... 580,348
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (JIATF-
401).
164 0305282K JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN).. 35,000 ............... 35,000
165 0305304D8Z REAL PROPERTY ANALYTICS.... 2,573 ............... 2,573
166 0305310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION 12,751 ............... 12,751
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
........................ SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 2,430,844 -72,500 2,358,344
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
168 0603829J JOINT CAPABILITY 12,332 ............... 12,332
EXPERIMENTATION.
169 0604122D8Z JADC2 DEVELOPMENT AND 2,109,895 -30,000 2,079,895
EXPERIMENTATION ACTIVITIES.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-30,000] ...............
171 0604774D8Z DEFENSE READINESS REPORTING 8,921 ............... 8,921
SYSTEM (DRRS).
172 0604875D8Z JOINT SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE 11,094 ............... 11,094
DEVELOPMENT.
173 0604940D8Z CENTRAL TEST AND EVALUATION 1,153,754 -40,000 1,113,754
INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT
(CTEIP).
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-15,000] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-25,000] ...............
175 0605001E MISSION SUPPORT............ 108,101 ............... 108,101
176 0605100D8Z JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT 234,700 ............... 234,700
TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
177 0605126J JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND 69,820 ............... 69,820
MISSILE DEFENSE
ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
179 0605131D8Z LIVE FIRE TESTING.......... 9,020 ............... 9,020
180 0605142D8Z SYSTEMS ENGINEERING........ 21,992 ............... 21,992
181 0605151D8Z STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 5,255 ............... 5,255
SUPPORT--OSD.
182 0605161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS MANAGEMENT 21,862 ............... 21,862
SUPPORT.
183 0605170D8Z SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND 26,878 ............... 26,878
INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
184 0605200D8Z GENERAL SUPPORT TO 10,695 ............... 10,695
OUSD(INTELLIGENCE AND
SECURITY).
185 0605384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 89,467 ............... 89,467
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
192 0605711D8Z CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY 10,913 ............... 10,913
ANALYSIS.
193 0605790D8Z SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION 8,435 ............... 8,435
RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER (STTR)
ADMINISTRATION.
194 0605797D8Z MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY 35,512 ............... 35,512
ADVANTAGE.
195 0605798D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS 165,450 ............... 165,450
196 0605801KA DEFENSE TECHNICAL 57,576 ............... 57,576
INFORMATION CENTER (DTIC).
197 0605803SE R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD 34,359 ............... 34,359
ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
EVALUATION.
198 0605804D8Z DEVELOPMENT TEST AND 35,106 ............... 35,106
EVALUATION.
199 0605898E MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D......... 5,383 ............... 5,383
200 0605998KA MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE 3,489 ............... 3,489
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
CENTER (DTIC).
201 0606005D8Z SPECIAL ACTIVITIES......... 19,260 ............... 19,260
202 0606100D8Z BUDGET AND PROGRAM 10,678 ............... 10,678
ASSESSMENTS.
203 0606114D8Z ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP 11,668 ............... 11,668
(AWG) SUPPORT.
205 0606220D8Z OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF 75,000 2,000 77,000
WAR ENTERPRISE
TRANSFORMATION AND
MODERNIZATION.
........................ Acquisition Workforce .............. [2,000] ...............
Data Analytics
Capability.
206 0606225D8Z ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND 3,264 ............... 3,264
RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
207 0606300D8Z DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD...... 6,307 ............... 6,307
208 0606301D8Z AVIATION SAFETY 986 15,000 15,986
TECHNOLOGIES.
........................ Health and Usage .............. [10,000] ...............
Monitoring Systems
modernization.
........................ HUMS................... .............. [5,000] ...............
209 0606771D8Z CYBER RESILIENCY AND 30,746 ............... 30,746
CYBERSECURITY POLICY.
211 0606775D8Z JOINT PRODUCTION 6,215 ............... 6,215
ACCELERATOR CELL (JPAC).
212 0606829D8Z SUSTAINMENT TRANSITION 29,408 ............... 29,408
CAPABILITIES.
215 0204571J JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL 5,088 ............... 5,088
SUPPORT.
216 0207834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM.... 7,000 ............... 7,000
217 0208045K C4I INTEROPERABILITY....... 72,581 ............... 72,581
218 0303169D8Z INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 6,416 ............... 6,416
RAPID ACQUISITION.
219 0305172K COMBINED ADVANCED 5,566 ............... 5,566
APPLICATIONS.
221 0305208K DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 2,951 ............... 2,951
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
222 0305248J JOINT STAFF OFFICE OF THE 67,007 ............... 67,007
CHIEF DATA OFFICER (OCDO)
ACTIVITIES.
223 0804768J COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT 90,424 ............... 90,424
AND TRAINING
TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
NON-MHA.
225 0808737SE INTEGRATED PRIMARY 5,768 ............... 5,768
PREVENTION.
226 0901598C MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA......... 31,863 ............... 31,863
228A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 36,977 ............... 36,977
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 4,775,182 -53,000 4,722,182
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL SYSTEM .............. ............... ...............
DEVELOPMENT.
229 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION INFORMATION 5,893 ............... 5,893
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
(5G).
231 0604538D8Z ECONOMIC DEFENSE UNIT (EDU) 403,903 ............... 403,903
232 0607162D8Z CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 2,931 ............... 2,931
WEAPONS ELIMINATION
TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENT.
233 0607210D8Z INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS 1,177,356 57,500 1,234,856
AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
........................ Digital Twin Center of .............. [2,500] ...............
Excellence For Army
Ground Vehicles Center
and Naval Special
Warfare Systems.
........................ Domestic manufacturing .............. [40,000] ...............
capability for advanced
reactive materials.
........................ Expanding Engineering .............. [5,000] ...............
Research & Development
Capability for Maritime
Industrial Base.
........................ Next Generation Fiber .............. [2,500] ...............
Production Line.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-2,500] ...............
........................ Public-Private Advanced .............. [10,000] ...............
Manufacturing
Initiative in the Indo-
Pacific.
234 0607310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION 11,304 ............... 11,304
MODERNIZATION.
235 0607327T GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY 6,010 ............... 6,010
COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
TSCMIS).
236 0607384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 82,695 ............... 82,695
DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
237 0607385BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 4,108 5,000 9,108
DESTRUCTION OPERATIONAL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
........................ Operational Rapid Multi- .............. [5,000] ...............
Pathogen Diagnostic
Tool.
238 0607757D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR 2,794 ............... 2,794
DEFENSE MODERNIZATION
OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT.
239 0208085JCY ROBUST INFRASTRUCTURE AND 155,613 ............... 155,613
ACCESS.
240 0208097JCY CYBER COMMAND AND CONTROL 85,958 ............... 85,958
(CYBER C2).
241 0208099JCY DATA AND UNIFIED PLATFORM 84,687 ............... 84,687
(D&UP).
245 0302019K DEFENSE INFO INFRASTRUCTURE 13,312 ............... 13,312
ENGINEERING AND
INTEGRATION.
246 0302609V COUNTERING THREATS 11,710 ............... 11,710
AUTOMATED PLATFORM.
247 0303126K LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS-- 10,508 ............... 10,508
DCS.
248 0303131K MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY 10,307 ............... 10,307
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
(MEECN).
250 0303140D8Z INFORMATION SYSTEMS 35,214 ............... 35,214
SECURITY PROGRAM.
252 0303140K INFORMATION SYSTEMS 33,502 ............... 33,502
SECURITY PROGRAM.
253 0303153K DEFENSE SPECTRUM 49,466 ............... 49,466
ORGANIZATION.
254 0303171K JOINT PLANNING AND 10,615 ............... 10,615
EXECUTION SERVICES.
257 0303430V FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE 50,900 ............... 50,900
SERVICES INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
265 0305104D8Z DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE 17,077 ............... 17,077
(DIB) CYBER SECURITY
INITIATIVE.
269 0305146V DEFENSE JOINT 6,751 ............... 6,751
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
270 0305172D8Z COMBINED ADVANCED 18,912 ............... 18,912
APPLICATIONS.
272 0305186D8Z POLICY R&D PROGRAMS........ 11,740 ............... 11,740
275 0305199D8Z NET CENTRICITY............. 55,673 ............... 55,673
282 0305387D8Z HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 1,730 ............... 1,730
TRANSFER PROGRAM.
283 0305601K MISSION PARTNER 15,464 ............... 15,464
ENVIRONMENTS.
293 0306250JCY CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY 1,303,094 5,000 1,308,094
SUPPORT.
........................ Pathfinder............. .............. [15,000] ...............
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-10,000] ...............
294 0307609V NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL 19,840 ............... 19,840
SECURITY SYSTEMS (NISS).
297 0708012K LOGISTICS SUPPORT 2,051 ............... 2,051
ACTIVITIES.
298 0708012S PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS... .............. 2,500 2,500
........................ Program increase....... .............. [2,500] ...............
299 0708047S DEFENSE PROPERTY 2,829 ............... 2,829
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
302 1160403BB AVIATION SYSTEMS........... 216,781 ............... 216,781
303 1160405BB INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS 109,227 ............... 109,227
DEVELOPMENT.
304 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS... 279,478 30,700 310,178
........................ Ground Infil Protection .............. [25,700] ...............
Systems(GIPS).
........................ Next Generation .............. [5,000] ...............
Geospatial Intelligence
Data Awareness.
305 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS............ 435,074 33,034 468,108
........................ Electromagnetic Warfare .............. [3,500] ...............
(EW) Family of Systems.
........................ Ground Infil Protection .............. [4,000] ...............
Systems(GIPS).
........................ Ground Organic .............. [5,000] ...............
Precision Strike
Systems (GOPSS).
........................ Low Cost, Platform .............. [12,000] ...............
Agnostic Lethal
Packages (Warhead and
Electronic Safe and Arm
Device (ESAD)) for
Group 1 Drones.
........................ Munitions War Reserves. .............. [8,534] ...............
306 1160432BB SPECIAL PROGRAMS........... 25,761 ............... 25,761
309 1160483BB MARITIME SYSTEMS........... 351,721 ............... 351,721
310 1160490BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS 25,747 15,000 40,747
INTELLIGENCE.
........................ Hybrid Threats .............. [15,000] ...............
Analytical Platform
(HTAP).
311 1203610K TELEPORT PROGRAM........... 22,244 ............... 22,244
311A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........ 8,923,353 178,900 9,102,253
........................ Foreign Materiel .............. [168,900] ...............
Program.
........................ Forward Based Theater .............. [10,000] ...............
Foreign Materiel
Exploitation.
........................ SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 14,093,333 327,634 14,420,967
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL .............. ............... ...............
TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS.
312 0608140D8Z ENTERPRISE PLATFORMS AND 481,775 -6,000 475,775
CAPABILITIES--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
........................ Unjustified growth..... .............. [-6,000] ...............
313 0608500D8Z WEAPONEERING CODE 23,071 ............... 23,071
SUSTAINMENT.
314 0608648D8Z ACQUISITION VISIBILITY-- 64,364 ............... 64,364
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
316 0608776D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 433,867 -3,000 430,867
FIELDING.
........................ Program decrease....... .............. [-3,000] ...............
317 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND CONTROL 124,329 ............... 124,329
SYSTEM.
........................ SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 1,127,406 -9,000 1,118,406
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RESEARCH, 55,736,724 334,356 56,071,080
DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND
EVALUATION, DEFENSE-
WIDE.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ GOLDEN DOME FOR AMERICA .............. ............... ...............
FUND.
........................ RESEARCH, DEV, TEST & EVAL* .............. ............... ...............
009 0604139D8Z GOLDEN DOME FOR AMERICA-- 367,000 ............... 367,000
MDA.
015 0901159D8Z GOLDEN DOME FOR AMERICA.... 30,971 ............... 30,971
........................ SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEV, 397,971 ............... 397,971
TEST & EVAL*.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL GOLDEN DOME FOR 397,971 ............... 397,971
AMERICA FUND.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ OPERATIONAL TEST AND .............. ............... ...............
EVALUATION, DEFENSE.
........................ MANAGEMENT SUPPORT......... .............. ............... ...............
001 0605118OTE OPERATIONAL TEST AND 101,365 50,177 151,542
EVALUATION.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [50,177] ...............
002 0605131OTE LIVE FIRE TEST AND 11,000 97,109 108,109
EVALUATION.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [97,109] ...............
003 0605814OTE OPERATIONAL TEST ACTIVITIES .............. 76,492 76,492
AND ANALYSES.
........................ Program increase....... .............. [76,492] ...............
........................ SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 112,365 223,778 336,143
SUPPORT.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST 112,365 223,778 336,143
AND EVALUATION,
DEFENSE.
........................ ........................... .............. ............... ...............
........................ TOTAL RDT&E........... 218,791,608 687,206 219,478,814
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 House
Line Item Request House Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY... .............. ............................. ................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 MANEUVER UNITS.................... 5,309,790 ............................. 5,309,790
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES.......... 375,682 ............................. 375,682
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE............ 1,193,028 ............................. 1,193,028
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS.............. 2,395,049 ............................. 2,395,049
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT.... 1,273,674 ............................. 1,273,674
060 AVIATION ASSETS................... 1,930,557 ............................. 1,930,557
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT 7,186,195 ............................. 7,186,195
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS..... 888,277 ............................. 888,277
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE..... 2,022,115 120,000 2,142,115
Ground combat vehicle .............. [120,000] ................
sustainment...................
100 MEDICAL READINESS................. 786,815 10,000 796,815
TC3Sim: Battlefield Trauma .............. [10,000] ................
Readiness.....................
110 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT........... 10,390,174 ............................. 10,390,174
120 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 5,435,364 5,500 5,440,864
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
Army National Guard Controlled .............. [5,500] ................
Humidity Preservation.........
130 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL 287,812 ............................. 287,812
HEADQUARTERS.....................
140 ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES............. 383,610 ............................. 383,610
150 RESET............................. 117,880 ............................. 117,880
160 US AFRICA COMMAND................. 693,812 142,000 835,812
COCO ISR...................... .............. [45,000] ................
Information Operations........ .............. [94,000] ................
Technology Experimentation and .............. [3,000] ................
Demonstration.................
170 US EUROPEAN COMMAND............... 510,862 3,000 513,862
including amount for Classified .............. ............................. [40,000]
Program.......................
Technology Experimentation and .............. [3,000] ................
Demonstration.................
180 US SOUTHERN COMMAND............... 464,769 3,000 467,769
Technology Experimentation and .............. [3,000] ................
Demonstration.................
190 US FORCES KOREA................... 77,775 ............................. 77,775
200 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE 366,311 -8,000 358,311
OPERATIONS.......................
Unjustified growth............ .............. [-8,000] ................
210 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES-- 579,954 ............................. 579,954
CYBERSECURITY....................
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 42,669,505 275,500 42,945,005
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
MOBILIZATION...................... .............. ............................. ................
220 STRATEGIC MOBILITY................ 53,602 ............................. 53,602
230 ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS......... 1,125,709 ............................. 1,125,709
including amount for .............. ............................. [380,000]
maintenance of APS-2 in the
USEUCOM AOR...................
240 INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS........... 3,172 ............................. 3,172
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION......... 1,182,483 ............................. 1,182,483
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TRAINING AND RECRUITING........... .............. ............................. ................
250 OFFICER ACQUISITION............... 193,530 ............................. 193,530
260 RECRUIT TRAINING.................. 70,431 ............................. 70,431
270 ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING......... 96,115 ............................. 96,115
280 SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING 503,896 ............................. 503,896
CORPS............................
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING........ 1,204,230 ............................. 1,204,230
300 FLIGHT TRAINING................... 1,381,437 ............................. 1,381,437
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION 201,481 ............................. 201,481
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................. 609,925 ............................. 609,925
330 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 712,092 ............................. 712,092
350 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.. 216,256 ............................. 216,256
360 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING... 218,683 ............................. 218,683
370 JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING 218,598 ............................. 218,598
CORPS............................
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND 5,626,674 ............................. 5,626,674
RECRUITING....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
390 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION........ 1,483,938 -172,500 1,311,438
Program decrease.............. .............. [-172,500] ................
400 CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES......... 703,829 ............................. 703,829
410 LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES....... 634,879 ............................. 634,879
420 AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT............. 525,732 ............................. 525,732
430 ADMINISTRATION.................... 402,276 -9,000 393,276
Program decrease.............. .............. [-9,000] ................
440 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS........ 2,252,914 -30,000 2,222,914
Program decrease.............. .............. [-30,000] ................
450 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT............... 324,069 ............................. 324,069
460 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT........... 961,851 ............................. 961,851
470 OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT............. 2,179,562 ............................. 2,179,562
480 ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES............ 139,480 ............................. 139,480
490 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT............ 308,271 ............................. 308,271
500 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT 434,778 ............................. 434,778
READINESS........................
510 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 37,654 ............................. 37,654
DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT..............
520 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY 760,520 ............................. 760,520
HEADQUARTERS.....................
530 MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS.... 28,681 ............................. 28,681
590A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 3,457,587 ............................. 3,457,587
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 14,636,021 -211,500 14,424,521
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
600 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -417,800 -417,800
Historical unobligated .............. [-417,800] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -417,800 -417,800
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 64,114,683 -353,800 63,760,883
MAINTENANCE, ARMY............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY .............. ............................. ................
RESERVE..........................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES.......... 15,213 ............................. 15,213
020 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE............ 674,766 ............................. 674,766
030 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS.............. 121,223 ............................. 121,223
040 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT.... 664,612 ............................. 664,612
050 AVIATION ASSETS................... 37,490 35,000 72,490
Aviation force structure...... .............. [35,000] ................
060 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT 380,473 ............................. 380,473
070 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS..... 41,301 ............................. 41,301
080 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE..... 37,429 ............................. 37,429
090 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT........... 577,337 ............................. 577,337
100 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 411,093 ............................. 411,093
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
110 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL 27,810 ............................. 27,810
HEADQUARTERS.....................
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE 2,725 ............................. 2,725
OPERATIONS.......................
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES-- 19,422 ............................. 19,422
CYBERSECURITY....................
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 3,010,894 35,000 3,045,894
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
140 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION........ 15,237 -4,000 11,237
Program decrease.............. .............. [-4,000] ................
