[Senate Report 119-39]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 115
119th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 119-39
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 2296]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION,
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
----------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
July 15, 2025.--Ordered to be printed
Calendar No. 115
119th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 119-39
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 2296]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION,
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
__________
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
July 15, 2025.--Ordered to be printed
_______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-121 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska JACK REED, Rhode Island
TOM COTTON, Arkansas JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
JONI K. ERNST, Iowa RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota TIM KAINE, Virginia
RICK SCOTT, Florida ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
TED BUDD, North Carolina TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
JIM BANKS, Indiana MARK KELLY, Arizona
TIM SHEEHY, Montana ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
John P. Keast, Staff Director
Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
REPORT TO ACCOMPANY S. 2296
Purpose of the Bill.............................................. 1
Committee Overview............................................... 2
Budgetary Effects of This Act (Sec. 4)........................... 2
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations and Budget Authority
Implication.................................................... 2
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS................. 5
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 5
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 5
Sec. 101--Authorization of appropriations................ 5
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 5
Sec. 111--Strategy for Army tactical wheeled vehicle
program................................................ 5
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 5
Sec. 121--Procurement authority for Columbia-class
submarine program...................................... 5
Sec. 122--Procurement authorities for Medium Landing
Ships.................................................. 5
Sec. 123--Recapitalization of Navy waterborne security
barriers; modification of prohibition on availability
of funds for legacy waterborne security barriers....... 5
Sec. 124--Modification to limitations on Navy medium and
large unmanned surface vessels......................... 6
Sec. 125--Limitation on availability of funds for TAGOS
ship program........................................... 6
Sec. 126--Limitation on availability of funds relating to
amphibious warfare ship requirement.................... 6
Sec. 127--Temporary unavailability of amphibious warfare
ships.................................................. 6
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 7
Sec. 131--B-21 bomber aircraft program accountability
matrices............................................... 7
Sec. 132--Bomber aircraft force structure and transition
roadmap................................................ 7
Sec. 133--Requirement for an intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance roadmap for the Air Force........... 7
Sec. 134--Annual report on Department of Defense unified
datalink strategy...................................... 8
Sec. 135--Plan for open mission systems of F-35 aircraft. 8
Sec. 136--Modification of prohibition on retirement of F-
15E aircraft........................................... 9
Sec. 137--Prohibition on retirement of A-10 aircraft..... 9
Sec. 138--Extension of limitations and minimum inventory
requirement relating to RQ-4 aircraft.................. 9
Sec. 139--Expansion of air refueler fleet................ 9
Sec. 140--Requirements relating to C-130 aircraft........ 9
Sec. 141--Information on future large and oversized air
cargo transportation services.......................... 9
Items of Special Interest................................ 10
Acceleration of Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile
Program............................................ 10
Acoustic system for passive surveillance............. 10
Advanced Combat Engine............................... 10
Aeromedical evacuation platform inventory
requirements....................................... 11
Airborne fire control radars......................... 11
Army aviation transformation......................... 12
Army command and control systems software............ 12
Army Digital Engineering Center of Excellence........ 13
Army Ground Combat Vehicles.......................... 13
Army load-carrying technology advancements........... 13
Army Prepositioned Stocks............................ 14
Assessment of hypersonic materials manufacturing and
industrial base.................................... 14
Briefing on Conventional Prompt Strike advanced
capability development............................. 15
C-130 propeller study................................ 16
C-130H divestment plan............................... 16
CMV-22 enhancement................................... 16
Collaborative Combat Aircraft program................ 17
Comptroller General review of tiltrotor technology... 17
Concerns about accelerated divestment of A-10
aircraft........................................... 18
Consideration of additional F-16 aircraft procurement 19
Considerations for Agile Combat Employment........... 19
Counter unmanned aerial system policy................ 20
Counter unmanned aerial systems delegation of
authority.......................................... 21
Counter unmanned aircraft system pilot program....... 21
Deployable expandable shelters....................... 22
Diversification of Army counter unmanned aerial
systems............................................ 23
Expeditionary air base defense in support of Agile
Combat Employment.................................. 23
Experimental Operations Unit......................... 24
F-15E propulsion modernization assessment............ 25
F-16 electronic warfare modernization................ 25
Flightline Equipment Connectivity.................... 26
Future X-band radar.................................. 26
Heavy Vehicle Simulator.............................. 27
Industrial base capacity to support dual sixth-
generation fighter programs........................ 27
Litter basket stabilization.......................... 28
Marine Corps Arctic capabilities..................... 28
MH-139 Grey Wolf procurement......................... 28
Military aircraft engine industrial base............. 29
Modular munitions for small unmanned aerial systems.. 30
MQ-9 Replacement..................................... 30
Munitions Handling Unit lift modernization........... 30
Navy actions on Government Accountability Office
recommendations.................................... 31
Next generation mobility requirements................ 31
Next generation night vision devices................. 32
Next Generation Squad Weapon magazine development
testing............................................ 32
Organic Industrial Base artillery ammunition
modernization...................................... 33
Precision artillery munition modernization........... 33
Preservation of World War II-era Aircraft in Air
Force Historic Collection.......................... 33
Propellant industrial base expansion................. 34
Rapid fielding of commercial command and control
operating systems.................................. 35
Report on critical suppliers registry................ 35
Requirements related to Navy amphibious warfare ships 36
Secondary sources in the munitions supply chain...... 36
Squad Designated Marksman Rifle...................... 36
Status of B-52 TF33 engine generators................ 37
Supporting new entrants and modern approaches to
address missile inventory.......................... 37
Tactical ground radars............................... 38
UH-60M Black Hawk modernization...................... 38
Ultra-Lightweight Camouflage Net System.............. 39
Urgent deployment of commercial counter unmanned
aerial systems capabilities for installation
protection......................................... 39
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 40
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 40
Sec. 201--Authorization of appropriations................ 40
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 40
Sec. 211--Modifications to defense research capacity
building program....................................... 40
Sec. 212--Program for the enhancement of the research,
development, test, and evaluation centers of the
Department of Defense.................................. 40
Sec. 213--Extension of authority for assignment to
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency of private
sector personnel with critical research and development
expertise.............................................. 42
Sec. 214--Limitation on use of funds for certain Navy
software............................................... 42
Sec. 215--Limitation on availability of funds for Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering...... 42
Sec. 216--Prohibition on contracts between certain
foreign entities and institutions of higher education
conducting Department of Defense-funded research....... 42
Sec. 217--Western regional range complex demonstration... 42
Sec. 218--Modification of requirement for Department of
Defense policies for management and certification of
Link 16 military tactical data link network............ 43
Sec. 219--Advanced robotic automation for munitions
manufacturing.......................................... 43
Sec. 220--Dual-use and defense advanced manufacturing
innovation hubs........................................ 43
Sec. 220A--Advanced manufacturing and additive
manufacturing programs................................. 43
Sec. 220B--Improvements relating to advanced
manufacturing.......................................... 43
Sec. 220C--Limitation on availability of funds for
fundamental research collaboration with certain
academic institutions.................................. 43
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters................ 44
Sec. 221--Catalyst Pathfinder Program.................... 44
Sec. 222--Extension of period for annual reports on
critical technology areas supportive of the National
Defense Strategy....................................... 44
Sec. 223--Evaluation of additional test corridors for
hypersonic and long-range weapons...................... 44
Sec. 224--Technical correction........................... 44
Sec. 225--Congressionally directed programs for test and
evaluation oversight................................... 44
Sec. 226--Prohibition on modification of indirect cost
rates for institutions of higher education and
nonprofit organizations................................ 45
Sec. 227--Enhance international coordination for advanced
manufacturing techniques, technologies, and adoption... 45
Subtitle D--Biotechnology.................................... 45
Sec. 231--Biotechnology Management Office................ 45
Sec. 232--Department of Defense biotechnology strategy... 45
Sec. 233--Defining guidelines and policies on the use of
biotechnology for the Armed Forces..................... 46
Sec. 234--Enhancement of international biodefense
capacity............................................... 46
Budget Items................................................. 46
Army..................................................... 46
High Performance Computing Modernization Program..... 46
Navy..................................................... 47
Air Force.................................................... 47
Adaptive threat modeling lab......................... 47
Defense Wide............................................. 47
Foreign Comparative Test program..................... 47
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research........................................... 47
Artificial intelligence algorithmic development
utilizing novel linguistics frameworks............. 48
Items of Special Interest................................ 48
Adaptation of air-launched weapons for ground launch. 48
Advanced Group 1 small unmanned aerial systems....... 49
Biometric collection and analysis.................... 49
Comprehensive inventory of departmental innovation
programs........................................... 49
Electromagnetic spectrum overmatch research.......... 50
Elevating warfighter capabilities for total force
optimization....................................... 50
Future Long Range Attack Aircraft program............ 51
Government Accountability Office report on aviation
risk management data............................... 51
Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate...... 52
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics activities 53
Low-cost hypersonic testing.......................... 53
Navy Modular Missile Solid Rocket Motors............. 54
Next-generation printed circuit boards............... 54
Project Pele......................................... 55
Quantum algorithm development........................ 56
Quantum benchmarking initiative...................... 56
Removing barriers to directed energy weapon system
testing, training, and exercising.................. 57
Researcher post-employment restrictions.............. 57
University research.................................. 57
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 59
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 59
Sec. 301--Authorization of appropriations................ 59
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment........................... 59
Sec. 311--Department of Defense guidelines regarding
implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969................................................ 59
Sec. 312--Requirement to support training on wildfire
prevention and response................................ 59
Sec. 313--Use of solid waste disposal systems by
Department of Defense.................................. 59
Sec. 314--Modification of availability and use of energy
cost savings........................................... 59
Sec. 315--Authority of Department of Defense to destroy
or dispose of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl
substances............................................. 60
Sec. 316--Modification to restriction on procurement or
purchasing of personal protective equipment for
firefighters containing perfluoroalkyl substances or
polyfluoroalkyl substances............................. 60
Sec. 317--Provision of bottled water to communities with
private drinking water contaminated with perfluoroalkyl
and polyfluoroalkyl substances from activities of
Department of Defense.................................. 60
Sec. 318--Repeal of prohibition on procurement by
Department of Defense of certain items containing
perfluorooctane sulfonate or perfluorooctanoic acid.... 60
Sec. 319--Repeal of temporary moratorium on incineration
by Department of Defense of perfluoroalkyl substances,
polyfluoroalkyl substances, and aqueous film forming
foam................................................... 60
Sec. 320--Interim responses to address releases or
threatened releases of perfluoroalkyl and
polyfluoroalkyl substances............................. 60
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment........................ 61
Sec. 321--Surface ship sustainment and readiness......... 61
Sec. 322--Technology enhancement for surface ship
maintenance............................................ 61
Sec. 323--Delegation to United States Transportation
Command of mitigating vulnerabilities and risks
associated with contested logistics for Department of
Defense................................................ 62
Sec. 324--Requirements for Department of Defense aircraft
operations near commercial airports.................... 62
Sec. 325--Extension and modification of semiannual
briefings on operational status of amphibious warship
fleet.................................................. 62
Sec. 326--Prohibition on closure of Army organic
industrial base sites.................................. 62
Sec. 327--Establishment of Defense Personal Property
Management Office under Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness................. 62
Sec. 328--Integration of commercially available
artificial intelligence capabilities into logistics
operations............................................. 63
Sec. 329--Pilot program on arsenal workload sustainment.. 63
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 63
Sec. 331--Modification of report on improved oversight
for implementation of Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Program of the Navy....................... 63
Sec. 332--Modification of readiness report to include
summary count of certain mishaps....................... 63
Sec. 333--Annual report on funding and status of interim
remedial actions of Department of Defense relating to
perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.......... 63
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 64
Sec. 341--Provision of sports foods and third-party
certified dietary supplements to members of the United
States Special Operations Command...................... 64
Sec. 342--Limitation on use of funds to establish or
expand Space Force Special Operations Component Command 64
Sec. 343--Requirements for contracts relating to
permanent change of station moving process............. 64
Sec. 344--Limitation on transformation by the Army of
primary helicopter training program at Fort Rucker,
Alabama................................................ 64
Sec. 345--Conveyance of certain aircraft from Air Force
to Arizona Aviation Historical Group, Phoenix, Arizona. 65
Sec. 346--Limitation on use of funds by the Army until
submittal of plan to integrate Joint Munitions Command
and Army Sustainment Command........................... 65
Sec. 347--Limitation on use of certain funds of the Air
Force until acquisition strategy submitted to maintain
Airborne Command Post capability....................... 65
Sec. 348--Pilot program for contracted amphibious air
resources for the area of responsibility of the United
States Indo-Pacific Command............................ 65
Sec. 349--Naming of certain assets of the Department of
Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia................ 65
Budget Items................................................. 65
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration
Program................................................ 65
Items of Special Interest.................................... 66
Advanced software for Navy and Marine Corps readiness
data................................................... 66
Aerial firefighting enhancement.......................... 66
Army field-level maintenance in a contested environment.. 67
Army strategy and requirements for wildfire suppression
mission................................................ 67
Blast exposure and weapons sensors for Special Operations
Forces................................................. 68
Briefing on activation of power projection wings by U.S.
Air Force Special Operations Command................... 69
Briefing on advanced manufacturing....................... 69
Briefing on Defense Language and National Security
Education Office and future planning for foreign
language programs...................................... 70
Briefing on software development and acquisition
capabilities for U.S. Special Operations Command....... 71
Comptroller General review of capabilities and planning
for sensitive crisis response operations............... 71
Expanding Arctic training................................ 72
Feasibility of floating drydock.......................... 73
FireGuard................................................ 73
Guam invasive species mitigation......................... 73
Head and hearing protection for aircraft maintenance
personnel.............................................. 74
Inclusion of personal protective equipment and
organizational clothing and individual equipment items
in Army Transformation in Contact...................... 75
Interagency integration on Arctic planning, testing, and
operations............................................. 75
Intermittent fault detection and isolation technology.... 76
Military working equid report............................ 76
Northern Strike Exercises................................ 77
Operational energy....................................... 77
Organic industrial base expansion........................ 78
Quantum sensing technologies for addressing
perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl contamination....... 79
Report on hexavalent chromium............................ 79
Special Operations Digital Force Protection.............. 80
Survival, evasion, resistance, and escape complex........ 80
United States-made Army training aircraft................ 81
Wing additive manufacturing.............................. 81
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 83
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 83
Sec. 401--End strengths for active forces................ 83
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 83
Sec. 411--End strengths for selected reserve............. 83
Sec. 412--End strengths for reserves on active duty in
support of the reserves................................ 83
Sec. 413--End strengths for military technicians (dual
status)................................................ 84
Sec. 414--Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized
to be on active duty for operational support........... 84
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 85
Sec. 421--Military personnel............................. 85
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 87
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 87
Sec. 501--Statutory adjustment to reflect transfer of
certain general officer billets from the Air Force to
the Space Force........................................ 87
Sec. 502--Notice of removal of Judge Advocates General... 87
Sec. 503--Qualifications for judge advocates............. 87
Sec. 504--Modification of waiver authority related to
joint qualified officer requirement prior to promotion
to general or flag grade............................... 88
Sec. 505--Notification of removal of officers from
selection board reports and promotion lists............ 88
Sec. 506--Space Force general officer management......... 88
Sec. 507--Temporary increase in fiscal year percentage
limitation for reduction or waiver of service-in-grade
requirement for general and flag officers to be retired
in pay grades O-7 and O-8.............................. 88
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management..................... 89
Sec. 511--Expansion of authority to waive limitations on
release of reserves from active duty within two years
of retirement eligibility.............................. 89
Sec. 512--Disestablishment of Navy Reserve Center system. 89
Sec. 513--National Guard personnel authorities........... 89
Sec. 514--National Guard personnel disaster response duty 90
Subtitle C--General Service Authorities and Military Records. 90
Sec. 521--Chief of Naval Personnel....................... 90
Sec. 522--Enhanced efficiency and service discretion for
Disability Evaluation System reviews................... 90
Sec. 523--Technical correction related to convalescent
leave for academy cadets and midshipmen................ 90
Sec. 524--Recognition of remotely piloted aircraft crew.. 90
Subtitle D--Military Justice and Other Legal Matters......... 91
Sec. 531--Notification of military sex offenders at
military installations................................. 91
Sec. 532--Quarterly reports on sexual assault prevention
and response efforts................................... 91
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, and Transition....... 91
Sec. 541--Military service academy nominations........... 91
Sec. 542--Asynchronous instruction in distance education
option for professional military education............. 91
Sec. 543--Army University................................ 91
Sec. 544--Integration of the Secretary of Defense
Strategic Thinkers Program............................. 92
Sec. 545--Improvements to information-sharing to support
individuals retiring or separating from the Armed
Forces................................................. 92
Sec. 546--Mandatory training on government ethics and
national security law.................................. 92
Sec. 547--Prohibition on consideration of race, sex,
color, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in
service academy admissions decisions................... 92
Sec. 548--Prohibition on participation of males in
athletic programs or activities at the military service
academies that are designated for women or girls....... 92
Sec. 549--Pathway for cadets and midshipmen to play
professional sports.................................... 92
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness and Dependents'
Education.................................................. 93
Part I--Dependents' Education............................ 93
Sec. 551--Certain assistance to local educational
agencies that benefit dependents of military and
civilian personnel................................. 93
Sec. 552--Management of special education in schools
operated by Department of Defense Education
Activity........................................... 93
Sec. 553--Enrollment of children of certain American
Red Cross employees in defense dependents'
education system................................... 94
Sec. 554--Regulations on the use of portable
electronic mobile devices in Department of Defense
Education Activity schools......................... 94
Sec. 555--Administration of college admissions tests
by the Department of Defense Education Activity.... 94
Sec. 556--Support for expanding early childcare
options for members of the Armed Forces and their
families........................................... 94
Sec. 557--Improved counseling and access to
information relating to foster care for military
families........................................... 94
Sec. 558--Pilot program on recruitment and retention
of employees for child development programs........ 95
Sec. 559--Report on unmet need for childcare in areas
with significant populations of members of the
Armed Forces....................................... 95
Part II--Other Matters................................... 95
Sec. 561--Legal assistance for guardianship transfers 95
Subtitle G--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.......... 95
Sec. 571--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
instructor qualifications.............................. 95
Sec. 572--Temporary authority to provide bonuses to
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps instructors.... 95
Sec. 573--Number of Junior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps units............................................ 96
Subtitle H--Decorations and Other Awards, Miscellaneous
Reports, and Other Matters................................. 96
Sec. 581--Honorary promotions on the initiative of the
Department of Defense.................................. 96
Sec. 582--National Week of Military Recruitment.......... 96
Sec. 583--Clarifying the calculation of enlistments for
persons whose score on the Armed Forces Qualification
Test is below a prescribed level for the future
servicemember preparatory course....................... 96
Sec. 584--Recruiter access to secondary schools.......... 97
Sec. 585--Compliance with travel charge card deactivation
requirements........................................... 97
Items of Special Interest.................................... 97
Adverse childhood experience response teams.............. 97
Briefing on after-hours childcare options................ 98
Briefing on childcare exceptions to policy............... 98
Briefing on general and flag officer reductions.......... 99
Briefing on military recruits who participated in Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps....................... 99
Briefing on section 555 of Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025....................................... 100
Careers in mapping and surveying......................... 101
Cell phone-free Department of Defense Education Activity
schools................................................ 101
Clarity in communications for Exceptional Family Member
Program legal assistance............................... 101
Comptroller General review of military service academy
curricula and staffing practices....................... 102
Comptroller General review of military service
compassionate reassignment policies.................... 102
Crew complement of F-15E and F-15EX programs............. 103
Enhance Department of Defense science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics education and career-
connected pathways..................................... 104
Enhanced career counseling in Transition Assistance
Program................................................ 104
Ensuring statutory compliance in accession classification
and reporting.......................................... 105
Filling short-term servicemember childcare needs with
Kinderspot............................................. 106
Implementation report on self-initiated mental health
referrals.............................................. 106
Importance of independent legal advice by military judge
advocates.............................................. 107
Integration of military service outcome data with state
educational systems.................................... 107
Navy Personnel Command Records Analysis Branch process
briefing............................................... 108
Oversight of suicide prevention policy and access to
mental health care..................................... 108
Potential school choice options for Department of Defense
Education Activity..................................... 109
Preservation of the Force and Family program............. 109
Recognition of military-friendly schools................. 109
Report on human performance technologies................. 110
Report on implementation of notification requirements
relating to prohibition on post-service employment with
certain governments.................................... 110
Report on public service loan forgiveness................ 111
Report on training records for post-9/11 servicemembers.. 111
Service casualty assistance office resourcing and
capacity............................................... 112
Study on the readiness and transition impacts of the
SkillBridge program.................................... 112
Summer camp programs for military-connected youth........ 113
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 115
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 115
Sec. 601--Modifications to calculation of basic allowance
for subsistence for enlisted members................... 115
Sec. 602--Inclusion of descriptions of types of pay on
pay statements......................................... 115
Sec. 603--Increased awareness and improved calculation of
rates for basic allowance for housing.................. 115
Sec. 604--Military compensation educational campaign..... 116
Subtitle B--Special and Incentive Pay........................ 116
Sec. 611--Reviews of designations of imminent danger pay
areas.................................................. 116
Sec. 612--Implementation of aviation incentive pay for
members of reserve components.......................... 117
Sec. 613--Pilot program on improving retention of members
with degrees in their fields of specialty.............. 117
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 117
Sec. 621--Extension of enhanced authority for selective
early retirement and early discharges.................. 117
Sec. 622--Extension of temporary early retirement
authority.............................................. 117
Sec. 623--Extension of authority to provide voluntary
separation pay and benefits............................ 117
Sec. 624--Designation of United States Army Garrison
Kwajalein Atoll as remote and isolated military
installation........................................... 117
Sec. 625--Designation of Creech Air Force Base as a
remote or isolated installation........................ 117
Sec. 626--Provision of counseling on housing for members
of the Armed Forces.................................... 118
Sec. 627--Program to provide Government-funded
transportation for certain members of the Armed Forces
stationed overseas..................................... 118
Sec. 628--Prohibition on procurement and commissary sales
of seafood originating or processed in the People's
Republic of China...................................... 118
Items of Special Interest.................................... 118
Analysis of outsourcing Defense Commissary Agency
functions for enhanced efficiency...................... 118
Briefing on adequacy of cost of living allowances
calculations........................................... 119
Briefing on separation and retirement policies of certain
members of the Armed Forces............................ 120
Commending the United Service Organizations.............. 120
Development of regular military compensation pay table... 121
Exempted positions from Deferred Resignation Program..... 121
Military housing price setting software report........... 122
Report on student loan challenges for servicemembers..... 122
Use of surcharge funds for Defense Commissary
infrastructure......................................... 122
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 125
Subtitle A--Tricare, Brain Health Matters, and Other Health
Care Benefits.............................................. 125
Sec. 701--Inclusion of additional requirements in
notifications to modify scope of services provided at
military medical treatment facilities.................. 125
Sec. 702--Expansion of eligibility for hearing aids to
include children of retired members of the Uniformed
Services enrolled in family coverage under TRICARE
Select................................................. 125
Sec. 703--Assessment of behavioral health and social
health conditions of military personnel and their
families assigned to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada..... 125
Sec. 704--Authority to provide sexual assault medical
forensic examinations on a nonreimbursable basis to
certain otherwise ineligible individuals............... 126
Sec. 705--Fertility treatment for certain members of the
Uniformed Services and dependents...................... 126
Sec. 706--Restriction on performance of sex change
surgeries.............................................. 126
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration....................... 126
Sec. 711--Codification of position of Director of the
Defense Health Agency.................................. 126
Sec. 712--Establishment of policies for priority
assignment of medical personnel of Department of
Defense................................................ 126
Sec. 713--Graduate medical education partnership
demonstration program.................................. 126
Sec. 714--Modification of administration of medical
malpractice claims by members of the uniformed services 127
Sec. 715--Improvement of transition of medics in the
Armed Forces to the civilian workforce in health care
occupations............................................ 127
Sec. 716--Improvement of provider directory accuracy for
specialty care providers under the TRICARE program..... 127
Sec. 717--Review of disclosure requirements under
processes and forms relating to health care provider
credentialing and privileging of Department of Defense. 127
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................ 128
Sec. 721--Strategic infectious disease medical research
plan................................................... 128
Sec. 722--Extension of authority for Joint Department of
Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund..................................... 128
Sec. 723--Pilot program on wastewater surveillance system
of Department of Defense............................... 128
Items of Special Interest.................................... 128
Access to obstetrician-gynecologist care................. 128
Anomalous health incidents............................... 128
Biologic vascular repair for warfighters................. 129
Blast overpressure data modernization.................... 129
Briefing on feasibility of Department of Defense
partnership with non-profit academic medical center to
study traumatic brain injury........................... 130
Briefing on telehealth-enabled solutions for treatment of
musculoskeletal injuries............................... 130
Comptroller General review of blast overpressure
documentation implementation........................... 131
Comptroller General study on impact of behavioral and
mental health staffing shortfalls at military medical
treatment facilities................................... 131
Continuing medical education for military professionals.. 132
Department of Defense pharmaceutical supply chain report. 133
Foreign adversary threats to genetic medicine supply
chains................................................. 134
General temporary military contingency payment adjustment
for children's hospitals............................... 134