150 ADMINISTRATION.................... 11,708 ............................. 11,708
160 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS........ 4,165 ............................. 4,165
170 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT............... 7,300 ............................. 7,300
180 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT........... 63,330 ............................. 63,330
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 101,740 -4,000 97,740
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
210 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -34,700 ................
Historical unobligated .............. [-34,700] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -34,700 ................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 3,112,634 -3,700 3,108,934
MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE....
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY .............. ............................. ................
NATIONAL GUARD...................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 MANEUVER UNITS.................... 807,777 ............................. 807,777
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES.......... 233,114 ............................. 233,114
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE............ 1,143,423 ............................. 1,143,423
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS.............. 84,598 ............................. 84,598
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT.... 344,161 ............................. 344,161
060 AVIATION ASSETS................... 1,096,948 ............................. 1,096,948
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT 864,172 9,500 873,672
GAMER live training capabilty. .............. [9,500] ................
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS..... 93,367 ............................. 93,367
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE..... 171,055 ............................. 171,055
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT........... 1,326,854 ............................. 1,326,854
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 1,065,363 ............................. 1,065,363
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
120 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL 1,116,559 ............................. 1,116,559
HEADQUARTERS.....................
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE 6,831 ............................. 6,831
OPERATIONS.......................
140 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES-- 24,785 ............................. 24,785
CYBERSECURITY....................
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 8,379,007 9,500 8,388,507
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
150 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION........ 6,604 ............................. 6,604
160 ADMINISTRATION.................... 50,221 5,000 55,221
Center for the Study of the .............. [5,000] ................
National Guard................
170 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS........ 24,846 ............................. 24,846
180 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT........... 239,142 ............................. 239,142
190 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT............ 4,004 ............................. 4,004
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 324,817 5,000 329,817
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
200 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -83,000 -83,000
Historical unobligated .............. [-83,000] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -83,000 -83,000
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 8,703,824 -68,500 8,635,324
MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL
GUARD........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND .............. ............................. ................
SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP............
COUNTER-ISIL TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND .............. ............................. ................
(CTEF)...........................
010 COUNTER-ISIL TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND 303,099 -50,000 253,099
(CTEF)...........................
Program decrease.............. .............. [-50,000] ................
SUBTOTAL COUNTER-ISIL TRAIN 303,099 -50,000 253,099
AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF).........
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE 303,099 -50,000 253,099
OF IRAQ AND SYRIA TRAIN AND
EQUIP........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY... .............. ............................. ................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT 8,324,572 ............................. 8,324,572
OPERATIONS.......................
020 FLEET AIR TRAINING................ 3,128,764 ............................. 3,128,764
030 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT............... 1,469,165 ............................. 1,469,165
040 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE........ 2,219,583 ............................. 2,219,583
050 AVIATION LOGISTICS................ 2,664,360 ............................. 2,664,360
060 MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS. 7,424,752 ............................. 7,424,752
070 SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING 1,713,065 ............................. 1,713,065
080 SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE............ 14,292,873 ............................. 14,292,873
090 SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT..... 2,597,722 -30,000 2,567,722
Program decrease.............. .............. [-45,000] ................
Small Shipyard Grants......... .............. [15,000] ................
100 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND 1,821,744 ............................. 1,821,744
ELECTRONIC WARFARE...............
110 MEDICAL READINESS................. 661,800 ............................. 661,800
120 SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE.... 572,000 ............................. 572,000
130 WARFARE TACTICS................... 1,038,456 ............................. 1,038,456
140 OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND 496,272 ............................. 496,272
OCEANOGRAPHY.....................
150 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............. 2,476,987 ............................. 2,476,987
160 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT 62,570 ............................. 62,570
OPERATIONS SUPPORT...............
170 COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE 105,379 ............................. 105,379
OPERATIONS.......................
180 COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT 1,994,139 ............................. 1,994,139
MISSION SUPPORT..................
190 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 662,040 -9,000 653,040
Unjustified growth............ .............. [-9,000] ................
200 STRATEGIC AND REGIONAL STRIKE 2,220,083 ............................. 2,220,083
DETERRENCE.......................
210 WEAPONS MAINTENANCE............... 1,833,006 ............................. 1,833,006
220 OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT...... 834,752 ............................. 834,752
230 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION............ 2,196,932 -11,000 2,185,932
Unjustified growth............ .............. [-11,000] ................
240 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND 4,891,828 ............................. 4,891,828
MODERNIZATION....................
250 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT............ 6,069,456 ............................. 6,069,456
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 71,772,300 -50,000 71,722,300
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
MOBILIZATION...................... .............. ............................. ................
260 SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE..... 378,073 ............................. 378,073
270 READY RESERVE FORCE............... 881,029 ............................. 881,029
280 SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS.... 831,641 125,000 956,641
Platform Supply Vessel........ .............. [125,000] ................
300 COAST GUARD SUPPORT............... 27,729 ............................. 27,729
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION......... 2,118,472 125,000 2,243,472
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TRAINING AND RECRUITING........... .............. ............................. ................
310 OFFICER ACQUISITION............... 198,743 ............................. 198,743
320 RECRUIT TRAINING.................. 17,813 10,000 27,813
U.S. Naval Sea Cadets......... .............. [10,000] ................
330 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS... 193,797 ............................. 193,797
340 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING........ 1,163,755 10,000 1,173,755
Generative AI and Spatial .............. [10,000] ................
Computing for Warfighter
Performance...................
350 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION 280,521 ............................. 280,521
360 TRAINING SUPPORT.................. 504,282 ............................. 504,282
370 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 261,140 ............................. 261,140
380 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.. 75,600 ............................. 75,600
390 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING... 60,191 ............................. 60,191
400 JUNIOR ROTC....................... 60,219 ............................. 60,219
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND 2,816,061 20,000 2,836,061
RECRUITING....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
410 ADMINISTRATION.................... 1,396,823 82,233 1,479,056
Integrated Data Management .............. [5,000] ................
Systems for Military Personnel
Harmful Behaviors Prevention..
Support for Navy Tuition .............. [77,233] ................
Assistance Funding............
430 CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL 244,308 ............................. 244,308
MANAGEMENT.......................
450 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL 642,260 ............................. 642,260
MANAGEMENT.......................
470 FOREIGN CURRENCY FLUCTUATION...... 5,517 ............................. 5,517
480 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 60,440 ............................. 60,440
DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT..............
490 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION........ 279,134 ............................. 279,134
510 PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM 605,530 ............................. 605,530
SUPPORT..........................
520 ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND 822,580 ............................. 822,580
OVERSIGHT........................
530 INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY 1,076,664 ............................. 1,076,664
SERVICES.........................
760A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 728,457 ............................. 728,457
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 5,861,713 82,233 5,943,946
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
770 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -307,900 -307,900
Historical unobligated .............. [-307,900] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -307,900 -307,900
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 82,568,546 -130,667 82,437,879
MAINTENANCE, NAVY............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE .............. ............................. ................
CORPS............................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 OPERATIONAL FORCES................ 3,113,102 ............................. 3,113,102
020 FIELD LOGISTICS................... 2,807,429 ............................. 2,807,429
030 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................. 344,750 ............................. 344,750
040 MARITIME PREPOSITIONING........... 280,543 ............................. 280,543
050 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 351,199 ............................. 351,199
060 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & 3,629,008 ............................. 3,629,008
MODERNIZATION....................
070 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT............ 3,175,027 ............................. 3,175,027
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 13,701,058 ............................. 13,701,058
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TRAINING AND RECRUITING........... .............. ............................. ................
080 RECRUIT TRAINING.................. 45,521 ............................. 45,521
090 OFFICER ACQUISITION............... 1,346 ............................. 1,346
100 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING........ 242,438 ............................. 242,438
110 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION 64,994 ............................. 64,994
120 TRAINING SUPPORT.................. 838,526 ............................. 838,526
130 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 363,287 ............................. 363,287
140 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.. 47,840 ............................. 47,840
150 JUNIOR ROTC....................... 33,292 ............................. 33,292
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND 1,637,244 ............................. 1,637,244
RECRUITING....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
180 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION........ 154,026 ............................. 154,026
190 ADMINISTRATION.................... 416,349 ............................. 416,349
300A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 80,140 ............................. 80,140
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 650,515 ............................. 650,515
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
310 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -80,300 -80,300
Historical unobligated .............. [-80,300] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -80,300 -80,300
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 15,988,817 -80,300 15,908,517
MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS....
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY .............. ............................. ................
RESERVE..........................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT 787,622 ............................. 787,622
OPERATIONS.......................
020 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT............... 9,733 ............................. 9,733
030 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE........ 215,547 ............................. 215,547
040 AVIATION LOGISTICS................ 27,703 ............................. 27,703
050 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS............. 19,652 ............................. 19,652
060 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............. 196,376 ............................. 196,376
070 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 288 ............................. 288
080 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION............ 30,811 ............................. 30,811
090 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND 59,386 ............................. 59,386
MODERNIZATION....................
100 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT............ 111,177 ............................. 111,177
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 1,458,295 ............................. 1,458,295
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
110 ADMINISTRATION.................... 2,747 ............................. 2,747
120 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL 14,944 ............................. 14,944
MANAGEMENT.......................
130 ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1,230 ............................. 1,230
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 18,921 ............................. 18,921
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
150 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -20,600 ................
Historical unobligated .............. [-20,600] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -20,600 ................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 1,477,216 -20,600 1,456,616
MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE....
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE .............. ............................. ................
CORPS RESERVE....................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 OPERATING FORCES.................. 142,416 ............................. 142,416
020 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................. 23,213 ............................. 23,213
030 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND 100,709 ............................. 100,709
MODERNIZATION....................
040 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT............ 128,902 ............................. 128,902
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 395,240 ............................. 395,240
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
050 ADMINISTRATION.................... 9,440 ............................. 9,440
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 9,440 ............................. 9,440
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
070 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -7,000 ................
Historical unobligated .............. [-7,000] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -7,000 ................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 404,680 -7,000 397,680
MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
RESERVE......................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR .............. ............................. ................
FORCE............................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............. 1,798,263 ............................. 1,798,263
020 COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES......... 3,117,205 ............................. 3,117,205
030 AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, 2,770,832 10,000 2,780,832
MAINTAIN SKILLS).................
Point Defense Battle Lab .............. [10,000] ................
Program.......................
040 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT 6,092,998 ............................. 6,092,998
MAINTENANCE......................
050 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 6,100,395 5,000 6,105,395
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
Advanced Nuclear Energy .............. [5,000] ................
Demonstration Project.........
060 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT............ 320,297 ............................. 320,297
070 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND 11,647,415 ............................. 11,647,415
SYSTEM SUPPORT...................
080 FLYING HOUR PROGRAM............... 7,265,480 ............................. 7,265,480
090 BASE SUPPORT...................... 11,318,037 ............................. 11,318,037
100 GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING...... 1,214,408 ............................. 1,214,408
110 OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS..... 2,146,977 -25,000 2,121,977
Program decrease.............. .............. [-25,000] ................
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 1,155,815 -9,000 1,146,815
Unjustified growth............ .............. [-9,000] ................
130 TACTICAL INTEL AND OTHER SPECIAL 1,992,280 ............................. 1,992,280
ACTIVITIES.......................
140 MEDICAL READINESS................. 561,626 ............................. 561,626
150 US NORTHCOM/NORAD................. 746,165 ............................. 746,165
160 US STRATCOM....................... 656,448 ............................. 656,448
170 US CENTCOM........................ 405,438 ............................. 405,438
180 US SOCOM.......................... 42,261 ............................. 42,261
190 US TRANSCOM....................... 694 ............................. 694
210 USSPACECOM........................ 555,147 ............................. 555,147
210A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 81,694 ............................. 81,694
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 59,989,875 -19,000 59,970,875
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
MOBILIZATION...................... .............. ............................. ................
220 AIRLIFT OPERATIONS................ 3,782,668 ............................. 3,782,668
230 MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS......... 321,889 ............................. 321,889
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION......... 4,104,557 ............................. 4,104,557
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TRAINING AND RECRUITING........... .............. ............................. ................
240 OFFICER ACQUISITION............... 267,971 ............................. 267,971
250 RECRUIT TRAINING.................. 70,462 ............................. 70,462
260 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS 143,686 ............................. 143,686
(ROTC)...........................
270 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING........ 589,549 ............................. 589,549
280 FLIGHT TRAINING................... 1,122,297 ............................. 1,122,297
290 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION 280,908 ............................. 280,908
300 TRAINING SUPPORT.................. 192,608 ............................. 192,608
310 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 254,720 ............................. 254,720
320 EXAMINING......................... 7,261 ............................. 7,261
330 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.. 232,768 ............................. 232,768
340 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING... 354,678 ............................. 354,678
350 JUNIOR ROTC....................... 114,790 ............................. 114,790
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND 3,631,698 ............................. 3,631,698
RECRUITING....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
360 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS.............. 1,124,763 ............................. 1,124,763
370 TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES...... 159,721 ............................. 159,721
380 ADMINISTRATION.................... 1,292,758 2,000 1,294,758
Integrated Data Management .............. [5,000] ................
Systems for Military Personnel
Harmful Behaviors Prevention..
Program decrease.............. .............. [-3,000] ................
390 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS........ 43,892 ............................. 43,892
410 OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES...... 1,666,547 ............................. 1,666,547
420 CIVIL AIR PATROL.................. 32,984 ............................. 32,984
430 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 58,936 ............................. 58,936
DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT..............
440 SECURITY PROGRAMS................. 202,400 ............................. 202,400
450 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............. 77,853 ............................. 77,853
450A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 1,653,652 ............................. 1,653,652
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 6,313,506 2,000 6,315,506
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
460 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -408,800 -408,800
Historical unobligated .............. [-408,800] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -408,800 -408,800
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 74,039,636 -425,800 73,613,836
MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE .............. ............................. ................
FORCE............................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 GLOBAL C3I & EARLY WARNING........ 1,056,824 ............................. 1,056,824
020 SPACE LAUNCH OPERATIONS........... 415,322 ............................. 415,322
030 SPACE OPERATIONS.................. 1,266,939 ............................. 1,266,939
040 EDUCATION & TRAINING.............. 783,168 ............................. 783,168
050 SPECIAL PROGRAMS.................. 733,761 ............................. 733,761
060 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................. 83,803 ............................. 83,803
070 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 1,384,326 ............................. 1,384,326
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
080 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS AND SYSTEM 2,096,381 ............................. 2,096,381
SUPPORT..........................
090 SPACE OPERATIONS--BOS............. 551,196 ............................. 551,196
100 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 289,958 ............................. 289,958
100A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 118,478 ............................. 118,478
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 8,780,156 ............................. 8,780,156
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
110 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS.............. 36,164 ............................. 36,164
120 ADMINISTRATION.................... 449,597 ............................. 449,597
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 485,761 ............................. 485,761
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
130 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -54,400 -54,400
Historical unobligated .............. [-54,400] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -54,400 -54,400
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 9,265,917 -54,400 9,211,517
MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.....
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR .............. ............................. ................
FORCE RESERVE....................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............. 2,138,964 ............................. 2,138,964
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS........ 217,542 4,000 221,542
Program increase.............. .............. [4,000] ................
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT 787,861 ............................. 787,861
MAINTENANCE......................
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 187,022 ............................. 187,022
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND 654,233 ............................. 654,233
SYSTEM SUPPORT...................
060 BASE SUPPORT...................... 632,638 ............................. 632,638
070 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 1,655 ............................. 1,655
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 4,619,915 4,000 4,623,915
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
080 ADMINISTRATION.................... 100,998 ............................. 100,998
090 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 11,620 ............................. 11,620
100 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT 15,893 ............................. 15,893
(ARPC)...........................
110 AUDIOVISUAL....................... 561 ............................. 561
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 129,072 ............................. 129,072
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
120 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -52,100 -52,100
Historical unobligated .............. [-52,100] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -52,100 -52,100
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 4,748,987 -48,100 4,700,887
MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
RESERVE......................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR .............. ............................. ................
NATIONAL GUARD...................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS............... 2,744,277 ............................. 2,744,277
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS........ 663,367 ............................. 663,367
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT 1,210,460 ............................. 1,210,460
MAINTENANCE......................
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, 531,241 ............................. 531,241
RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION......
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND 1,632,461 ............................. 1,632,461
SYSTEM SUPPORT...................
060 BASE SUPPORT...................... 1,128,729 ............................. 1,128,729
070 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT............ 26,354 ............................. 26,354
080 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............. 81,720 ............................. 81,720
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 8,018,609 ............................. 8,018,609
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
090 ADMINISTRATION.................... 64,249 ............................. 64,249
100 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING........ 47,831 ............................. 47,831
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 112,080 ............................. 112,080
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
110 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -50,800 -50,800
Historical unobligated .............. [-50,800] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -50,800 -50,800
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 8,130,689 -50,800 8,079,889
MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL
GUARD........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE- .............. ............................. ................
WIDE.............................
OPERATING FORCES.................. .............. ............................. ................
010 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............. 534,218 ............................. 534,218
020 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--JTEEP...... 1,393,798 ............................. 1,393,798
030 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CYBER...... 9,103 ............................. 9,103
040 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF 325,609 15,000 340,609
DEFENSE--PSYOP...................
AI-based IO agentic Assessment .............. [15,000] ................
050 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT 2,589,383 428,600 3,017,983
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES...........
Accelerated Fielding of Group .............. [3,600] ................
3 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)
Capability....................
Maritime Mission Support .............. [425,000] ................
Vessel........................
060 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 1,388,865 48,764 1,437,629
MAINTENANCE......................
Electromagnetic Warfare (EW) .............. [1,286] ................
Family of Systems.............
Ground Infil Protection .............. [15,340] ................
Systems(GIPS).................
Ground Organic Precision .............. [3,639] ................
Strike Systems (GOPSS)........
Munitions War Reserves........ .............. [2,888] ................
Non-Standard Aviations (NSAv). .............. [15,611] ................
USASOC Dive Tank and .............. [10,000] ................
Compression Chamber...........
070 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 180,691 ............................. 180,691
MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONAL
HEADQUARTERS.....................
080 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER 3,695,859 10,763 3,706,622
FORCES...........................
Cognitive Performance .............. [7,500] ................
Initiative....................
Manpower for TSOC Next........ .............. [3,263] ................
090 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 78,512 ............................. 78,512
CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............
100 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 1,130,849 8,000 1,138,849
INTELLIGENCE.....................
Identity and Signature .............. [8,000] ................
Management....................
110 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 1,796,851 16,000 1,812,851
OPERATIONAL SUPPORT..............
Identity and Signature .............. [11,000] ................
Management....................
USSOCOM Lessons Learned .............. [5,000] ................
Program.......................
120 CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS............. 1,880,381 -8,000 1,872,381
Unjustified growth............ .............. [-8,000] ................
130 USCYBERCOM HEADQUARTERS........... 303,726 ............................. 303,726
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES..... 15,307,845 519,127 15,826,972
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TRAINING AND RECRUITING........... .............. ............................. ................
140 DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY.... 193,017 ............................. 193,017
150 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............. 173,748 ............................. 173,748
160 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/ 30,040 ............................. 30,040
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
EDUCATION........................
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND 396,805 ............................. 396,805
RECRUITING....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
170 CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS........... 118,488 256,000 374,488
National Guard Youth Challenge .............. [198,000] ................
Program (NGYCP)...............
Senator Robert J. Dole .............. [5,000] ................
Greatest Generation Education
Program.......................
STARBASE...................... .............. [53,000] ................
180 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY-- 3,825 ............................. 3,825
CYBER............................
190 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY..... 611,600 ............................. 611,600
200 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY 1,462,988 ............................. 1,462,988
210 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT 42,367 ............................. 42,367
AGENCY--CYBER....................
220 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND 1,035,974 ............................. 1,035,974
SECURITY AGENCY..................
240 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND 16,885 ............................. 16,885
SECURITY AGENCY--CYBER...........
250 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY-- 49,611 ............................. 49,611
CYBER............................
260 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY.. 1,505,352 5,000 1,510,352
Modernization of DOD Drug .............. [5,000] ................
Testing.......................
290 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY 3,873,222 ............................. 3,873,222
300 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 602,017 ............................. 602,017
AGENCY--CYBER....................
310 DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY..... 147,620 ............................. 147,620
320 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY.......... 585,610 ............................. 585,610
330 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY............ 207,551 ............................. 207,551
340 DEFENSE POW/MIA OFFICE............ 160,358 ............................. 160,358
350 DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION 3,780,757 613,077 4,393,834
AGENCY...........................
Additional International .............. [210,000] ................
Security Cooperation Programs--
EUCOM.........................
including amount for Baltic .............. [175,000] ................
Security Initiative.........
Defense Institute for .............. [1,396] ................
International Legal Studies...
Institute for Security .............. [1,681] ................
Governance....................
Prior-year authorization...... .............. [400,000] ................
360 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY 47,101 ............................. 47,101
ADMINISTRATION...................
370 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY... 637,514 ............................. 637,514
390 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY-- 73,477 ............................. 73,477
CYBER............................
400 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION 3,493,232 70,000 3,563,232
ACTIVITY.........................
Impact Aid.................... .............. [50,000] ................
Impact Aid Students with .............. [20,000] ................
Disabilities..................
410 MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY............ 487,235 ............................. 487,235
420 OFFICE OF THE LOCAL DEFENSE 142,597 10,000 152,597
COMMUNITY COOPERATION............
Program increase.............. .............. [10,000] ................
430 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--JIATF...... 431,652 ............................. 431,652
470 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF 81,163 43,000 124,163
DEFENSE--CYBER...................
DIB Cybersecurity............. .............. [4,000] ................
Enterprise Unified Data .............. [15,000] ................
Library.......................
Senior Military College DoD .............. [24,000] ................
Cyber Institutes..............
480 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 3,832,831 43,000 3,875,831
Readiness and Environmental .............. [30,000] ................
Protection Integration
Program (REPI)...............
Legacy Resource Management .............. [8,000] ................
Program.......................
Native American Lands .............. [5,000] ................
Environmental Mitigation
Program (NALEMP)..............
510 WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES.. 536,546 ............................. 536,546
510A CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 24,579,358 58,000 24,637,358
Automated Man-made Vertical .............. [15,000] ................
Obstruction/Obstacle Detection
Software Integration..........
Forward Based Theater Foreign .............. [21,100] ................
Materiel Exploitation.........
Machine Speed Intelligence .............. [8,000] ................
Fusion........................
Personnel adjustments......... .............. [13,900] ................
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 48,546,931 1,098,077 49,645,008
SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. ............................. ................
520 UNDISTRIBUTED..................... .............. -1,380,803 -1,380,803
Foreign currency fluctuations. .............. [-900,000] ................
Historical unobligated .............. [-480,803] ................
balances......................
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED........ .............. -1,380,803 -1,380,803
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION AND 64,251,581 236,401 64,487,982
MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE....
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR .............. ............................. ................
THE ARMED FORCES.................
ADMINISTRATION AND ASSOCIATED .............. ............................. ................
ACTIVITIES.......................
010 US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 21,698 ............................. 21,698
FORCES, DEFENSE..................
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND 21,698 ............................. 21,698
ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES.........
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL UNITED STATES COURT OF 21,698 ............................. 21,698
APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES.
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ACQUISITION .............. ............................. ................
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FUND.......
ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. .............. ............................. ................
010 ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD.............. 37,478 60,000 97,478
Defense Civilian Training .............. [30,000] ................
Corps.........................
IP cadre...................... .............. [30,000] ................
SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 37,478 60,000 97,478
DEVELOPMENT...................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 37,478 60,000 97,478
ACQUISITION WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT FUND.............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, .............. ............................. ................
AND CIVIC AID....................
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE........... .............. ............................. ................
010 OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER 78,187 37,148 115,335
AND CIVIC AID....................
Program increase.............. .............. [37,148] ................
SUBTOTAL HUMANITARIAN 78,187 37,148 115,335
ASSISTANCE....................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, 78,187 37,148 115,335
DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION .............. ............................. ................
ACCOUNT..........................
FSU THREAT REDUCTION.............. .............. ............................. ................
010 COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION...... 221,332 ............................. 221,332
SUBTOTAL FSU THREAT REDUCTION. 221,332 ............................. 221,332
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT 221,332 ............................. 221,332
REDUCTION ACCOUNT............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY... .............. ............................. ................
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY............ .............. ............................. ................
050 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY... 282,444 ............................. 282,444
SUBTOTAL DEPARTMENT OF THE 282,444 ............................. 282,444
ARMY..........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 282,444 ............................. 282,444
RESTORATION, ARMY............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY... .............. ............................. ................
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY............ .............. ............................. ................
060 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY... 305,246 ............................. 305,246
SUBTOTAL DEPARTMENT OF THE 305,246 ............................. 305,246
NAVY..........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 305,246 ............................. 305,246
RESTORATION, NAVY............
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR .............. ............................. ................
FORCE............................
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE....... .............. ............................. ................
070 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR 320,060 ............................. 320,060
FORCE............................
SUBTOTAL DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR 320,060 ............................. 320,060
FORCE.........................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 320,060 ............................. 320,060
RESTORATION, AIR FORCE.......
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE .............. ............................. ................
DEFENSE-WIDE...................... .............. ............................. ................
080 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE 8,957 ............................. 8,957
SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE......... 8,957 ............................. 8,957
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 8,957 ............................. 8,957
RESTORATION, DEFENSE.........
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, .............. ............................. ................
FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES......
DEFENSE-WIDE...................... .............. ............................. ................
090 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY 238,927 8,000 246,927
USED SITES.......................
Program increase.............. .............. [8,000] ................
SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE......... 238,927 8,000 246,927
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 238,927 8,000 246,927
RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED
DEFENSE SITES................
.................................. .............. ............................. ................
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE 338,624,638 -952,118 337,672,520
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2027 Request House Change House Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel.................................. 190,771,931 -750,000 190,021,931
Historical unobligated balances................ .................. [-750,000] ..................
MERHCF.............................................. 14,349,269 .................. 14,349,269
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2027 Request House Change House Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS............................... 20,563 .................. 20,563
SUPPLY MANAGEMENT--ARMY............................. .................. .................. ..................
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY............. 20,563 .................. 20,563
.................. .................. ..................
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY.......................... .................. .................. ..................
NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTERS....................... 266,212 .................. 266,212
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY............. 266,212 .................. 266,212
.................. .................. ..................
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE..................... .................. .................. ..................
TRANSPORTATION...................................... .................. .................. ..................
CRITICAL SPARES..................................... 4,245,563 .................. 4,245,563
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.............................. 194,851 .................. 194,851
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........ 4,440,414 .................. 4,440,414
.................. .................. ..................
NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION FUND......... .................. .................. ..................
DEFENSE STOCKPILE................................... 5,700 .................. 5,700
TOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION 5,700 .................. 5,700
FUND.........................................
.................. .................. ..................
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.................. .................. .................. ..................
DEFENSE FINANCE OPERATIONS--DIRECT.................. 273,760 .................. 273,760
DOD MARKET FLUCTUATION ACCOUNT (FUEL)............... 1,000,000 .................. 1,000,000
UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... .................. -400,000 -400,000
WCF cash balances.............................. .................. [-400,000] ..................
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE..... 1,273,760 -400,000 873,760
.................. .................. ..................
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE COMMISSARY AGENCY..... .................. .................. ..................
COMMISSARY OPERATIONS............................... 1,501,344 .................. 1,501,344
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE 1,501,344 .................. 1,501,344
COMMISSARY AGENCY............................
.................. .................. ..................
CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE.. .................. .................. ..................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... .................. .................. ..................
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION......... 55,972 .................. 55,972
TOTAL CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS 55,972 .................. 55,972
DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE.........................
.................. .................. ..................
DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, .................. .................. ..................
DEFENSE............................................
COUNTER-NARCOTICS SUPPORT........................... 658,191 .................. 658,191
DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM....................... 135,745 .................. 135,745
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM................. 117,418 .................. 117,418
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS................. .................. .................. 6,648
TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG .................. .................. 918,002
ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE..........................
.................. .................. ..................
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL..................... .................. .................. ..................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 501,371 .................. 501,371
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL--CYBER.............. 2,073 .................. 2,073
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION......... 1,506 .................. 1,506
PROCUREMENT......................................... 1,393 .................. 1,393
TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........ 506,343 .................. 506,343
.................. .................. ..................
COMBAT AND OPERATIONAL MEDICINE PROGRAM............. .................. .................. ..................
IN-HOUSE CARE....................................... 10,863,317 131,000 10,994,317
Dental Readiness............................... .................. [131,000] ..................
CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT......................... 2,375,175 .................. 2,375,175
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.............................. 2,600,177 .................. 2,600,177
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES............................... 304,382 .................. 304,382
EDUCATION AND TRAINING.............................. 349,460 .................. 349,460
BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS...................... .................. .................. 2,463,042
R&D RESEARCH........................................ 41,924 25,000 66,924
Endometrial cancer research.................... .................. [25,000] ..................
R&D EXPLORATRY DEVELOPMENT.......................... 185,153 .................. 185,153
R&D ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT............................ 361,241 67,600 428,841
Blast Overpressure............................. .................. [6,000] ..................
Cryopreserved Platelet Development............. .................. [5,000] ..................
Freeze-Dried Platelet Hemostatics.............. .................. [5,000] ..................
Joint Neuroscience Demonstration Program....... .................. [10,000] ..................
Musculoskeletal resilience..................... .................. [7,000] ..................
Pathogen Reduced Freeze-Dried Cryoprecipitate .................. [7,600] ..................
Manufacturing Technology.......................
Pathogen reduction technology Funding.......... .................. [7,000] ..................
Physics-based Neutralizations of Threats to .................. [5,000] ..................
Human tissues and Organs Research..............
Resilient Optimization of Load & Integrated .................. [15,000] ..................
Neuromusculoskeletal Anabolism Research........
R&D DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION........................ 186,018 15,000 201,018
Thermal Burn and Concurrent Pulmonary Therapies .................. [15,000] ..................
R&D ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT......................... 124,662 .................. 124,662
R&D MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT.......................... 100,912 .................. 100,912
R&D CAPABILITIES ENHANCEMENT........................ 19,452 11,000 30,452
Advanced Vital Intervention Airborne Training .................. [11,000] ..................
for Emergencies (AVIATE).......................
PROC INITIAL OUTFITTING............................. 25,555 .................. 25,555
PROC REPLACEMENT & MODERNIZATION.................... 231,382 .................. 231,382
PROC JOINT OPERATIONAL MEDICINE INFORMATION SYSTEM.. 31,203 .................. 31,203
PROC MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM--DESKTOP TO DATACENTER.. 78,588 .................. 78,588
TOTAL COMBAT AND OPERATIONAL MEDICINE PROGRAM 20,341,643 249,600 20,591,243
.................. .................. ..................
PRIVATE SECTOR CARE PROGRAM......................... .................. .................. ..................
PRIVATE SECTOR CARE................................. 22,175,472 .................. 22,175,472
TOTAL PRIVATE SECTOR CARE PROGRAM............ 22,175,472 .................. 22,175,472
.................. .................. ..................
TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS................... 51,505,425 -150,400 51,355,025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2027 House
Account State/ Country Installation Project Title Request House Change Agreement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Alabama Anniston Army Depot Access Control Point 0 53,000 53,000
(INC).
Army Alabama Anniston Army Depot Consolidated Shipping 0 5,400 5,400
and Receiving Facility
(Design).
Army Alabama Anniston Army Depot Welding Shop (Design).. 0 4,940 4,940
Army Alaska Fort Wainwright Barracks (INC 2)....... 24,000 ............ 24,000
Army Florida Naval Air Station Key Command and Control 160,000 ............ 160,000
West Facility (INC 2).
Army Germany Grafenwoehr Underground Electric 12,800 ............ 12,800
Lines.
Army Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Guam Def Sys, 190,000 ............ 190,000
EIAMD, PH 2 (INC 2).
Army Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Guam Def Sys, 155,000 -95,000 60,000
EIAMD, PH 3.
Army Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Land Acquisition.. 29,000 -29,000 0
Army Hawaii Fort Shafter CTC: Clearwell and 71,000 ............ 71,000
Booster Pump.
Army Hawaii Helemano CTC: Wells and Storage 72,000 ............ 72,000
Tanks.
Army Hawaii Schofield Barracks CTC: Elevated Tank and 26,000 ............ 26,000
Distribution Lines.
Army Hawaii Schofield Barracks CTC: Water Storage Tank 21,000 ............ 21,000
Army Hawaii Schofield Barracks Fire Station........... 30,000 ............ 30,000
Army Hawaii Wheeler Army Air Field Aircraft Maintenance 90,000 ............ 90,000
Hangar (INC 1).
Army Italy Caserma Renato Del Din Access Control Point... 17,000 ............ 17,000
Army Japan Kadena Air Base CTC: Vehicle 69,000 ............ 69,000
Maintenance Shop.
Army Louisiana Fort Polk Rotational Unit 0 157,000 157,000
Billeting Area.
Army New York Fort Drum Automated Record Fire 25,000 ............ 25,000
Plus Range.
Army North Carolina Fort Bragg CTC: Aircraft 31,000 ............ 31,000
Maintenance Hangar.
Army Oklahoma Fort Sill Automated-Aided 0 94,000 94,000
Instruction Building.
Army Texas Fort Bliss Shipping and Receiving 35,000 ............ 35,000
Building.
Army Texas Fort Hood Vehicle Maintenance 0 81,000 81,000
Shop.
Army Texas Joint Base San Antonio Adv Ind Training 303,000 -200,000 103,000
Barracks-METC (INC).
Army Washington Joint Base Lewis-Mcchord Airfield Fire and 89,000 ............ 89,000
Rescue Station.
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 173,421 ............ 173,421
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Host Nation Support.... 53,521 ............ 53,521
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Minor Construction..... 178,626 ............ 178,626
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide PDI: Minor Construction 76,270 ............ 76,270
Locations
Military Construction, Army Total 1,931,638 71,340 2,002,978
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Navy Australia Royal Australian Air PDI: Aircraft 46,958 ............ 46,958
Force Base Darwin Maintenance Hangar
(INC).
Navy Australia Royal Australian Air PDI: Maintenance 33,955 ............ 33,955
Force Base Darwin Support Facs (INC).
Navy California Marine Corps Base Camp Fire/Emergency Response 43,000 ............ 43,000
Pendleton Station (53 Area)
Replace.
Navy California Marine Corps Base Camp Landfill Liner Phase 53,150 ............ 53,150
Pendleton III and IV.
Navy California Naval Base Coronado Ford Class CVN 33,000 ............ 33,000
Infrastructure Upg.,
Pier Lima (INC).
Navy California Naval Air Station Strike Fighter Center 155,939 ............ 155,939
Lemoore of Excellence Pacific
(INC).
Navy California Naval Support Activity Naval Innovation Center 50,000 ............ 50,000
Monterey (INC).
Navy California Naval Base Ventura Community & Airfield 164,000 ............ 164,000
County Point Mugu Area Flood Protection.
Navy Connecticut Naval Submarine Base New Submarine Pier 8 142,124 ............ 142,124
London Replacement (INC).
Navy Connecticut Naval Submarine Base New Weapons Magazine & 79,600 ............ 79,600
London Ordnance Operations
Fac. (INC).
Navy District Of Columbia Naval Research Biomolecular Science & 157,000 ............ 157,000
Laboratory Synthetic Biology Lab.
Navy Federated States of Micronesia Yap PDI: Yap Port and 142,235 ............ 142,235
Harbor Improvements
(INC).
Navy Florida Marine Corps Support Communications 46,075 ............ 46,075
Facility Blount Island Infrastructure (INC).
Navy Florida Cape Canaveral Space Cape Canaveral Railhead 60,990 ............ 60,990
Force Station & Transfer Facilities.
Navy Florida Naval Air Station Child Development 0 4,135 4,135
Whiting Field Center (Design).
Navy Florida Naval Air Station Multi Aircraft Paint & 0 28,225 28,225
Jacksonville Strip (Design).
Navy Georgia Albany Consolidated 86,350 ............ 86,350
Communication Facility.
Navy Georgia Naval Submarine Base Transit Protection 100,000 ............ 100,000
Kings Bay Program Facility (INC).
Navy Georgia Naval Submarine Base Trident Refit Fac. 30,000 ............ 30,000
Kings Bay Expansion (Columbia
Sub) (INC).
Navy Guam Andersen Air Force Base PDI: Joint Consolidated 132,416 ............ 132,416
Communications Center
(INC).