Medical licensure portability for the National Guard..... 135
Military efforts to mitigate risks of antimicrobial
resistance............................................. 135
Military Health System facilities........................ 136
Military medical personnel timecards..................... 136
National Disaster Medical System pilot program........... 137
Nonaddictive opioid alternatives......................... 137
On-demand intravenous fluids for expeditionary medicine.. 137
Private sector support for multi-patient movement
contingency requirements............................... 138
TRICARE contingency planning............................. 138
TRICARE pharmacy briefing................................ 139
TRICARE provider and beneficiary complaint mechanism..... 139
U.S. Naval Hospital Guantanamo Bay....................... 140
Unified joint military trauma system..................... 140
Wound care and management in future combat............... 141
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS................................................ 143
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 143
Sec. 801--Transition of program executive officer role to
portfolio acquisition executive........................ 143
Sec. 802--Capstone requirements.......................... 143
Sec. 803--Modification to acquisition strategy........... 143
Sec. 804--Modifications to modular open systems approach. 143
Sec. 805--Alternative test and evaluation pathway for
designated defense acquisition programs................ 143
Sec. 806--Department of Defense member of Cost Accounting
Standards Board........................................ 144
Sec. 807--Combatant command experimentation authority.... 144
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations................................ 144
Sec. 821--Modifications to nontraditional defense
contractor definitions................................. 144
Sec. 822--Financing for covered activities............... 144
Sec. 823--Exemptions for nontraditional defense
contractors............................................ 145
Sec. 824--Modifications to treatment of certain products
and services as commercial products and commercial
services............................................... 145
Sec. 825--Modifications to commercial products and
commercial services.................................... 145
Sec. 826--Modifications to commercial solutions openings. 145
Sec. 827--Modifications to other transactions............ 146
Sec. 828--Modifications to procurement for experimental
purposes............................................... 146
Sec. 829--Consumption-based solutions.................... 146
Sec. 830--Modifications to prohibition on contracting
with persons that have fossil fuel operations with the
Government of the Russian Federation or the Russian
energy sector.......................................... 146
Sec. 831--Modifications to relationship of other
provisions of law to procurement of commercial products
and commercial services................................ 147
Sec. 832--Limitation on required flowdown of contract
clauses to subcontractors providing commercial products
or commercial services................................. 147
Sec. 833--References in contracts to Department of
Defense policy documents, instructions, and manuals.... 147
Sec. 834--Uninsurable risk on certain contracts.......... 147
Sec. 835--Reporting of price increases................... 147
Sec. 836--Instructions for continued operational
readiness.............................................. 147
Sec. 837--Indemnification of contractors against nuclear
and unusually hazardous risks.......................... 147
Sec. 838--Late submission of cost and pricing data as
invalid defense to contract price reductions for
defective cost or pricing data......................... 148
Sec. 839--Modifications to submissions of cost or pricing
data................................................... 148
Subtitle C--Industrial Base Matters.......................... 148
Sec. 841--Repeal of limitations on certain Department of
Defense Executive Agent authority...................... 148
Sec. 842--Small unmanned aircraft system industrial base
remediation plan....................................... 149
Sec. 843--Application of national security waiver for
strategic materials sourcing requirement to sensitive
materials.............................................. 149
Sec. 844--Prohibition on acquisition of clothing and
fabric from countries of concern under domestic-
sourcing waivers....................................... 149
Sec. 845--Mitigation of risks related to foreign
ownership, control, or influence of Department of
Defense contractors or subcontractors.................. 150
Sec. 846--Prohibition of procurement of molybdenum,
gallium, or germanium from non-allied foreign nations
and authorization for production from recovered
material............................................... 150
Sec. 847--Sourcing options for certain critical products. 150
Sec. 848--Prohibiting the purchase of photovoltaic
modules or inverters from Foreign Entities of Concern.. 150
Sec. 849--Modernization of Army arsenals................. 150
Sec. 849A--Modifications to Defense Industrial Base Fund. 150
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters........................... 150
Sec. 851--APEX Accelerators.............................. 150
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 151
Sec. 861--Clarification of procurement prohibition
related to acquisition of materials mined, refined, and
separated in certain countries......................... 151
Sec. 862--Independent study on the acquisition workforce
of the Department of Defense........................... 151
Sec. 863--Expedited acceptance program for supply chain
illumination........................................... 151
Sec. 864--Simultaneous conflicts critical munitions
report................................................. 151
Sec. 865--Permanent extension and modification of
demonstration and prototyping program to advance
international product support capabilities in a
contested logistics environment........................ 152
Sec. 866--Estimate of ally and partner demand for United
States-produced munitions and specified expendables.... 152
Sec. 867--Reform of contractor performance information
requirements........................................... 153
Sec. 868--Repeals of existing law to streamline the
defense acquisition process............................ 153
Sec. 869--Enhancement of defense supply chain resilience
and secondary source qualification..................... 153
Sec. 870--Enhanced product support management for
integrated sustainment of weapon systems............... 154
Sec. 871--Modifications to current defense acquisition
requirements........................................... 154
Sec. 872--Minimum production levels for munitions........ 155
Sec. 873--Processes for incentivizing contractor
expansion of sources of supply......................... 155
Sec. 874--Duty-free entry of supplies procured by
Department of Defense.................................. 155
Sec. 875--Other transactions authority reporting......... 155
Sec. 876--Assessment of competitive effects of defense
contractor transactions................................ 155
Sec. 877--Evaluation of TP-Link telecommunications
equipment for designation as covered telecommunications
equipment or services.................................. 156
Sec. 878--Country-of-origin disclosure requirements for
generic drugs purchased by the Department of Defense... 156
Sec. 879--Phase-out of computer and printer acquisitions
involving entities owned or controlled by China........ 156
Sec. 880--Prohibition on operation, procurement, and
contracting related to foreign-made additive
manufacturing machines................................. 156
Items of Special Interest.................................... 156
Advanced polymeric composite ammunition materials........ 156
Biosurveillance for servicemember readiness.............. 157
Briefing on feasibility and advisability of
biomanufacturing in Indo-Pacific....................... 157
Briefing on Neodymium Iron Boron Magnets................. 158
Briefing on textile war reserve stocks................... 158
Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear
protective equipment................................... 159
Combatting viral pathogens and bioengineered viruses..... 159
Commercial requirements evaluation....................... 160
Comptroller General assessment of information technology
contracts.............................................. 160
Comptroller General review of Office of the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation........................ 161
Comptroller General review of role of distributors in
supply chain........................................... 161
Department of Defense battery strategy................... 162
Department of Defense coordination with broader chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear threats.......... 163
Department of Defense supply chain mapping efforts....... 163
Efforts to accelerate bioindustrial manufacturing
innovation............................................. 164
Feasibility and advisability of a critical minerals index 164
Feasibility and advisability of establishing
biosurveillance network at United States embassies and
military installations overseas........................ 165
Government Accountability Office defense industrial base
review................................................. 165
Hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene supply chain........... 166
Organic industrial base governance....................... 167
Predictive manufacturing analytics at Army depots........ 168
Rapid hull production of unmanned vessels................ 168
Report on addressing acquisition and merger review
shortfalls............................................. 168
Review of reporting requirements......................... 169
Review of sole source awards in cloud computing
contracting............................................ 169
Silica fabric manufacturing.............................. 169
Small Business Innovation Research to support organic
industrial base........................................ 170
Small business support for Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification requirements............................. 170
Streamline authorities to establish Navy rapid
capabilities office.................................... 171
Study on contracting official workload................... 172
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 175
Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related
Matters.................................................... 175
Sec. 901--Economic Defense Unit.......................... 175
Sec. 902--Additional authorities for Office of Strategic
Capital................................................ 175
Sec. 903--Modifications to responsibilities of Director
for Operational Test and Evaluation.................... 176
Sec. 904--Directive authority for matters for which Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering has
responsibility......................................... 176
Sec. 905--Modification of energetic materials strategic
plan and investment strategy of Joint Energetics
Transition Office...................................... 176
Sec. 906--Limitation on availability of funds pending
establishment of Joint Energetics Transition Office.... 176
Sec. 907--Modification of covered technology categories
for Office of Strategic Capital........................ 177
Sec. 908--Modification of organization and authorities of
Assistant Secretaries of Defense with duties relating
to industrial base policy and readiness................ 177
Subtitle B--Other Department of Defense Organization and
Management Matters......................................... 177
Sec. 911--Modifications to Joint Requirements Oversight
Council................................................ 177
Sec. 912--Transfer of responsibility for countering small
unmanned aircraft systems.............................. 177
Sec. 913--Study on feasibility and advisability of
establishing a Joint Capabilities and Programming Board 177
Sec. 914--Briefing on restructuring of Army Futures
Command and Training and Doctrine Command.............. 178
Sec. 915--Designation of senior official for military-to-
civilian transition.................................... 178
Sec. 916--Removal of members of Joint Chiefs of Staff.... 178
Sec. 917--Longer term and eligibility for appointment to
rank of Admiral of Commander of Naval Sea Systems
Command................................................ 178
Sec. 918--Delay of disestablishment of Navy Expeditionary
Combat Command Pacific................................. 178
Sec. 919--Limitation on use of funds for consolidation,
disestablishment, or elimination of geographic
combatant commands..................................... 179
Sec. 920--Elimination of statutory provisions relating to
diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Department of
Defense................................................ 179
Sec. 921--Defense Science Board study on optimal
organizational structure for digital engineering
solutions.............................................. 179
Sec. 922--Establishment of Advanced Nuclear Transition
Working Group.......................................... 179
Items of Special Interest.................................... 179
Civilian oversight and advocacy for special operations
forces................................................. 179
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 181
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 181
Sec. 1001--General transfer authority.................... 181
Sec. 1002--Amendments and repeals to budgetary
requirements for defense acquisition................... 181
Sec. 1003--Briefing on beginning balance issues for audit
purposes............................................... 181
Sec. 1004--Defense Business Audit Remediation Plan
reporting.............................................. 182
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels.................................... 182
Sec. 1011--Requirements related to Medium Landing Ships
and Light Replenishment Oilers......................... 182
Sec. 1012--Modification of authority to purchase used
vessels under the National Defense Sealift Fund........ 182
Sec. 1013--Exemption of unmanned surface vessels and
unmanned underwater vehicles from certain technical
authority requirements................................. 183
Sec. 1014--Prohibition on retiring and decommissioning
oceanographic research vessels of the Navy............. 183
Sec. 1015--Report accompanying requests for new flights
or blocks of major shipbuilding programs............... 183
Sec. 1016--Report on auxiliary vessel co-production...... 183
Sec. 1017--Report on vessel leasing program.............. 184
Sec. 1018--Pilot program on use of automated shipbuilding
technologies and capabilities.......................... 184
Subtitle C--Counterterrorism................................. 184
Sec. 1021--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.......................................... 184
Sec. 1022--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.......................... 184
Sec. 1023--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.............................................. 185
Sec. 1024--Extension of prohibition on use of funds to
close or relinquish control of United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.......................... 185
Sec. 1025--Clarification regarding definition of
individual detained at Guantanamo...................... 185
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 185
Sec. 1031--Prohibition on use of funds to support
entertainment projects with ties to the Government of
the People's Republic of China......................... 185
Sec. 1032--Prohibition on destruction or scrapping of
World War II-era aircraft.............................. 186
Sec. 1033--Support for counterdrug activities and
activities to counter transnational organized crime.... 186
Sec. 1034--Senior leaders of the Department of Defense
and other specified persons: authority to provide
protection............................................. 186
Sec. 1035--Notification of the use of military aircraft
for immigration enforcement operations................. 186
Sec. 1036--Modification of requirements relating to
support of civil authorities by Armed Forces........... 187
Sec. 1037--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......................... 187
Subtitle E--Studies and Reports.............................. 187
Sec. 1041--Annual report on contract cancellations....... 187
Sec. 1042--Streamlining of total force reporting
requirements........................................... 187
Sec. 1043--Report on National Guard sexual assault
prevention and response training....................... 188
Sec. 1044--Reports to Congress on Department of Defense
support for immigration enforcement operations......... 188
Sec. 1045--Military Sealift Command...................... 188
Sec. 1046--Report on aliens held at installations of
Department of Defense.................................. 188
Sec. 1047--Briefing on expenditures or planned
expenditures of funds allocated for exploration and
development of existing Arctic infrastructure.......... 188
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 189
Sec. 1051--Modification of limitation on assistance in
support of Department of Defense accounting for missing
United States Government personnel..................... 189
Sec. 1052--Extension of admission to Guam or the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands for
certain H-2B nonimmigrants............................. 189
Sec. 1053--Prohibiting Secretary of Defense from
developing voting technology or methodology............ 189
Sec. 1054--Assessment of the feasibility and advisability
of using personnel of the Department of Defense to
support U.S. Customs and Border Protection............. 190
Sec. 1055--Limitation on availability of funds for travel
expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense..... 190
Sec. 1056--Department of Defense sensitive activities.... 190
Sec. 1057--Irregular Warfare Exercise Laboratory......... 190
Sec. 1058--Semiannual report on Department of Defense
operations at the southern land border................. 191
Sec. 1059--University-based secure innovation incubator
program of Department of Defense....................... 191
Sec. 1060--Priority consideration of energy projects that
are likely to experience significant temporal impact
due to seasonal Arctic climate conditions.............. 191
Sec. 1061--Non-reimbursable support for Afghanistan War
Commission............................................. 191
Sec. 1062--Contracting authority for Afghanistan War
Commission............................................. 191
Sec. 1063--Commission on the National Defense Strategy... 191
Sec. 1064--Provision by Air Force of meteorological and
environmental services for intelligence community...... 192
Sec. 1065--Expansion of Individual Longitudinal Exposure
Record................................................. 192
Sec. 1066--Classification of Nevada Test and Training
Range as location where contamination occurred and
members of the Armed Forces were exposed to toxic
substances............................................. 192
Subtitle G--Defense Workforce Integration.................... 192
Sec. 1081--Integration of military and civilian hiring
processes.............................................. 192
Sec. 1082--Provision of information on career
opportunities in the defense industrial base to persons
ineligible for military service........................ 192
Sec. 1083--Provision to Navy personnel of information on
career opportunities at Military Sealift Command....... 192
Sec. 1084--Report on defense workforce integration....... 193
Items of Special Interest.................................... 193
Adopting and scaling commercially available extra-large
unmanned underwater vehicles........................... 193
Briefing on commercial technology for shipbuilding....... 193
Briefing on DOD Record Management........................ 194
DDG-51 shipbuilding...................................... 194
Department of Defense sites for purposes of national
security reviews....................................... 195
Dissemination of civilian legal services (549C) review... 195
Economic considerations in tabletop exercises............ 195
Government Accountability Office review of costs of
supporting civil authorities........................... 196
Increased access to ocean data........................... 197
Irregular warfare........................................ 197
Irregular Warfare Center................................. 197
Large surface combatant briefing......................... 198
Maritime industrial base supplier funding................ 199
Medium unmanned surface vessel program requirements and
acquisition............................................ 199
Narrative intelligence and cognitive warfare............. 200
Navy water purification system upgrades.................. 201
Safety Investigation Board report........................ 201
Shipbuilding industrial base cost estimate............... 202
Software colors of money................................. 203
Special operations forces promotions, assignments, and
retention.............................................. 203
Status of the Department of Defense financial audit...... 204
Study on Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance
Program grant administration and compliance............ 205
Study on integration of force management, budgeting, and
requirements processes and combatant commands
headquarters funding................................... 205
Support for clarifying budget materials for industry
consumption............................................ 206
Transportation to and from Naval Station Guantanamo Bay.. 206
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security
Charter................................................ 207
Weather wing cloud modernization......................... 207
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 209
Subtitle A--Personnel Matters................................ 209
Sec. 1101--Educational travel authority for dependents of
certain employees...................................... 209
Sec. 1102--One-year extension of authority to waive
annual limitation on premium pay and aggregate
limitation on pay for Federal civilian employees
working overseas....................................... 209
Sec. 1103--One-year extension of temporary authority to
grant allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian
personnel on official duty in a combat zone............ 209
Sec. 1104--Modifications to Defense Civilian Training
Corps.................................................. 210
Sec. 1105--Modifications to requirements for the
President of the Defense Acquisition University........ 210
Sec. 1106--Modification of direct hire authority for
domestic defense industrial base facilities............ 210
Sec. 1107--Cyber workforce recruitment and retention..... 210
Sec. 1108--Prohibition on use of funds to reduce the
workforce at public shipyards.......................... 211
Items of Special Interest.................................... 211
Civilian workforce policy................................ 211
Scholarship for service hiring........................... 212
Hiring freeze and scholarship programs................... 212
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 215
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 215
Sec. 1201--Modification of authorities................... 215
Sec. 1202--Modification of payment of costs for Regional
Centers for Security Studies........................... 215
Sec. 1203--Modification of authority for Naval Small
Craft Instruction and Technical Training School........ 215
Sec. 1204--Permanent extension of acceptance and
expenditure of contributions for multilateral security
cooperation programs and activities.................... 215
Sec. 1205--Building capacity of the armed forces of
Mexico to counter transnational criminal organizations. 215
Sec. 1206--Cybersecurity cooperation with the Government
of Panama and the Panama Canal Authority............... 216
Sec. 1207--State Partnership Program selection analysis.. 216
Sec. 1208--Modification of authority to build capacity of
foreign security forces................................ 216
Sec. 1209--Extension and Modification of Pilot Program to
Improve Cyber Cooperation with Foreign Military
Partners in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands..... 216
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran........ 216
Sec. 1211--Extension of authority for reimbursement of
certain coalition nations for support provided to
United States military operations...................... 216
Sec. 1212--Extension and modification of authority to
support operations and activities of the Office of
Security Cooperation in Iraq........................... 217
Sec. 1213--Extension of authority to provide assistance
to vetted Syrian groups and individuals................ 217
Sec. 1214--Extension and modification of authority to
provide assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria.............................................. 217
Sec. 1215--Extension and modification of authority to
provide certain support................................ 217
Sec. 1216--Security and oversight of al-Hol and Roj camps 217
Sec. 1217--Limitation on use of funds for reduction or
consolidation of United States Armed Forces bases in
Syria.................................................. 217
Sec. 1218--Limitation on availability of funds for the
Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq................. 218
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian
Federation................................................. 218
Sec. 1221--Extension of prohibition on availability of
funds relating to sovereignty of the Russian Federation
over internationally recognized territory of Ukraine... 218
Sec. 1222--Extension of annual report on military and
security developments involving the Russian Federation. 218
Sec. 1223--Extension and modification of Ukraine Security
Assistance Initiative.................................. 218
Sec. 1224--Weapons depot maintenance strategic plan for
Ukraine................................................ 218
Sec. 1225--Oversight of United States military posture in
Europe................................................. 219
Sec. 1226--Acceptance back into stock of equipment
procured under the Ukraine Security Assistance
Initiative............................................. 219
Sec. 1227--Statement of policy relating to Ukraine
Security Assistance Initiative......................... 219
Sec. 1228--Intelligence support for Ukraine.............. 219
Sec. 1229--International Security Cooperation Program
funding for United States European Command............. 220
Sec. 1230--Promotion of the Joint Ukrainian Multinational
Program--Services, Training and Articles Rapid Timeline
(JUMPSTART)............................................ 220
Sec. 1230A--Modification of United States basing and
training, and exercises in North Atlantic Treaty
Organization member countries.......................... 220
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region...... 220
Sec. 1231--Extension of Pacific Deterrence Initiative.... 220
Sec. 1232--Extension of authority to transfer funds for
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup................................ 221
Sec. 1233--Oversight of United States military posture on
the Korean Peninsula................................... 222
Sec. 1234--Limitation on availability of funds for travel
expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense..... 222
Sec. 1235--Bolstering industrial resilience with allies
in Indo-Pacific region................................. 222
Sec. 1236--Modification of Taiwan security cooperation
initiative............................................. 222
Sec. 1237--Joint program with Taiwan to enable fielding
of uncrewed systems and counter-uncrewed systems
capabilities........................................... 223
Sec. 1238--Report on critical digital infrastructure of
Taiwan................................................. 223
Sec. 1239--Report on Japanese counterstrike capabilities. 223
Sec. 1240--Report on enhanced security cooperation with
the Philippines........................................ 223
Sec. 1241--Modification to annual report on military and
security developments involving the People's Republic
of China............................................... 223
Sec. 1242--Strategic partnership on defense industrial
priorities between the United States and Taiwan........ 224
Sec. 1243--Invitation to Taiwan to Rim of the Pacific
(RIMPAC) exercise...................................... 224
Sec. 1244--Extension of Indo-Pacific extended deterrence
education pilot program................................ 224
Sec. 1245--Inclusion on list of Chinese military
companies of entities added to certain other lists..... 224
Sec. 1246--Preventing circumvention by Chinese military
companies in third-party countries..................... 224
Sec. 1247--Sense of Congress on defense alliances and
partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region................ 224
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 225
Sec. 1251--Middle East integrated air and missile defense
architecture........................................... 225
Sec. 1252--Modification of program and processes relating
to foreign acquisition................................. 225
Sec. 1253--Enhancing security partnership with Jordan and
Lebanon................................................ 225
Sec. 1254--Joint Program Office for Non-Programs of
Record to support foreign acquisition.................. 226
Sec. 1255--Extension and modification of United States-
Israel anti-tunnel cooperation......................... 226
Sec. 1256--Extension and modification of United States-
Israel cooperation to counter unmanned aerial systems.. 226
Sec. 1257--Guidance for coordination of international
arms transfers......................................... 226
Sec. 1258--Requirement to update the National Disclosure
Policy................................................. 227
Sec. 1259--Improvements to security cooperation workforce
and defense acquisition workforce...................... 227
Sec. 1260--Expansion of country prioritization........... 227
Sec. 1261--Streamlining and expediting sales of defense
articles and services.................................. 227
Sec. 1262--Redesignation of the Africa Center for
Strategic Studies as the James M. Inhofe Center for
Africa Security Studies................................ 228
Sec. 1263--Establishment of program to promote
participation of foreign students in the Senior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps............................... 228
Sec. 1264--Modification of authority for assistance in
support of Department of Defense accounting for missing
United States Government personnel..................... 228
Items of Special Interest.................................... 228
AUKUS senior civilian official........................... 228
Contracting support relative to Taiwan................... 228
Cooperation between United States and Vietnam............ 229
Department of Defense support to maritime law enforcement
activities in Indo-Pacific region...................... 229
Enhancing United States-Mexico military communication in
support of border operations........................... 229
Foreign Military Sales contract modifications............ 230
Foreign Military Sales timeline.......................... 230
Illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing............. 231
Indo-Pacific Multilateral Security Cooperation
Initiatives............................................ 232
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance strategy
Sahel.................................................. 232
Kurdish Peshmerga forces................................. 233
People's Republic of China security detection equipment
at strategic ports..................................... 233
Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreements................ 234
Security cooperation with Co-operative Republic of Guyana 234
State Partnership Program................................ 234
Strategic ports reporting................................ 235
Strategy on increasing membership in the Comprehensive
Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement.......... 235
United States-Morocco defense partnership................ 236
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION......................... 237
Sec. 1301--Cooperative Threat Reduction funds............ 237
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 239
Subtitle A--Military Programs................................ 239
Sec. 1401--Working capital funds......................... 239
Sec. 1402--Chemical agents and munitions destruction,
defense................................................ 239
Sec. 1403--Drug interdiction and counter-drug activities,
defense-wide........................................... 239
Sec. 1404--Defense Inspector General..................... 239
Sec. 1405--Defense Health Program........................ 239
Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile....................... 239
Sec. 1411--Modifications to Strategic and Critical
Materials Stock Piling Act............................. 239
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 240
Sec. 1421--Authorization of appropriations for Armed
Forces Retirement Home................................. 240
Items of Special Interest.................................... 240
Advancing cobalt production in the United States......... 240
Domestic recycling of critical minerals.................. 240
Material preference for the National Defense Stockpile... 240
Reimbursement of Armed Forces Retirement Home for medical
care provided to TRICARE-eligible beneficiaries........ 241
Securing niobium supply.................................. 241
Support for continued focus on critical mineral
investment............................................. 241
TITLE XV--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS........................................................ 243
Subtitle A--Space Activities................................. 243
Sec. 1501--Delay in implementation of environmental
assessment for rocket cargo test and demonstration at
Johnston Atoll......................................... 243
Sec. 1502--Study on future space launch capacity......... 243
Sec. 1503--Acquisition and operation of space systems for
space warfighting and control.......................... 243
Sec. 1504--Blast damage assessment guide for space
vehicles at Air Force launch complexes................. 244
Sec. 1505--Acquisition of space-based tactical data
capability............................................. 244
Sec. 1506--Use of middle tier acquisition program for
proliferated warfighter space architecture of the Space
Development Agency..................................... 245
Sec. 1507--Continuation of operation of Defense
Meteorological Satellite Program....................... 245
Subtitle B--Nuclear Forces................................... 245
Sec. 1511--Matters relating to intercontinental ballistic
missiles of the United States.......................... 245
Sec. 1512--Matters relating to Air Force Global Strike
Command................................................ 245
Sec. 1513--Adjustment to bomber aircraft nuclear
certification requirement.............................. 246
Sec. 1514--Limitation on availability of funds pending
establishment of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense
Policy and Programs.................................... 246
Sec. 1515--Adjustment to responsibilities of Nuclear
Weapons Council........................................ 247
Sec. 1516--Limitation on availability of funds pending
notification of tasking authority delegation........... 247
Sec. 1517--Modification of requirement for nuclear-armed,
sea-launched cruise missile initial operational
capability............................................. 247
Sec. 1518--Pilot program for unmanned aerial vehicle
resupply to launch control facilities.................. 248
Sec. 1519--Limitation on availability of funds pending
commencement of annual briefings on implementation of
recommendations by the Congressional Commission on the
Strategic Posture of the United States................. 248
Sec. 1520--Deep cleaning of launch control centers of the
Air Force Global Strike Command........................ 248
Sec. 1521--Limitation on compensation caps............... 249
Subtitle C--Missile Defense.................................. 249
Sec. 1531--Matters relating to the Golden Dome missile
defense system......................................... 249
Sec. 1532--Inclusion of Hawaii and Alaska in plans for
Iron Dome for America.................................. 250
Sec. 1533--Inclusion of air and missile defense in
unconstrained total munitions requirements............. 250
Sec. 1534--Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system
and Israeli cooperative missile defense program co-
development and co-production.......................... 251
Sec. 1535--Requirement for Aegis Combat Systems
operationally deployed under United States Indo-Pacific
Command................................................ 251
Sec. 1536--Amendments to technical authority of Director
of Missile Defense Agency regarding integrated air and