Navy Guam Apra Heights PDI: Inner Apra Harbor 13,400 ............ 13,400
Resiliency (INC).
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Defense Access 0 16,500 16,500
Roads III (INC).
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Joint 60,000 ............ 60,000
Communication Upgrade
(INC).
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Polaris Point 122,000 -100,000 22,000
Electrical Capacity
Upgrade.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: Polaris Point 171,800 ............ 171,800
Submarine Pier (INC).
Navy Hawaii Ford Island Pacific Warfighting 183,760 ............ 183,760
Center Expansion.
Navy Hawaii Joint Base Pearl Harbor- Dry Dock 3 Replacement 507,453 ............ 507,453
Hickam (INC).
Navy Hawaii Joint Base Pearl Harbor- Water Treatment Plant 248,170 ............ 248,170
Hickam (INC).
Navy Hawaii Marine Corps Base 3d Mlr Armory Expansion 76,550 ............ 76,550
Kaneohe Bay
Navy Hawaii Marine Corps Base ATC CO M Compound...... 134,090 -100,000 34,090
Kaneohe Bay
Navy Hawaii Marine Corps Base Main Gate Entry Control 49,260 ............ 49,260
Kaneohe Bay Point.
Navy Hawaii Kauai PDI: Airfield Pavement 142,470 ............ 142,470
Upgrades (INC).
Navy Japan Kadena Air Base Aircraft Intermediate 31,780 ............ 31,780
Maintenance Facility.
Navy Maine Portsmouth Naval Multi-Mission Drydock 50,755 ............ 50,755
Shipyard #1 Extension (INC).
Navy Maine Portsmouth Naval Power Reliability & 138,875 ............ 138,875
Shipyard Water Resilience
Upgrade (INC).
Navy Maryland United States Naval Storm Water Management 0 86,020 86,020
Academy Facilities.
Navy Nevada Naval Air Station Fallon Range Training Complex 387,570 ............ 387,570
Improvements.
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune Amphibious Combat 0 24,140 24,140
Vehicle (ACV) Shelters
(INC).
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune 10th Marines 77,520 ............ 77,520
Operational Complex
(INC).
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune Ammunition Supply Point 15,451 ............ 15,451
Upgrade Phase II (INC).
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune Combat Water Survival 141,880 ............ 141,880
Training Facility.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Station CTC: Aircraft 47,560 ............ 47,560
Cherry Point Maintenance Hangar.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Station CTC: CH-53K Gearbox 17,941 ............ 17,941
Cherry Point Repair and Test
Facility.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Station F-35 Aircraft 89,181 ............ 89,181
Cherry Point Sustainment Ctr (INC).
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Station Maintenance Facility & 62,575 ............ 62,575
Cherry Point Marine Air Group HQS
(INC).
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Station 2D LAAD Maintenance and 0 19,390 19,390
Cherry Point Operations Facilities
(Design).
Navy Federated States of Micronesia Palau PDI: Palau Port and 384,560 ............ 384,560
Harbor Improvements
(INC).
Navy Pennsylvania Mechanicsburg Machinery Control 79,140 ............ 79,140
Development Center
(INC).
Navy Rhode Island Naval Station Newport Consolidated RDT&E 40,000 ............ 40,000
Integration Laboratory.
Navy Rhode Island Naval Station Newport Next Generation 73,000 ............ 73,000
Submarine Platform
Facility.
Navy Rhode Island Naval Station Newport Submarine Payload 40,000 ............ 40,000
Integration Laboratory.
Navy South Carolina Charleston Air Force Nuclear Power Training 161,700 ............ 161,700
Base Fac Simulation Expan
(INC).
Navy Spain Rota UH for Permanent Party. 64,080 ............ 64,080
Navy Virginia Joint Expeditionary Base Child Development 65,640 ............ 65,640
Little Creek--Ft Story Center.
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk Pier 10 Replacement 0 15,800 15,800
(Design).
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk Child Development 93,040 -83,040 10,000
Center.
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk Child Development 84,940 ............ 84,940
Center.
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk Electrical Distribution 124,965 ............ 124,965
System Upgrades (INC).
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk MQ-25 Aircraft Laydown 54,622 ............ 54,622
Facilities (INC).
Navy Virginia Oceana Naval Air Station Child Development 104,340 -70,000 34,340
Center.
Navy Virginia Portsmouth Dry Dock 3 189,353 ............ 189,353
Modernization (INC).
Navy Virginia Naval Weapons Station CTC: Containerized Long 16,170 ............ 16,170
Yorktown Weapons Storage
Magazine.
Navy Virginia Naval Weapons Station CTC: Conventional 13,710 ............ 13,710
Yorktown Prompt Strike Test
Facility.
Navy Virginia Naval Weapons Station Weapons Magazines (INC) 100,782 ............ 100,782
Yorktown
Navy Washington Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor Columbia Submarine 64,000 ............ 64,000
Repair Facility
Expansion (INC).
Navy Washington Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor Columbia Submarine 90,900 ............ 90,900
Training Facility
Expansion.
Navy Washington Naval Base Kitsap- Missile Assembly 195,227 ............ 195,227
Bremerton Building Replacement.
Navy Washington Puget Sound Naval Multi-Mission Dry Dock 245,000 ............ 245,000
Shipyard (INC).
Navy Washington Naval Air Station EA-18G Aircraft 202,000 ............ 202,000
Whidbey Island Regional Service
Facility.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 1,163,477 ............ 1,163,477
Locations
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 142,764 ............ 142,764
Locations Construction.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 146,460 ............ 146,460
Locations Construction.
Military Construction, Navy Total 8,266,703 -158,830 8,107,873
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
AF Alabama Redstone Arsenal Space Force Operational 250,000 ............ 250,000
Facility.
AF Alabama Redstone Arsenal USSPACECOM HQ.......... 450,000 ............ 450,000
AF Alaska Eielson Air Force Base Jparc Range Operations 91,000 -41,000 50,000
Center.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- Joint Integrated Test 42,000 ............ 42,000
Richardson and Training Ctr (INC).
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--ADAL Field 56,000 ............ 56,000
Richardson Training Detachment
(Ftd).
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Conventional 132,300 ............ 132,300
Richardson Munitions Complex.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Dormitory......... 451,500 ............ 451,500
Richardson
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Flight Simulator.. 93,800 ............ 93,800
Richardson
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Fuel Cell 31,250 ............ 31,250
Richardson Maintenance.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Infrastructure & 422,100 ............ 422,100
Richardson Utilities.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Low Observable 63,250 ............ 63,250
Richardson Aircraft Structural
Maintenance.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Operations and 127,500 ............ 127,500
Richardson Generation Hangar.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--PGM Relocation.... 359,100 ............ 359,100
Richardson
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Public Traffic 50,000 ............ 50,000
Richardson Route Realignment.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Squadron 1-1 125,250 ............ 125,250
Richardson Airfield Pavements.
AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- FTR--Squadron 1-1 154,000 ............ 154,000
Richardson Flowthrough Hangars.
AF Arizona Davis-Monthan Air Force Hangar/Aircraft 15,000 ............ 15,000
Base Maintenance Unit.
AF Arkansas Little Rock Air Force Child Development 27,000 ............ 27,000
Base Center.
AF California Edwards Air Force Base Construct Vehicle 0 4,500 4,500
Search Area Afrl Gate
Ecp.
AF California Beale Air Force Base Multi-Domain Operations 126,000 ............ 126,000
Complex.
AF Colorado Schriever Space Force Space Force Operational 250,000 ............ 250,000
Base Facility.
AF Djibouti Chabelley Airfield Chabelley Power Plant 27,000 ............ 27,000
and Primary Dist.
AF Federated States of Micronesia Yap Airfield PDI: Runway Extension 27,000 ............ 27,000
(INC).
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space Base Support Warehouse. 64,000 ............ 64,000
Force Station
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space Command Facility....... 85,000 ............ 85,000
Force Station
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space Communications Plant 48,400 ............ 48,400
Force Station Warehouse.
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space Launch Support Facility 84,000 ............ 84,000
Force Station
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space LRS Vehicle Maintenance 80,400 ............ 80,400
Force Station Facility.
AF Florida Cape Canaveral Space Security Forces 48,000 ............ 48,000
Force Station Operations Facility.
AF Florida Tyndall Air Force Base AFCEC RDT&E Facilities 160,000 -80,000 80,000
and Gate.
AF Georgia Moody Air Force Base Military Working Dog 0 15,870 15,870
Flight Operations
Facility.
AF Hawaii Maui Secure Integration 3,600 ............ 3,600
Support Lab W/ Land
Acq.
AF Japan Kadena Air Base Theater Strategic 99,000 -39,000 60,000
Communications Hub.
AF Mississippi Columbus Air Force Base T-7A Allied Support.... 11,800 ............ 11,800
AF Missouri Whiteman Air Force Base B-21 ADAL Field 89,000 ............ 89,000
Training Detachment,
B152.
AF Missouri Whiteman Air Force Base B-21 Weapons Loader 80,000 ............ 80,000
Trainer.
AF Montana Malmstrom Air Force Base Sentinel Land 43,500 ............ 43,500
Acquisition (INC).
AF Montana Malmstrom Air Force Base Sentinel Operations & 95,000 ............ 95,000
Maint. Complex (INC).
AF Nevada Creech Air Force Base RPA Reconnaissance 0 36,000 36,000
Operations/Training
Facility.
AF Nevada Creech Air Force Base Mission Support 0 55,000 55,000
Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 2-Bay Fuel Cell (F- 52,000 ............ 52,000
35).
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Age Washrack...... 500 ............ 500
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Aircraft Washrack 4,000 ............ 4,000
& Support Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Apron Complex..... 192,500 ............ 192,500
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Combined 177,800 ............ 177,800
Operations Maintenance
Hangar (Comh).
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Consolidated 32,000 ............ 32,000
Maintenance Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Fuel Cell......... 28,000 ............ 28,000
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Fuel Station...... 10,000 ............ 10,000
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Low Observable 38,700 ............ 38,700
Corrosion Repair
Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Maintenance 29,000 ............ 29,000
Training Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 R-11 East Side 1,800 ............ 1,800
Shade Structure.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Repair Munitions 4,600 ............ 4,600
Admin Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Re-Programming Lab 61,000 ............ 61,000
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Simulator Facility 62,000 ............ 62,000
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Weapons Load 34,000 ............ 34,000
Training Facility.
AF Nevada Nellis Air Force Base F-47 Weapons Storage 2,800 ............ 2,800
Facility.
AF New Jersey Joint Base McGuire-Dix- Well No.6 and Wellhouse 0 11,500 11,500
Lakehurst
AF New Jersey Joint Base McGuire-Dix- Well No.5 and Wellhouse 0 11,000 11,000
Lakehurst
AF New Mexico Cannon Air Force Base Dormitory.............. 10,000 ............ 10,000
AF New Mexico Kirtland Air Force Base Space Force Operational 250,000 ............ 250,000
Facility.
AF North Dakota Grand Forks Air Force Space Force Operational 250,000 ............ 250,000
Base Facility.
AF North Dakota Minot Air Force Base Sentinel Consolidated 124,000 -75,000 49,000
Vehicle Maintenance
Complex.
AF North Dakota Minot Air Force Base Sentinel Security 108,000 -40,000 68,000
Forces Operations
Complex.
AF Ohio Wright-Patterson Air Human Performance Wing 0 21,000 21,000
Force Base Laboratory (INC).
AF Ohio Wright-Patterson Air Advanced Materials 0 9,000 9,000
Force Base Research Lab (Design).
AF Oklahoma Tinker Air Force Base E-7 AWACS Squadron 0 55,000 55,000
Operations Facility.
AF Oklahoma Tinker Air Force Base Bomber Agile Common 112,000 ............ 112,000
Hangar (INC).
AF Oregon Mountain Home Air Force Homeland Defense Over- 33,650 ............ 33,650
Base the-Horizon Radar
(INC).
AF Spain Moron Parking Apron.......... 75,500 ............ 75,500
AF Tennessee Arnold Air Force Base Installation Access 0 20,000 20,000
Control Point Gate 2
Upgrade.
AF Texas Dyess Air Force Base B-21 Flight Simulator 63,000 ............ 63,000
Facility.
AF Texas Dyess Air Force Base B-21 Low Observable 74,000 ............ 74,000
Corrosion Control Fac.
AF Texas Dyess Air Force Base B-21 Utilities Site 23,000 ............ 23,000
Improvements Electric.
AF Texas Fort Sam Houston METC--Barracks/Ships/ 308,000 ............ 308,000
Dorms #1 (INC).
AF Texas Goodfellow Air Force Pipeline Student 12,000 ............ 12,000
Base Dormitory.
AF Texas Joint Base San Antonio MWD Large Capacity 180,000 -100,000 80,000
Kennel.
AF Texas Lackland Air Force Base 91 Cyber Operations 96,000 -56,000 40,000
Center.
AF Utah Hill Air Force Base F-35 Maintenance 100,000 ............ 100,000
Facility, Phase 1
(INC).
AF Utah Hill Air Force Base T-7A Depot Maintenance 72,000 ............ 72,000
Complex (INC).
AF Virginia Joint Base Langley- Fuel System Maintenance 49,000 ............ 49,000
Eustis Dock.
AF Wake Island Wake Island PDI: Aircraft Park. 129,000 ............ 129,000
Apron (Wake) Phase 1
(INC).
AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 1,820,607 29,000 1,849,607
Locations
AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 670,005 ............ 670,005
Locations
AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 315,810 ............ 315,810
Locations Military Construction.
AF Wyoming F.E. Warren Air Force GBSD Operations Group 171,000 -140,000 31,000
Base Facility.
AF Wyoming F.E. Warren Air Force GBSD Utility Corridor 461,158 ............ 461,158
Base (INC).
Military Construction, Air Force Total 10,601,180 -303,130 10,298,050
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Def-Wide Alabama Maxwell Air Force Base Maxwell Elementary/ 44,000 ............ 44,000
Middle School Addition.
Def-Wide Alabama Redstone Arsenal Power Generation and 0 90,000 90,000
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Bahrain Naval Support Activity Power Generation....... 0 5,900 5,900
Bahrain
Def-Wide Belgium Brussels Brussels Unit School 33,000 ............ 33,000
Annex.
Def-Wide California Camp Roberts Power Generation and 0 79,000 79,000
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Colorado Def Reutil and Mktg Ofc- General Purpose 85,000 ............ 85,000
Colorado Springs Warehouse.
Def-Wide Florida Eglin Air Force Base Power Generation and 0 43,000 43,000
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Florida Homestead Air Reserve SOF Climate Controlled 33,000 ............ 33,000
Base Tactical Storage
Warehouse.
Def-Wide Florida Naval Air Station Ambulatory Care Center 40,000 ............ 40,000
Jacksonville Substance Abuse
Rehabilitation Program
(SARP) Replacement.
Def-Wide Germany Army Garrison Ansbach Power Generation and 0 72,000 72,000
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Germany Baumholder Baumholder Middle/High 140,000 -120,000 20,000
School.
Def-Wide Germany Ramstein Air Base Vehicle Fueling 20,500 ............ 20,500
Facility.
Def-Wide Germany Rhine Ordnance Barracks Medical Center 95,002 ............ 95,002
Replacement (INC 13).
Def-Wide Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: GDS, Command 99,700 ............ 99,700
Center (INC).
Def-Wide Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: GDS, EIAMD, Ph1 75,113 ............ 75,113
(INC).
Def-Wide Guam Joint Region Marianas PDI: GDS, EIAMD, PH3... 179,446 ............ 179,446
Def-Wide Japan Camp Butler PDI: Truck Offload 37,900 ............ 37,900
Facilities.
Def-Wide Japan Yokota Air Base PDI: Bulk Storage Tanks 88,200 ............ 88,200
PH 2.
Def-Wide Kentucky Fort Knox Scott Middle School.... 117,000 -80,000 37,000
Def-Wide Korea Kunsan Air Base Ambulatory Care Center 65,000 ............ 65,000
Replacement.
Def-Wide Maryland Bethesda Naval Hospital MEDCEN Addition/ 87,275 ............ 87,275
Alteration (INC 10).
Def-Wide Maryland Bethesda Naval Hospital Support Facilities 55,000 ............ 55,000
Replacement (INC).
Def-Wide Maryland Fort Meade Cyber National Mission 98,411 ............ 98,411
Force Mission
Operations Facility
(INC).
Def-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW East Campus 180,000 ............ 180,000
Building #5 (INC 2).
Def-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW East Campus Site 52,000 ............ 52,000
Infrastructure.
Def-Wide Nevada Creech Air Force Base Ambulatory Care Center 25,381 ............ 25,381
Addition/Alteration.
Def-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Operations 0 65,000 65,000
Ammunition Supply
Point Phase 2.
Def-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Battallion 0 6,400 6,400
Operations Facility
(Design).
Def-Wide North Carolina Camp Lejeune SOF Marine Raider 80,000 ............ 80,000
Battalion Operations
Facility.
Def-Wide North Carolina Camp Lejeune SOF Operational Support 72,000 ............ 72,000
Facility.
Def-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF Operational 50,000 ............ 50,000
Training Facility.
Def-Wide Pennsylvania Defense Distribution Microgrid.............. 0 58,000 58,000
Center, Susquehanna
Def-Wide Puerto Rico Fort Buchanan Emergency Water 0 33,500 33,500
Treatment System.
Def-Wide Texas Brooks Army Medical Power Generation and 0 55,500 55,500
Center Energy Upgrades.
Def-Wide United Kingdom Menwith Hill Station Fire Station 35,000 ............ 35,000
Replacement.
Def-Wide United Kingdom Royal Air Force Hospital Replacement, 78,000 ............ 78,000
Lakenheath Phase 2 (INC).
Def-Wide Utah Camp Williams Nsau Consolidation-- 50,000 ............ 50,000
Mission Facility (INC).
Def-Wide Virginia Joint Expeditionary Base SOF Launch & Recovery 36,000 ............ 36,000
Little Creek--Ft Story Facility.
Def-Wide Wake Island Def Fuel Spt Point Wake PDI: Fueling Facilities 100,000 ............ 100,000
Island
Def-Wide Washington Joint Base Lewis-Mcchord SOF Tactical Equipment 35,000 ............ 35,000
Maintenance Facility.