missile defense activities and programs................ 251
Sec. 1537--Assessment of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic
Missile Defense Test Site.............................. 251
Sec. 1538--Biennial assessments of the Ronald Reagan
Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site.................... 251
Sec. 1539--Limitation on availability of funds for Office
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment pending commencement of annual briefings on
missile defense of Guam................................ 252
Sec. 1540--Limitation on availability of funds for
Missile Defense Agency pending arrangement for
independent analysis of space-based missile defense
capability............................................. 252
Sec. 1541--Limitation on authority to reduce sustainment
for or halt operation of the AN/FPS-108 COBRA DANE
radar.................................................. 252
Sec. 1542--Accelerating development of autonomous agents
to defend against cruise missiles and unmanned systems. 253
Sec. 1543--Missile defense testing requirements.......... 253
Sec. 1544--Improving United States missile defense
capabilities........................................... 253
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 253
Sec. 1551--Independent assessment of the Department of
Defense National Industrial Security Program........... 253
Sec. 1552--Reforms relating to inactive security
clearances............................................. 253
Sec. 1553--Annual review of the Joint Electromagnetic
Battle Management Software Program..................... 254
Sec. 1554--Integration of electronic warfare into Tier 1
and Tier 2 joint training exercises.................... 254
Sec. 1555--Briefings on intercepts of unidentified
anomalous phenomena by North American Aerospace Defense
Command and United States Northern Command............. 254
Sec. 1556--Consolidated security classification guidance
matrix for programs relating to unidentified anomalous
phenomena.............................................. 254
Sec. 1557--Plan for increasing utility of user activity
monitoring capabilities................................ 255
Sec. 1558--Support by the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing to
EA-37B Compass Call Aircraft........................... 255
Sec. 1559--Report on the technical collection
capabilities of the People's Republic of China and the
Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba............. 255
Sec. 1560--Extension of protection of certain facilities
and assets from unmanned aircraft...................... 255
Sec. 1561--Consolidation of reporting requirements
applicable to All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office..... 256
Sec. 1562--Limitation on the divestment, consolidation,
and curtailment of certain electronic warfare test and
evaluation activities.................................. 256
Sec. 1563--Modification of functions of Electromagnetic
Spectrum Enterprise Operational Lead for Joint
Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations to include dynamic
spectrum sharing technologies.......................... 256
Sec. 1564--Limitation on modification of certain
electromagnetic spectrum relied on by Department of
Defense................................................ 256
Items of Special Interest.................................... 256
Accelerating space sensors............................... 256
Advanced manufacturing methods for hypersonic flight
bodies................................................. 257
All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office future plans........ 257
Army Indirect Fire Protection Capability High-Power
Microwave program...................................... 258
Automation of intelligence tipping and cueing............ 258
Autonomous Weapons Stations for Strategic Asset
Protection............................................. 259
Briefing on Defense Property Accountability System
applicability to missile wing vehicles maintained by
Air Force Global Strike Command........................ 259
Briefing on infrastructure rehabilitation plan for
restoring U.S. Army Garrison--Kwajalein Atoll and the
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site...... 259
Briefing on resource-loaded plans for sustaining
Minuteman III until deployment of Sentinel............. 260
Briefing on risks to Global Positioning System and
associated positioning, navigation, and timing services 260
Briefing on Space Force education and potential center
for orbital warfare.................................... 261
Briefing on U.S. Navy nuclear propulsion plant trainer... 262
Commercial ground stations............................... 262
Commercial Satellite Bus Integration..................... 262
Commercial space domain awareness........................ 263
Comptroller General assessment of coordination with
allies on national security space acquisitions......... 263
Comptroller General assessment of Department of Defense
program protection for space acquisition programs...... 264
Comptroller General review of electromagnetic spectrum
needs during defense acquisition process............... 265
Comptroller General review of electromagnetic spectrum
operations............................................. 265
Comptroller General review of performance of the
Logistics Civil Augmentation Program contracting
structure in supporting U.S. Army Garrison Kwajalein
Atoll.................................................. 266
Comptroller General review of Space Development Agency
ground systems development............................. 266
Comptroller General review of Space Fence program
challenges............................................. 267
Comptroller General review of space systems data
networking capabilities................................ 267
Cybersecurity for space assets........................... 268
Demonstrate leveraging commercial in-space data purchases
and analysis for unresolved imagery for Space Domain
Awareness.............................................. 269
Directed energy weapons.................................. 269
Dynamic robotic servicing in space....................... 270
Electromagnetic warfare and spectrum operations manpower. 270
Electronic warfare requirements and testing for Group 1-3
unmanned aerial systems and loitering munitions........ 271
Encouraging investment in deep space telescopes.......... 272
Extended life operations for U.S. Government satellites.. 272
High-resolution three-dimensional geospatial data........ 272
Integrated sensing roadmap for unidentified anomalous
phenomena.............................................. 273
Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor acquisition.... 274
Modernizing mission assurance for space launch........... 274
Multi-use commercial communications for deep space
missions............................................... 275
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.................. 275
Non-propulsive orbital maneuvering technologies.......... 275
Ongoing Comptroller General review of Minuteman III
intercontinental ballistic missile operations and
sustainment............................................ 276
Performance review of security clearance process......... 276
Protection and advancement of electronic warfare systems. 277
Public-private partnerships in nuclear effects testing... 277
Satellite hyperspectral imaging.......................... 278
Sea-based launch platforms for ballistic missile defense
targets................................................ 278
Space access, mobility, and logistics.................... 278
Space cooperation with allies and partners in Indo-
Pacific region......................................... 279
Support for Space Development Agency's acquisition model. 280
Tactical Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Tracking
program................................................ 281
Tactically Responsive Space.............................. 281
Unified Data Library (UDL) integration and sensor data
fusion................................................. 282
TITLE XVI--CYBERSPACE-RELATED MATTERS............................ 283
Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Cyber Operations and Cyber
Forces..................................................... 283
Sec. 1601--Comprehensive cyber workforce strategy........ 283
Sec. 1602--United States Cyber Command artificial
intelligence industry collaboration roadmap............ 283
Sec. 1603--Strategy for deterrence against cyberattacks
against defense critical infrastructure of the United
States................................................. 284
Sec. 1604--Amendment to annual assessments and reports on
assignment of certain budget control responsibility to
Commander of the United States Cyber Command........... 285
Sec. 1605--Report on reserve component integration into
cyber mission force and cyberspace operations.......... 285
Sec. 1606--Evaluation of cyber range management and
funding................................................ 285
Sec. 1607--Modification to reporting requirements for
Senior Military Advisor for Cyber Policy............... 286
Sec. 1608--Planning, programming, and budget coordination
for operations of cyber mission force.................. 286
Sec. 1609--Expansion of scope of affirmation of authority
for cyber operations to include defense of critical
infrastructure of the Department of Defense............ 286
Sec. 1610--Review of future force employment concepts and
associated personnel policy needs for evolving cyber
forces................................................. 286
Sec. 1610A--Evaluation of Joint Task Force-Cyber in
support of geographic combatant commands............... 287
Sec. 1610B--Prohibition on availability of funds to
modify authorities of the Commander of United States
Cyber Command.......................................... 287
Sec. 1610C--Program for talent management of cyber
personnel through active and reserve transitioning..... 287
Sec. 1610D--Designation of Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Cyber Policy as principal staff assistant.......... 287
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Department of Defense
Cybersecurity and Information Technology................... 287
Sec. 1611--Modernization program for full content
inspection............................................. 287
Sec. 1612--Assessment regarding real-time monitoring of
defense weapons platforms for cyber threats............ 288
Sec. 1613--Assessment of feasibility and advisability of
establishing an operational technology cybersecurity
training center of excellence.......................... 288
Sec. 1614--Framework for integration of information
technology technical debt assessment into annual budget
process................................................ 289
Sec. 1615--Mission Infrastructure Resilience Task Force.. 289
Sec. 1616--Plan for deploying private fifth generation
Open Radio Access Networks on Department of Defense
bases.................................................. 289
Sec. 1617--Limitation on funds for travel pending
briefing on process for best-in-class cyber data
products and services.................................. 290
Sec. 1618--Limitation of funds for travel expenses for
the Office of the Chief Information Officer............ 290
Sec. 1619--Limitation on availability of funds for the
Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control
initiative............................................. 291
Sec. 1620--Review of Joint Fires Network program
transition............................................. 291
Sec. 1620A--Prohibition of the elimination of certain
cyber assessment capabilities for test and evaluation.. 291
Sec. 1620B--Modification to certification requirement
regarding contracting for military recruiting.......... 291
Sec. 1620C--Department of Defense working group,
strategy, and report on ensuring the security,
resiliency, and integrity of undersea cables........... 292
Subtitle C--Data and Artificial Intelligence................. 292
Sec. 1621--Public-private cybersecurity partnership for
highly capable artificial intelligence systems......... 292
Sec. 1622--Digital sandbox environments for artificial
intelligence........................................... 292
Sec. 1623--Artificial intelligence model assessment and
oversight.............................................. 292
Sec. 1624--Department of Defense Ontology Governance
Working Group.......................................... 293
Sec. 1625--Modification of high-performance computing
roadmap................................................ 294
Sec. 1626--Artificial General IntelligenceSteering
Committee.............................................. 294
Sec. 1627--Physical and cybersecurity procurement
requirements for artificial intelligence systems....... 295
Sec. 1628--Guidance and prohibition on use of certain
artificial intelligence................................ 295
Sec. 1629--Roadmap for advancing digital content
provenance standards................................... 295
Sec. 1630--Enhanced protection of data affecting
operational security of Department of Defense personnel 295
Items of Special Interest.................................... 296
Advancing Analytics data platform application integration
framework.............................................. 296
Artificial intelligence for assistive automation......... 296
Artificial intelligence-enabled weapons systems center of
excellence............................................. 297
Assessment of cybersecurity vulnerabilities of connected
vehicles............................................... 297
Building core synthetic data sets for model development.. 298
Collaborative computing environment in support of AUKUS
partnership............................................ 298
Competition related to the adoption of artificial
intelligence and commercial cloud computing
capabilities........................................... 299
Department of Defense software authorization and
accreditation reform................................... 299
Evaluation of Department of Defense data residency and
retention policies..................................... 300
Evaluation of incentives for acquisition personnel
supporting United States Cyber Command................. 301
Expansion of Department of Defense Cyber Service Academy
Eligibility............................................ 302
Implementing open architecture accreditation of
encryption in mounted form factor program.............. 302
Improving cyber coordination with foreign partners....... 303
Independent review of lessons learned from United States
Cyber Command acquisition activities................... 304
Integration of local initiatives, small business
programs, and academic institutions to limit gaps
between training events................................ 304
Leveraging artificial intelligence-enabled training
environments for cyber readiness....................... 305
Modernization of Department of Air Force reserve
component business applications........................ 305
Multimodal generative artificial intelligence language
translation capabilities............................... 306
Munitions production decision support.................... 306
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber
Policy resourcing...................................... 307
Phishing-resistant authentication........................ 308
Realignment of the Defense Cyber Crime Center............ 308
Strategy for identifying and addressing blockchain....... 309
Strategy for private cloud capabilities.................. 309
Time-based objectives for Department of Defense data
recovery............................................... 310
Transition strategy for formal methods in software and
hardware development................................... 310
United States Cyber Command dual-hat leadership
arrangement............................................ 311
Zero trust implementation................................ 312
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 315
Summary and explanation of funding tables.................... 315
Sec. 2001--Short title....................................... 315
Sec. 2002--Expiration of authorizations and amounts required
to be specified by law..................................... 315
Sec. 2003--Effective date.................................... 316
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................ 317
Summary...................................................... 317
Sec. 2101--Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects................................................... 317
Sec. 2102--Family housing.................................... 317
Sec. 2103--Authorization of appropriations, Army............. 317
Sec. 2104--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year
2021 project at Fort Gillem, Georgia....................... 317
Sec. 2105--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2022 projects......................................... 318
Sec. 2106--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2023 projects......................................... 318
Sec. 2107--Modification of authority to carry out certain
fiscal year 2025 projects.................................. 318
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION........................... 319
Summary...................................................... 319
Sec. 2201--Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects................................................... 319
Sec. 2202--Family housing.................................... 319
Sec. 2203--Authorization of appropriations, Navy............. 319
Sec. 2204--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2022 projects......................................... 319
Sec. 2205--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2023 projects......................................... 320
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION..................... 321
Summary...................................................... 321
Sec. 2301--Authorized Air Force construction and land
acquisition projects....................................... 321
Sec. 2302--Family housing.................................... 321
Sec. 2303--Authorization of appropriations, Air Force........ 321
Sec. 2304--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year
2017 project at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany.............. 321
Sec. 2305--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2019 projects......................................... 322
Sec. 2306--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2020 projects......................................... 322
Sec. 2307--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2022 projects......................................... 322
Sec. 2308--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2023 projects......................................... 322
Sec. 2309--Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year
2025 project at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming........ 322
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............... 323
Summary...................................................... 323
Sec. 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land
acquisition projects....................................... 323
Sec. 2402--Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation
Investment Program projects................................ 323
Sec. 2403--Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies. 323
Sec. 2404--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year
2019 project at Iwakuni, Japan............................. 323
Sec. 2405--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2022 projects......................................... 324
Sec. 2406--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2023 projects......................................... 324
Sec. 2407--Modification of authority to carry out certain
fiscal year 2024 projects.................................. 324
Sec. 2408--Modification of authority to carry out certain
fiscal year 2025 projects.................................. 324
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................ 325
Summary.................................................. 325
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program......................................... 325
Sec. 2501--Authorized NATO construction and land
acquisition projects................................... 325
Sec. 2502--Authorization of appropriations, NATO......... 325
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions............... 325
Sec. 2511--Republic of Korea funded construction projects 325
Sec. 2512--Republic of Poland funded construction
projects............................................... 325
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 327
Summary...................................................... 327
Sec. 2601--Authorized Army National Guard construction
and land acquisition projects.......................... 327
Sec. 2602--Authorized Army Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects................................... 327
Sec. 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps
Reserve construction and land acquisition projects..... 327
Sec. 2604--Authorized Air National Guard construction and
land acquisition projects.............................. 327
Sec. 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and
land acquisition projects.............................. 327
Sec. 2606--Authorization of appropriations, National
Guard and Reserve...................................... 328
Sec. 2607--Extension of authority to carry out certain
fiscal year 2023 projects.............................. 328
Sec. 2608--Modification of authority to carry out fiscal
year 2023 project at Tucson International Airport,
Arizona................................................ 328
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES............. 329
Summary and explanation of tables........................ 329
Sec. 2701--Authorization of appropriations for base
realignment and closure activities funded through
Department of Defense Base Closure Account............. 329
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS........... 331
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program.................... 331
Sec. 2801--Requirement for the military departments to
develop and annually update a 20-year infrastructure
improvement plan....................................... 331
Sec. 2802--Increase of maximum amount for restoration or
replacement of damaged or destroyed facilities......... 331
Sec. 2803--Reauthorization and modification of special
design-build authority for military construction
projects............................................... 331
Sec. 2804--Modification of pilot program on increased use
of sustainable building materials in military
construction to include sustainable building
technologies identified by the Comptroller General of
the United States...................................... 331
Sec. 2805--Implementation of Comptroller General
recommendations relating to information sharing to
improve oversight of military construction............. 332
Sec. 2806--Extension of requirement for contract for
obligation and execution of design funds for military
construction projects.................................. 332
Sec. 2807--Extension of authorization of depot working
capital funds for unspecified minor military
construction........................................... 332
Sec. 2808--Extension of authority for temporary expanded
land acquisition for equine welfare.................... 332
Sec. 2809--Prohibition on designation of military
construction projects as part of military intelligence
program................................................ 332
Sec. 2810--Expansion of Defense Community Infrastructure
Program to include installations of the Coast Guard.... 332
Subtitle B--Military Housing................................. 333
Sec. 2821--Improvements to annual reports of Department
of Defense on waivers of privacy and configuration
standards for covered military unaccompanied housing... 333
Sec. 2822--Modification of Housing Requirements and
Market Analysis to account for impact of civilians and
contractors............................................ 333
Sec. 2823--Authority for unaccompanied housing project
under pilot authority for use of other transactions for
installation or facility prototyping................... 333
Sec. 2824--Elimination of indoor residential mold in
housing of Department of Defense....................... 333
Sec. 2825--Requirement for disclosure of information
relating to liability insurance and dispute resolutions
relating to privatized military housing................ 334
Sec. 2826--Treatment of nondisclosure agreements with
respect to privatized military housing................. 334
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances................................. 334
Sec. 2831--Authorization to acquire through exchange or
lease certain land used by the Armed Forces in Hawaii.. 334
Sec. 2832--Report on land withdrawals.................... 334
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 334
Sec. 2841--Modifications to Defense Community
Infrastructure Program................................. 334
Sec. 2842--Designation of Ronald Reagan Space and Missile
Test Range at Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.. 334
Sec. 2843--Joint base facility management of Department
of Defense............................................. 334
Sec. 2844--Limitation on use of amounts for travel based
on compliance with requirements related to minimum
capital investment..................................... 335
Sec. 2845--Extension of prohibition on joint use of
Homestead Air Reserve Base with civil aviation......... 335
Sec. 2846--Pilot program on procurement of utility
services for installations of the Department of Defense
through areawide contracts............................. 335
Sec. 2847--Authorization for monetary contributions to
the conveyees of utility systems for infrastructure
improvements........................................... 336
Sec. 2848--Prohibition on use of funds for development of
Greenbury Point Conservation Area at Naval Support
Activity Annapolis, Maryland........................... 336
Sec. 2849--Application of certain authorities and
standards to historic military housing and associated
historic properties of the Department of the Navy and
the Department of the Air Force........................ 336
Items of Special Interest.................................... 336
B-21 bomber shelter strategy............................. 336
Civilian housing at public naval shipyards............... 337
Clarification of inclusion of certain energy production
facilities in authority for contracts for energy or
fuel for military installations........................ 337
Comptroller General review of maintenance of general and
flag officer quarters.................................. 338
Coordination of advanced nuclear efforts................. 338
Feasibility study on potential land use of Pentagon
Reservation............................................ 339
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning replacement at
Luke Air Force Base.................................... 340
Impacts to energy and water utilities on military
installations.......................................... 340
Implementation of increased architecture and engineering
design fee limitation.................................. 341
Infrastructure support for the 185th Air Refueling Wing.. 341
Installation energy demands in Indo-Pacific.............. 342
Integrated project delivery.............................. 342
Intergovernmental service agreements for unaccompanied
housing................................................ 343
Mold kits................................................ 344
Requirement for Camp Navajo entry bridge repairs......... 344
Study to enhance electrical grid resilience.............. 344
Yuma Proving Ground...................................... 345
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS....................................... 347
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 347
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations.... 347
Sec. 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration...... 347
Sec. 3102--Defense environmental cleanup................. 347
Sec. 3103--Other defense activities...................... 347
Sec. 3104--Nuclear energy................................ 347
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 347
Sec. 3111--Organization and codification of provisions of
law relating to atomic energy defense activities....... 347
Sec. 3112--Adjustment to plutonium pit production
capacity............................................... 347
Sec. 3113--National Nuclear Security Administration Rapid
Capabilities Development Office........................ 348
Sec. 3114--Review and assessment of the National Nuclear
Security Administration Enterprise Blueprint........... 348
Sec. 3115--Notification of cost overruns for certain
Department of Energy projects.......................... 348
Sec. 3116--Protection of certain nuclear facilities and
assets from unmanned aircraft.......................... 349
Sec. 3117--Extension of authority for appointment of
certain scientific, engineering, and technical
personnel.............................................. 349
Sec. 3118--Appropriate scoping of artificial intelligence
research within the National Nuclear Security
Administration......................................... 349
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 349
Sec. 3121--National security positions within the
Department of Energy................................... 349
Sec. 3122--Office of Environmental Management program-
wide performance metrics for reducing risk............. 349
Sec. 3123--Office of Environmental Management integrated
radioactive waste disposal planning and optimization... 350
Sec. 3124--Report on future activities and resources for
the delivery of specialized infrastructure............. 350
Items of Special Interest.................................... 350
Accelerating cleanup milestones at Los Alamos National
Laboratory............................................. 350
Briefing on Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation program..... 350
Briefing on feasibility of public-private partnerships to
support modernization of National Nuclear Security
Administration high-yield experimentation capabilities. 351
Comptroller General review of Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation legacy nuclear security programs...... 351
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration construction project cost drivers....... 352
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's artificial intelligence and machine
learning strategy...................................... 352
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's federal program and project manager
responsibilities....................................... 353
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's Office of Cost Estimating and Program
Evaluation............................................. 354
Comptroller General review of Office of Environmental
Management efforts to optimize cleanup activities...... 354
Comptroller General review of Office of Environmental
Management's fraud risk management for contracts and
subcontracts........................................... 355
Comptroller General review of options for grouting low-
activity waste at the Hanford Site..................... 356
Comptroller General review of status of Idaho National
Laboratory's defense nuclear waste treatment........... 356
Comptroller General review of the transportation of
defense radiological materials......................... 357
Comptroller General review to identify efficiency
opportunities in National Nuclear Security
Administration capital asset acquisitions.............. 357
Rendija Canyon land study................................ 358
Report on advances in the nuclear weapons design process. 358
Report on commercially available counter unmanned aerial
systems................................................ 359
Satellite facility long-term leasing..................... 360
Unexploded ordnance from legacy tests near Sandia
National Laboratories.................................. 360
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 361
Sec. 3201--Authorization..................................... 361
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES....................................... 363
Sec. 4001--Authorization of amounts in funding tables........ 363
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT........................................... 365
Sec. 4101--Procurement....................................... 365
Sec. 4102--Procurement for overseas contingency operations... 365
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.......... 367
Sec. 4201--Research, development, test, and evaluation....... 367
Sec. 4202--Research, development, test, and evaluation for
overseas contingency operations............................ 367
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 369
Sec. 4301--Operation and maintenance......................... 369
Sec. 4302--Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency
operations................................................. 369
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................................... 371
Sec. 4401--Military personnel................................ 371
Sec. 4402--Military personnel for overseas contingency
operations................................................. 371
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 373
Sec. 4501--Other authorizations.............................. 373
Sec. 4502--Other authorizations for overseas contingency
operations................................................. 373
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................ 375
Sec. 4601--Military construction............................. 375
Sec. 4602--Military construction for overseas contingency
operations................................................. 375
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS..... 377
Sec. 4701--Department of Energy national security programs... 377
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS......................................... 533
Committee Action............................................. 533
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................... 536
Regulatory Impact............................................ 536
Change in Existing Law....................................... 536
Calendar No. 115
119th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 119-39
======================================================================
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION,
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
_______
July 15, 2025.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Wicker, from the Committee on Armed Services,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2296]
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an
original bill (S. 2296) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2026 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
for military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths
for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and recommends
that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill would:
(1) Authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b)
research, development, test, and evaluation, (c)
operation and maintenance and the revolving and
management funds of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2026;
(2) Authorize the personnel end strengths for each
military Active-Duty component of the Armed Forces for
fiscal year 2026;
(3) Authorize the personnel end strengths for the
Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2026;
(4) Impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) Impose certain limitations with regard to
specific procurement and research, development, test,
and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide
certain additional legislative authority; and make
certain changes to existing law;
(6) Authorize appropriations for military
construction programs of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2026; and
(7) Authorize appropriations for national security
programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2026.
COMMITTEE OVERVIEW
Each year, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
authorizes funding levels and provides authorities for the U.S.
military and other critical defense priorities, ensuring
America's forces have the training, equipment, and resources
they need to carry out their missions.
On July 9, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 26-1
to advance the NDAA for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 to the Senate
floor.
Today, the United States is operating in the most dangerous
threat environment since World War II. We face an axis of
aggressors comprised of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea,
and this axis operates across multiple theaters. These nations
share weapons, resources, and a unifying objective: to
dismantle American influence around the world. While many of
the national security challenges we face resemble those of the
past, warfare looks much different today. Technological
advances in artificial intelligence, unmanned technology,
hypersonic strike weapons, sixth-generation aircraft, and
space-based weapons are transforming the nature of modern
conflict.
Thankfully, there is broad consensus among Congress, the
White House, the Department of Defense, and key allies about
these current threats and the need to address them. Recognizing
the complexity of today's geopolitical environment, our nation
must take action toward reindustrialization and work to rebuild
the arsenal of democracy.
To achieve this, we must advance significant reforms to
modernize the Pentagon's budgeting and acquisition operations.
This bill implements key Pentagon reforms to improve
efficiency, unleash innovation, and modernize the budget
process. Ultimately, our servicemembers must have the resources
they need to carry out their duties successfully, and the
American people deserve operational efficiency from their
government. Both are achievable.
BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT (SEC. 4)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the budgetary effects of this Act be determined in
accordance with the procedures established in the Statutory
Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-139).
SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS AND BUDGET AUTHORITY
IMPLICATION
The administration's budget request for national defense
discretionary programs within the jurisdiction of the Senate
Committee on Armed Services for fiscal year 2026 was $848.5
billion for base Department of Defense (DOD) programs and $33.8
billion for national security programs in the Department of
Energy (DOE).
The committee recommends an overall discretionary
authorization of $925.8 billion in fiscal year 2026, including
$879.3 billion for base DOD programs, $35.2 billion for
national security programs in the DOE, and $11.3 billion for
defense-related activities outside the jurisdiction of the
NDAA.
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
Division D of this bill summarizes the direct discretionary
authorizations in the committee recommendation and the
equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2026 defense
programs. The table summarizes the committee's recommended
discretionary authorizations by appropriation account for
fiscal year 2026 and compares these amounts to the request.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 101--Authorization of appropriations
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for procurement activities at the levels
identified in section 4101 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Sec. 111--Strategy for Army tactical wheeled vehicle program
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 112(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to require the Secretary
of the Army to provide an updated tactical wheeled vehicle
strategy with the submission of the President's budget request
for fiscal year 2027.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Sec. 121--Procurement authority for Columbia-class submarine program
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
procurement authorities for not more than five Columbia-class
submarines.
Sec. 122--Procurement authorities for Medium Landing Ships
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
authorities for a block buy of up to 15 Medium Landing Ships to
support testing and experimentation of the Marine Littoral
Regiment formation. The committee notes that this authority may
include the lead ship and follow on commercial or non-
developmental ships as authorized under section 128(b) of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (118-159).
Sec. 123--Recapitalization of Navy waterborne security barriers;
modification of prohibition on availability of funds for legacy
waterborne security barriers
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 130 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), as
most recently amended by section 123 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), by extending the
prohibition on replacing existing waterborne security barriers
with the current barriers. The provision would require the
Secretary of the Navy to submit a plan to the congressional
defense committees, not later than April 1, 2026, that would:
(1) Develop a formal set of requirements for waterborne
barriers; (2) Certify that the requirements exceed the
capability of existing barriers; (3) Produce an acquisition
strategy to meet the requirements; and (4) Submit a plan for
acquiring waterborne security barriers using full and open
competition. The provision would require implementation of the
plan by September 30, 2027.
Sec. 124--Modification to limitations on Navy medium and large unmanned
surface vessels
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 122 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) and
replace it with new requirements.
Sec. 125--Limitation on availability of funds for TAGOS ship program
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
limitation on the availability of funds for the Tactical
Auxiliary General Ocean Surveillance (TAGOS) ship program
pending the submission of a report by the Secretary of the Navy
on the maturity of the design for the TAGOS vessels, among
other things.
Sec. 126--Limitation on availability of funds relating to amphibious
warfare ship requirement
The committee recommends a provision that would limit
certain funds for the Secretary of the Navy unless the 30-year
shipbuilding plan for fiscal year 2027 meets the requirement to
maintain 31 amphibious warfare ships pursuant to section 8062
of title 10, United States Code. The provision would further
limit certain funds for the Secretary of Defense unless the
defense budget materials for fiscal year 2027 support the same
requirement for 31 amphibious warfare ships.
Sec. 127--Temporary unavailability of amphibious warfare ships
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 8062 of title 10, United States Code, to define
``temporarily unavailable'' to be a ship that has not surpassed
its planned maintenance availability by certain margins. Ships
that exceed those margins would no longer count toward filling
the requirement to maintain 31 amphibious ships.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
Sec. 131--B-21 bomber aircraft program accountability matrices
The committee recommends a provision that replaces section
238 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017 (Public Law 114-238) with a new provision to account for
advances in the B-21 program as it advances from engineering to
manufacturing and production. The provision would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit, beginning with the
President's annual budget request for fiscal year 2027 and
every 180 days after, information on B-21 program costs, goals,
and program execution to the congressional defense committees
and the Comptroller General of the United States. The provision
would further direct the Comptroller General, not less
frequently than annually, to review the information submitted
by the Secretary of the Air Force and submit to the
congressional defense committees an assessment of this
information.
Sec. 132--Bomber aircraft force structure and transition roadmap
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit a comprehensive bomber
roadmap, not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
The committee supports the Air Force's continued
modernization of the bomber force to ensure credible long-range
strike capabilities against peer adversaries. This includes
transitioning from legacy platforms to the B-21, modernizing
the B-52 to remain operational through the 2050s, and
responsibly divesting the aging B-1 fleet. The committee is
also interested in the Department of the Air Force's efforts to
more fully integrate the reserve components into next-
generation bomber operations to enhance readiness, increase
operational flexibility, and improve cost-effectiveness.
The committee wants this roadmap to ensure that the Air
Force implements a coherent, phased transition that will
maintain global strike capacity and align with long-term force
design and deterrence objectives. This roadmap should: (1)
Establish the full timeline for bomber modernization; (2)
Identify key decision points on that timeline; (3) Explain the
strategic rationale for platform divestments, capability
fielding, and modernization investments across the bomber
fleet; and (4) Specify the planned role of the Air National
Guard and Air Force Reserve in the future bomber force.
The committee expects this roadmap to serve as a tool for
oversight, risk mitigation, and long-term resourcing. The
committee also reiterates its support for the Air Force to
acquire and field no fewer than 100 B-21 aircraft.
Sec. 133--Requirement for an intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance roadmap for the Air Force
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit a comprehensive
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) roadmap to
the congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act. This roadmap should
outline the Air Force's strategic vision for ISR across air,
space, and cyberspace domains and must include: (1) An
assessment of current and projected ISR requirements, including
ISR support to joint and coalition operations; (2) An inventory
of existing ISR systems and platforms, including associated
capabilities, readiness levels, and expected service lives; (3)
Plans for modernization or divestment of legacy ISR systems and
the rationale for each such decision; (4) Planned investments
in emerging ISR technologies, including artificial
intelligence, autonomy, and space-based capabilities; (5) A
strategy for integrating ISR data into command and control
systems, ensuring interoperability with other services and
allied forces; (6) An assessment of potential capability gaps,
risks, and proposed mitigation strategies; and (7)
Implementation timelines and key milestones over the next 10
fiscal years.
The committee is concerned with the lack of a comprehensive
and unified roadmap for the future of capabilities across the
U.S. Air Force. As global threats evolve and near-peer
competitors continue to invest in advanced ISR technologies,
the committee believes that a clearly articulated strategy is
necessary to guide the Air Force's ISR investment, divestment,
and integration decisions over the next decade.
The committee expects this report to be submitted in
unclassified form, but the Secretary may include a classified
annex as appropriate.
Sec. 134--Annual report on Department of Defense unified datalink
strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1527 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to require annual reports
through 2032 on the Department of Defense's datalink strategy.
These reports are to include updated implementation timelines
for each element of the strategy outlined in subsection (a)(2)
of section 1527, as well as detailed accounts of both funding
and execution efforts planned or undertaken during the current
fiscal year.
The committee continues to emphasize the critical
importance of resilient, interoperable, and secure datalink
capabilities as a foundation for Joint All-Domain Command and
Control (JADC2) and future warfighting concepts. Building on
the requirement established by section 1527, the committee
believes sustained oversight is essential to ensure the
Department achieves measurable progress toward an integrated
and future-ready datalink enterprise.
The committee expects these annual reports to provide clear
visibility into datalink modernization across platforms,
services, and domains, including efforts to address legacy
system integration, electromagnetic spectrum resilience,
software-defined datalinks, and coalition interoperability.
Sec. 135--Plan for open mission systems of F-35 aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive plan to
establish a government-controlled open mission systems
computing environment for all variants and blocks of the F-35
aircraft operated by the Department of Defense and to deliver a
report describing this plan to the congressional defense
committees, not later than July 1, 2026.
The committee recognizes the strategic imperative of
enabling rapid, secure, and cost-effective modernization of the
Department of Defense's fifth-generation aircraft, including
the F-35. An open mission systems computing environment that is
government-controlled would reduce reliance on proprietary
architectures, enhance joint interoperability, and allow for
the rapid integration of advanced capabilities across
platforms.
Sec. 136--Modification of prohibition on retirement of F-15E aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9062(l)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by striking
``September 30, 2029'' and inserting ``September 30, 2027'' and
by striking ``68 F-15E aircraft'' and inserting ``34 F-15E
aircraft.'' The provision would also repeal certain portions of
section 150 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159).
Sec. 137--Prohibition on retirement of A-10 aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Air Force from divesting A-10 aircraft below the inventory
level of 103 in fiscal year 2026.
Sec. 138--Extension of limitations and minimum inventory requirement
relating to RQ-4 aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9062(m)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by
extending the limitation through September 30, 2030 for the
requirement that the Air Force maintain a minimum inventory of
RQ-4 aircraft.
Sec. 139--Expansion of air refueler fleet
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Air Force to reassign KC-135 tanker aircraft that are replaced
by KC-46 tanker aircraft to existing air refueling wings with
the ability to absorb a larger fleet.
Sec. 140--Requirements relating to C-130 aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
minimum inventory requirement for C-130 aircraft, extend
prohibitions on reduction of the C-130 aircraft assigned to the
Air National Guard, and direct the Secretary of the Air Force
to submit an annual report to the congressional defense
committees providing information on the Air Force's C-130
inventory.
Sec. 141--Information on future large and oversized air cargo
transportation services
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report, not later than April
1, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on future large and oversized air
cargo transportation services.
Items of Special Interest
Acceleration of Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile Program
The committee supports the Department of the Air Force's
continued development of hypersonic strike capabilities,
including the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) program.
As peer adversaries invest heavily in advanced long-range
systems, the United States must ensure timely fielding of
survivable, precision-strike options capable of penetrating
integrated air defense systems. The committee is interested in
the Air Force's plans to accelerate this timeline where
feasible, including steps to ensure industrial base readiness
and early production.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the plan to
transition the HACM to production. The briefing must include:
(1) Identification of key program milestones and funding
requirements, by the fiscal year, necessary to deliver
tactically relevant quantities of HACM by October 1, 2029; (2)
Assessment of opportunities for producibility improvements or
capability enhancements that could accelerate the timeline to
initial operational capability; and (3) A description of
industrial facilitization and supply chain investments needed
to support production, including any associated schedule risks
or constraints.
Acoustic system for passive surveillance
The committee notes that the Army has been testing a multi-
array, non-line-of-sight, passive surveillance system with
sensors that can detect and track acoustic emissions from
threat platforms while rejecting signals from commercial
aircraft and other ambient noise sources. Such a system has
broad applications for developing situational awareness in
congested airspaces to identify incursions of recreational
drones or other threats in an operational environment, such as
at joint-use airports.
Therefore, the committee encourages the National Guard
Bureau, in consultation with Reserve and Active-Duty partners,
to examine the utility of these systems specifically at joint-
use airports and Combat Readiness Training Centers during
military exercises focused on contingency response operations.
Advanced Combat Engine
The committee is encouraged by the Department of the Army's
development of a more fuel-efficient, lower-emission, and cost-
efficient engine to support Next Generation Combat Vehicles.
Based on the successful demonstrations at Camp Grayling and
Yuma Proving Grounds, the committee expects the Department of
the Army to continue development and then transition to the
fielding of this critical powertrain solution.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on funding requirements and fielding plans
to integrate the Advanced Combat Engine into current and next-
generation combat vehicles.
Aeromedical evacuation platform inventory requirements
The committee recognizes the importance of aeromedical
evacuation capabilities but is concerned that the Department of
the Army may have insufficient capacity to meet requirements
for the range of missions the Army may be called to support. It
is critical that the Army maintain the right mix of
capabilities to meet contingency training, humanitarian
assistance, and operations requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report, not later than March 31, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives detailing the Army's inventory of aeromedical
evacuation platforms as of the date on which the report is
submitted, as well as the projected inventory of such platforms
in 2030. The report shall also include: (1) The number of HH-
60M aircraft in the Army inventory configured for aeromedical
evacuation; (2) The number of UH-60L or other utility
helicopters equipped with an aeromedical evacuation interior;
(3) The number of LUH-72 aircraft configured or used for
aeromedical evacuation missions; and (4) The minimum number of
aircraft, by type, required to support: (a) geographic and
functional combatant commanders; (b) contingency operations and
operational plans; (c) defense support to civil authorities and
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear response force
missions; (d) humanitarian assistance and disaster response
missions; and (e) installation support for garrison emergency
medical response operations.
The report required shall be submitted in unclassified form
but may include a classified annex.
Airborne fire control radars
The committee is aware that the U.S. Air Force and the U.S.
Navy primarily rely on two suppliers to equip fighter aircraft
with fire control radars. These radars allow aircraft to
detect, target, identify, and engage or avoid airborne and
ground threats at tactically significant ranges. United States
air dominance is predicated on fielding premier fighters with
innovative weapons and sensors, and this in turn depends on a
healthy industrial base.
The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense
to be cognizant of the radar industrial base implications of
pending tactical air acquisition decisions, including the risk
to the engineering workforce from further program delays, and
expects that the Department would seek to mitigate the
implications of any such delay with appropriate industrial base
investment. Further, the committee directs the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy to review the
risks to and resilience of the fire control radar industrial
base and provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 31, 2026, with recommendations to mitigate any identified
industrial base risks.
Army aviation transformation
The committee is aware of the Army's plan to significantly
reduce the force structure of Army Combat Aviation Brigades, to
include divesting of Air Cavalry Squadrons. While the committee
supports the cost savings of pure fleeting to AH-64E Apache
aircraft, the committee is concerned about the lack of details
regarding the proposed realignment, particularly how the Army
will maintain sufficient capability and capacity through its
transformation. The committee is interested in Apache Future
Development funding and its alignment with Army Transformation
Initiative goals, including efforts on manned-unmanned teaming,
launched effects, and modular open system approach
implementation.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report, not later than February 15, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the combat aviation transformation efforts
that includes: (1) The rationale supporting the Army aviation
force structure decision; (2) The investment plan to sustain
and modernize the enduring AH-64E Apache fleet across the
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP); (3) A detailed description
of current technologies capable of assuming the reconnaissance
role of the Air Cavalry Squadrons, to ensure there are no
capability gaps; (4) A detailed plan describing the quantities
of AH-64E required, by component, across the FYDP; and (5) Any
other matters the Secretary determines relevant.
Army command and control systems software
The committee supports the objectives of the Army's new
network modernization strategy, which aims to field simpler,
more intuitive, flexible, and lower signature command and
control capabilities across its formations. The committee also
notes the significant investments the Army has previously made
in developing and fielding its Integrated Tactical Network.
Given rapid advances in commercial software and overall
budgetary challenges, the committee would like to better
understand how the Army is taking advantage of its prior
investment in commercially developed command and control
software as it pivots its Next Generation Command and Control
(NGC2) strategy.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report, not later than March 31, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on command and control software as it relates
to the Army's NGC2 strategy. The report shall include the
following: (1) An identification of the capabilities and
requirements the Army is seeking in a new suite of command and
control software; (2) The schedule, acquisition strategy,
costs, and affordability assessment associated with the
development of new command and control software for theater,
corps, division, and below headquarters; (3) An assessment of
the Army's prior investment in commercial, off-the-shelf
software for its network strategy and its plans to maintain
commercially developed software to meet its future command and
control needs; (4) Details on the Army's plans to mandate
interoperability with NATO and Indo-Pacific allies as a
requirement in its new command and control software program;
and (5) Any other information the Secretary considers relevant.
Army Digital Engineering Center of Excellence
The committee remains supportive of previous efforts to
establish a Digital Engineering Center of Excellence led by the
Army Ground Vehicle System Center. This effort will apply the
U.S. Army's digital transformation effort to all parts of the
vehicle lifecycle, including development, manufacturing, fleet
maintenance (including producing an inventory of obsolete
parts, which are no longer manufactured, for deployed weapon
systems), and the ability to virtually and physically prototype
next generation ground systems. The committee believes that a
Digital Engineering Center of Excellence would provide the
government and its academic partners with an avenue whereby the
warfighter can meet the growing threats by rapidly fielding
capabilities that are both current and emerging.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than February 20, 2026,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives detailing the status of the establishment of
a Digital Engineering Center of Excellence. The briefing shall
include, at a minimum, information about the Army's planning
for and implementation of digital engineering practices across
the lifecycle of its vehicles. It should also include Army
efforts to capitalize on the capabilities of domestic academic
partners in this endeavor.
Army Ground Combat Vehicles
The committee supports the Army's decision to accelerate
its M1E3 tank modernization program and to continue investment
in its next-generation combat vehicle program, XM-30. The
committee is concerned with the shift in the autonomous ground
combat vehicle efforts and would like to better understand how
the Army intends to incorporate remote ground combat vehicle
investments to date into its future formations. Additionally,
with years of lagging investment in Armored Brigade Combat Team
modernization and near-term focus on Infantry Brigade Combat
Team organization and structure, the committee is concerned
about the Army's planning and investment strategy for
modernizing its heavier formations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than October 10, 2025, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, on the Army's concept for delivering
modernized ground combat vehicles to its Stryker and Armored
Brigade Combat Teams. The briefing shall include: (1) A
description of brigade combat team structure, by vehicle type,
as planned; (2) A projected timeline for modernizing these
formations across the active and reserve components; (3)
Procurement quantities and funding through the future years
defense program; and (4) Any other matters the Secretary
believes relevant.
Army load-carrying technology advancements
The committee recognizes the need to advance the
warfighter's capabilities through innovative load-carrying
solutions. The positive outcomes associated with the
Maneuverable Lightweight Electric Weight Reducer (MLEWR)
efforts, including incorporating Silent Tactical Energy
Enhanced Dismount and associated Modular Mission Payloads (MMP)
into U.S. Army Transformation-in-Contact events, highlight the
potential for significant enhancements in troop mobility,
lethality, and survivability. Further, the committee
understands that the U.S. Army developed an Abbreviated
Capability Development Document for the Dismount Unit Soldier
Transport (DUST) based on the MLEWR effort. We applaud U.S.
Army efforts to rapidly experiment, procure, and deploy these
capabilities.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026, to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on: (1) The procurement plan for DUST
capabilities; (2) An analysis of the utility of the MMPs
developed at the direct request of units; (3) How MMPs fit into
the procurement plan; and (4) A summary of current activities
on the platforms within the DUST and MLEWR efforts.
Army Prepositioned Stocks
The committee understands that the Army is developing
concepts to optimize its Army Prepositioned Stocks (APS)
program. As strategically positioned sets of equipment with
rolling stock and weapon systems, APS are designed to reduce
deployment response times. Recent actions, including Army
efforts to move away from afloat stocks and issuance of stop-
work notices for other APS sets due to lack of funding, raise
serious concerns about the Army's commitment to this critical
capability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, on Army efforts to optimize its APS programs
to ensure it has the right equipment in the right location with
the right readiness level. The briefing shall include: (1)
Planned posture, location, and structure of stocks; (2)
Intended readiness model; (3) Plan to maintain visibility of
equipment sets; (4) Future facility requirements, including
modernization requirements of current facilities; (5) Planned
governance structure that mitigates noted deficiencies in
current management model; and (6) Planned funding for the APS
program through the future years defense program.
Assessment of hypersonic materials manufacturing and industrial base
The committee supports the Department of Defense's ongoing
efforts to expand and strengthen the U.S. hypersonic weapons
industrial base, which is critical to the development and
fielding of current and future hypersonic and reentry systems
in alignment with the National Defense Strategy. To ensure
continued progress in this area and mitigate supply chain
risks, the committee emphasizes the need for a comprehensive
assessment of the resilience and scalability of the industrial
base supporting these technologies.
The committee notes that hypersonic systems and reentry
vehicles used in strategic systems operate under extreme
thermal and structural stress, relying on advanced high-
temperature materials, including Thermal Protection System
(TPS) components. The committee understands that one such
material, Carbon/Carbon (C/C) composite, is essential due to
its ability to withstand extreme heat. However, the
manufacturing of these materials, especially through processes
such as densification, which makes the material stronger and
more heat-resistant, remains slow and presents a key production
bottleneck. These constraints, along with limitations in
machining, assembly, and specialized workforce availability,
present challenges to scaling production to meet national
security needs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 31, 2026, on the state of the U.S. hypersonic materials
manufacturing and industrial base. The briefing shall include:
(1) An evaluation of current Carbon/Carbon composite
densification capabilities, including capacity limitations and
throughput challenges; (2) An analysis of emerging or
alternative densification processes being developed or utilized
by industry that could significantly accelerate production and
reduce cost; (3) A review of key bottlenecks across the
industrial base, including in the areas of materials
fabrication, precision machining, and system assembly, along
with recommendations to address these constraints and improve
scalability; (4) An assessment of material performance and
durability under extreme thermal and mechanical conditions
relevant to hypersonic and reentry applications; (5)
Recommendations for targeted investments in infrastructure,
workforce development, and manufacturing capabilities needed to
strengthen domestic production capacity; and (6) A strategy to
optimize production throughput, control costs, and reduce
dependency on foreign sources of critical materials or
components.
The committee expects this briefing to inform future
oversight and investment decisions aimed at ensuring the U.S.
hypersonic industrial base is resilient, responsive, and
capable of meeting national defense requirements.
Briefing on Conventional Prompt Strike advanced capability development
The committee notes the role that the Navy Conventional
Prompt Strike (CPS) weapon will play in potential Indo-Pacific
contingencies. The committee is concerned, however, that
adversaries' abilities to counter various U.S. munitions are
improving at a rapid pace.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of Navy
Strategic Systems Programs, in coordination with the Director
of the Army's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies
Office, to brief the congressional defense committees on the
CPS program's Advanced Capability Program for addressing
navigation and interceptor threats that could reduce the
capability of the CPS system. The Director should provide that
briefing not later than October 1, 2025. The briefing should
address: (1) The current threat assessment for the baseline CPS
program and the level of expected capability degradation from
those threats that the baseline CPS is expected to experience;
(2) Future technology insertion points to enhance performance
and survivability; (3) Funding projections for continuing the
Advanced Capability Program through fiscal year 2031; (4) The
technologies and capabilities being developed with that
funding; and (5) Whether the funding plan is sufficient to
adequately address wartime survivability and lethality
requirements.
C-130 propeller study
The committee supports the Navy and Air Force in their
respective propeller retrofit programs across multiple
platforms. Having the safest, most reliable, and highest-
performing propellers across aircraft enhances operational
readiness and contributes to the overall airlift mission. The
committee understands the Navy and Air Force will finish
retrofitting the entire C-130H fleet this year with an 8-bladed
propeller system, while the C-130J currently operates with a
legacy 6-bladed propeller system.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
Navy and Air Force to conduct a comparative study, independent
of the air vehicle manufacturer, on the two propeller systems
on each platform that would, at a minimum, provide a
comparative analysis that includes the following for the
preceding fiscal year: (1) Quantify propeller removals due to
propeller-specific issues for both systems; (2) Identify the
mean time between failure and mean time between removal of each
system; (3) Identify maintenance costs, both dollars and man-
hours, to maintain each propeller system; (4) Quantify mission
aborts due to propeller system issues for both systems; and (5)
Include any other relevant data or analysis relevant for
comparing the two systems.
The Secretaries should provide this report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2026.
C-130H divestment plan
The committee is aware of the Air Force's plans to divest
portions of the C-130H fleet as part of ongoing modernization
and force structure adjustments. The committee emphasizes the
importance of maintaining mission capability and readiness at
installations affected by such changes, particularly within the
Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.
To ensure transparency and informed oversight, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 31, 2026. The briefing should address: (1)
Installations impacted by C-130H divestment; (2) Potential new
or replacement flying missions under consideration for affected
bases; (3) Anticipated personnel and infrastructure
implications; and (4) The status of coordination with state and
local stakeholders.
The committee expects the Air Force to remain engaged with
affected communities and to keep the Congress informed
throughout the decision-making process.
CMV-22 enhancement
The committee is aware the Department of Defense has been
executing a nacelle improvement program to improve the
reliability and maintainability of the V-22 Osprey helicopter's
two nacelles, which house power components critical to the V-
22's vertical take-off and landing capabilities. The program
has improved the V-22's endurance, but not all V-22s have yet
received the improvements.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of the
Navy to integrate nacelle improvement modifications into the
CMV-22B aircraft fleet to improve readiness and reliability and
to help sustain the tiltrotor industrial base.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft program
The committee remains concerned about the rapid military
growth of U.S. adversaries and the speed at which mass-
produced, modern capabilities are proliferating, threatening
the air superiority that has underpinned U.S. military
dominance for decades. To counter these threats, the committee
encourages the Air Force to continue pursuing initiatives that
enable the affordable and rapid fielding of capable airpower at
scale.