Def-Wide Washington Yakima Training Center Power Generation and 0 73,000 73,000
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Washington Naval Base Kitsap Power Generation and 0 132,690 132,690
Microgrid.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (DHA)........... 45,813 ............ 45,813
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (DODEA)......... 26,625 ............ 26,625
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (MDA)........... 42,846 ............ 42,846
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (SOCOM)......... 81,628 ............ 81,628
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (DLA)........... 100,511 ............ 100,511
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 16,783 ............ 16,783
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (NSA)........... 33,700 ............ 33,700
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design--Joint Analysis 5,000 ............ 5,000
Locations Center of Excellence.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Energy Resilience & 694,307 -694,307 0
Locations Conservation
Investment Program.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design (ERCIP)......... 39,346 ............ 39,346
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Exercise Related Minor 13,328 4,320 17,648
Locations Construction.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide INDOPACOM Military 27,740 ............ 27,740
Locations Construction Pilot
Program.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Minor Construction 24,500 ............ 24,500
Locations (SOCOM).
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide PAX System Support..... 13,000 ............ 13,000
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide UFC System Support..... 12,000 ............ 12,000
Locations
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 10,000 ............ 10,000
Locations Construction (DODEA).
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 14,237 ............ 14,237
Locations Construction (DLA).
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 3,000 ............ 3,000
Locations Construction.
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 9,000 ............ 9,000
Locations Construction (NSA).
Def-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 2,659 ............ 2,659
Locations Construction (MDA).
Def-Wide Wyoming F.E. Warren Air Force Power Generation and 0 51,717 51,717
Base Microgrid With
Geothermal Heating and
Cooling.
Military Construction, Defense-Wide Total 3,402,951 -124,280 3,278,671
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
NATO Worldwide Unspecified Nato Security Investment NATO Security 604,270 ............ 604,270
Program Investment Program.
NATO Security Investment Program Total 604,270 0 604,270
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Army NG Florida Camp Blanding Automated Multi Purpose 28,000 ............ 28,000
Training Range.
Army NG Guam Barrigada National Guard 0 20,000 20,000
Readiness Center
Alteration.
Army NG Idaho Orchard Training Area Mission Training 27,000 ............ 27,000
Complex (Small).
Army NG Indiana Shelbyville Armory Aircraft Maintenance 0 27,500 27,500
Hangar Addition/
Alteration (INC).
Army NG Louisiana Abbeville National Guard 23,000 ............ 23,000
Readiness Center.
Army NG Massachusetts Camp Edwards National Guard 43,000 ............ 43,000
Readiness Center.
Army NG New York Colonie Readiness Center National Guard 90,000 ............ 90,000
Readiness Center.
Army NG North Carolina Salisbury Readiness Aircraft Maintenance 0 69,000 69,000
Complex Hangar Addition/
Alteration (INC).
Army NG Oklahoma Tulsa Army Aviation Aircraft Maintenance 18,500 ............ 18,500
Support Facility Bay.
Army NG Washington Yakima Training Center Dining Facility........ 18,000 ............ 18,000
Army NG West Virginia Martinsburg Readiness National Guard 20,000 ............ 20,000
Center Readiness Center Add/
Alt.
Army NG Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 71,909 ............ 71,909
Locations
Army NG Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 19,500 ............ 19,500
Locations Construction.
Military Construction, Army National Guard Total 358,909 116,500 475,409
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Army Res Colorado Fort Carson Equipment Concentration 92,000 ............ 92,000
Site.
Army Res Illinois Fort Sheridan Area Maintenance 38,000 ............ 38,000
Support Activity.
Army Res Virginia Richmond Reserve Center Army Reserve Center.... 48,000 ............ 48,000
Army Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 10,413 ............ 10,413
Locations
Army Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 21,500 ............ 21,500
Locations Construction.
Military Construction, Army Reserve Total 209,913 0 209,913
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
N/MC Res Florida Naval Air Station Ramp Expansion & Rtc... 47,000 ............ 47,000
Jacksonville
N/MC Res Texas Fort Worth Hangar 1050 56,870 ............ 56,870
Modernization (INC).
N/MC Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Design............ 6,578 ............ 6,578
Locations
N/MC Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Unspecified Minor 2,522 ............ 2,522
Locations Construction.
N/MC Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide USMCR Design........... 19,302 ............ 19,302
Locations
Military Construction, Naval Reserve Total 132,272 0 132,272
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Air NG Alaska Eielson Air Force Base BCE Pavements and 0 16,000 16,000
Grounds Facility.
Air NG Iowa Sioux City Repair Runway 13-31 0 38,500 38,500
(INC).
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National Mitigate Runway 110,000 ............ 110,000
Guard Base Encroachment.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National Taxiway Alpha Extension 28,000 ............ 28,000
Guard Base
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National Taxiway Bravo Extension 24,000 ............ 24,000
Guard Base
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National F-15EX Maintenance 0 60,000 60,000
Guard Base Complex Phase 3.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National F-15EX Maintenance 0 65,000 65,000
Guard Base Complex Phase 2.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National Mcca KC-46 ADAL Aircrew 0 35,000 35,000
Guard Base Training Facility.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National KC-46 ASE Complex 0 4,300 4,300
Guard Base (Design).
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National KC-46 ADAL Parking 0 1,400 1,400
Guard Base Apron (Design).
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National Mcca KC-46 ADAL SQ Ops 0 38,000 38,000
Guard Base B17.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National F-15EX Maintenance 0 65,000 65,000
Guard Base Complex Phase 1.
Air NG Michigan Selfridge Air National KC-46 Dual Bay Hangar 0 21,200 21,200
Guard Base (Design).
Air NG Missouri Rosecrans Air National Aircraft Parking Apron. 0 63,000 63,000
Guard Base
Air NG Oregon Kingsley Air Force Base F-35 FTU Academic 80,000 ............ 80,000
Training Center.
Air NG Texas Naval Air Station Joint C-130J ADAL Maintenance 27,000 ............ 27,000
Reserve Base Fort Worth Hangar B1676.
Air NG Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 110,656 ............ 110,656
Locations
Air NG Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 136,565 ............ 136,565
Locations
Air NG Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 9,000 ............ 9,000
Locations Construction.
Military Construction, Air National Guard Total 525,221 407,400 932,621
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
AF Res Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Air Reserve Communications Facility 19,500 ............ 19,500
Station
AF Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 1,347 ............ 1,347
Locations
AF Res Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor 1,325 ............ 1,325
Locations Military Construction.
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve Total 22,172 0 22,172
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Con Army Germany South Camp Vilseck FH Replacement 95,060 -59,000 36,060
Construction (44
Units).
FH Con Army Japan Camp Zama FH Improvement 106,356 ............ 106,356
Construction (68
Units).
FH Con Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Family Housing Design.. 39,079 ............ 39,079
Locations
Family Housing Construction, Army Total 240,495 -59,000 181,495
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............ 18,177 ............ 18,177
Locations
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leased Housing......... 132,820 ............ 132,820
Locations
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance of Real 172,866 ............ 172,866
Locations Property Facilities.
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management Account..... 42,802 ............ 42,802
Locations
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Military Housing 42,026 ............ 42,026
Locations Privatization
Initiative.
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous.......... 92 ............ 92
Locations
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services............... 10,130 ............ 10,130
Locations
FH Ops Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities.............. 49,494 ............ 49,494
Locations
Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Army Total 468,407 0 468,407
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Con Navy District Of Columbia Marine Barracks CTC: W/H 1,532 ............ 1,532
Washington (8th Street Revitalization,
& I) Quarters #1 (1 Units).
FH Con Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas CTC: Replace Andersen 25,876 ............ 25,876
Housing PH V (74
Units).
FH Con Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas CTC: Replace Andersen 44,920 ............ 44,920
Housing PH VI (52
Units).
FH Con Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas CTC: Replace Andersen 33,771 ............ 33,771
Housing Phase 8 (62
Units).
FH Con Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Replace Andersen 144,495 ............ 144,495
Housing PH 9 (149
Units) (INC).
FH Con Navy Japan Yokosuka Naval Base W/H & Utility Revit, 44,128 ............ 44,128
Ikego Th Ph6 (32
Units).
FH Con Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 14,971 ............ 14,971
Locations
FH Con Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Navy Southeast MHPI 52,177 ............ 52,177
Locations (2nd Restructure) (100
Units).
Family Housing Construction, Navy And Marine Corps Total 361,870 0 361,870
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............ 17,252 ............ 17,252
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization 60,997 ............ 60,997
Locations Support.
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................ 66,242 ............ 66,242
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............ 119,152 ............ 119,152
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management............. 54,612 ............ 54,612
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous.......... 445 ............ 445
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services............... 14,394 ............ 14,394
Locations
FH Ops Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities.............. 52,515 ............ 52,515
Locations
Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Navy And Marine Corps Total 385,609 0 385,609
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Con AF Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- MHPI Restructure--JBER 156,964 ............ 156,964
Richardson Phase II (1,194 Units).
FH Con AF Japan Yokota Air Base Yokota PAIP 10 PH 1 (32 36,100 ............ 36,100
Units).
FH Con AF United Kingdom Royal Air Force Croughton (Replacement) 24,104 ............ 24,104
Croughton (12 Units).
FH Con AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Design................. 25,854 ............ 25,854
Locations
Family Housing Construction, Air Force Total 243,022 0 243,022
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............ 28,691 ............ 28,691
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization.. 40,627 ............ 40,627
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................ 5,523 ............ 5,523
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............ 160,528 ............ 160,528
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management............. 64,841 ............ 64,841
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous.......... 2,492 ............ 2,492
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services............... 12,957 ............ 12,957
Locations
FH Ops AF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities.............. 51,097 ............ 51,097
Locations
Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Air Force Total 366,756 0 366,756
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............ 93 ............ 93
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............ 566 ............ 566
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing (NSA).......... 14,320 ............ 14,320
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing (DIA).......... 34,693 ............ 34,693
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing (DSCA)......... 8,792 ............ 8,792
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............ 37 ............ 37
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities (DIA)........ 4,548 ............ 4,548
Locations
FH Ops DW Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities (NSA)........ 15 ............ 15
Locations
Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Defense-Wide Total 63,064 0 63,064
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
FHIF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative 8,412 ............ 8,412
Locations Expenses--FHIF.
DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund Total 8,412 0 8,412
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
UHIF Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative 501 ............ 501
Locations Expenses--UHIF.
Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund Total 501 0 501
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Base Realignment & Base Realignment and 151,293 ............ 151,293
Closure, Army Closure.
Base Realignment and Closure--Army Total 151,293 0 151,293
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Base Realignment & 108,325 50,000 158,325
Locations Closure.
Base Realignment and Closure--Navy Total 108,325 50,000 158,325
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide DOD BRAC Activities-- 111,381 ............ 111,381
Locations Air Force.
Base Realignment and Closure--Air Force Total 111,381 0 111,381
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide INT-4: DLA Activities.. 1,318 ............ 1,318
Locations
Base Realignment and Closure--Defense-wide Total 1,318 0 1,318
.................................. ........................ ....................... ............ ............ ............
Military Construction, Total 28,565,682 0 28,565,682
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL
SECURITY PROGRAMS
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House
Program FY 2027 Request House Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies...... ................ ................ ................
Appropriation Summary:.................................. ................ ................ ................
Nuclear Energy........................................ 160,000 0 160,000
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D........................ 253,000 -253,000 0
................ ................ ................
Atomic Energy Defense Activities...................... ................ ................ ................
National nuclear security administration:........... ................ ................ ................
Weapons activities................................ 27,441,159 145,000 27,586,159
Defense nuclear nonproliferation.................. 2,389,595 0 2,389,595
Naval reactors.................................... 2,393,692 -150,000 2,243,692
Federal salaries and expenses..................... 577,097 0 577,097
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration..... 32,801,543 -5,000 32,796,543
................ ................ ................
Environmental and other defense activities:......... ................ ................ ................
Defense environmental cleanup..................... 6,983,318 211,000 7,194,318
Other defense activities.......................... 1,184,721 0 1,184,721
Total, Environmental & other defense activities..... 8,168,039 211,000 8,379,039
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities............... 40,969,582 206,000 41,175,582
Total, Discretionary Funding.............................. 41,382,582 -47,000 41,335,582
................ ................ ................
Nuclear Energy............................................ ................ ................ ................
Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.................. 160,000 ................ 160,000
Total, Nuclear Energy..................................... 160,000 0 160,000
................ ................ ................
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D............................ ................ ................ ................
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D Program.................. 253,000 -253,000 0
Program decrease...................................... ................ [-253,000] ................
Total, Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D..................... 253,000 -253,000 0
................ ................ ................
Weapons Activities........................................ ................ ................ ................
Stockpile Management.................................... ................ ................ ................
Stockpile Major Modernization......................... ................ ................ ................
B61-13.............................................. 46,428 ................ 46,428
W80-4 LEP........................................... 1,048,340 ................ 1,048,340
W80-5 Modification Program.......................... 0 50,000 50,000
Program adjustment................................ ................ [50,000] ................
W87-1 Modification Program.......................... 913,231 ................ 913,231
W93 Program......................................... 1,106,106 ................ 1,106,106
Future Programs..................................... 99,794 ................ 99,794
Total, Stockpile Major Modernization.................. 3,213,899 50,000 3,263,899
................ ................ ................
Stockpile services.................................... ................ ................ ................
Stockpile Operations................................ 1,885,290 ................ 1,885,290
Weapons Dismantlement and Disposition............... 90,760 ................ 90,760
Production Operations............................... 1,146,586 ................ 1,146,586
Nuclear Enterprise Assurance........................ 121,015 ................ 121,015
Subtotal, Stockpile Services........................ 3,243,651 0 3,243,651
Total, Stockpile Management............................. 6,457,550 50,000 6,507,550
................ ................ ................
Production Modernization................................ ................ ................ ................
Primary Capability Modernization...................... ................ ................ ................
Plutonium Modernization............................. ................ ................ ................
Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization................ ................ ................ ................
Los Alamos Pit Production....................... 1,460,791 ................ 1,460,791
21-D-512 Plutonium Pit Production Project, LANL. 812,100 ................ 812,100
07-D-220-04 Transuranic Liquid Waste Facility, 10,000 ................ 10,000
LANL...........................................
04-D-125 Chemistry and Metallurgy Research 110,000 ................ 110,000
Replacement Project, LANL......................
Subtotal, Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization...... 2,392,891 0 2,392,891
Savannah River Plutonium Modernization............ ................ ................ ................
Savannah River Pit Production................... 302,000 ................ 302,000
21-D-511 Savannah River Plutonium Processing 1,946,523 ................ 1,946,523
Facility, SRS..................................
Subtotal, Savannah River Plutonium Modernization.. 2,248,523 0 2,248,523
Enterprise Pit Production Support................. 270,897 ................ 270,897
Total, Plutonium Modernization...................... 4,912,311 0 4,912,311
High Explosives and Energetics...................... ................ ................ ................
High Explosives & Energetics.................... 251,765 ................ 251,765
Total, High Explosives and Energetics............... 251,765 0 251,765
Total, Primary Capability Modernization............... 5,164,076 0 5,164,076
................ ................ ................
Secondary Capability Modernization.................... ................ ................ ................
Secondary Capability Modernization.................. 1,728,546 ................ 1,728,546
06-D-141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12.......... 290,000 75,000 365,000
Commissioning risk reduction and early casting ................ [75,000] ................
demonstration....................................
Total, Secondary Capability Modernization............. 2,018,546 75,000 2,093,546
................ ................ ................
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program..................... ................ ................ ................
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program................... 880,781 ................ 880,781
Total, Tritium and Defense Fuels Program.............. 880,781 0 880,781
................ ................ ................
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization.................. ................ ................ ................
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization................ 258,008 ................ 258,008
26-D-511 MESA Photolithography Capability (MPC), SNL 51,000 ................ 51,000
22-D-513 Power Sources Capability, SNL.............. 140,000 ................ 140,000
Total, Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization........... 449,008 0 449,008
Capability Based Investments.......................... 203,163 ................ 203,163
Warhead Assembly Modernization........................ 47,965 ................ 47,965
18-D-680 Material Staging Capability, PX.............. 22,500 20,000 42,500
Program acceleration................................ ................ [20,000] ................
Total, Production Modernization......................... 8,786,039 95,000 8,881,039
................ ................ ................
................ ................ ................
Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering......... ................ ................ ................
Assessment Science.................................... ................ ................ ................
Assessment Science.................................. 1,243,267 ................ 1,243,267
26-D-512 LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP), LANL.. 15,200 ................ 15,200
24-D-513 Z-pinch Experimental Underground System 91,700 ................ 91,700
(ZEUS) Test Bed Facilities Improvement (ZTBFI),
NNSS...............................................
17-D-640 U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS..... 154,142 ................ 154,142
Total, Assessment Science............................. 1,504,309 0 1,504,309
Engineering........................................... ................ ................ ................
Engineering......................................... 230,043 ................ 230,043
26-D-513 Combined Radiation Environments for 105,000 ................ 105,000
Survivability Testing, SNL.........................
Total, Engineering.................................... 335,043 0 335,043
Rapid & Advanced Capabilities......................... 499,209 ................ 499,209
Inertial Confinement Fusion........................... ................ ................ ................
Inertial Confinement Fusion......................... 829,736 ................ 829,736
26-D-514 NIF Enhanced Fusion Yield Capability, LLNL. 84,000 ................ 84,000
Total, Inertial Confinement Fusion.................... 913,736 0 913,736
Advanced Simulation and Computing..................... 909,765 ................ 909,765
Weapon Technology and Manufacturing Maturation........ 405,413 ................ 405,413
Total, Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering.. 4,567,475 0 4,567,475
................ ................ ................
Infrastructure and Operations........................... ................ ................ ................
Operations of facilities.............................. 1,752,310 ................ 1,752,310
Safety and environmental operations................... 217,902 ................ 217,902
Maintenance and repair of facilities.................. 1,384,323 ................ 1,384,323
Recapitalization...................................... 1,203,127 ................ 1,203,127
Construction:......................................... ................ ................ ................
27-D-512 Plutonium Engineering Support Building, 88,700 ................ 88,700
LANL...............................................
25-D-511 PULSE New Access, NNSS..................... 50,000 ................ 50,000
23-D-517 Electrical Power Capacity Upgrade, LANL.... 65,000 ................ 65,000
Total, Construction................................... 203,700 0 203,700
Total, Infrastructure and operations.................... 4,761,362 0 4,761,362
................ ................ ................