The committee remains strongly supportive of the
Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program, particularly
Increment 1. In just a few years, the CCA program has
progressed from conceptual development to the verge of
production and fielding of an operationally relevant capability
while leveraging technologically advanced contributions from an
expanding industrial base. While CCAs are envisioned to operate
alongside fighter aircraft, the committee is also supportive of
the potential for autonomous aircraft and the expansion of
these capabilities to other missions traditionally conducted by
manned platforms. However, the committee is concerned that the
Air Force has not articulated a clear and detailed plan to
integrate the F-35A into the CCA concept of operations, despite
the F-35's central role in the future fighter force.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 15, 2025, on the service's plans to transition CCA
Increment 1 prototypes to full-scale production. The
Secretary's briefing should include: (1) The associated
resource requirements; (2) Plans for incorporating the reserve
components into the CCA operational structure; (3) A detailed
description of the Air Force's approach to integrating CCAs
with fifth-generation platforms, including the F-35A; (4)
Technical integration and mission pairing concepts; (5) Data
link and software interoperability; and (6) Operational test
planning. The committee further requests that the Air Force
provide regular updates on the progress of fielding CCA
capability, including the integration of these systems into
operational squadrons.
Comptroller General review of tiltrotor technology
The committee remains concerned about the safety record of
the V-22 program and believes that an independent group should
assess the safety, operational viability, and cost-
effectiveness of the V-22 program.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a comprehensive review of the V-22 program.
The Comptroller General should submit a report based on the
review, not later than December 31, 2026, and include the
following: (1) An assessment of the safety, cost, reliability,
and performance of the V-22 Osprey aircraft across the
Department of Defense (DOD) over the history of the V-22 Osprey
program; (2) An analysis of: (a) the causes and impacts of
fatal and non-fatal accidents involving V-22 Osprey aircraft;
and (b) the cost growth, maintenance and supply issues,
availability rates, and overall contributions to military
readiness of the V-22 Osprey program; (3) An examination of the
mechanical and design characteristics of the V-22 Osprey
aircraft and an assessment of the role such characteristics
have played in accidents and other V-22 Osprey program issues;
(4) An assessment of the Department's efforts and levels of
success in addressing accidents and other issues with the V-22
Osprey program, including the Department's approach to
mitigating risk and improving aircraft reliability; (5)
Identification of options available to the Department to
address any ongoing issues with the V-22 Osprey program and
strengthen safety, reliability, and cost-effectiveness across
the V-22 Osprey aircraft fleet; (6) An assessment of any data
available from testing of the Future Long-Range Assault
Aircraft (FLRAA) program related to safety, operating and
support costs, reliability, and any other performance measures;
(7) An estimate of the extent to which actual data from the V-
22 program would be useful in projecting: (a) attrition rates;
(b) operating and support costs; and (c) operational readiness
rates; and (8) An assessment of DOD efforts to incorporate
lessons learned from the development and deployment of the V-22
for the FLRAA program.
Concerns about accelerated divestment of A-10 aircraft
The committee is gravely concerned by the Department of the
Air Force's decision to accelerate full divestment of the A-10
fleet in fiscal year 2026, 3 years ahead of the previously
stated glidepath. This decision, disclosed only through fiscal
year 2026 budget documents and not through direct communication
with Congress, represents a fundamental breach of transparency
and undermines prior commitments to responsibly manage force
structure changes.
The Department's decision to proceed with full divestment,
without providing mission transition plans for affected units
or ensuring sufficient combat capacity replacement, raises
serious concerns about readiness, force distribution, and the
Department's commitment to responsible stewardship.
Of particular concern is the lack of communication with or
consideration for A-10 units that are currently deployed in
support of combatant commands. These units are actively
supporting ongoing operational requirements, and to propose
their divestment immediately upon return from deployment--
without replacement missions or personnel transition plans--
damages the credibility of the Department and risks future
recruitment and retention of pilots and maintainers across the
total force.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide, not later than January 15, 2026, a briefing
for the congressional defense committees that includes:
(1) A list of all A-10 units scheduled for divestment
in fiscal year 2026, fiscal year 2027, and fiscal year
2028, including location, component (Active, Guard,
Reserve), number of aircraft, and whether the unit is
currently deployed or scheduled for deployment during
that period;
(2) For each affected unit:
(a) a timeline for drawdown and divestment;
(b) replacement mission plans and associated
aircraft, equipment, and training requirements;
and
(c) personnel transition plans and impacts
(e.g., reassignments, retention, recruiting
shortfalls); and
(3) An assessment of the operational risk incurred by
removing the A-10 fleet from the inventory on an
accelerated timeline.
Consideration of additional F-16 aircraft procurement
The committee recognizes the continued relevance of the F-
16 Fighting Falcon in meeting U.S. and allied tactical air
requirements, particularly in support of homeland defense,
partner capacity-building, and theater security cooperation. As
the Department of the Air Force continues to modernize its
fighter fleet, the committee believes that procuring additional
new-build F-16 aircraft could provide a cost-effective means to
augment force structure and mitigate near-term capacity gaps
caused by legacy aircraft retirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 1, 2025, on the feasibility, cost, and strategic
benefit of procuring additional Block 70/72 F-16 aircraft. The
briefing should include: (1) An evaluation of potential roles
and missions for additional F-16 aircraft in the context of Air
National Guard and active-duty force utilization; (2) An
analysis of production capacity and timelines from the F-16
production line, including options to accelerate delivery; and
(3) An estimate of procurement costs, including unit cost
comparisons with alternative platforms.
The committee encourages the Air Force to seriously
consider the benefits of additional F-16 procurement as part of
a balanced and affordable tactical airpower strategy.
Considerations for Agile Combat Employment
The committee supports the Air Force's Agile Combat
Employment (ACE) concept and emphasizes the need to rapidly
reconstitute airfield operations and defend forward locations
in contested environments. Three critical capability areas
require continued development: (1) Clearance of unexploded
ordnance (UXO); (2) Deployable precision landing surveillance
systems in GPS-denied conditions; and (3) Mobile air base
defense systems.
The committee notes the Recovery of Air Bases Denied by
Ordnance (RADBO) vehicle provides vital UXO clearance
capabilities but relies on the legacy Mine-Resistant Ambush
Protected vehicle platform. The committee is encouraged by
efforts to transition RADBO capabilities to the Joint Light
Tactical Vehicle. The committee is also concerned with the Air
Force's ability to deploy precision landing systems to austere
airfields in GPS-denied environments and notes the need for
lightweight, rapidly deployable solutions. Additionally, the
committee notes the potential use of the Army's Land-Based
Phalanx Weapon System (LPWS) for contributing to air base
defense but recognizes modifications are required for C-130
transportability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on plans to support
ACE through: (1) Transition and future requirements for RADBO,
including platform modernization; (2) Current and planned
capabilities for deployable surveillance and precision landing
in GPS-denied environments; and (3) Assessment of LPWS
suitability for air base defense, including potential redesign
for expeditionary use.
The committee expects this briefing to include cost,
schedule, operational concepts, and requirements to ensure the
Air Force can project and sustain combat power from dispersed,
austere locations.
Counter unmanned aerial system policy
The committee notes that the war in Ukraine has led to an
explosion of innovation in technology and tactics when it comes
to technology and tactics for both Unmanned Aerial Systems
(UAS) and counter-UAS (cUAS). This was most dramatically
demonstrated in Ukraine's early June Operation Spiderweb, in
which Ukraine launched over 100 first person view (FPV) drones
from deep within Russian territory, dealing a significant blow
to the Russian air force.
The committee recognizes that this not only demonstrated
the ingenuity and capability of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, it
highlighted our own vulnerabilities to FPV drones--a dramatic
culmination of concerns that have been growing in the committee
for years.
PM 17-00X, Supplemental Guidance for Countering Unmanned
Aircraft, provides critical guidance to the Department of
Defense (DOD) and military services--including the definition
of ``threat'' under section 130i of title 10, United States
Code, and delineating when and how the Department can track and
engage UAS threats. However, this guidance dates back to 2017,
long before the war in Ukraine rapidly accelerated UAS
technology and tactics.
Accordingly, the committee recommends that the Secretary of
Defense update PM 17-00X and provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives at a mutually agreed upon time, not later than
February 15, 2026, on the following: (1) Plans to update PM 17-
00X to account for changes in technology, tactics, and threats
to DOD installations since 2017; (2) A reassessment of the PM
17-00X definition of ``threat'' under section 130i of title 10,
United States Code, to account for the ongoing physical and
surveillance threat a fast-moving UAS poses to a covered asset
or facility even as it departs a military installation; (3) An
assessment of whether overflight and surveillance activities
should be considered a physical threat to DOD personnel,
systems, and facilities given the ease with which small FPV
drones can be configured with offensive capabilities and the
lack of reaction time their speed affords servicemembers on
base; (4) An assessment of when kinetic cUAS options should be
employed, especially in light of advances in artificial
intelligence and non-radio frequency means of UAS guidance; (5)
An assessment of any legislative changes required to provide
cUAS protection to private shipyards actively building U.S.
Navy vessels and whether that varies depending on the type of
ship under construction; (6) Any barriers in statute that
prevent a comprehensive policy update by the Department.
Counter unmanned aerial systems delegation of authority
The committee is concerned that current Department of
Defense policy may not adequately support the timely use of
force against unmanned aerial systems (UAS) that pose a threat
to U.S. military installations. In particular, the committee
notes that delegation of use-of-force authority from the
Secretary of Defense to service-retained units is operationally
challenging in the absence of standing identification
procedures and clearly defined rules of engagement tailored to
UAS threats. Without such frameworks, installation commanders
and their subordinates may be constrained in their ability to
respond immediately and effectively to hostile or suspicious
UAS activity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than March
31, 2026. The report shall outline a plan for ensuring
installation commanders have delegated authority to immediately
use force--kinetic or non-kinetic--against UAS posing a threat
to personnel, infrastructure, or operations.
The plan shall include: (1) A framework for delegation of
use-of-force authority below the Secretary of Defense level;
(2) Criteria and procedures for immediate engagement of UAS
under various threat conditions; (3) An assessment of the
required coordination with civil authorities, including the
Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Homeland
Security; (4) Requirements for installation-level response
plans, training, and reporting; and (5) An assessment of legal
compliance with title 10 and title 18, United States Code. The
committee expects the Department to ensure that commanders are
fully empowered through appropriate delegation, standing rules,
and coordination procedures to defend installations promptly
and lawfully against emerging UAS threats.
Counter unmanned aircraft system pilot program
The committee is aware that incidents of unmanned aerial
systems (UAS) intruding in Department of Defense (DOD)-managed
airspace have been growing at an alarming rate. UAS events
around Hampton, Virginia, and in the New Jersey and New York
areas point out the urgent need for rapid responses and
innovation in counter-UAS (cUAS) systems and processes.
To ensure rapid responses and smooth operations in a
crisis, DOD facilities must have the equipment before anything
happens and must have worked out and exercised agreements with
other Federal, state, and local organizations beforehand.
The committee believes that it would behoove the DOD to
establish one or more pilot programs that would demonstrate and
exercise the processes for responding to incursions. Such a
demonstration should address: (1) Sharing situational awareness
data from civilian sensor networks to military installation
defense systems; (2) Sharing DOD situational awareness data
with appropriate state and local officials; (3) Ensuring that
other Federal agencies have the same merged operation picture;
(4) Developing capabilities for cUAS systems; and (5) Assessing
what authorities and capability shortfalls should be further
addressed to enhance cooperation between the DOD, civilian
partners, and other U.S. Government entities.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees, not later than
March 1, 2026, on the recommendations for establishing one or
more pilot programs for implementing and testing standard
operating procedures among the interested parties and assessing
capability shortfalls.
Deployable expandable shelters
The committee recognizes that the Army's Standard Family of
Rigid Wall Shelters (ASF RWS) program standardizes shelter
systems to deliver mature, cost-effective technologies to
soldiers. This standardization reduces expenses, simplifies
logistics, and enhances field support. The committee believes
the program provides critical capabilities that align with key
strategic priorities, including the Army Campaign Plan, the
Army Modernization Strategy, and the Army Arctic Strategy.
The committee supports prioritizing investment in medical
and Temporary Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility
(TSCIF) variants of the Expandable, Panelized, and Collapsible
Shelters (EPACS) within the ASF RWS program. These variants are
essential for maintaining strategic advantage and ensuring
operational readiness across military units.
In addition, the committee recognizes the growing
importance of Expeditionary Shelter Protection Systems (ESPS)
in enhancing contested logistics operations, such as fuel
distribution and food provision. ESPS systems have been
deployed at the Army's Combat Training Centers (CTCs) to
simulate battlefield effects and provide direct exposure to
end-users.
The committee encourages the Army to expand procurement and
fielding of ESPS across CTCs and other operational environments
to further demonstrate their utility and transition the program
into the base budget.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives that addresses the ASF RWS program's current
status and future requirements, including the following
elements: (1) An assessment of the existing Army shelter
program, including EPACS and ESPS variants; (2) Any challenges
identified in developing EPACS TSCIF, medical, and
infrastructure protection variants; (3) The operational
advantages of deploying EPACS TSCIF, ESPS, and alternative
shelter configurations to Army units; (4) The funding levels
and legal authorities required to fully resource all shelter
programs, including recommendations for integrating ESPS into
annual budget submissions; and (5) A recommended approach for
rapidly fielding these capabilities at the lowest cost to the
Government.
Diversification of Army counter unmanned aerial systems
The committee recognizes the complex threat environment the
Joint Force faces from advanced adversarial Unmanned Aerial
Systems (UAS) capabilities and supports the military services'
recent efforts to utilize the Unfunded Priority List process,
supplemental funding, and novel contracting approaches, such as
U.S. Special Operations Command's System Integrations
Partnership (SIP), to procure Group 3 defeat interceptors and
integrate innovative systems into existing Army programs.
The committee notes that production and use of advanced
Group 3 systems by our adversaries has begun to outpace the
acquisition of counter-UAS effectors in Army Programs of
Record. The committee remains concerned that the Army does not
have a long-term acquisition plan, nor accompanying budget
resources across the Future Years Defense Plan, to procure
these capabilities at scale or sustain them across the Army.
This situation risks increasing weapons inventory shortages and
sustainment budget shortfalls for existing systems and fails to
address the growing threat in priority theaters including U.S.
Central Command.
The committee encourages the Army to leverage funding
available and utilize the budget process to diversify and
expand available counter-UAS systems. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 31, 2026, on the
service's plan to utilize existing authorities to procure
combat-validated counter-UAS interceptors from additional
vendors over the next 5 years.
Expeditionary air base defense in support of Agile Combat Employment
The committee recognizes the centrality of Agile Combat
Employment (ACE) to the Air Force's future operating concepts,
particularly in the Indo-Pacific and other contested theaters.
The success of ACE depends not only on the ability to disperse
and maneuver air assets but also on the survivability and
security of expeditionary air bases under persistent threat
from unmanned aerial systems (UAS), cruise missiles, and other
precision strike capabilities.
The committee is concerned that the Air Force currently
lacks dedicated, organic capabilities to defend forward-
deployed air bases and that expeditionary base defense remains
underdeveloped as a core service competency. While the Army is
expected to provide ground-based air defense in joint
operations, the evolving character of the threat and the
operational demands of ACE require that the Air Force assume
greater responsibility for the defense of its own forward
installations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 31, 2026, on the Department of
the Air Force's plan to develop and institutionalize organic
air base defense capabilities for expeditionary operations. The
briefing should include: (1) A description of the Air Force's
efforts to establish formal responsibility for expeditionary
air base defense within its organizational structure, including
consideration of a dedicated office, program executive group,
or cross-functional team charged with developing and
integrating relevant capabilities; (2) An overview of efforts
to field layered air base defense solutions such as point-
defense missile systems, counter-UAS platforms, electronic
warfare tools, directed energy weapons, sensors, and command
and control architectures tailored to the ACE mission set; (3)
A summary of current or planned pilot units tasked with air
base defense at ACE hubs in forward theaters, including the
Indo-Pacific; (4) An overview of system prototypes in use,
initial operational concepts, and how these initiatives are
informing future doctrine, training, and force structure
decisions; (5) An explanation of how expeditionary air base
defense is being incorporated into Air Force wargames, campaign
modeling, and force design exercises, with attention to
contested logistics, defensive mobility, and ACE-specific
operational constraints; and (6) A review of current and
planned budget lines supporting expeditionary base defense
capabilities and how the Air Force intends to prioritize and
sustain these efforts across the future years defense program.
The committee encourages the Air Force to treat
expeditionary base defense as a core enabler of ACE and to
pursue innovative, scalable, and threat-adaptive solutions. The
committee expects the Air Force to institutionalize this
mission area and provide sustained leadership, oversight, and
resourcing to ensure the protection of forward airpower
projection capabilities in contested environments.
Experimental Operations Unit
The committee applauds the Department of the Air Force's
efforts to develop doctrine, organization, training, materiel,
leadership, personnel, facilities, and policy concepts related
to the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). While these efforts
are crucial to delivering the next generation of air
superiority, the committee is concerned that the Experimental
Operations Unit (EOU) is duplicative to work already conducted
by other test organizations and diverts critical funding,
personnel, and aircraft from focused, deliberative, and
expeditious test, evaluation, and fielding of CCA.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees, by not later than February 15, 2026, on the EOU.
The report should include: (1) The complete funding profile for
the EOU, including the current fiscal year and across the
future years defense program, as well as requirements for
military personnel and military construction for the
organization; (2) The current and projected requirements for
manning the organization over the next 5 years, including a
breakdown of job classifications; (3) The specific aspects of
CCA operations the Air Force intends to evaluate in the EOU,
including the specific data that will be collected, how the
data will be collected, who will process the data, and when
such evaluations shall begin and conclude; (4) An explanation
as to why the duties of EOU-assigned personnel could not be
performed in the course of developmental or operational test by
pre-existing developmental or operational test organizations;
(5) An explanation of how the tasks performed by the EOU are
different from testing for remotely piloted aircraft and how
such evaluations were accomplished for remotely piloted
aircraft; (6) A list of impacts to developmental test,
operational test, and contractor operations by the
establishment of a third test location for the EOU; (7) A
projected timeline of how long the Air Force expects to operate
the EOU; (8) A description of the difference between
experimentation versus traditional developmental and
operational test as well as any difference in risk acceptance
between the two processes; and (9) A recommendation as to
whether the Air Force should use the EOU for the CCA program
and, if so, an assessment of whether the Air Force should use
the EOU for other acquisitions programs.
F-15E propulsion modernization assessment
The committee remains concerned about fighter capacity and
has consistently raised issues regarding the future of U.S. air
superiority and the sustainability of the fighter aircraft
industrial base. While the committee continues to support
procurement of additional F-15EX aircraft, it remains uncertain
whether the tactical fighter force will meet future operational
needs even with purchases of F-15EX and other fighter aircraft
in the plan. The committee also notes that the Air Force has
not yet submitted the F-15E retirement report required by the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public
Law 118-31) and recognizes there may be viable options to
extend the F-15E's service life.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide, by December 31, 2025, a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on the financial and
operational costs and benefits of modernizing the F-15E fleet,
specifically the subset of the fleet with older engines. The
assessment should address the potential impact on mission
capability, including propulsion system upgrades.
F-16 electronic warfare modernization
The committee recognizes the continued importance of the F-
16 to the Air Force's tactical aviation portfolio. As adversary
electronic warfare (EW) and air defense capabilities grow more
sophisticated, legacy platforms like the F-16 must be equipped
with modern survivability enhancements to remain operationally
relevant in contested environments.
The Air Force has been developing the Integrated Viper
Electronic Warfare Suite (IVEWS), a digital, open-architecture
system intended to significantly improve the F-16's
survivability against advanced threats. The committee supports
the continued advancement of IVEWS and encourages the Air Force
to evaluate additional EW upgrade options to ensure the most
cost-effective, capable, and sustainable solution is available
to the total force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the Air Force's
plan to field these F-16 EW capabilities. The briefing should
include: (1) The current status, schedule, and performance of
IVEWS development and integration; (2) A description of any
other potential F-16 EW modernization efforts under
consideration or in development; (3) The strategy and criteria
for fielding EW upgrades across the active duty, Air National
Guard, and Air Force Reserve F-16 fleets; (4) Funding profiles
and procurement plans across the Future Years Defense Program;
and (5) Any assessments of operational effectiveness, cost, and
risk associated with competing or complementary EW solutions.
The committee emphasizes the importance of ensuring parity
in survivability and mission capability across the total force
F-16 fleet and encourages the Department of Defense to pursue a
common, interoperable solution set where feasible.
Flightline Equipment Connectivity
The committee recognizes the critical need to enhance
connectivity for flightline support equipment to enable the Air
Force's Agile Combat Employment (ACE) strategy. The committee
is concerned that most flightline support equipment, such as
generators, light carts, and support vehicles, remains
unconnected, limiting the Air Force's ability to optimize asset
tracking, health monitoring, and power management in contested
or austere environments. This creates gaps, particularly in
pre-deployed locations, where unmonitored equipment often
becomes nonmission-capable, requiring repair or replacement,
degrading readiness and undermining forward-operating
capabilities.
While the committee supports continued investment in 5G
technologies, the committee encourages the Air Force to pursue
complementary connectivity solutions tailored to the specific
needs of flightline support equipment--particularly for assets
in austere environments, contested environments, and in long-
term storage. These solutions may include military-grade long-
range communications systems, which offer key advantages,
including extended range and portability; security and
independence; low power consumption; and cost and deployment
efficiency due to minimal infrastructure requirements.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to
prioritize the evaluation and integration of connectivity
solutions specifically designed for flightline support
equipment and directs the Secretary to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 31, 2026. At a minimum,
this briefing shall include: (1) A detailed assessment of
current and planned initiatives to improve connectivity for
flightline support equipment; (2) The challenges and
limitations of using existing and future support systems in ACE
scenarios, including impacts on operational security, spectrum
management, and deployability; (3) An analysis of the
feasibility, scalability, and benefits of incorporating
military-grade radio systems into flightline support systems,
and how these technologies complement existing connectivity
efforts; and (4) Recommendations for integrating diverse
connectivity solutions to enhance the operational readiness and
resilience of flightline support equipment in austere
environments.
Future X-band radar
The committee notes that the future X-band radar (FXR) is a
planned Navy development program that is designed to replace
legacy mast-mounted radars on surface combatants for horizon
and surface search and track. These radars stare out to the
horizon to identify threats. The committee notes that this
program is uniquely funded through Spectrum Relocation Fund
dollars, associated with deconflicting the 3.45-3.55 Mhz S-band
spectrum. With this funding available, the committee believes
the Navy should move expeditiously to begin fielding FXR to the
fleet to counter advanced threats. Navy inaction puts more than
$11.0 billion in available funding at risk. With a planned
initial operating capability in 2035, the Navy acquisition plan
risks failing to complete procurement of 130 planned ship-sets
before the Spectrum Relocation Fund expires in 2041.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to develop a plan to accelerate the acquisition of FXR.
That plan should achieve low-rate initial production not later
than January 1, 2030, and the delivery of at least 5 percent of
total planned production quantities not later than December 31,
2035. The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report on the
contents of that plan to the congressional defense committees,
not later than March 1, 2026.
Heavy Vehicle Simulator
The committee recognizes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
involvement in performing critical infrastructure research on
roads, bridges, airfields, and railroads. The committee notes
that a critical enabler of this mission is the Heavy Vehicle
Simulator (HVS), which is designed to simulate a large number
of vehicle passes, at full scale, on asphalt or concrete
pavement in order to safely and quickly evaluate the effects of
highway traffic on a particular pavement being tested.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the U.S. Army and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to continue its efforts to
upgrade, test, and qualify the HVS Mark IV Program.
Industrial base capacity to support dual sixth-generation fighter
programs
The committee recognizes that both the Air Force and the
Navy are pursuing sixth-generation tactical aircraft
platforms--the Air Force through the F-47 program and the Navy
through the F/A-XX effort. While some have questioned whether
the defense industrial base can sustain two sixth-generation
fighter programs simultaneously, the committee believes that
recent reforms to the acquisition system and targeted
investments in the defense aerospace sector have materially
strengthened domestic capacity to meet this challenge, if
properly managed.
The committee urges the Department of the Navy to continue
its pursuit of the F/A-XX program as a core component of its
future carrier air wing. In doing so, the Navy should
coordinate with the Department of the Air Force while
responding to the unique operational requirements of the
maritime domain. The committee further encourages the
Department of Defense to ensure that acquisition strategies for
both platforms prioritize programmatic stability, realistic
production planning, and retention of a robust supply chain.
Litter basket stabilization
The committee understands that the Army is beginning to
adopt autonomous litter stabilization technology that provides
precision, reliability, and predictability for medical
evacuation crews operating in complex environments. The
committee believes efforts to eliminate the need for a tagline
in lift operations, and especially medical evacuation
operations, are worth the investment as operations are improved
and risk is reduced to personnel and aircraft. The committee
notes the interest from the Army National Guard for these
capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than March 31, 2026, to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on Army efforts to procure and employ this
capability that enables hoist operations without the need of a
tagline.
Marine Corps Arctic capabilities
The committee recognizes the growing importance of Arctic
capabilities for our military, especially as commerce and
competition increase in the region. This is underscored by
China's ambitions to be a ``near-Arctic nation'' and Russia's
continued attempts to exploit the region for its own strategic
gain. The committee further believes that the U.S. military is
currently ill-equipped and undertrained for Arctic conditions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
in consultation with the Commandant of the Marine Corps, to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
February 26, 2026, detailing a proposed glidepath to train and
fully equip a regimental-sized element within 3 years of the
report's submission. The glidepath shall include at a minimum:
(1) Resourcing requirements to provide the unit with military
equipment and clothing that enables fighting in Arctic
environments as part of the unit's permanently assigned
equipment set; (2) Resourcing requirements to support annual
training in seasonal cold weather environments for all or part
of the unit that prioritizes training opportunities in support
of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
MH-139 Grey Wolf procurement
The committee recognizes that the Air Force has been
procuring the MH-139 Grey Wolf helicopter to modernize its
aging fleet of UH-1 helicopters. However, the committee
believes that the decision to truncate the MH-139 program
before acquiring enough aircraft to fully replace the UH-1
fleet raises significant concerns.
The committee believes that restoring procurement to the
original plan of 84 aircraft is necessary to meet mission
requirements for security, missile field transport, and very
important person operations. The committee does not believe
that continuing to operate some portion of the UH-1 fleet makes
economic sense or is advisable from the standpoint of safety.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Air Force to notify
the congressional defense committees within 30 days of
identifying any anticipated delays in the delivery of MH-139
aircraft. This notification should include a written
explanation detailing the reasons for the delay.
Military aircraft engine industrial base
The committee recognizes that maintaining a skilled
engineering and design workforce within the military aircraft
engine industrial base is essential to national security. To
that end, the U.S. Government has made significant investments
in next-generation military engine technologies over the past
decade. However, the absence of a comprehensive strategy for
transitioning these innovations into developmental and in-
production aircraft platforms remains a critical gap. These
advancements, while promising, are not being fielded at the
pace necessary to maintain U.S. superiority, particularly as
foreign adversaries continue to make measurable gains in engine
performance and reliability.
Additionally, the committee notes that ongoing aircraft
development programs across military departments are
progressing largely in isolation, without unified guidance or
coordination. This fragmented approach undermines efforts to
build a resilient, competitive, and effective engine industrial
base that supports both current and future manned and unmanned
aircraft programs. As the Department of Defense increases its
focus on strengthening the U.S. industrial and manufacturing
base, it is imperative to provide the domestic military
aircraft engine sector with a clearer, more coherent path from
innovation to integration. This includes aligning technology
maturation, production readiness, and platform adoption
timelines.
The committee believes that the Air Force's Next Generation
Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program represents a notable effort
to develop and reduce risk for adaptive engine prototypes to
support the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of
systems, including F-47 and Collaborative Combat Aircraft
(CCA), as well as joint requirements like F/A-XX. While NGAP is
designed to operate independently of NGAD's broader development
timeline, it remains critical that this initiative be viewed
within the larger context of a strategic engine industrial base
framework.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, that would outline
the current state and future trajectory of the U.S. military
aircraft engine industrial base, with a particular focus on:
(1) Workforce sustainability and advanced manufacturing
readiness; (2) Integration of next-generation engine
technologies into current and future platforms; (3) Inter-
service coordination and strategic guidance for engine
development; (4) Industrial base capacity and competitiveness;
(5) Alignment of the NGAP program within broader Department
objectives; and (6) A roadmap for fielding sixth-generation
propulsion technologies.
This briefing will inform congressional oversight and
support the continued technological superiority and industrial
resilience of the U.S. military aircraft engine sector.
Modular munitions for small unmanned aerial systems
The Secretary of Defense has stated that the Department of
Defense will prioritize the adoption and integration of drone
technology in the military. The role that drones and small,
unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) will play in future warfare is
evident in these systems' use in Ukraine. As part of the
broader adoption of drones, the committee believes it is
important that payloads on these sUAS vehicles be able to
integrate with various types of sUAS for a variety of missions,
from clearing minefields to strategic target prosecution.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing, not later than March 31, 2026, on any
plans to procure modular munitions that can be adopted for the
different types of autonomous systems that the Department plans
to widely field in the coming years. The briefing shall
include: (1) Potential cost savings for the Department that
modular munitions can provide; (2) The Department's plan for
payloads on autonomous systems; (3) How such procurement
relates to the Department's strategies for distributed
operations; and (4) The contribution that the Department
expects of autonomous systems in carrying out distributed
operations.
MQ-9 Replacement
The committee is concerned that current attrition rates for
the MQ-9 platform will leave the Air Force unable to meet
warfighter intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
requirements that cannot be fulfilled by space-based
capabilities. The committee believes that planning for a
capable airborne successor to the MQ-9 must be a key element of
the Air Force's broader ISR strategy, required elsewhere in
this Act.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to prepare an analysis of the feasibility of developing
and deploying an airborne alternative to the MQ-9 and provide a
briefing on this analysis to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 31, 2025. This analysis should consider options for a
dedicated MQ-9 replacement or a next-generation medium-altitude
unmanned aerial system capable of performing, at a minimum, the
missions currently conducted by the MQ-9 and deployable at a
comparable scale.
Munitions Handling Unit lift modernization
The committee is aware that capital investment in new
pieces of ground support equipment (GSE) has been limited,
leading to a situation where, after over 50 years of operation,
sustainment and readiness are now critical capability shortfall
risks across the GSE fleet. The committee notes that the
Munitions Handling Unit-83 (MHU-83) is an essential munitions
trailer, used primarily for loading ordnance in the 3000-7000lb
range. The MHU-83 is used for loading both nuclear and
conventional weapons on U.S. Air Force Strategic Bombers and
heavy ordnance for strike aircraft and U.S. Navy P-8s. The
committee understands that modernization efforts to the MHU-83
have been requested by operators for years, as the legacy MHU-
83 has faced readiness and operational issues and has caused
airmen to be hospitalized due to exhaust inhalation during
extended loading operations.
Therefore, given the importance of the MHU-83, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a
one-time briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 31, 2026, on efforts to modernize the MHU-83
for conventional and strategic munitions.
Navy actions on Government Accountability Office recommendations
The committee notes that the Comptroller General of the
United States has produced several reports over the last 10
years that have included 90 specific recommendations to help
the Navy improve its management of the shipbuilding portfolio.
The committee understands that the Navy has only implemented,
to a greater or lesser extent, some 30 of these
recommendations. As part of a larger effort to improve the
quality and timeliness of the Navy's shipbuilding enterprise,
the committee needs to understand why the Navy has chosen not
to implement the other Government Accountability Office (GAO)
recommendations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than May 1, 2026, on the 90
recommendations the GAO has made since 2015 to improve Navy
shipbuilding. The report should: (1) Identify actions the Navy
has taken in response to recommendations that have been
implemented, including an assessment of whether the
recommendations had a positive impact on Navy shipbuilding; (2)
Identify actions the Navy has taken in response to
recommendations that have been partially implemented, explain
why those recommendations were only partially implemented, and
identify what gaps in authorities or resources have prevented
full implementation; and (3) Identify GAO recommendations on
which the Navy has taken no action, including an explanation
for why given recommendations have not been followed and
whether gaps in authorities or resources have prevented
adoption of the GAO recommendation.
Next generation mobility requirements
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
modernizing the Air Force's mobility enterprise to ensure the
Joint Force retains the ability to project and sustain combat
power in contested and degraded operational environments. In
particular, the committee supports ongoing efforts to develop
next-generation strategic and intra-theater airlift, aerial
refueling, and distinguished visitor airlift capabilities that
are survivable, agile, and aligned with future operational
concepts such as Agile Combat Employment and integrated with
the Air Force's force design.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 31, 2026, on the status of: (1) A next-generation
strategic airlift program, including efforts to define
requirements, operational concepts, and acquisition strategies
to replace or augment existing strategic airlift aircraft; (2)
A next-generation tactical airlift program, including defining
platform characteristics, projected mission sets, and
describing how the capability will support distributed
operations in contested environments; (3) The Next Generation
Aerial Support System program for satisfying aerial refueling
requirements, including survivability requirements, integration
with future airframes, and concepts for operations in denied or
degraded threat environments; (4) A program for distinguished
visitor airlift recapitalization, including modernization
needs, mission requirements, and alignment with broader
mobility force structure planning; (5) Cross-service
coordination and integration with allied and partner
capabilities; (6) Alignment with the Department of Defense's
force design and posture planning; and (7) Any anticipated
challenges or decision points in the coming fiscal years.
The committee also encourages the Air Force to explore the
potential applicability of emerging commercial technologies,
including supersonic platforms, alternative propulsion systems,
and innovative airframe designs, that may offer improvements in
speed, efficiency, and survivability for future mobility
missions.
Next generation night vision devices
The committee recognizes the importance of the goal of the
Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) program to enhance
warfighter situational awareness, lethality, and operational
effectiveness. However, the committee is concerned about the
delays in the Army's ability to acquire an optimized system
that meets soldier requirements. With the increased
competitiveness in the advanced night vision capabilities
environment, the committee encourages the U.S. Army to
expeditiously pursue its next generation night vision devices.
Further, the committee encourages the Army to prioritize the
selection of a night vision solution that is cost-efficient;
that is designed with durability, modularity, and lightweight
construction; and that has the ability to rapidly iterate to
address soldier-identified improvements or expansions of
capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on its ``Own the Night Strategy'' and its
efforts to optimize investment in advanced night vision
capabilities.
Next Generation Squad Weapon magazine development testing
The committee recognizes the importance of rapidly
developing and acquiring commercial components that reduce
soldier load and improve reliability. Magazine selection is
critical as it directly impacts weapon performance and soldier
safety, with historical testing showing significant performance
variations between designs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to review the Next Generation Squad Weapon magazine
qualification testing and reliability process to ensure that
there were transparent and timely opportunities for commercial,
off-the-shelf supplied components, specifically magazines, to
compete fairly. Additionally, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to review whether proper contracting
practices were instituted. Finally, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing, not later than
February 20, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, detailing the findings
from these reviews.
Organic Industrial Base artillery ammunition modernization
The committee is concerned that the Army needs to increase
its investment in organic ammunition plant manufacturing safety
and readiness projects to meet current and future requirements.
The committee understands that adding a new production line,
based upon designs for the Universal Artillery Production Line,
to the organic industrial base would provide the Army
additional resilience and surge capacity to meet demand across
a range of artillery production, particularly for metal
components.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than February 26, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the progress of modernization funding across
ammunition plants.
Precision artillery munition modernization
The committee understands that capabilities currently exist
that would enable the Army to integrate Global Positioning
System (GPS)-resilient hardware and software into the Excalibur
increment 1b and other precision artillery munitions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than March 31, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the Army's assessment of technical options
available to enhance the performance of the munition in a GPS-
denied environment, including the technical feasibility and
operational utility of incorporating Global Positioning System
(GPS)-resilient hardware and software into current munitions to
improve and expand capability.
Preservation of World War II-era Aircraft in Air Force Historic
Collection
The committee recognizes the profound contributions of
American airmen 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 Air Force's
historic collection 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
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.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing, not later than December 31, 2025,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on the Department of the Air Force's plan to
relocate, preserve, and sustain its World War II-era aircraft
currently on external display. 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, with prioritization
given to B-17s, B-18s, B-24s, B-25s, B-29s, A-26s, P-38s, P-
47s, P-51s, C-46s, and C-47s; (2) A proposed prioritization
framework for relocation, favoring institutions such as the
National Museum of the United States Air Force (NMUSAF), the
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, NMUSAF-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
NMUSAF collection or broader Department of the Air Force
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 NMUSAF
activities; (b) transfer aircraft on an as-is, where-is basis,
with no cost or guarantee of condition to the Department of the
Air Force; and (c) remove end-use restrictions from de-
accessioned assets; (6) A reaffirmation that no aircraft
produced prior to December 31, 1945, may be destroyed,
scrapped, or otherwise damaged by the Department of the Air
Force; and (7) 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.
The committee intends to closely monitor the Department of
the Air Force's stewardship of these artifacts to ensure their
preservation for future generations.
Propellant industrial base expansion
The committee understands the defense industrial base
currently lacks sufficient surge capacity for energetic
material production, including propellants that are required
across a broad spectrum of critical munitions programs. The
committee is aware that the current energetic industrial base
consists of multiple single points of failure that would limit
the Department of Defense's ability to surge propellant
production in moments of crisis, specifically during large-
scale combat operations against a peer competitor. Further, the
committee notes that section 114 of the Servicemember Quality
of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) required a report on the
procurement of energetic materials from sources outside the
United States and expressed the need to strengthen and expand
domestic production capacity of energetic materials, including
propellants.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a one-time report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on the advisability
and feasibility of expanding domestic propellant production
capacity to increase resiliency within the defense industrial
base. The report should be unclassified and may include a
classified annex if necessary. At a minimum, the report should
include: (1) An analysis of current defense organic industrial
base (OIB) propellant production capacity, including the
capability to surge production; (2) A review of current and
expected propellant requirements across the military services;
(3) An analysis of the Department's OIB, specifically the U.S.
Army's OIB, which identifies installations that could support
additional propellant manufacturing activities; and (4) An
assessment of estimated financial costs associated with
expanding propellant production at the aforementioned U.S. Army
OIB installations, including the potential of public-private
partnerships.
Rapid fielding of commercial command and control operating systems
The committee recognizes that the deployment of integrated
command and control operating systems that leverage proven
commercial technologies has demonstrated significant
operational success in enhancing command and control
capabilities, situational awareness, targeting, and decision-
making effectiveness for the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
February 16, 2026, on: (1) Efforts to field commercial command
and control operating systems to the military departments, the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and the
Missile Defense Agency; (2) Plans for the integration or
retirement of existing data platforms and command and control
systems; (3) Metrics for evaluating mission impact, data
interoperability, and operational readiness; and (4) Any other
matters the Secretary considers appropriate.
Report on critical suppliers registry
The committee notes that section 844 of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232) requires the Secretary of Defense to administer a
process to analyze and assess potential items for consideration
to be required to be procured from a manufacturer that is part
of the national technology and industrial base (NTIB). Despite
multiple requests, the committee has not received information
regarding progress toward the establishment of the required
process.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than December 1, 2025, providing an update on the
implementation of this requirement. The report shall include,
at a minimum, a description of: (1) How the Department of
Defense has implemented the program; (2) The Department's
designated official responsible for administration; (3) The
process for an organization to apply for the status of a
specific component to be an item required to be procured from a
manufacturer that is part of the NTIB; (4) The number of
components or organizations that have applied; (5) The number
and list of components that have been approved; and (6)
Recommendations for facilitating accessibility for applications
from suppliers.
Requirements related to Navy amphibious warfare ships
The committee notes that in the last several years, the
Marine Corps has not been able to sustain the 3.0 Marine
Expeditionary Unit (MEU) presence because only 13 or 14 of the
Navy's fleet of 31 amphibious ships are available at any one
time due to maintenance challenges. The committee believes the
Department of Defense should define the requirement for MEU
presence and program the resources to achieve that requirement
by providing sufficient ships, repair and maintenance of those
ships, and manning of those ships.
Therefore, the committee directs the Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff to conduct an analysis to determine the
requirement for MEU presence and to report the results of that
analysis to the congressional defense committees, not later
than May 1, 2026.
The committee believes that the Navy, as it executes the
shipbuilding program to achieve those requirements, should
purchase amphibious ships using multi-ship procurement
authorities.
The committee also directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a report, not later than May 1, 2026, that formally
responds to the recommendations in the Government
Accountability Office report published on December 4, 2024,
titled ``Amphibious Warfare Fleet: Navy Needs to Complete Key
Efforts to Better Ensure Ships Are Available for Marines'''
(GAO-25-106728), which concluded that the Navy needs to
complete key efforts to better ensure ships are available for
marines to conduct Marine Corps missions, such as amphibious
assault and humanitarian response.
Secondary sources in the munitions supply chain
The committee recognizes the critical importance of our
arsenals, depots, and ammunition plants for our national
defense. The provision included in section 334 of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159)
required a plan for secondary sources in the munitions supply
chain.
The committee remains focused on this issue and urges the
Department of Defense to expedite the briefing and subsequent
plan, which is already past its original due date of June 23,
2025, as it will help inform the committee on potential future
legislative actions.
Squad Designated Marksman Rifle
The committee is aware that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) has procured and fielded the Mid-Range Gas Gun Sniper
(MRGG-S) platform that has proven to be highly accurate and
reliable. The committee is also aware that the M110 Squad
Designated Marksman Rifle (SDMR) that is used extensively
throughout the Army is coming to the end of its service life.
The M110 SDMR is chambered in the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge, and
the Army is in the process of transitioning to a new 6.8x51mm
cartridge. The committee is aware that MRGG-S upper receivers
have been developed and chambered in 6.8x51mm and that those
upper receiver groups are compatible with the lower receiver of
the M110 SDMR.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than February 20, 2026,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on the advisability and feasibility of a
service life extension program for the M110 SDMR that
incorporates the 6.8x51mm upper receiver group.
Status of B-52 TF33 engine generators
The committee notes that the B-52H Stratofortress is
undergoing a program to replace its original TF33 engines,
which are now in diminishing supply and are a critical asset to
airplane availability. The committee further notes that the
TF33 engines are paired with one generator for every two
engines to provide 125 kilovolt-amperes (kVA) each. Until such
time as the replacement engine and generator set under the
Commercial Engine Replacement Program become available, the
B52-H will rely on the existing TF33 engine and generator. The
committee recognizes that efforts are underway to extend the
life of TF33 engine. However, it is unaware of any effort to
maintain a supply of 125-kVA generators to power the engine.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to brief the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, but not later than March 31, 2026,
on the current supply of TF33 engines and generators and any
effects the limited generator supply may be having on the
availability of the existing fleet of B-52H planes. Further,
the briefing shall include what effort will be made to ensure
that sufficient generators are available until the Commercial
Engine Replacement Program can provide both new engines and
generators as required for the B-52H mission.
Supporting new entrants and modern approaches to address missile
inventory
The committee remains concerned that the Department of
Defense's projected inventory of precision-guided munitions is
insufficient to deter or prevail in a conflict with a near-peer
adversary. The committee notes that the current industrial base
lacks the capacity to surge production of affordable weapons
systems to fulfill the quantity demanded within the timeframe
required to deter or win a conflict.
The committee is encouraged by the establishment of the
Enterprise Test Vehicle (ETV) program, a recent collaboration
between the Air Force Armament Directorate and the Defense
Innovation Unit. The ETV program is prioritizing partnerships
with manufacturers new to the defense industrial base, using
innovative processes and commercial, off-the-shelf components
to enable high-speed production at scale to meet surges in
demand.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
January 31, 2026, on plans to enter into production contracts
with new market entrants that employ innovative and cost-
effective processes, including digital engineering, additive
manufacturing, and minimization of parts counts and supply
chain dependencies. This briefing should also include an
assessment of how these manufacturing techniques can be
utilized by other programs of record in the production of
advanced, multi-mission air vehicles.
Tactical ground radars
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to field new
tactical ground radars capable of detecting a broad range of
threats, from small unmanned aerial systems to hypersonic and
missile systems, as part of a mid-range layered defense. The
committee also recognizes the TPS-75 radar has faced
sustainment and modernization issues. While the Air Force plans
to replace it with the Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-
Range Radar TPY-4 radar, currently under development, the early
retirement of TPS-75 systems still raises concerns. Delays in
TPY-4 fielding, or failure to meet operational requirements,
could create a significant capability gap, especially as
evolving threats demand greater mobility, autonomy, networking,
and resilience.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026. This briefing shall
include: (1) Status of TPY-4 development; (2) Funds expended to
date and required to complete development of the TPY-4; (3)
TPY-4 fielding timeline and quantity; (4) TPS-75 inventory and
mission capability rates (full and partial); (5) Number of TPS-
75 systems needed to prevent capability gaps; and (6) Efforts
to sustain and upgrade the TPS-75 until full TPY-4 deployment.
UH-60M Black Hawk modernization
The committee notes that in February 2024, the Army
announced its Aviation Rebalance Initiative to reallocate its
aviation modernization investments across new and enduring
platforms to meet emerging capability requirements in a
resource constrained environment. As part of that announcement,
the Army committed to pursuing a new Multi-Year Procurement
(MYP) contract starting in fiscal year 2027 for new UH-60M
Black Hawk aircraft when the current MYP is completed at the
end of fiscal year 2026. This new MYP is needed to ensure
adequate inventories of UH-60M helicopters for the active Army
and the Army National Guard (ARNG), given the Army's decision
to cancel the UH-60V modification program. Even as the Army
develops the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, the Army has
stated that the UH-60M will remain a large part of the Army's
active and ARNG aviation fleet for decades to come.
The committee endorses the Army's efforts to continue to
procure and modernize the UH-60M Black Hawk as part of the
future aviation force. The committee supports Army efforts to
prepare for a fiscal year 2027 MYP, including any long lead or
advance procurement actions that can be taken to streamline
schedules, maintain the supplier base, and secure key
components to ensure timely deliveries.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than September 30, 2026, to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, on measures the Army is taking to support a
new MYP for the UH-60M Black Hawk, including the number of
aircraft to be included in the new MYP, delivery schedules, and
contracting in advance for key components and subsystems. The
briefing should also include an assessment of the total UH-60M
requirement for the active and ARNG aviation fleet in light of
the cancellation of the UH-60V modification program.
Ultra-Lightweight Camouflage Net System
The committee continues to be concerned by the Army's
inability to centrally fund basic camouflage and concealment
for the warfighter. This has resulted in rotational forces
deploying with 30-year-old camouflage technology that is unable
to defeat modern sensor threats. The committee notes that
soldiers believe they are protected and concealed by their
camouflage when, in fact, they are more vulnerable than ever to
threat sensors and lethal loitering munitions. The committee
believes that camouflage is inherent to Army doctrine and, as
such, should be procured with strategic intent, and not ad hoc,
as unit funding allows.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing, not later than February 20, 2026,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on the Army's evaluation of the Ultra-
Lightweight Camouflage Net System for classification as a
minimum mission essential wartime requirement.
Urgent deployment of commercial counter unmanned aerial systems
capabilities for installation protection
The committee is concerned that the military services are
not acting with sufficient urgency to address the growing
threat posed by small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) to
Department of Defense installations and critical
infrastructure. While comprehensive, integrated counter-UAS
(cUAS) architectures may be necessary in the long term, the
committee is frustrated by the continued reliance on plodding,
service-driven research and requirements development processes
at the expense of near-term protection.
The recent Ukrainian Operation Spiderweb--a coordinated,
long-range drone campaign that struck five Russian airbases
deep inside sovereign territory--highlights the increasing
sophistication, range, and tactical impact of low-cost,
commercially available drone platforms. The operation
demonstrates how peer adversaries or non-state actors could
exploit similar capabilities to threaten U.S. military
installations.
The committee urges the military departments to move
aggressively to leverage the growing ecosystem of commercially
available cUAS systems--some of which are already deployed by
special operations forces, other federal agencies, and critical
infrastructure operators--to immediately improve protection of
high-value military facilities. The threat is real, present,
and escalating.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, not later than February 1, 2026, to provide a briefing
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on efforts to: (1) Rapidly assess, acquire,
and field commercial cUAS systems for use at U.S. military
installations; (2) Identify and address any institutional,
regulatory, or budgetary barriers to rapid deployment; and (3)
Incorporate lessons learned from real-world conflict
environments--including Operation Spiderweb--into planning and
procurement timelines for installation defense.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 201--Authorization of appropriations
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for research, development, test, and evaluation
activities at the levels identified in section 4201 of division
D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Sec. 211--Modifications to defense research capacity building program
The committee recommends a provision that would require
separate funding solicitations each focused toward Historically
Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Tribal Colleges and
Universities (TCUs), and other Minority-Serving Institutions
(MSI).
The committee notes that currently the Department of
Defense's program for funding research at HBCUs, TCUs, and MSIs
lumps funding opportunities together, with no ability to tailor
the solicitation to the preferred institution type. Because of
the disparities in size and comprehensiveness of the
institutions' research programs, the committee believes that
having some ability to target and scale programs based on the
outcome desired by the government would be a useful tool for
the Department. The committee believes that differentiating
funding opportunities will allow the Department to continue to
foster and grow the nascent research capabilities of HBCUs and
TCUs while not forcing them to compete directly with the more
established research capabilities of MSIs. The committee
encourages the Department to use this authority strategically
in order both to meet its strategic research goals and to
expand and grow the Department's overall research capacity to
support U.S. national and economic security goals.
Sec. 212--Program for the enhancement of the research, development,
test, and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 305 of title 10, United States Code, by adding a new
section, 4145, and codify the authority from section 233 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public
Law 114-328), which allows eligible centers in the Department
of Defense research, development, test and evaluation
enterprise to waive certain policies or regulations if the
waiver is demonstrated to increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of such organizations and is approved by the
respective military department's Assistant Secretary or the
Deputy Secretary of Defense for organizations within the
Department of Defense.
Sec. 213--Extension of authority for assignment to Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency of private sector personnel with
critical research and development expertise
1The committee recommends a provision that would extend
the pilot authority of the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency to temporarily assign employees from
the private sector with skills, background, or
expertise in critical technology areas to work for the
Agency until September 30, 2030.