Secure transportation asset............................. ................ ................ ................
Operations and equipment.............................. 443,075 ................ 443,075
Program direction..................................... 143,996 ................ 143,996
Total, Secure transportation asset...................... 587,071 0 587,071
................ ................ ................
Defense Nuclear Security................................ ................ ................ ................
Operations and Maintenance............................ 1,305,793 ................ 1,305,793
Total, Defense nuclear security......................... 1,305,793 0 1,305,793
................ ................ ................
Information technology and cybersecurity................ 935,000 ................ 935,000
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 40,869 ................ 40,869
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 27,441,159 145,000 27,586,159
................ ................ ................
................ ................ ................
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.......................... ................ ................ ................
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs............... ................ ................ ................
Material management and minimization.................. ................ ................ ................
Reactor Conversion and Uranium Supply............... 117,820 ................ 117,820
Nuclear Material Removal and Elimination............ 68,945 ................ 68,945
Plutonium Disposition............................... 79,039 ................ 79,039
Total, Material management & minimization............. 265,804 0 265,804
................ ................ ................
Global material security.............................. ................ ................ ................
International nuclear security...................... 61,013 ................ 61,013
Radiological security............................... 193,104 ................ 193,104
Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence.......... 136,457 ................ 136,457
Total, Global material security....................... 390,574 0 390,574
................ ................ ................
Nonproliferation and arms control..................... 214,494 ................ 214,494
................ ................ ................
Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D.................. ................ ................ ................
Proliferation Detection............................. 296,170 ................ 296,170
Nuclear Detonation Detection........................ 318,447 ................ 318,447
Forensics R&D....................................... 30,000 ................ 30,000
Nonproliferation Stewardship Program................ 174,383 ................ 174,383
Total, Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D........... 819,000 0 819,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs........ 1,689,872 0 1,689,872
................ ................ ................
Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program ................ ................ ................
Emergency Management................................ 35,045 ................ 35,045
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation........... 650,550 ................ 650,550
Total, Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response 685,595 0 685,595
Program..............................................
................ ................ ................
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 14,128 ................ 14,128
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................... 2,389,595 0 2,389,595
................ ................ ................
................ ................ ................
Naval Reactors............................................ ................ ................ ................
Naval reactors operating................................ 1,551,574 ................ 1,551,574
Program direction....................................... 71,841 ................ 71,841
Construction:........................................... ................ ................ ................
25-D-530 Naval Examination Acquisition Project........ 80,000 ................ 80,000
14-D-901 Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project, 691,953 -150,000 541,953
NRF..................................................
Program decrease.................................... ................ [-150,000] ................
Total, Construction..................................... 771,953 -150,000 621,953
Use of prior-year balances.............................. -1,676 ................ -1,676
Total, Naval Reactors..................................... 2,393,692 -150,000 2,243,692
................ ................ ................
................ ................ ................
Federal Salaries And Expenses............................. ................ ................ ................
Program Direction....................................... 577,097 ................ 577,097
Total, Federal Salaries And Expenses...................... 577,097 0 577,097
................ ................ ................
................ ................ ................
Defense Environmental Cleanup............................. ................ ................ ................
Closure sites:.......................................... ................ ................ ................
Closure sites administration.......................... 500 ................ 500
................ ................ ................
Richland:............................................... ................ ................ ................
River corridor and other cleanup operations........... 69,000 65,000 134,000
Project increase.................................... ................ [65,000] ................
Central plateau remediation........................... 795,124 ................ 795,124
Richland community and regulatory support............. 12,000 ................ 12,000
Construction:......................................... ................ ................ 0
24-D-401 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 0 6,000 6,000
Supercell 11 Expansion Proj........................
Project increase.................................. ................ [6,000] ................
Total, Construction--Richland......................... 0 6,000 6,000
Total, Richland......................................... 876,124 71,000 947,124
................ ................ ................
Office of River Protection:............................. ................ ................ ................
Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning.... 466,000 ................ 466,000
Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition... 984,000 ................ 984,000
Construction:......................................... ................ ................ ................
01-D-16D High-Level Waste Facility.................. 330,000 100,000 430,000
Project increase.................................. ................ [100,000] ................
15-D-409 Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System..... 75,000 ................ 75,000
23-D-403, Hanford 200 West Area Tank Farms Risk 90,000 ................ 90,000
Management Project.................................
Total, Construction--Office of River Protection ...... 495,000 100,000 595,000
................ ................ ................
Total, Office of River Protection....................... 1,945,000 100,000 2,045,000
................ ................ ................
Idaho National Laboratory:.............................. ................ ................ ................
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition................... 472,726 ................ 472,726
Idaho community and regulatory support................ 3,295 ................ 3,295
Construction:....................................... ................ ................ ................
22-D-403 Idaho Spent Nuclear Fuel Staging Facility 2,000 ................ 2,000
23-D-402--Calcine Construction.................... 2,000 ................ 2,000
Total, Construction--Idaho.......................... 4,000 0 4,000
Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................ 480,021 0 480,021
................ ................ ................
NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites......................... ................ ................ ................
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................ 1,955 ................ 1,955
Nuclear facility D & D................................ ................ ................ ................
Separations Process Research Unit................... 950 ................ 950
Nevada Site......................................... 64,835 ................ 64,835
Sandia National Laboratories........................ 1,030 ................ 1,030
Los Alamos National Laboratory...................... 293,937 ................ 293,937
Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.................. 362,707 0 362,707
................ ................ ................
Oak Ridge Reservation:.................................. ................ ................ ................
OR Nuclear facility D & D............................. 289,297 ................ 289,297
Total, OR Nuclear facility D & D...................... 289,297 0 289,297
................ ................ ................
U233 Disposition Program.............................. 70,000 ................ 70,000
OR cleanup and disposition............................ 85,800 ................ 85,800
Construction:....................................... ................ ................ ................
17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility.......... 57,828 ................ 57,828
Total, Construction--Oak Ridge...................... 57,828 0 57,828
Total, OR cleanup and waste disposition............... 213,628 0 213,628
................ ................ ................
OR community & regulatory support..................... 5,100 ................ 5,100
OR technology development and deployment.............. 3,500 ................ 3,500
Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................ 511,525 0 511,525
................ ................ ................
Savannah River Sites:................................... ................ ................ ................
Savannah River risk management operations............. 465,620 ................ 465,620
Total, Savannah River Risk Management Operations...... 465,620 0 465,620
................ ................ ................
SR Community and Regulatory Support................... 5,450 ................ 5,450
Savannah River National Laboratory Operations & 90,719 ................ 90,719
Maintenance..........................................
Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and 1,066,000 40,000 1,106,000
Disposition..........................................
Program increase.................................... ................ [40,000] ................
Construction:....................................... ................ ................ ................
20-D-401 Saltstone Disposal Unit #10, 11, 12...... 82,500 ................ 82,500
Total, Construction--Savannah River sites........... 82,500 0 82,500
Total, Savannah River sites............................. 1,710,289 40,000 1,750,289
................ ................ ................
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant............................. ................ ................ ................
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant........................... 400,020 ................ 400,020
Construction:......................................... ................ ................ ................
21-D-401 Hoisting Capability Project................ 72,000 ................ 72,000
Total, Construction--Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...... 72,000 0 72,000
Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...................... 472,020 0 472,020
................ ................ ................
Program Direction....................................... 297,318 ................ 297,318
Program Support......................................... 20,320 ................ 20,320
Safeguards and Security................................. 291,482 ................ 291,482
Technology Development and Deployment................... 16,012 ................ 16,012
Total, Defense Environmental Cleanup...................... 6,983,318 211,000 7,194,318
................ ................ ................
Other Defense Activities.................................. ................ ................ ................
Environment, health, safety and security................ ................ ................ ................
Program direction..................................... 81,179 ................ 81,179
Environment, Health, Safety & Security................ 150,761 ................ 150,761
Total, Environment, Health, safety and security......... 231,940 0 231,940
................ ................ ................
Office of Enterprise Assessments........................ ................ ................ ................
Program direction..................................... 56,632 ................ 56,632
Enterprise Assessments................................ 32,183 ................ 32,183
Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments................. 88,815 0 88,815
................ ................ ................
Specialized security activities......................... 471,082 ................ 471,082
................ ................ ................
Office of Legacy Management............................. ................ ................ ................
Legacy management..................................... 177,716 ................ 177,716
Program direction..................................... 22,670 ................ 22,670
Total, Office of Legacy Management...................... 200,386 0 200,386
................ ................ ................
Defense-related administrative support.................. 187,475 ................ 187,475
................ ................ ................
Office of hearings and appeals.......................... 5,023 ................ 5,023
Subtotal, Other Defense Activities........................ 1,184,721 0 1,184,721
Total, Other Defense Activities........................... 1,184,721 0 1,184,721
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAVINGS TABLE, FY 2027 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL SAVINGS
SERVICE/COMPONENT DESCRIPTION OF SAVINGS/PLATFORM DIVESTED (Dollars in
Thousands)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIR FORCE KC-46A MDAP, BTAR EARLY TO NEED -50,000
AIR FORCE B-1B -40,000
AIR FORCE C-135 -10,000
AIR FORCE OTHER AIRCRAFT -10,205
AIR FORCE AIRCRAFT REPLACEMENT SUPPORT EQUIP -25,280
AIR FORCE JOINT REGION MARIANAS PDI: LAND ACQUISITION -29,000
AIR FORCE OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS -25,000
AIR FORCE CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES -9,000
AIR FORCE ADMINISTRATION -3,000
AIR FORCE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE, HISTORICAL UNOBLIGATED -408,800
BALANCES
AIR FORCE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE, HISTORICAL -52,100
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
AIR FORCE AIR FORCE PHYSICAL SECURITY SYSTEM -110,000
AIR FORCE AFNET -3,000
AIR FORCE MOBILITY EQUIPMENT -20,000
AIR FORCE DCGS-AF -10,000
AIR FORCE CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS -5,000
AIR FORCE CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY -3,000
AIR FORCE DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION ENTERPRISE R&D -5,000
AIR FORCE ADVANCED BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ABMS) -5,000
AIR FORCE NEXT GENERATION ADAPTIVE PROPULSION -51,368
AIR FORCE FAMILY OF AFFORDABLE MASS MISSILES (FAMM) -52,522
AIR FORCE TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM -16,606
AIR FORCE COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT -137,374
AIR FORCE AUTONOMOUS COLLABORATIVE PLATFORMS -5,721
AIR FORCE COMMON DATA LINK EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA) -2,640
AIR FORCE ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT -40,000
AIR FORCE ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT -9,676
AIR FORCE COMBAT TRAINING RANGES -13,278
AIR FORCE OPEN ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT -4,348
AIR FORCE ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING -7,217
AIR FORCE MICROELECTRONICS SECURE ENCLAVE -4,000
AIR FORCE F-47 -66,379
AIR FORCE KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS -228,000
AIR FORCE MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT -15,000
AIR FORCE TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT -90,000
AIR FORCE ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER, NETWORK, & BUS SYS -2,000
AIR FORCE REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND MATURATION -2,167
AIR FORCE ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT -1,213
AIR FORCE ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE AGENCY -13,061
AIR FORCE B-2 SQUADRONS -20,000
AIR FORCE TACTICAL AIM MISSILES -9,886
AIR FORCE AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS CENTER (AOC) -15,887
AIR FORCE DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND EXERCISES -10,000
AIR FORCE MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS -12,217
AIR FORCE TACTICAL DECEPTION -4,885
AIR FORCE DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE OPERATIONS -2,000
AIR FORCE ISR TRANSPORT AND PROCESSING -35,000
AIR FORCE AIR FORCE STUDIES AND ANALYSIS AGENCY -16,250
ARMY SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS -5,000
ARMY FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT FAMILY OF SYSTEMS AP -127,217
ARMY COUNTER-ISIL TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF) -50,000
ARMY INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION CAPABILITY INC 2-I -70,000
ARMY CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS -8,000
ARMY SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION -172,500
ARMY ADMINISTRATION -9,000
ARMY SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS -30,000
ARMY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY, HISTORICAL UNOBLIGATED -417,800
BALANCES
ARMY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD, HISTORICAL -50,800
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
ARMY SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION -4,000
ARMY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE, HISTORICAL -34,700
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
ARMY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, HISTORICAL -83,000
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
ARMY C2 INFRASTRUCTURE -360,000
ARMY C2 TRANSPORT -460,000
ARMY MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE -35,000
ARMY INFORMATION SYSTEMS -6,000
ARMY INSTALLATION INFO INFRASTRUCTURE MOD PROGRAM -9,000
ARMY TITAN -10,000
ARMY TERRESTRIAL LAYER SYSTEMS (TLS) -25,000
ARMY COUNTERFIRE RADARS -20,000
ARMY IAMD BATTLE COMMAND SYSTEM -70,000
ARMY ROBOTICS AND APPLIQUE SYSTEMS -15,000
ARMY CTG, 5.56MM, ALL TYPES -30,000
ARMY CTG, 7.62MM, ALL TYPES -15,000
ARMY LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY -2,500
ARMY ELECTRONIC WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH -5,000
ARMY BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR MATERIALS--APPLIED RESEARCH -2,500
ARMY MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY -7,000
ARMY MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -5,000
ARMY AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -3,000
ARMY SOLDIER LETHALITY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -10,000
ARMY COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS) ADVANCED -2,500
TECHNOLOGY
ARMY ELECTRONIC WARFARE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -7,000
ARMY HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING MODERNIZATION PROGRAM -5,000
ARMY TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER AMMUNITION -20,000
ARMY EXPANDED MISSION AREA MISSILE (EMAM) -25,000
ARMY TECHNOLOGY MATURATION INITIATIVES -15,400
ARMY CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT -1,000
ARMY ARTILLERY SYSTEMS-- EMD -57,500
ARMY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT -5,000
ARMY AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY DEVELOPMENT -10,000
ARMY GROUND ROBOTICS, LOW EXPENDITURE RATES -10,000
ARMY AIAMD SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT & INTEGRATION -7,000
ARMY AN/TPQ-53 COUNTERFIRE TARGET ACQUISITION RADAR SYSTEM -10,000
ARMY DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT -3,000
CBDP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM -10,000
CBDP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD -27,500
CYBER CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS -8,000
CYBER CYBER TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (CTE) -9,000
CYBER CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT -10,000
DEFENSE-WIDE FOREIGN CURRENCY FLUCTUATIONS -900,000
DEFENSE-WIDE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE, HISTORICAL -480,803
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
DEFENSE-WIDE WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH BALANCES -400,000
DHA BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS -13,000
DOE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DEFENSE URANIUM ENRICHMENT D&D PROGRAM -253,000
DOE NAVAL REACTORS 14-D-901 SPENT FUEL HANDLING RECAPITALIZATION PROJECT NRF -150,000
MDA BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS -277,000
MILITARY PERSONNEL MILITARY PERSONNEL, HISTORICAL UNOBLIGATED BALANCES -750,000
NAVY E-2D ADV HAWKEYE, MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENT COST SAVINGS -350,000
NAVY E-2D ADV HAWKEYE AP -55,000
NAVY COMMON AVIONICS CHANGES -24,672
NAVY COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT -33,307
NAVY SPECIAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT -10,415
NAVY SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT -45,000
NAVY CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES -9,000
NAVY ENTERPRISE INFORMATION -11,000
NAVY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY, HISTORICAL UNOBLIGATED -307,900
BALANCES
NAVY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE, HISTORICAL -20,600
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
NAVY LCS IN-SERVICE MODERNIZATION -190,000
NAVY CANES -7,000
NAVY SHIP MISSILE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT -15,000
NAVY PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT -27,000
NAVY NEXT GENERATION ENTERPRISE SERVICE -7,000
NAVY FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES APPLIED RESEARCH -5,000
NAVY FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT -5,000
NAVY LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS) -5,000
NAVY LCS MISSION MODULES -30,000
NAVY DIRECTED ENERGY AND ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS -5,000
NAVY DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE -6,000
NAVY NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ) INCREMENT II -40,000
NAVY TACAMO MODERNIZATION -110,000
NAVY TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT -5,000
NAVY MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT -8,000
NAVY ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE IMPROVEMENT -8,049
NAVY AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS -10,850
NAVY TACTICAL AIM MISSILES -12,251
NAVY AS SUBMARINE TENDER, REDUCTION FOR INCREMENTAL FUNDING -500,000
NAVY AS SUBMARINE TENDER -380,000
NAVY TAGOS SURTASS SHIPS -30,000
NAVY COMPLETION OF PY SHIPBUILDING PROGRAMS -12,000
OSD MAJOR EQUIPMENT, OSD -5,000
OSD TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION -65,000
OSD NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES -35,000
OSD DEFENSE INNOVATION ACCELERATION (DIA) -22,500
OSD TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY -35,000
OSD INTERNATIONAL INNOVATION INITIATIVES -4,000
OSD ALPHA-1 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES -40,000
OSD OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES -5,000
OSD JADC2 DEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIMENTATION ACTIVITIES -30,000
OSD CENTRAL TEST AND EVALUATION INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP) -40,000
OSD INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT -2,500
OSD ENTERPRISE PLATFORMS AND CAPABILITIES--SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM -6,000
OSD DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT FIELDING -3,000
SPACE FORCE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE, HISTORICAL UNOBLIGATED -54,400
BALANCES
SPACE FORCE AUTOMATE SAT C2 -719,400
USMC OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS, HISTORICAL -80,300
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
USMC OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE, HISTORICAL -7,000
UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
USMC GROUND BASED AIR DEFENSE -20,000
USMC GCSS-MC -10,000
USMC MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM -20,000
USMC MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS -20,000
USMC USMC INTELLIGENCE/ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS -10,000
DEFENSE-WIDE STREAMLINING CONTRACT SERVICES (INCLUDED IN PRESIDENT'S BUDGET -13,300,000
JUSTIFICATION)
DEFENSE-WIDE TERMINATING UNDERPERFORMING PROGRAMS AND REDUCING LEGACY -2,500,000
PLATFORMS (INCLUDED IN PRESIDENT'S BUDGET JUSTIFICATION)
DEFENSE-WIDE IMPLEMENTING ORGANIZATIONAL OVERHEAD, INCLUDING ADMIN/ -1,800,000
WAREHOUSE LEASES, TRAVEL, AND GENERAL SUPPLIES (INCLUDED IN
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET JUSTIFICATION)
DEFENSE-WIDE RE-BASELINING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (S&T) FUNDING TO CUT -1,400,000
UNDERPERFORMING AND NON-DEFENSE-SPECIFIC RESEARCH (INCLUDED
IN PRESIDENT'S BUDGET JUSTIFICATION, AS AMENDED)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL SAVINGS .............................................................. -29,849,944
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES
House of Representatives,
Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on
Appropriations.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Appropriations does
not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject
matters contained in the bill that fall within its Rule X
jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name
members of this committee to any conference committee that is
named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter in the committee report on H.R.