Sec. 214--Limitation on use of funds for certain Navy software
The committee recommends a provision that would limit
funding for the Navy's Autonomy Baseline Manager and Common
Control System software until the Secretary of the Navy and the
Chief of Naval Operations submit program schedule and cost
information to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 215--Limitation on availability of funds for Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2026 travel funds for
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering until the date on which the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering submits to the
congressional defense committees the report required by section
245(d) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159).
Sec. 216--Prohibition on contracts between certain foreign entities and
institutions of higher education conducting Department of
Defense-funded research
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit,
beginning on January 1, 2027, any institution of higher
education that conducts research funded by the Department of
Defense from entering into a contract with a covered nation as
defined by section 4872(d) of title 10, United States Code, or
a foreign entity of concern as recorded on one of the defined
lists in the underlying provision.
Sec. 217--Western regional range complex demonstration
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a demonstration of a joint,
multi-domain kinetic and non-kinetic training and testing
environment through interconnecting existing ranges and
training sites in the western States in order to improve
training, testing, research, and development.
Sec. 218--Modification of requirement for Department of Defense
policies for management and certification of Link 16 military
tactical data link network
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 228(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) by modifying the
requirement for Department of Defense policies for management
and certification of the Link 16 military tactical data link
network.
Sec. 219--Advanced robotic automation for munitions manufacturing
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Army to carry out a program to support the
maturation and expansion of robotic automation capabilities for
munitions manufacturing at government-owned, contractor-
operated production facilities. Additionally, it would require
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing, not later than
March 1, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the required
program.
Sec. 220--Dual-use and defense advanced manufacturing innovation hubs
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish one or more dual-use advanced
manufacturing hubs.
Sec. 220A--Advanced manufacturing and additive manufacturing programs
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to qualify and approve not fewer than one
million parts or components that use advanced manufacturing
techniques, subject to the availability of funding. The
provision would also require additive manufacturing
requirements for certain unmanned aerial systems, ground combat
vehicles, certain metal parts, and systems experiencing
diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages.
Sec. 220B--Improvements relating to advanced manufacturing
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Section 4842(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code, and make
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment
co-chair of key manufacturing panels and consortium and adds
requirements for updating guidance, instructions, and manuals
for advanced manufacturing.
Sec. 220C--Limitation on availability of funds for fundamental research
collaboration with certain academic institutions
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense (DOD) from using any funds authorized
to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 to make an award to an
institution of higher education for fundamental research in
collaboration with an academic institution included on the list
developed pursuant to section 1286(c)(9) of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232).
Subtitle C--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters
Sec. 221--Catalyst Pathfinder Program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army, not later than January 1, 2027, to
establish a soldier-inspired innovation program that creates
partnerships between operational units of the Army and leading
national research universities to integrate soldiers into
early-stage problem identification and solution development
processes.
The committee recognizes the need for a formalized soldier-
driven innovation program that integrates soldiers into the
research, development, test, and evaluation process, allowing
them to have touchpoints with new technology and provide
feedback to inform the solutions development process. The
provision would also drive collaboration between operational
units of the Army, research universities, and small businesses
to bring more technology solutions into warfighters' hands.
This program would also support soldiers with ``maker spaces'''
where they can engineer their own unique solutions to
challenges with their equipment.
Sec. 222--Extension of period for annual reports on critical technology
areas supportive of the National Defense Strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
reporting requirement in section 217(c)(1) of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) to December 1, 2030.
Sec. 223--Evaluation of additional test corridors for hypersonic and
long-range weapons
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to evaluate the suitability of a corridor
for testing hypersonic and long-range weapons in the
continental United States, focusing on special activity
airspace, test range requirements, and specific locations. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 1, 2026, describing the evaluation's progress and
estimated completion date.
Sec. 224--Technical correction
The committee recommends a provision that makes a technical
correction to chapter 9 of title 10, United States Code, by
redesignating the section 222e that was added by section 211 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(Public Law 118-31) as section 222f.
Sec. 225--Congressionally directed programs for test and evaluation
oversight
The committee recommends a provision that would add three
efforts to the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation's
oversight requirements in section 139 of title 10, United
States Code, and require that any effort identified in this
section designated as a software acquisition pathway under
section 3603 of title 10, United States Code, by the Department
of Defense shall be evaluated in accordance with the
alternative test and evaluation pathway created elsewhere in
this Act.
Sec. 226--Prohibition on modification of indirect cost rates for
institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from changing or modifying indirect
cost rates for Department of Defense grants and contracts to
institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations
until the Secretary makes certain certifications to the
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 227--Enhance international coordination for advanced manufacturing
techniques, technologies, and adoption
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to
establish a working group to enhance information sharing and
interoperability of advanced manufacturing techniques and
technologies with countries that have a reciprocal defense
procurement agreement or security of supply arrangement with
the United States.
Subtitle D--Biotechnology
Sec. 231--Biotechnology Management Office
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, within 90 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to designate a senior official in the
Department of Defense to serve as the senior official for
biotechnology issues. The provision would also require the
Secretary of Defense, within 120 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to establish a Biotechnology Management
Office. Such office shall be under the authority, direction,
and control of the Deputy Secretary of Defense and will foster
the development, acquisition, and sustainment of broad-based
biotechnology capabilities for the Department.
Sec. 232--Department of Defense biotechnology strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a Department of Defense-wide
strategy to enhance the use of biotechnology-developed and
biotechnology-manufactured products and submit the strategy to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than June 1, 2026.
The committee notes the work the National Security
Commission on Emerging Biotechnology has done to investigate
the relationship between biotechnology and the future of
defense and the interagency engagement in this sector. The
committee recognizes the Commission's recommendations and
analysis that the United States risks falling behind the
People's Republic of China in biotechnology research,
development, and capabilities unless more aggressive action is
taken. The committee also recognizes the importance of the
competition with China and the strategic role that
biotechnology plays in that competition. The committee believes
that the Department must have a unified, cohesive strategy in
place to remain competitive in the biotechnology arena.
Sec. 233--Defining guidelines and policies on the use of biotechnology
for the Armed Forces
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop guidelines on the ethical and
responsible development and deployment of biotechnology within
the Department of Defense and the U.S. Armed Forces. The
provision would also require the Secretary to brief the
congressional defense committees on the implementation of the
guidelines and policies developed, not later than 2 years after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 234--Enhancement of international biodefense capacity
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to direct the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense
Programs, in consultation with the Director of the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency, to enter into memoranda of
understanding with other departments and agencies of the
Federal Government to clarify the roles and responsibilities of
those entities for building biodefense capabilities
internationally.
Budget Items
Army
High Performance Computing Modernization Program
The committee notes that in the section 4201 table for
Research Development Test and Evaluation, Army, there is an
increase to PE 63461A, High Performance Computing Modernization
Program of $50.0 million for additional infrastructure capacity
to support increased artificial intelligence demand.
The committee is aware of the Department of Defense's needs
for additional infrastructure capacity to be able to experiment
with and deploy useful artificial intelligence solutions to
meet defense needs. That includes the needs for additional
computing hardware, expanding connections of the Defense
Research and Engineering Network to additional users for
testing and demonstration, and the need for additional physical
and cybersecurity measures to increase the protection of these
systems from vulnerabilities and threats from sophisticated
nation-state actors. The committee also encourages the
Department to experiment with new computing architectures in
order to reduce energy demands placed on AI data centers based
on current technologies and business practices.
Navy
Air Force
Adaptive threat modeling lab
The committee notes that in the section 4201 table for
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, there
is an increase to PE 66005F, Digital Transformation Office, of
$15.0 million for the development of an adaptive threat
modeling lab to support operational experimentation of
surveillance and counter-surveillance systems in threat
representative environments.
The committee is aware that military operations are
increasingly at risk from ubiquitous technical surveillance,
which leverages pervasive collection of digital data from
internet of things (IoT) and other sensing devices coupled with
powerful artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML)
tools that allow for greater analysis and correlation of this
extensive digital footprint in ways that can uncover and
compromise military operations. The committee believes that the
military should leverage evolving commercial off-the-shelf
technologies with underpinning AI and ML analytics to analyze
realistic scenarios by establishing a flexible, simulated lab
environment for demonstration, analysis, and operational
training. In such a threat lab environment, operators can study
emerging threats, practice and evolve their tactics, and gain
critical insight into the advantages and vulnerabilities of
modern IoT systems.
Defense Wide
Foreign Comparative Test program
The committee notes that in the section 4201 table for
Research Development Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide, there
is an increase to PE 63133D8Z, Foreign Comparative Testing
(FCT) of $10.0 million to evaluate foreign allied nation
artificial intelligence systems.
The committee notes that the FCT program was established to
identify and evaluate systems or tools produced by foreign
allied nations that could be rigorously tested to determine if
they could meet specific military requirements. The committee
believes this is a cost-effective tool to quickly identify
capabilities that can be adopted by the military without
lengthy developmental processes. In addition, FCT helps
strengthen the web of defense relationships with partners by
providing opportunities for them to get appropriate
capabilities into the U.S. acquisition systems. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to use the additional
funding authorized by this Act to examine foreign-developed
artificial intelligence and machine learning capabilities,
including hardware and network processing capabilities, to
assess the benefits of integrating such systems into the
overall networking architecture of the Department.
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
The committee notes that in the section 4201 table for
Research Development Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide, there
is an increase to PE 61110D8Z, Basic Research Initiatives of
$30.0 million for the Defense Established Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) program.
The committee continues to be supportive of the DEPSCoR
program, which helps build and expand the national innovation
base for research and education by funding research activities
in science and engineering areas responsive to the needs of
national defense. Participation in this program is limited to
states that meet eligibility criteria as outlined in the
authorizing language from previous National Defense
Authorization Acts. The program is intended to increase the
number of university researchers and improve the capabilities
of institutions of higher education in eligible jurisdictions
to perform competitive research relevant to the Department of
Defense (DOD). The committee also views DEPSCoR as a component
in any effort by the DOD to identify, shape, and foster
innovation ecosystems that support DOD research and technology
needs. Along with other funding programs and authorities
available to the Department, DEPSCoR should be considered as a
means to expand and diversify the innovation ecosystem for the
DOD.
Artificial intelligence algorithmic development utilizing novel
linguistics frameworks
The committee notes that in the section 4201 table for
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide,
there is an increase to PE 61228D8Z, Historically Black
Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions, of $10.0
million for additional research in artificial intelligence (AI)
algorithm development using novel linguistics frameworks.
The committee is aware of opportunities to develop a
research program to investigate the cognitive structural
complexity and the unique linguistics frameworks embedded
within indigenous languages to support development of new and
novel AI large language models. Additionally, the committee
notes that these linguistic systems could be used for
developing diverse AI linguistic models that enable more
resilient, more computationally efficient, and more secure AI
algorithmic architectures.
Items of Special Interest
Adaptation of air-launched weapons for ground launch
The committee recognizes the urgent need to deliver
coordinated and integrated maritime strike warfighting
capability to combatant commanders. The committee is aware of
the AGM-158 JASSM/LRASM and its survivability and efficacy as a
high-end anti-ship weapon. The committee is also aware of the
Family of Affordable Mass Missiles program and other nascent
air- and ship-launched weapons programs that could be adapted
for ground launch, as the Small Diameter Bomb program was in
the Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb program.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the
acquisition executives of the military services, to provide to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 31, 2026, a report on the
status of efforts to demonstrate ground launch of the AGM-158
LRASM, the FAMM missile, and other nascent weapons.
Advanced Group 1 small unmanned aerial systems
The committee recognizes the role that ultra-lightweight
Group 1 small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) can play in
supporting special operations forces (SOF) activities around
the world. The committee believes that SOF units could benefit
from ultra-light Group 1 sUAS that provide secure, modular, and
rapidly deployable intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance capabilities to support intelligence gathering,
targeting, and force protection in contested and denied
environments, including through the employment of light
detection and ranging, electro-optical/infrared, and multi-
spectral imaging capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the U.S. Special
Operations Command to seek opportunities to procure and conduct
operational testing of ultra-light Group 1 sUAS capabilities
that provide such aforementioned capabilities, as appropriate.
Biometric collection and analysis
The committee is aware of efforts by U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) to develop scalable biometric
collection and analysis systems and the use of Partnership
Intermediary Agreements to identify relevant and commercially
viable, small business-developed technologies. The committee
recognizes the utility of next-generation biometric collection
capabilities that utilize contactless collection and artificial
intelligence-powered analytics for accelerating the
identification of threats, including those posed by
international violent extremists, transnational criminal
organizations, and malign foreign actors.
Furthermore, the committee notes that advances in mobile
software and sensors can enable end-users to adopt, integrate,
and scale new technologies much more cost-effectively. The
committee also recognizes the potential value across a broad
range of national security applications beyond special
operations where the availability of near real-time biometric
information on mobile devices and the ability to utilize
software can enable more timely decision-making. Therefore, the
committee encourages continued development and enhancement of
mobile biometrics software by SOCOM as appropriate.
Comprehensive inventory of departmental innovation programs
The committee is aware of the Department of Defense's wide
array of innovation-focused organizations and initiatives,
including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), the Strategic
Capabilities Office (SCO), and the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)).
While these entities pursue valuable and often complementary
missions, the lack of a consolidated inventory risks
duplication, inefficiency, and suboptimal allocation of limited
resources. The committee believes that such an inventory would
provide a useful mechanism to strengthen coordination across
its technical ecosystem, eliminate stovepipes, and ensure that
emerging technology investments are being prioritized according
to strategic military needs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit, not later than March 1, 2026, to the congressional
defense committees a comprehensive report cataloguing all
Department-sponsored technical innovation programs, offices,
initiatives, and pilot projects across all services and defense
agencies. This report shall include:
(1) A complete inventory of innovation-focused
organizations and initiatives, including but not
limited to DARPA, SCO, DIU, OUSD(R&E), service-level
innovation cells, Federally Funded Research and
Development Centers, University Affiliated Research
Centers, and any other Department-affiliated or
Department-supported research and innovation
activities;
(2) A description of the mission, budget, and
staffing levels of each program or office, as well as a
summary of current research focus areas, active
projects, and recent technology transition outcomes;
(3) An analysis of how these innovation entities
coordinate with one another and with external actors,
including industry, academia, and allied partners;
(4) Identification of any gaps, redundancies, or
opportunities for enhanced collaboration and resource
alignment among the Department's innovation activities;
and
(5) Recommendations, if any, for structural reforms
or process improvements to streamline innovation
efforts, ensure clearer lines of authority and
responsibility, and accelerate the development and
fielding of warfighter-relevant capabilities.
Electromagnetic spectrum overmatch research
The committee is aware of the Army's Combat Capabilities
Development Command Army Research Laboratory's engagement in
successful research with university and industry partners in
various aspects of electronic warfare, including efforts to
develop technology for better communications, collections, and
sensor data fusion and processing. All are essential
capabilities to enhance real-time accurate decision-making in a
highly contested electromagnetic spectrum.
The committee strongly supports the continued advancement
of the Army Research Laboratory's collaborative research with
academia in the development of technology in areas of antennae,
counter-unmanned aerial systems, sensors, computing at the
edge, and swarm technology to enable overmatch electronic
warfare capabilities in the highly contested and congested
electromagnetic spectrum operating environment.
Elevating warfighter capabilities for total force optimization
The committee believes that investment in operational
health, readiness, and the performance of U.S. warfighters is
critical to ensuring combat effectiveness against near-peer
adversaries. Modern warfare demands personnel who are not only
technically proficient but also physically and mentally
prepared to endure the challenges of high-intensity combat
operations. While existing research has made strides in injury
prevention and performance optimization, critical gaps remain
in understanding the biomechanical, physiological, and
psychological factors that influence warfighter lethality,
survivability, and longevity in service. Addressing these gaps
is essential for ensuring force readiness and sustaining
operational effectiveness across all domains of warfare.
In its efforts to sustain warfighter readiness and progress
toward total force optimization, the U.S. Armed Forces must
leverage advancements in science and technology to maximize
warfighter operational effectiveness and reduce injury risks.
Therefore, the committee urges the Department of Defense to
support additional research and development focused on
optimizing warfighter performance, including biomechanical,
physiological, and psychological research to mitigate injury
risks, improve physical resilience, and maximize readiness,
survivability, and lethality in combat operations.
Future Long Range Attack Aircraft program
The committee supports Department of the Army efforts to
establish improved ability to operate in a contested
environment which requires increased speed, endurance, and
reliability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the Department of the Army's Future
Long Range Attack Aircraft (FLRAA) program, addressing the
following elements: (1) The risks in safety, cost, reliability,
and performance the Army has identified through its prototyping
of FLRAA; (2) The extent to which the Army and its contractors
applied lessons learned from the development and operations of
the V-22 Osprey into their development of FLRAA; and (3) The
extent to which the Army is using modern digital engineering
tools in the FLRAA program to improve the design, reduce risks
of accidents, and improve planning for operations and
maintenance.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than April 15, 2026, with a report to follow in a format and
time frame agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Government Accountability Office report on aviation risk management
data
The committee supports efforts to increase safety of U.S.
military flights, including in U.S. civilian airspace. The
committee is especially concerned about recent investigative
reporting that a disproportionate amount of aviation close
calls in U.S. civilian airspace involve military aircraft.
To enhance aviation safety in the Department of Defense
(DOD), the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to review Department policy and service policies
and procedures for data gathering, risk assessment, and risk
mitigation of U.S. military flights, especially as it relates
to differentiating between flights in U.S. domestic civilian
airspace, including Class B airspace, and other missions. This
can, in part, be an update from the 2018 Government
Accountability Office report on mishap data, but it should also
assess how the Department approaches ex-ante risk analysis to
prevent mishaps.
The review should include but not be limited to the
following: (1) A review of existing databases related to post-
hoc mishaps, including which services contribute data, the
quality and comprehensiveness of data, opportunities for
gathering more data, and assessment of the rigor of data-
gathering approaches; (2) A review of existing databases
related to ex-ante aviation safety and prediction of risk,
including which services contribute data, the quality and
comprehensiveness of data, opportunities for gathering more
data, and assessment of the rigor of data gathering approaches;
(3) An assessment of the methodologies, procedures, and
processes used by the services, the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, and other DOD agencies to analyze existing data,
identifying gaps, concerns, and opportunities--an assessment
that should comment on the rigorousness of these methodologies
and procedures, including by comparing to best practices in
civilian agencies and the private sector; (4) A review and
assessment of the efficacy of guidance and procedures for risk
mitigation before flights, detailing any differences among the
services and oversight by other DOD entities, as applicable;
(5) A review of whether and how services collect existing data,
methodologies, and risk procedures that differentiate between
missions in U.S. domestic civilian airspace, especially Class B
airspace compared with missions in other locations.
Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate
The committee notes that the Irregular Warfare Technical
Support Directorate (IWTSD) within the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict conducts rapid research and development in support of
Department of Defense (DOD) requirements, including those of
special operations forces. The committee further notes that the
joint explanatory statement accompanying the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) directed the
Secretary of Defense to submit a plan for optimizing the
contributions of the IWTSD to the fulfillment of DOD irregular
warfare activities.
The committee notes the growing importance of unmanned
systems to the operational effectiveness of special operations
forces across the continuum of competition and conflict. The
committee understands that U.S. Naval Special Warfare Command
(NSW), acting through Special Boat Team-22, has undertaken
activities focused on experimentation and prototyping related
to unmanned maritime capabilities. The committee believes there
may be opportunities for enhanced collaboration between IWTSD
and NSW on unmanned maritime experimentation and prototyping.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and
the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, to provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
December 31, 2025, on opportunities for IWTSD to complement
innovation efforts by NSW for research, experimentation, and
prototyping unmanned maritime vessels.
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics activities
The committee recognizes that the nation's defense
capabilities and economic strength are intrinsically linked to
its ability to innovate and produce advanced technologies
domestically and that science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) education is a cornerstone of this
capability. The committee also notes that the House Report
accompanying H.R. 8070 (H. Rept. 118-529) of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) directed the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than March
1, 2025, providing insight into the feasibility of a STEM-
specific Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC)
program.
The committee notes that the report issued by the
Department of Defense should emphasize the benefits of
integrating STEM-related subjects and activities into JROTC
programs and other similar programs that support military-
connected students; encourage the identification and
dissemination of best practices related to STEM across JROTC
and other programs serving military-connected students; and
encourage the program to leverage, where feasible, the
capacities of not-for-profits and educational institutions as
they support JROTC and other programs serving military-
connected students.
The committee urges the Department of Defense to submit the
report as soon as possible.
Low-cost hypersonic testing
The committee remains concerned with the lack of progress
by the Department of Defense in developing capabilities for
hypersonic weapons, as well as the technology and systems
needed to counter or defeat such weapons. The committee notes
the work of the Comptroller General of the United States in the
report published on July 29, 2024, titled ``DOD Could Reduce
Cost and Schedule Risks by Following Leading Practices'' (GAO-
24-106792). The committee notes that the Comptroller General
recommended the Department utilize ``Digital Twinning'' to
reduce cost and schedule risks.
The committee is aware that such digital twin technology
requires verified computational simulations for hypersonics,
which in turn have reduced maturity and accuracy when detailed
flight test data is absent. The committee applauds the
Department for initiating the Multi-Service Advanced Capability
Hypersonic Test Bed program as a means to increase the pace and
scale of hypersonic testing, producing more of the necessary
flight test data needed to increase the fidelity overall for
modeling and simulation technologies, including for digital
twins. Therefore, the committee encourages the Department to
continue to seek out low-cost hypersonic testing opportunities
to validate these models.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering to develop a plan to
utilize digital twin technology in hypersonic design and to
evaluate and assess the defense industrial base's capability
and capacity to support digital twinning for hypersonics
capability development and operational simulation. The
committee directs the Under Secretary to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees, not later than January
31, 2026, on the following: (1) The Department's plan to
incorporate digital twins for advancing hypersonic design and
fielding; (2) Current digital twin models utilized by the
Department; (3) The Department's investments in obtaining
accurate hypersonic flight test data; (4) An assessment of the
defense industrial base's ability to build accurate digital
twins for hypersonic system design; and (5) The Department's
plan to utilize the three components of hypersonic design:
analytical and computational models, flight testing, and ground
testing.
Navy Modular Missile Solid Rocket Motors
The committee believes that the Navy Modular Missile (NMM)
program is a critical opportunity for the Navy to establish a
strong foundation for developing and maturing future weapons
systems. The committee encourages the Navy to develop and
produce the NMM in a manner consistent with the Secretary of
Defense's commitment to Congress to ``leverage market forces to
prioritize competition and maximize innovation and efficient
production.'' Because the NMM program contemplates a common
weapon system with different solid rocket motors (SRM) for
different missions, the Navy has an opportunity to leverage an
expanding SRM industrial base effectively to support large-
scale production of the NMM.
The committee recognizes that programs with multiple
qualified sub-tier suppliers are adaptable and resilient.
Programs with multiple qualified SRM providers can take
advantage of competition, minimize the impacts of supply chain
disruptions, scale production efficiently, and respond to
dynamic warfighting needs.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy, in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than December 1, 2025, on a plan to
invest in qualifying at least two domestic SRM manufacturers
for each configuration of the NMM. The briefing should address
how this investment will be incorporated in the NMM acquisition
strategy to accomplish these policy objectives. The briefing
should be unclassified without dissemination restrictions but
may contain a classified or restricted annex.
Next-generation printed circuit boards
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD)
lacks reliable, domestic sources of supply for printed circuit
boards (PCBs), which are critical components underpinning the
electronics that power all of our weapons systems. Numerous
studies by the DOD and other agencies have documented the
critical need to strengthen domestic PCB and printed circuit
board assembly manufacturing to ensure a secure and reliable
supply chain of these critical technology components. The
Department has also recognized the importance of domestic
sources of these vital parts, with individual awards under the
Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-774) to try to
stimulate investment in the manufacture of these technologies.
Further, the committee notes that the Executive Agent for
Printed Circuit Board and Interconnect Technology was
established in section 256 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-
417) to ensure both a secure supply of PCBs, as well as to
maintain deep technical understanding of the technology to help
inform the Department.
The committee is also aware that the Department has
leveraged the Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) to support some
capacity expansion for manufacturing of next generation PCBs.
Next generation PCBs are needed not only to increase the supply
chain security of such technology, but also to take advantage
of advances in needed technology to modernize the substrates
and manufacturing processing for PCBs to incorporate changes
like the incorporation of new materials, optical interconnects,
and 3D heterogenous integration. The committee believes an
opportunity exists to leverage the innovative financing
opportunities of organizations like OSC, the Defense Innovation
Unit (DIU), and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) to leap ahead in the space of PCBs.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy,
acting through the Executive Agent for Printed Circuit Board
and Interconnect Technology and in coordination with the
Directors of the OSC, DIU, and DARPA; the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Industrial Base Policy; and the Principal
Director for Microelectronics in the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, to develop a
roadmap and investment strategy for next-generation PCBs and to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than June 1, 2026. Such briefing shall include: (1)
Identification of technological advances that might require new
technical approaches for PCB design and manufacture, including
from foreign partners or allies; (2) Emerging research in new
PCB design, including internationally; (3) Survey of private
capital investment opportunities in current and next-generation
PCBs; (4) Assessment of technical integration challenges and
opportunities for next-generation PCBs; and (5) Other such
considerations as the Executive Agent for Printed Circuit Board
and Interconnect Technology considers appropriate.