8800 and in the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Tom Cole,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Tom Cole,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Cole: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Appropriations has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Appropriations is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Budget,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on the Budget does not
waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters
contained in the bill that fall within its Rule X jurisdiction.
I request that you urge the Speaker to name members of this
committee to any conference committee that is named to consider
such provisions.
Please place this letter in the committee report on H.R.
8800 and in the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Jodey C. Arrington,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Jodey C. Arrington,
Chairman, Committee on the Budget,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Arrington: Thank you for your letter
regarding H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on the Budget has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on the Budget is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Education and Workforce,
Washington, DC, June 10, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.
There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Education
and Workforce.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this Committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Education and
Workforce does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over
the subject matters contained in the bill that fall within its
Rule X jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to
name members of this Committee to any conference committee that
is named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Tim Walberg,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Tim Walberg,
Chairman, Committee on Education and Workforce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Walberg: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Education and
Workforce has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions
in this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of
your decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Education and Workforce
is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of
letters will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I write to you concerning H.R. 8800,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.
While there are provisions in the legislation that fall within
the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, I write this letter to notify you that the Committee
will forgo action on the bill and waive any sequential referral
rights so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor
for consideration.
This is done with the understanding that the Committee's
jurisdictional interests over this and similar legislation are
in no way diminished or altered. In addition, the Committee
reserves the right to seek conferees on H.R. 8800 and requests
your support when such a request is made.
I would appreciate your response confirming this
understanding with respect to H.R. 8800 and ask that a copy of
our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the
committee report on the bill or in the Congressional Record
during consideration of the bill on the House floor.
Sincerely,
Brett Guthrie,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Brett Guthrie,
Chair, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Guthrie: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce
has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland
Security.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committees right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Homeland Security
does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject
matters contained in the bill that fall within its Rule X
jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name
members of this committee to any conference committee that is
named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Andrew R. Garbarino,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Andrew R. Garbarino,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Garbarino: Thank you for your letter
regarding H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Homeland
Security has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions
in this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of
your decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Homeland Security is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committees right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence does not waive any future jurisdictional claim
over the subject matters contained in the bill which fall
within its Rule X jurisdiction. I request that you urge the
Speaker to name members of this committee to any conference
committee which is named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Crawford: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that
by foregoing a sequential referral, the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence is not waiving its jurisdiction.
Further, this exchange of letters will be included in the
committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House Of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I write regarding H.R. 8800, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.
Provisions of this bill fall within the Judiciary Committees
Rule X jurisdiction, and I appreciate that you consulted with
us on those provisions. The Judiciary Committee agrees that it
will forego any further consideration of the bill so that it
may proceed expeditiously to the House floor.
The Committee takes this action with the understanding that
forgoing further consideration of this measure does not in any
way alter the Committees jurisdiction or waive any future
jurisdictional claim over these provisions or their subject
matter. We also reserve the right to seek appointment of an
appropriate number of conferees in the event of a conference
with the Senate involving this measure or similar legislation.
I ask that you please include this letter in your
committees report to accompany this legislation. I appreciate
the cooperative manner in which our committees have worked on
this matter, and I look forward to working collaboratively in
the future on matters of shared jurisdiction. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Jim Jordan,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Jim Jordan,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Jordan: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on the Judiciary has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on the Judiciary is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Natural Resources,
Washington, DC, June 10, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural
Resources.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committees right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Natural Resources
does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject
matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X
jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name
members of this committee to any conference committee which is
named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Bruce Westerman,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Bruce Westerman,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Westerman: Thank you for your letter
regarding H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Natural
Resources has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions
in this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of
your decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Natural Resources is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: The Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform agrees to be discharged from further
consideration of H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2027, so that it may proceed expeditiously
to the House Floor.
By foregoing consideration of H.R. 8800 at this time, I do
not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in
this or similar legislation, and I ask to be appropriately
consulted and involved on this or similar legislation as it
moves forward. I also would seek appointment of an appropriate
number of conferees from my committee to any House-Senate
conference on this legislation.
I ask that you place a copy of our exchange of letters on
this bill in the bill report filed by the Committee on Armed
Services and in the Congressional Record during House floor
consideration thereof. I appreciate your cooperation regarding
this bill and look forward to future opportunities to work
together on matters of shared jurisdiction.
Sincerely,
James Comer,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. James Comer,
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Comer: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further,
this exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committees right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over
the subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its
Rule X jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to
name members of this committee to any conference committee
which is named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Brian Babin,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Brian Babin,
Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Babin: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further,
this exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Small Business,
Washington, DC, June 10, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Small
Business (Committee).
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this Committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Small Business does
not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject
matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X
jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name
members of this Committee to any conference committee which is
named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the Committee on Armed
Services' report on H.R. 8800 and in the Congressional Record
during consideration of the measure on the House floor. Thank
you for the cooperative spirit in which you have worked
regarding this matter and others between our respective
committees.
Sincerely,
Roger Williams,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Roger Williams,
Chairman, Committee on Small Business,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Williams: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Small Business has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Small Business is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, June 10, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that fall
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure does not waive any future jurisdictional claim
over the subject matters contained in the bill which fall
within its Rule X jurisdiction. I request that you urge the
Speaker to name members of this Committee to any conference
committee which is named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Sam Graves,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Sam Graves,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Graves: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure is not waiving its
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be
included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2027. There are certain provisions in the legislation that
fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs.
In the interest of permitting the Committee on Armed
Services to proceed expeditiously to floor consideration of
this important bill, I am willing to waive consideration of
this bill by the Committee on Veterans Affairs. I do so with
the understanding that by waiving consideration of the bill at
this time, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs does not waive
any future claim on the subject matters in the bill that fall
within its jurisdiction and that my Committee will be
appropriately consulted on any issues that fall under its
jurisdiction. Further, I request that you urge Speaker Johnson
to name members of the Committee on Veterans Affairs to any
conference committee that is named to consider such provisions
to ensure that we deliver the best NDAA for our servicemembers
and their families.
Please place this letter in the committee report on H.R.
8800 as well as in the Congressional Record during
consideration of the measure on the House Floor. Thank you for
the continued partnership between our two Committees to improve
the lives of active duty servicemembers, veterans, and their
families.
Sincerely,
Mike Bost,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Mike Bost,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bost: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC, June 11, 2026.
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Rogers: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
8800, the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2027''. There are certain provisions in the legislation that
fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways
and Means.
In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
am willing to waive this committee's right to sequential
referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Ways and Means does
not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject
matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X
jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name
members of this committee to any conference committee which is
named to consider such provisions.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
8800 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Jason Smith,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 12, 2026.
Hon. Jason Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Smith: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2027. I agree that the Committee on Ways and Means has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Ways and Means is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers,
Chairman.
------
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House
of Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the
Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows:
June 11, 2026.
Re: Direct Spending and Revenue Effects of H.R. 8800, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027
Hon. Mike Rogers,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
completed an estimate of the direct spending and revenue
effects of H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2027, as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Armed Services on June 4, 2026. This estimate is
based on the Committee Print 119-33, which was posted to the
website of the House Committee on Rules on June 11, 2026.
Enacting the bill would have an insignificant net effect on
direct spending and revenues each year and in total over the
2027-2036 period, CBO estimates. Provisions that would affect
direct spending and revenues include the following:
Some provisions in H.R. 8800 would affect
direct spending by between -$500,000 and $500,000,
generally because very few people would be affected.
Those provisions primarily involve personnel benefits
such as health care and compensation.
Several provisions would allow the
Department of Defense to collect receipts (which are
recorded as reductions in direct spending) and spend
them without further appropriation so that the net
effect on direct spending would be negligible.
Four sections would modify the authority of
working capital funds to incur obligations in advance
of appropriations, which is classified as direct
spending. CBO estimates that the net change in spending
for those provisions would be between -$500,000 and
$500,000.
Five sections would increase revenues from
criminal fines by less than $500,000.
Because the bill would affect direct spending and revenues,
statutory pay-as-you-go procedures apply.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 8800 would not increase
net direct spending by more than $2.5 billion in any of the
four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2037.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 8800 would not increase
on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2037.
Our complete cost estimate for H.R. 8800, including a
discussion of discretionary authorizations and mandates under
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, will be provided as soon as
it is available.
I hope this information is useful to you. If you wish
further details on this analysis, we would be pleased to
provide them.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director.
STATEMENT REQUIRED BY THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT
Pursuant to clause (3)(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, and section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344):
(1) this legislation does not provide budget authority
subject to an allocation made pursuant to section 302(b) of
Public Law 93-344;
(2) the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Estimate included
in this report pursuant to clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives contains CBO's projection
of how this legislation will affect the levels of budget
authority, budget outlays, revenues, and tax expenditures for
fiscal year 2027 and for the ensuing 5 fiscal years; and
(3) the CBO Estimate does not identify any new budget
authority for assistance to state and local governments by this
measure at the time that this report was filed.
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(2)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Congressional Budget Office
estimate included in this report satisfies the requirement for
the committee to include an estimate by the committee of the
costs incurred in carrying out this bill.
DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
The following table is submitted in compliance with clause
9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and
lists the congressional earmarks (as defined in paragraph (e)
of clause 9) contained in the bill or in this report. Neither
the bill nor the report contain any limited tax benefits or
limited tariff benefits as defined in paragraphs (f) or (g) of
clause 9 of rule XXI.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XXI
(Community Project Funding Items)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMOUNT
(Dollars
TITLE AGENCY PROJECT NAME PROJECT LOCATION in MEMBER(S)
Thousands)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4601 Army Welding Shop (Design) Anniston Army Depot, AL 4,940 Rogers, Mike (AL)
4601 Army Consolidated Shipping and Receiving Facility Anniston Army Depot, AL 5,400 Rogers, Mike (AL)
(Design)
4601 Army Access Control Point (INC) Anniston Army Depot, AL 53,000 Rogers, Mike (AL)
4601 Army Rotational Unit Billeting Area Fort Polk, LA 94,000 Johnson, Mike (LA)
4601 Army Automation-Aided Instruction Building Fort Sill, OK 94,000 Cole, Tom (OK)
4601 Navy Multi Aircraft Paint & Strip Facility (Design) Naval Air Station Jacksonville, 28,225 Rutherford, John H.
FL (FL)
4601 Navy Child Development Center (Design) Naval Air Station Whiting Field, 4,135 Patronis, Jimmy (FL)
FL
4601 Navy PDI: Defense Access Roads III (INC) Naval Base Guam, GU 16,500 Moylan, James C.
(GU)
4601 Navy Storm Water Management Facilities United States Naval Academy, MD 86,020 Elfreth, Sarah (MD)
4601 Navy Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) Operational Camp Lejeune, NC 24,140 Murphy, Gregory F.
Facilities (INC) (NC)
4601 Navy Pier 10 Replacement (Design) Naval Station Norfolk, VA 15,800 Kiggans, Jennifer A.
(VA)
4601 Air Force Construct Vehicle Search Area AFRL Gate ECP Edwards Air Force Base, CA 4,500 Fong, Vince (CA)
4601 Air Force Military Working Dog Flight Operations Facility Moody Air Force Base, GA 15,870 Scott, Austin (GA)
4601 Air Force RPA Reconnaissance Operations/Training Facility Creech Air Force Base, NV 36,000 Lee, Susie (NV)
4601 Air Force Mission Support Facility Creech Air Force Base, NV 55,000 Lee, Susie (NV)
4601 Air Force Well No. 5 and Wellhouse Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, 11,000 Conaway, Herbert C.,
NJ Jr. (NJ)
4601 Air Force Well No. 6 and Wellhouse Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, 11,500 Conaway, Herbert C.,
NJ Jr. (NJ)
4601 Air Force 2D LAAD Maintenance and Operations Facilities Marine Corps Air Station Cherry 19,390 Davis, Donald (NC)
(Design) Point, NC
4601 Air Force Advanced Materials Research Laboratory (Design) Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 9,000 Turner, Michael R.
OH (OH)
4601 Air Force Human Performance Wing Laboratory (INC) Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 21,000 Turner, Michael R.
OH (OH)
4601 Air Force E-7 AWACS Squadron Operations Facility Tinker Air Force Base, OK 55,000 Cole, Tom (OK)
4601 Air Force Installation Access Control Point Gate 2 Upgrade Arnold Air Force Base, TN 20,000 DesJarlais, Scott
(TN)
4601 Defense-Wide SOF Battallion Operations Facility (Design) Fort Bragg, NC 6,400 Hudson, Richard (NC)
4601 Defense-Wide SOF Operations Ammunition Supply Point Phase 2 Fort Bragg, NC 65,000 Hudson, Richard (NC)
4601 Army National Guard National Guard Readiness Center Alteration Barrigada, GU 20,000 Moylan, James C.
(GU)
4601 Army National Guard Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Addition/Alteration Shelbyville Armory, IN 27,500 Shreve, Jefferson
(INC) (IN)
4601 Army National Guard Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Addition/Alteration Salisbury Readiness Complex, NC 69,000 Hudson, Richard (NC)
(INC)
4601 Air National Guard BCE Pavements and Grounds Facility Eielson AFB, AK 16,000 Begich, Nicholas J.,
III (AK)
4601 Air National Guard Repair Runway 13-31 (INC) Sioux City, IA 38,500 Feenstra, Randy (IA)
4601 Air National Guard KC-46 ADAL Parking Apron (Design) Selfridge Air National Guard 1,400 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard KC-46 ASE Complex (Design) Selfridge Air National Guard 4,300 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard KC-46 Dual Bay Hangar (Design) Selfridge Air National Guard 21,200 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard MCCA KC-46 ADAL Aircrew Training Facility Selfridge Air National Guard 35,000 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard MCCA KC-46 ADAL SQ OPS B17 Selfridge Air National Guard 38,000 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard F-15EX Maintenance Complex Phase 3 Selfridge Air National Guard 60,000 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard F-15EX Maintenance Complex Phase 1 Selfridge Air National Guard 65,000 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard F-15EX Maintenance Complex Phase 2 Selfridge Air National Guard 65,000 James, John (MI)
Base, MI
4601 Air National Guard Aircraft Parking Apron Rosecrans Air National Guard 63,000 Graves, Sam (MO)
Base, MO
....................... ................................................... ................................. .......... ....................
....................... ................................................... ................................. .......... ....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, this legislation results from
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X. The findings
are reflected in the body of this report.
GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the general goals and objectives
of H.R. 8800 are to maintain the national defense, to prepare
the United States to meet current and future challenges to the
national defense, and to accomplish each of those goals and
objectives in a responsible manner.
The bill authorizes $1.14 trillion of discretionary funding
to support national defense requirements. The bill authorizes
funding sufficient to provide a 5 to 7 percent pay raise for
servicemembers, to invest in key maintenance and readiness
areas, and to modernize the force to deter adversaries.
The bill continues the longstanding work of the Committee
on Armed Services to provide U.S. military forces with
sufficient resources to maintain the national defense, and it
fulfills the committee's duties under Article I, Section 8, of
the Constitution.
STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES
The committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
Consistent with the requirements of section 5(b) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the committee finds that the
functions of the proposed advisory committees authorized in the
bill are not currently being performed, nor could they be
performed, by one or more agencies, an advisory committee
already in existence, or by enlarging the mandate of an
existing advisory committee.
APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The committee finds that this legislation does not relate
to the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law
104-1).
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of
H.R. 8800 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the Federal
Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program,
a program that was included in any report from the Government
Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of
Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a program
identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance.
COMMITTEE VOTES
In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, recorded votes were taken with
respect to the committee's consideration of H.R. 8800. The
record of these votes is contained in the following pages.
The committee ordered H.R. 8800 to be reported to the House
with a favorable recommendation by a vote of 44-12, a quorum
being present.
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 1
h.r. 8800
On Moulton Log 6123r1--National Defense Authorization Act
topline budget cut of $150.0 billion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 2
h.r. 8800
On Smith Log 6087--Strikes funding for BBG(X).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 3
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6681--Prohibition on the use of funds for
cluster munitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 14 42 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 4
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6537r1--Require the establishment of human
rights offices within each geographic combatant command.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 5
h.r. 8800
On Jackson Log 6453r1--Ensures that no funding authorized
by this act may be used to purchase or research cell-cultivated
meat products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 20 35 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 6
h.r. 8800
On Mace Log 6081--Requiring the exclusive use of merit in
military personnel actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. x ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... ...... x
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 29 26 1 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 7
h.r. 8800
On Cisneros Log 5997r1--Preventing DoD from banning
Military Service Academies identity based clubs that do not
require DoD funding.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 8
h.r. 8800
On Mace Log 6757--Directs the Secretary of Defense to
report on the impacts of DEI criteria, metrics, and quotas on
promotion selection board recommendations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. x ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 29 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 9
h.r. 8800
On Crow Log 6656r1--Prevents the use of JAGs as immigration
judges and clarifies that JAGs may not serve as SAUSAs in cases
without a direct military nexus.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 10
h.r. 8800
On Garamendi Log 6815--Requires DoD to provide written
readiness assessments to HASC and SASC when military units
support civilian law enforcement missions for more than 30
days, with follow-on quarterly updates until the mission ends.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 11
h.r. 8800
On Carbajal Log 6808r1--Prohibits the DoD from using funds
to enter into an agreement that would constrain military access
to offshore ranges in California or Florida until the Secretary
certifies there will not be adverse effects on military
readiness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 12
h.r. 8800
On Ryan Log 6769--Requires a briefing on the cancellation
of any reviews or investigations regarding the March 28, 2025
aviation event involving aircraft assigned to the 101st Combat
Aviation Brigade of Fort Campbell in the Nashville area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 13
h.r. 8800
On Tokuda Log 6429--Require human approval of decisions to
operate a weapon or weapon system, establish waiver process,
and revise DoD policies related to test, evaluation,
verification, and validation of autonomous systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 14
h.r. 8800
On Moulton Log 6127--Sense of Congress on the current
situation with Iran, and the need for a diplomatic solution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... x ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 15
h.r. 8800
On Houlahan Log 6378--Prohibition of funds for partisan
political events at military installations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 24 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 16
h.r. 8800
On Houlahan Log 6382r3-- Mandate SECDEF to Update Policy
Prohibiting Sale/Distribution of Partisan Political Merchandise
on Military Installations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 24 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 17
h.r. 8800
On Ryan Log 6649--Prohibition on certain political
activities by members of the armed forces.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 18
h.r. 8800
On Houlahan Log 6386r6--Ensure religious neutrality in DoD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 19
h.r. 8800
On Moulton Log 6132r2--Prohibits SECDEF from denying any
covered member from completing an eligible program offered by
an eligible institution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 20
h.r. 8800
On Mace Log 6611r2--Repeals moratorium on A76 process for
the Department of Defense and creates exemption for certain
installation services.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 21
h.r. 8800
On Mace Log 6148--Service Academy admission reform.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 22
h.r. 8800
On Mace Log 6635r1--Requires the Service Academies accept
test scores of the Classic Learning Test in the admissions
process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 27 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 23
h.r. 8800
On Higgins Log 6476r2--This amendment codifies the
establishment of age-normed, sex-neutral, physical fitness
standards for the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Space
Force.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 24
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6552r1--Statutorily establishes the Ombudsman
of Stars and Stripes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 25
h.r. 8800
On Goodlander Log 6527r1--Establishes Stars and Stripes as
an independent establishment in the executive branch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 26
h.r. 8800
On Goodlander Log 6482r1--Prohibits DoD from taking actions
to restrict the free and independent press corps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 27
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6777--Reinstates any area of the Pentagon
previously accessible to the press, authorizes unescorted
access in relevant areas of the Pentagon, and ensures the
Pentagon Force Protection Agency handles the security
credentialing of members of the press.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 28
h.r. 8800
On Strickland Log 6105--This amendment makes the President
the sole authority to remove officers from promotion lists and
limits DoD officials from withholding names.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 29
h.r. 8800
On Houlahan Log 6093--Prohibit DOD from preventing women to
serve in any role within the military and ensure gender neutral
standards for women in ground combat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 28 28 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 30
h.r. 8800
On Golden Log 6638r2--Regulations applicable to wearing
optional combat boots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 17 39 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 31
h.r. 8800
On Cisneros Log 5987r1--National Guard counter-drug program
funding increase.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... ...... x
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 28 1 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 32
h.r. 8800
On Garamendi Log 6857r1--Repeals the statutory inventory
requirement that prohibits reducing the number of U.S.
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and mandates a
Department of Defense report to evaluate alternative nuclear
force compositions with fewer or entirely off-alert ICBMs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 23 33 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 33
h.r. 8800
On Garamendi Log 6855r1--Replaces existing statutory
requirements regarding plutonium pit production capacity with a
mandate for a comprehensive report detailing the master
schedule and life-cycle costs of pit production.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 34
h.r. 8800
On Moulton Log 6128r1--Direct Report Language reaffirming
restriction of DoD Personnel at Polling Places and Election
Activity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 35
h.r. 8800
On Goodlander Log 6464r1--Reaffirms existing prohibitions
on deploying federal troops or armed law enforcement to polling
places and requires the Department to brief Congress on efforts
to protect free and fair elections.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 36
h.r. 8800
On Ryan Log 6626r2--To prohibit the use of funds for
military force in or against Iran.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 26 30 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 37
h.r. 8800
On Keating Log 6435r2--Prohibits funds for invasion of
NATO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 38
h.r. 8800
On Keating Log 6096r3--Requiring the public release of the
"second strike attack" conducted on September 2, 2025.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 27 29 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 39
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6819--Limits support to civilian law
enforcement agencies pending reimbursement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 40
h.r. 8800
On Jacobs Log 6816r3--Limits the use of military force
against Mexico.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 41
h.r. 8800
On Ryan Log 6623--Prohibits establishment or support of
National Guard Quick Reaction Forces as described in Executive
Order 14339.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 42
h.r. 8800
On Harrigan Log 6155r1--Directs the DOD to establish the
Operational Energy Deployable Nuclear Power Program to deploy
and evaluate a transportable nuclear microreactor within the
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of responsibility by January 1,
2030.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 47 9 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 43
h.r. 8800
On Garamendi Log 6827r3--DoD may not enter into a lease,
license, permit, or other agreement authorizing a commercial
entity to construct, operate, or maintain a data center unless
a written certification is provided to HASC and SASC 90 days
before entering an agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 25 31 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 44
h.r. 8800
On Norcross Log 6922r1--To prohibit the use of funds to
limit collective bargaining.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 30 26 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 45
h.r. 8800
On Strickland Log 6825r2--Codifies military installation
names selected by FY21 NDAA 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) x ...... ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). x ...... ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... x ...... ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ ....... x ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. ....... x ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... ....... x ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... x ...... ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... x ...... ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. ....... x ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ ....... x ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. ....... x ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. ....... x ............ Ms. Goodlander x ...... ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ ....... x ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. ....... x ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... ....... x ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. ....... x ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... ....... x ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... ....... x ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 29 27 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 46
h.r. 8800
On Jackson Log 6820--Requires that any reference to the
Secretary of Defense or Department of Defense in any law,
regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United
States shall be deemed to be a reference to the Secretary of
War or Department of War, respectively.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). ...... x ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). ...... x ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... ...... x ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland ...... x ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... ...... x ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... ...... x ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). ...... x ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). ...... x ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides ...... x ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 29 27 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
committee on armed services
recorded vote no. 47
h.r. 8800
On Motion to Report the Bill Favorably to the House as
Amended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Aye No Present Member Aye No Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rogers (AL)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Smith (WA).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Wilson (SC)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Courtney (CT). x ...... ...........
Mr. Turner (OH)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Garamendi (CA) ...... x ...........
Mr. Wittman (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Norcross (NJ). x ...... ...........
Mr. Scott (GA)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Moulton (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Graves (MO)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Carbajal (CA). ...... x ...........
Ms. Stefanik (NY).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Khanna (CA)... ...... x ...........
Dr. DesJarlais (TN)............ x ....... ............ Mr. Keating (MA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Kelly (MS)................. x ....... ............ Ms. Houlahan (PA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Bacon (NE)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Crow (CO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Bergman (MI)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Golden (ME)... x ...... ...........
Dr. Jackson (TX)............... x ....... ............ Ms. Jacobs (CA)... ...... x ...........
Mr. Fallon (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Strickland x ...... ...........
(WA).
Mr. Gimenez (FL)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Ryan (NY)..... ...... x ...........
Ms. Mace (SC).................. ....... ....... ............ Mr. Vasquez (NM).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Finstad (MN)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Deluzio (PA).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Luttrell (TX).............. x ....... ............ Ms. Tokuda (HI)... x ...... ...........
Mrs. Kiggans (VA).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Davis (NC).... x ...... ...........
Mr. Moylan (GU)................ x ....... ............ Mr. Cisneros (CA). x ...... ...........
Mr. Mills (FL)................. x ....... ............ Mr. Sorensen (IL). x ...... ...........
Dr. McCormick (GA)............. x ....... ............ Ms. Goodlander ...... x ...........
(NH).
Mr. Gooden (TX)................ x ....... ............ Ms. Elfreth (MD).. ...... x ...........
Mr. Higgins (LA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Whitesides x ...... ...........
(CA).
Mr. Van Orden (WI)............. x ....... ............ Mr. Tran (CA)..... x ...... ...........
Mr. McGuire (VA)............... x ....... ............ Mr. Vindman (VA).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Harrigan (NC).............. x ....... ............ Mr. Bell (MO)..... ...... x ...........
Mr. Messmer (IN)............... x ....... ............ Dr. Conaway (NJ).. x ...... ...........
Mr. Schmidt (KS)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Crank (CO)................. x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
Mr. Hamadeh (AZ)............... x ....... ............ .................. ...... ...... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recorded Vote Total:........... 44 12 0 .................. ...... ...... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
The committee has taken steps to make available the
analysis of changes in existing law made by the bill, as
required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, and will make the analysis available as
soon as possible.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
Following the passage of this year's National Defense
Authorization Act by the House Armed Services Committee, I
write to share my additional views and concerns with the bill
as marked up by the full committee. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 authorizes significant
investments in our service members, military families,
readiness, military construction, shipbuilding, sustainment,
and the defense industrial base. I appreciate the committee's
bipartisan work to provide for the common defense and to ensure
our servicemembers have the support necessary to carry out
their missions.
However, I must register serious concern with the direction
of this bill and the broader defense posture it reflects. The
bill autho1izes a $1.15 trillion defense topline while Congress
also plans to advance another $350 billion in defense spending
through reconciliation, with far too little specificity,
accountability, or meaningful oversight. At a time when
taxpayers are being asked to support unprecedented levels of
defense spending, it is irresponsible for Congress to provide
the Department with hundreds of billions of additional dollars
while failing to demand basic discipline over costly nuclear
modernization programs, politicization of the Department of
Defense, and the executive branch's use of military force
without meaningful congressional authorization. I am also
disappointed that the committee failed to adopt basic
guardrails for commercial data centers on milita1y
installations. These shortcomings should be corrected before
this bill becomes law.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND TOPLINE ACCOUNTABILITY
``An object in motion remains in motion.'' The term is as
true in government as it is in physics. Year after year, we
continue to increase our defense spending, reaching ever-higher
levels. Adjusted for inflation, we are spending an amount
roughly equal to what we spend in 1943. Such high levels are
wholly unjustified today, particularly since this
administration continues to claim, however unbelievable it may
be, that we are not at war even as it requests ever larger
budgets.
I remain deeply concerned with the defense topline. As this
administration defunds humanitarian assistance programs,
dismantles our education system, undermines access to
healthcare, and chips away at hard-earned public benefits in
the name of cost savings, the boulder of defense spending
continues to roll down the hill, picking up speed as it goes,
regardless of the damage it may cause. It is time for Congress
to act: to cut wasteful defense spending, impose meaningful
oversight, and reassert its responsibility to ensure that our
defense budget is reasonable, accountable, and aligned with the
needs of the American people.
A larger defense budget, standing alone, is not a strategy.
It can mask mismanagement, reward cost growth, and allow
troubled programs to continue without the discipline that
Congress should demand. At a time when families across the
country are asked to make difficult choices, Congress should
not authorize enormous defense increases without a clear
showing that every dollar is necessary, executable, and tied to
real national security outcomes.
However Sisyphean may seem, it's time for us to push the
boulder back up the Hill and restore balance. It's time to
restore true congressional oversight. We cannot keep funding
ever larger defense budgets with less oversight and be
surprised when the president takes advantage of it. The first
step to restoring that balance is for Congress to reclaim its
constitutional role: demanding transparency before authorizing
new spending, requiring accountability before expanding failed
programs, and insisting that no administration, regardless of
party, may use the military or the public purse without
meaningful congressional scrutiny.
OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY WINS
Although I remain concerned with the overall direction of
this bill, I appreciate that several oversight and
accountability provisions were accepted. These provisions do
not cure the larger flaws in the bill, but they are meaningful
steps toward better congressional oversight and a more
responsible defense enterprise.
I am encouraged that the bill includes important reforms to
strengthen cost-growth accountability, including improvements
to Nunn-McCurdy oversight and additional reporting on NNSA
cost-growth compliance. It also includes F-35 accountability
provisions requiring greater scrutiny of multiyear procurement
savings and a reset plan for the F-35 global sustainment spares
backlog. I am also pleased that the committee accepted
provisions related to V-22 Osprey safety oversight, domestic
manufacturing requirements for shipbuilding programs, limits on
Jones Act waivers involving foreign entities of concern,
shipyard workforce concerns, and contractor progress payment
protection. I am proud to have joined my colleagues in adding
an amendment that would improve the Departments Right to Repair
by taking meaningful steps toward improving sustainment
oversight, technical-data access, and the Department's ability
to repair and maintain the systems it buys. These wins should
be built upon, not treated as a substitute for the broader
accountability this bill still lacks.
I am proud of my amendment to ensure that the Department of
Defense can hold defense contractors accountable for poor
performance. However, I am concerned that a provision included
in the original bill would have effectively given defense
contractors a veto over their own punishment. Whether the issue
is price-gouging, poor performance, or the misallocation of
taxpayer funds, the Department needs more tools to hold
contractors accountable, not fewer.
NUCLEAR MODERNIZATION
As I noted in my additional views last year, I continue to
have grave concerns about the direction of the United States'
nuclear enterprise. When Congress considers weapons of this
destructive power, our decisions must be guided by strategic
need, fiscal reality, risk reduction, and constitutional
oversight. This bill again fails to demand sufficient scrutiny
of nuclear modernization plans that are growing more expensive,
more difficult to execute, and less clearly connected to
today's security environment.
For another year, the committee declined to provide the
Department of Defense with flexibility on the statutory
requirement to maintain a fixed number of intercontinental
ballistic missiles. A rigid requirement to keep 400 ICBMs
deployed and available is not a substitute for analysis. It
deprives the President and the Department of the flexibility
needed to adapt nuclear posture to evolving threats, arms
control opportunities, resource constraints, and the
demonstrated survivability of the sea-based and bomber legs of
the triad. Congress should ask what force is necessarily to
deter adversaries, not preserve an arbitrary number because it
has become politically difficult to revisit.
The Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program and
the plutonium modernization program remain clear examples of
why this oversight is necessary. Sentinel has already
experienced extraordinary cost growth and schedule pressure,
yet Congress continues to act as though continuing the program
unchanged is the only acceptable option. NNSA has also
repeatedly acknowledged the difficulty of meeting statutory pit
production requirements, and independent reviews have raised
serious concerns about costs, schedules, and execution.
Congress should require credible life-cycle cost estimates,
integrated schedules, and a full comparison of alternatives,
including reuse and refurbishment of existing pits where
technically viable.
I am also concerned by continued support for the nuclear
sea-launched cruise missile, tactical nuclear capabilities,
low-yield nuclear options, potential nuclear-armed hypersonic
systems, explosive nuclear testing, and expansive missile
defense concepts that could increase strategic instability.
Congress should focus on reducing nuclear risks, preserving
channels for strategic stability, and avoiding costly programs
that invite arms racing without making the American people
safer. As I wrote in a journal article earlier this year,
``Congress may have enabled arms races in the past, but a
reinvigorated Congress has the authority and responsibility to
reduce the risk from nuclear weapons. It's time we started
acting like it.''.
POLITICIZATION OF THE MILITARY AND DEPARTMENT OF WAR RENAMING
I strongly object to the committee's decision to adopt
language deeming references to the Department of Defense and
Secretary of Defense as references to the Department of War and
Secretary of War. The name Department of Defense reflects the
proper purpose of the institution: to defend the United States,
uphold the Constitution, and protect the American people under
civilian control. Changing that name does nothing to improve
readiness, strengthen deterrence, support servicemembers, or
repair the defense industrial base.
Instead, this proposal is a costly and disruptive act of
political symbolism. It would create administrative confusion
across law, regulation, maps, records, contracts, forms,
publications, information systems, signage, and official
communications. More importantly, it sends the wrong message
about the role of the United States military. Our military
exists to defend the nation, not to serve as a political
instrument or a branding opportunity for any administration.
Congress has a duty to guard against the politicization of the
armed forces and to preserve the professional, nonpartisan
character of military service.
MILITARY INSTALLATION NAMES
By contrast, I was pleased that the Committee adopted
language requiring military installations to be renamed in a
manner that better reflects American values and honors the
right people. This is a modest but important victory. Congress
should not allow any administration to rewrite military history
at will, restore honors to Confederate generals who betrayed
the United States, or disregard the process Congress
established to ensure that our military installations reflect
the best of our country.
Names such as Fort Liberty, Fort Moore, Fort Cavazos, Fort
Gregg-Adams, Fort Johnson, Fort Novosel, Fort Barfoot, and Fort
Walker honor service, sacrifice, and values worthy of emulation
by the men and women who wear the uniform. The names of our
military installations should inspire servicemembers, families,
and communities.
DATA CENTERS ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INSTALLATIONS
I am disappointed that the committee rejected an amendment
to establish basic oversight for commercial data centers on
Department of Defense installations. Data centers are becoming
critical infrastructure, but they also require enormous amounts
of power, water, land, security, and infrastructure support.
When such facilities are placed on or near military
installations, Congress has a responsibility to ensure they do
not undermine readiness, training, installation resilience, or
community quality of life.
The amendment would have required the Secretary of Defense
to certify, before entering into an agreement for the
construction or operation of a commercial data center, that the
facility had a clear military purpose and posed no risk to
national defense. It would have required the Department to
assess costs, continuity of operations, energy supply, water
consumption, sound and light pollution, encroachment on
training and operations, physical security, supply chain risks,
personnel security, and the ability of surrounding communities
to raise concerns. These are not unreasonable requirements. No
installation should be asked to trade readiness, energy
resilience, water security, or future mission needs for opaque
commercial arrangements.
CONGRESSIONAL WAR POWERS
Finally, I am deeply concerned that this bill does not do
enough to reassert Congress's constitutional role over
decisions to use military force. The Constitution gives
Congress the power to declare war, raise and support armies,
provide and maintain a navy, make rules governing the armed
forces, and fund military operations. These responsibilities
are not optional, and they cannot be delegated away because it
is politically easier to remain silent.
No administration, of either party, should be permitted to
place servicemembers in harm's way, risk escalation with
foreign powers, or initiate sustained hostilities without
meaningful consultation with Congress and, when required,
explicit authorization. After-the-fact briefings are not a
substitute for congressional authorization. This is not a
partisan issue; it is a constitutional issue. Our
servicemembers deserve clear legal authority for the missions
we ask them to execute, and the American people deserve a
Congress willing to debate and vote on matters of war and
peace.
Our decisions should be guided by careful consideration,
constitutional responsibility, and a commitment to spending
taxpayer dollars wisely. I will continue to support investments
that strengthen our servicemembers, improve readiness, rebuild
the defense industrial base, and protect the United States. But
I will also continue to oppose policies that waste resources,
politicize the military, increase nuclear risks, or erode the
role of Congress in decisions of war and peace. We owe it to
the American people and to those who se1ve to get this right.
Sincerely,
John Garamendi,
Member of Congress.