Project Pele
The committee is encouraged by the continued progress made
by the Department of Defense Strategic Capabilities Office on
Project Pele, an effort to design, build, and demonstrate a
prototype mobile micro nuclear fission reactor. In particular,
the committee notes the advancements made by Project Pele to
meet the requirement of demonstrating the ability of mobile
nuclear power generation technologies to comply fully with all
relevant regulations and statutory requirements, satisfy
stakeholder needs, and operate safely in real-world conditions.
Accordingly, given the continued investments in the mobile
micro nuclear reactor program, the committee encourages the
Department of Defense to consider using Project Pele as the
technical baseline for future micro nuclear fission reactors.
Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
not later than May 1, 2026, to brief the congressional defense
committees on Department efforts to expedite and expand efforts
to prototype and evaluate advanced deployable nuclear energy
systems capable of supporting forward-deployed military forces,
expeditionary missions, and resilient base operations. Such
briefing shall address, at a minimum:
(1) A Department-wide strategy to identify and
develop deployable nuclear energy solutions;
(2) A timeline for prototyping and initial testing of
one or more reactor designs;
(3) The means by which the Department will coordinate
efforts with other state and Federal agencies, as
necessary; and
(4) The military requirements and key performance
parameters for each separate design to be pursued.
Quantum algorithm development
The committee recognizes the importance of the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Quantum Benchmarking
Initiative (QBI) program in making progress to determine
whether fault-tolerant utility-scale quantum computers could
plausibly be realized ahead of conventional predictions. The
committee also notes that while progress is being made on the
hardware underpinning quantum computing, the Department of
Defense also needs to be prepared with useful and functional
algorithms to operate on those machines once they do become
available. The committee believes the Department should be
making such investments in parallel in order to maximize the
benefits of quantum computing should the investment manifest in
a utility-scale machine. The committee supports DARPA's efforts
with QBI and encourages the program to identify industry
performers to explore algorithm development for quantum
computing applications to ensure the maturation of that part of
the industrial base.
Accordingly, the committee believes that advances in
quantum algorithms have the potential to enhance the ability to
computationally design and discover new advanced materials for
a broad set of national security applications across the
Department and the military services, among other applications.
Quantum benchmarking initiative
The committee notes that quantum computing has been
identified as a critical technology where the United States
must maintain its leadership. The committee strongly supports
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Quantum
Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) as well as the consideration of
all relevant quantum computing technologies, including both
gate-model and annealing approaches, that have the potential to
reach utility-scale. The committee expects the DARPA Director
to ensure QBI evaluates all quantum computing modalities,
within budgetary and resource constraints, to determine the
maturity and long-term potential of quantum computing concepts,
development plans, and prototypes, components, and subsystems
needed to develop a utility-scale quantum computing capability.
Removing barriers to directed energy weapon system testing, training,
and exercising
The committee supports the continued development and
fielding of directed energy weapon systems as a critical
component of future U.S. military capabilities. These systems
offer scalable, non-kinetic options to address a range of
operational challenges.
The committee, however, is concerned that current policies
and overly restrictive interpretations of legal authorities may
unnecessarily limit the Department of Defense's ability to
conduct realistic testing, training, and exercises with
directed energy systems, even in low-risk environments with
only consenting participants. To address these concerns, the
committee supports efforts to thoughtfully delegate appropriate
approval authorities and remove barriers to such activities
when they do not pose risks to foreign relations, arms control
compliance, or nonconsenting parties. The committee believes
that continued, focused oversight will support faster
integration of directed energy capabilities into the force.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 31, 2026. This briefing should include: (1) A summary of
current testing, training, and exercise activities involving
directed energy weapon systems across the Department of
Defense; (2) Identification of policy, legal, or procedural
barriers limiting such activities; (3) A review of current
approval authorities and their delegation; and (4)
Recommendations for legislative or regulatory changes needed to
facilitate broader operational use of directed energy weapons.
Researcher post-employment restrictions
The committee is concerned that the current level of
oversight and coordination between the Department of Defense
and other relevant federal agencies may not be robust enough
when it comes to assessing the potential impact of post-
employment activities of researchers who have participated on
sensitive unclassified projects funded by the Department but
may be approached by foreign entities of concern for
prospective employment. The committee notes the potential
benefits which a foreign government could receive if such
researchers accept employment with foreign entities of concern
after the conclusion of their research.
The committee further notes that there are existing
processes for research security that could support visibility
into the breadth and scope of this issue and help mitigate
risks to broader national security, though some of those
processes are managed by interagency partners. Therefore, the
committee encourages the Department to strengthen policies for
research security to maintain visibility of post-employment
activities of Department-funded or Department-employed
researchers on unclassified topics and to mitigate any negative
impacts through increased synchronization with interagency
partners with authorities in this space.
University research
The committee understands that the economic and national
security of the United States, as well as our military
effectiveness, depends on sustained technological superiority.
The committee also understands that technological superiority
is directly supported by federally funded research conducted at
our nation's universities that fuel the future science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics workforce.
The committee believes universities, university affiliated
research centers (UARCs), and their partners serve as trusted,
long-term partners to the Department of Defense (DOD),
maintaining specialized capabilities essential to mission
success that are not readily available in the commercial
sector. The committee agrees with the assessment of the
Government Accountability Office in its report from December
2018 titled ``Defense Laboratory Authorities: DOD Uses
Authorities to Support Science and Technology, but Could
Strengthen Its Approach (GAO-19-64)'' that UARCs enable DOD to
``maintain essential capabilities'' and gain access to research
``where the private sector may not have sufficient incentive to
invest.''
Therefore, the committee strongly recommends sustained
investment by the Department in university research, including
UARCs and their partners, to ensure the United States maintains
its edge over near-peer competitors in emerging technologies
and critical defense capabilities. The committee further
believes these investments have achieved positive outcomes in
day-to-day operations of the Department, including repairs to
ships, submarines, ground vehicles, aircraft, and weapons
systems; air, land, and sea warfare; arctic operations,
healthcare, additive manufacturing, advanced materials,
hypersonics, directed energy, artificial intelligence, and data
analysis, accelerating readiness and increasing effectiveness
for the entire force.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 301--Authorization of appropriations
The committee recommends a provision that 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--Department of Defense guidelines regarding implementation of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to rescind all existing Department of
Defense directives regarding implementation of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190) and
replace those directives with a new directive with uniform
guidance that the military departments and other agencies of
the Department of Defense must implement.
Sec. 312--Requirement to support training on wildfire prevention and
response
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 351 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to require the U.S. Army
and the U.S. Air Force, in consultation with the National Guard
Bureau, to provide support for the training of appropriate
National Guard personnel on wildfire prevention and response.
Sec. 313--Use of solid waste disposal systems by Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to use expeditionary solid waste
disposal systems for the destruction of illicit contraband and
other materials.
Sec. 314--Modification of availability and use of energy cost savings
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2912(e)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by
requiring the Secretary of Defense to transfer savings derived
from this section, not later than 60 days after being notified
of said savings, and make additional technical changes as
requested by the Department of the Air Force.
The committee notes that cost savings derived under the
current authority are not being provided in a timely fashion
with funds being transferred so close to the end of the current
fiscal year as to leave insufficient time to obligate said
funds.
Sec. 315--Authority of Department of Defense to destroy or dispose of
perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Department of Defense to use any Federal or state-approved
methodology to destroy or dispose of perfluoroalkyl and
polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Sec. 316--Modification to restriction on procurement or purchasing of
personal protective equipment for firefighters containing
perfluoroalkyl substances or polyfluoroalkyl substances
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Section 345 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) by
updating the Department of Defense firefighting personal
protective equipment procurement requirements to ensure that
firefighting equipment meets the standards set by the National
Fire Protection Association.
Sec. 317--Provision of bottled water to communities with private
drinking water contaminated with perfluoroalkyl and
polyfluoroalkyl substances from activities of Department of
Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide bottled water to communities
with private drinking water wells where contamination from per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances resulting from activities of the
Department of Defense has exceeded maximum contamination
levels.
Sec. 318--Repeal of prohibition on procurement by Department of Defense
of certain items containing perfluorooctane sulfonate or
perfluorooctanoic acid
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 333 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Sec. 319--Repeal of temporary moratorium on incineration by Department
of Defense of perfluoroalkyl substances, polyfluoroalkyl
substances, and aqueous film forming foam
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 343 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81).
Sec. 320--Interim responses to address releases or threatened releases
of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, consistent with the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(Public Law 96-510), to conduct preliminary assessments and
site inspections relating to the detection of per- and
polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances on Department of Defense
installations, and determine interim actions to be taken to
reduce immediate public exposure to the release of PFAS. The
provision would also require a report regarding various
elements related to the preliminary assessment or site
investigation of facilities, their associated timelines, and
any relevant explanations of actions taken.
Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment
Sec. 321--Surface ship sustainment and readiness
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to enhance surface ship maintenance at
private shipyards through processes led by the Type Commanders
(TYCOMs) that emphasize workforce stability, ship-specific
assignments, collaborative planning, and small business
involvement. The provision would authorize the TYCOMs to
oversee maintenance and delegate decision-making authority to
project managers, port engineers, and ship commanding officers.
The requirements under this section would terminate on January
1, 2031.
The committee supports the Navy's goal of achieving 80
percent surge combat readiness for both conventional and
nuclear ships, as well as the Navy's commitment to improving
maintenance, repair, and overhaul processes. The committee is
concerned, however, that the Navy's contracting strategy with
the private shipyards has led to inefficiencies in planning and
executing sustainment activities. Moreover, it has led to
workload instability that disincentivizes capital and workforce
investments. The committee is also concerned with the diffusion
of authority, responsibility, and accountability that has
prevented timely decision making and integrated management
under an organization charged with the man, train, and equip
functions for the fleet. The committee believes that
implementing this provision would help alleviate these
concerns.
Sec. 322--Technology enhancement for surface ship maintenance
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to expedite the investigation,
qualification, and integration of specified advanced
technologies and processes into Navy surface ship maintenance
to improve readiness, reduce costs, and address delays. The
provision would also: (1) Mandate an open process for
evaluating additional technologies within 90 days of their
submission; (2) Require updated policies and modified
contracts; and (3) Require information on implementation
timelines and third-party reviews for non-selected
technologies. The provision would require the Secretary of the
Navy to submit a report to the Congress, not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, detailing
timelines to qualify and approve each advanced technology or
process specified in the provision.
Sec. 323--Delegation to United States Transportation Command of
mitigating vulnerabilities and risks associated with contested
logistics for Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
U.S. Transportation Command as the global manager for contested
logistics. The provision would also require an interim briefing
on progress and a report within 1 year on implementation of
this designation.
The committee has been discouraged by the lack of a
cohesive, unified strategy by the Department of Defense. The
committee believes that this course of action, similar to the
designation of a single manager for bulk fuel, would streamline
the Department's efforts and create a renewed pathway to
achieving a capability to provide logistics support for U.S.
Armed Forces in a contested environment.
Sec. 324--Requirements for Department of Defense aircraft operations
near commercial airports
The committee recommends a provision that would require all
aircraft of the Department of Defense that operate near
commercial airports to be equipped with position broadcast
technology. The provision would require the development of
standard operating procedures that maximize the use of such
technology. Finally, the provision would require annual reports
describing near miss incidents involving military and
commercial aircraft.
Sec. 325--Extension and modification of semiannual briefings on
operational status of amphibious warship fleet
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 352 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) by extending the sunset
date for the reporting requirements on the operational status
of the amphibious warship fleet from 2026 to 2028 and by
including an additional requirement to report on a plan for
maintenance and service life extensions that would retain
active amphibious warships until replacement warships enter
service in order to meet the requirement for operationally
available amphibious warships set forth in section 8062 of
title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 326--Prohibition on closure of Army organic industrial base sites
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from closing any facility or sites
that are part of the Army's organic industrial base. Not later
than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and
annually thereafter for 5 years, the Secretary of the Army
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the status of all facilities in the organic industrial base
of the Army.
Sec. 327--Establishment of Defense Personal Property Management Office
under Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
the Defense Personal Property Management Office under the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness, not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Sec. 328--Integration of commercially available artificial intelligence
capabilities into logistics operations
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to facilitate the integration of
commercially available artificial intelligence capabilities
specifically designed for logistics tracking, planning,
operations, and analytics into two relevant Department of
Defense exercises to be conducted during fiscal year 2026.
Sec. 329--Pilot program on arsenal workload sustainment
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program, for a period
of 5 years, on arsenal workload sustainment within the
Department of Defense.
Subtitle D--Reports
Sec. 331--Modification of report on improved oversight for
implementation of Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program
of the Navy
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 355(c)(2)(A) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) to include information
on digital infrastructure in the annual reporting requirement
on the Department of the Navy's Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Program.
Sec. 332--Modification of readiness report to include summary count of
certain mishaps
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 482(b)(8) of title 10, United States Code, to reduce
overburdensome reporting requirements in the Semiannual
Readiness Report to Congress (SRRC). Previously, the SRRC
included case-by-case descriptions of each Class C mishap. The
committee's intent is to streamline the SRRC and eliminate the
case-by-case descriptions for Class C mishaps but still retain
a summary count of all Class C mishaps.
Sec. 333--Annual report on funding and status of interim remedial
actions of Department of Defense relating to perfluoroalkyl and
polyfluoroalkyl substances
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the funding and status of interim remedial
actions of the Department of Defense relating to per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances, including criteria for prioritizing
military installations based on risk to human health,
environmental impact, and proximity to affected communities.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 341--Provision of sports foods and third-party certified dietary
supplements to members of the United States Special Operations
Command
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to use amounts authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Defense for Major Force
Program 11 for the procurement of sports foods and third-party
certified dietary supplements and the distribution of such
foods and supplements to servicemembers of the U.S. Special
Operations Command. The provision would also direct the
Secretary to conduct a review of the feasibility and
advisability of expanding such an authority to the military
departments and submit the findings of such review to the
congressional defense committees, not later than September 30,
2026.
Sec. 342--Limitation on use of funds to establish or expand Space Force
Special Operations Component Command
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for Major
Force Program 11 for the U.S. Special Operations Command to
establish or expand a Space Force Special Operations Component
Command until the date that is 30 days after the date on which
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and
Low-Intensity Conflict and the Commander, U.S. Special
Operations Command, in consultation with the Chief of Space
Operations, submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report articulating
the requirement for such a component command and the
resourcing, personnel, and other requirements necessary for
reaching initial and full operational capability.
Sec. 343--Requirements for contracts relating to permanent change of
station moving process
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to include additional oversight mechanisms
for any renegotiation of the contract under the Global
Household Goods Contract in place as of the date of the
enactment of this Act, or negotiation of a new contract under
the Global Household Goods Contract or any successor program or
contract.
The committee is concerned that the original Global
Household Goods Contract lacked proper oversight mechanisms
leading to an inability of the Department of Defense to
safeguard the best interest of servicemembers and their
families.
Sec. 344--Limitation on transformation by the Army of primary
helicopter training program at Fort Rucker, Alabama
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of the Army from implementing any transformation
of the Initial Entry Rotary Wing training program until certain
reporting requirements are met.
Sec. 345--Conveyance of certain aircraft from Air Force to Arizona
Aviation Historical Group, Phoenix, Arizona
The committee recommends a provision that would grant the
Air Force permissive authority to convey five surplus T-37B
aircraft to the Arizona Aviation Historical Group at no cost to
the Government.
Sec. 346--Limitation on use of funds by the Army until submittal of
plan to integrate Joint Munitions Command and Army Sustainment
Command
The committee directs the Secretary of Army to provide a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, prior to the expenditure of the
funds authorized to be appropriated to restructure commands, on
its proposed plan to integrate the Joint Munitions Command and
the Army Sustainment Command.
Sec. 347--Limitation on use of certain funds of the Air Force until
acquisition strategy submitted to maintain Airborne Command
Post capability
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2026 travel funds for
the Secretary of the Air Force until the Secretary of the Air
Force submits a report on the acquisition strategy of the Air
Force to maintain the Airborne Command Post capability.
Sec. 348--Pilot program for contracted amphibious air resources for the
area of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific
Command
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to establish and maintain a 3-year
pilot program for the contracted operation of a fleet of
commercial amphibious aviation resources for tasking within the
area of responsibility of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
Sec. 349--Naming of certain assets of the Department of Defense in the
Commonwealth of Virginia
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to implement the naming recommendations
for assets of the Department of Defense located in the
Commonwealth of Virginia that were adopted by the base naming
commission.
Budget Items
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program
The committee notes that in the section 4301 table for
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, there is an increase
to SAG 4GTN, Office of the Secretary of Defense of $20.0
million for Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration
(REPI).
The committee notes that REPI funding, combined with
funding from state and local government and other non-
government organization partners, helps the Department of
Defense (DOD) prevent encroachment and reduces threats to
military installation resilience. The committee anticipates
that the military services will identify validated requirements
for fiscal year 2026 in excess of the $158.3 million requested.
Additionally, the committee encourages the military services to
establish and resource additional staff to increase capacity to
more effectively implement available REPI funds and to take
full advantage of the benefits of the REPI program to improve
military readiness and military installation resilience.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced software for Navy and Marine Corps readiness data
The committee applauds the Army and the Air Force for
deploying advanced software platforms with capabilities that
allow commanders and servicemembers to track, monitor, and
better inform unit readiness reporting for personnel,
equipment, status of that equipment, and training. The Army and
the Air Force's ability to derive insights from this data
better informs and enhances unit readiness reporting.
The committee encourages the Navy and the Marine Corps to
deploy similar technologies that will enable unit commanders to
leverage similar benefits to better inform their readiness
reporting. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Navy to brief to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than March
1, 2026, on plans to deploy advanced software that enables the
tracking, monitoring, and improvement of key metrics to align
with the overall readiness objectives for the Department of
Defense.
Aerial firefighting enhancement
The committee recognizes that fire season is year-round and
that additional resources are required to suppress catastrophic
wildfires. The lack of availability for spare parts hampers
some state, local, and private sector entities in conducting
aerial wildfire suppression missions. Additionally, the sale of
parts could help the United States maintain its existing aerial
firefighting aircraft fleet. The committee notes that Congress
originally adopted such a provision in 1996 but that the
authority expired in 2005. Congress again authorized such
authority in 2012, but that authority lapsed in 2017.
The committee notes that in 2025, the President signed a
bill, the Aerial Firefighting Enhancement Act of 2025 (Public
Law 119-8), that authorized a new 10-year period for the
Secretary of Defense to sell excess Department of Defense
aircraft and aircraft parts to persons or entities that
contract with the Government for the delivery of fire retardant
or water by air to suppress wildfires. This law requires that
such aircraft or spare parts be used only for wildfire
suppression.
The committee recognizes the importance of this new
authority and encourages the Department to use this law to
actively respond to the growing wildfire crisis. The committee
believes this law will strengthen national readiness for
wildfire response and suppression during the year-round fire
season. The committee will continue to monitor the
implementation of this legislation and work with the Department
to determine if additional legislation is needed.
Army field-level maintenance in a contested environment
The committee notes that the Army is moving toward a
division-based force to better position ground forces for
large-scale combat operations. Theater armies, corps, and
divisions need to take the lead in coordinating large-scale
campaigns against well-armed nation-states, with brigade-level
forces fully focused on winning the direct force-on-force
engagements. The committee believes that the Army's ability to
sustain operations while under fire means that forces at all
levels will need to be able to repair battle-damaged tanks,
personnel carriers, trucks, and other ground vehicles--
especially when the ability to reach back to the United States
for depot maintenance, personnel support, and supplies is
contested.
At the same time, the committee understands that the
Government Accountability Office's preliminary work on an
ongoing report has shown that field-level maintenance is
growing more complex and challenging because the Army is
fielding multiple ground vehicle variants. Given these and
other challenges, the committee is interested in further
examining the Army's plans for ensuring its combat units are
effectively organized, trained, and equipped to perform field-
level maintenance when operating in a contested environment.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to assess the following: (1) How the Army
is adjusting its field maintenance forces to sustain large-
scale combat operations in a contested environment; (2) The
extent to which the Army has identified and addressed field-
level maintenance challenges at the brigade, division, corps,
and theater levels through combat training center rotations and
warfighter exercises for fighting in a contested environment;
(3) The extent to which the Army has provided its field
maintenance forces with the tools, technology, training, and
equipment they need to perform field maintenance when operating
in a contested environment; and (4) Any other related matters
the Comptroller General considers appropriate.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not
later than April 1, 2026, on the Comptroller General's
preliminary findings and to present final results in a format
and timeframe agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Army strategy and requirements for wildfire suppression mission
The committee notes that over the last 10 years, wildfires
in the United States have grown in frequency, size, destructive
capacity, and cost. Given the threat of more frequent and
larger wildfires, communities increasingly rely on U.S. Army
personnel in significant numbers to augment dwindling U.S.
Forest Service firefighting capabilities. In 2024 alone, more
than 2,000 Army Active, Guard, and Reserve personnel were
deployed to carry out wildfire suppression duties, including
direct firefighting and suppression, air and ground logistics
support, and evacuations and security. In January 2025, 1,200
personnel from the Washington Army National Guard were
activated to address the wildfires that destroyed more than
18,000 homes and other structures in southern California.
Unfortunately, this mission emerged so quickly that the U.S.
Army did not have time to develop requirements for wildfire
response. Consequently, U.S. Army units received inconsistent
training and dangerously outdated equipment to meet the
firefighting mission.
As the frequency, scope, and destructive power of wildfires
continues to grow, U.S. Army personnel continue to be called
upon to protect American communities. The committee understands
that deploying home-stationed U.S. Army units for this mission
is increasingly essential for successful wildfire suppression
missions in support of communities around the country facing
wildfire threats.
However, the committee is concerned that the Department of
Defense has not methodically assessed this emergent mission and
lacks a strategy and requirements for meeting it. In
particular, the committee is concerned that, absent a formal
wildfire firefighting requirement, the U.S. Army will continue
to rely on equipment, provided by other agencies, that does not
meet U.S. Army standards designed to protect readiness and
ensure effective operations of units deployed to meet this
mission.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on the U.S.
Army's strategy and requirements for meeting the emergent
wildfire suppression mission. The briefing should include: (1)
The current process for procuring mission-specific equipment,
such as load carriage, for Active, Guard, and Reserve units;
(2) A strategy and timeline for assessing the quality and
suitability of equipment currently issued to ensure mission
readiness and mitigate fatigue and injury; and (3) An
assessment of the needs and benefits of establishing a formal
U.S. Army requirement for wildfire response, including the
opportunity to procure appropriate equipment.
Blast exposure and weapons sensors for Special Operations Forces
The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) is working to identify blast overpressure exposure
resulting from heavy weapons systems use, breaching, and small
arms in dynamic combat and training environments. However, the
committee understands SOCOM's knowledge of the effect of blast
exposure may be limited by lack of objective blast exposure
monitoring data. The committee also notes that the cumulative
effects of small arms and crew-served weapons use may
contribute to brain injuries.
The committee believes the development of new sensors,
including sensors enabled by artificial intelligence, may
enable greater understanding of blast overpressure events and
the cumulative effect of other weapons on the long-term health
of special operations forces.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Commander, SOCOM,
to continue testing and fielding, as appropriate, blast
exposure and other weapons sensors to support the safety and
welfare of special operations forces.
Additionally, the committee directs the Commander, SOCOM,
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 31, 2025, regarding blast exposure and weapons sensor
development efforts, including testing and potential plans for
fielding of such sensors.
Briefing on activation of power projection wings by U.S. Air Force
Special Operations Command
The committee notes that the U.S. Air Force Special
Operations Command is in the process of establishing power
projection wings with the objective of more effectively
supporting the requirements of the geographic combatant
commanders.
Accordingly, not later than March 1, 2026, the committee
directs the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, and the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict, to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the status of the activation of power projection wings. At a
minimum, the briefing should identify: (1) Roles,
responsibilities, and anticipated missions of the power
projection wings; (2) The personnel, aircraft, and equipment
that will be transferred from other installations to support
the activation of power projection wings; (3) Any additional
resourcing or authorities that may be needed to complete the
activation of power projection wings; and (4) Any other matters
deemed relevant by the Commander and Assistant Secretary.
Briefing on advanced manufacturing
The committee notes that innovations in advanced
manufacturing have the potential to make producing parts for
weapons and weapons systems faster, cheaper, more customizable,
and more mobile than existing, traditional manufacturing
techniques. The committee understands that metal and polymer-
based advanced manufacturing processes have the potential to
change the way the Joint Force plans combat and sustainment
operations. Integrating advanced manufacturing capabilities as
an inherent foundational sustainment capability and
proliferating access to advanced manufactured products to every
operational unit will shorten logistics tails and timelines,
decrease maintenance costs and delays, and empower each
warfighter with the tools and equipment they need to execute
their missions more efficiently and effectively.
The committee believes that the establishment of the Joint
Additive Manufacturing Working Group in 2017 and the release of
the first Department of Defense (DOD) Additive Manufacturing
Strategy in 2021 were important steps toward capitalizing on
innovations in advanced manufacturing. Since the release of the
strategy, however, the DOD has made modest investments in
advanced manufacturing technologies and methods relative to the
potential outsized impacts that advanced manufacturing can have
on military operations, maintenance, sustainment, and
logistics, should the capability be proliferated widely. The
committee believes the Department should accelerate efforts to
develop common technology, standards, and processes for
advanced manufacturing that will enable the military services
to share data and increase readiness with the goal of
proliferating advanced manufacturing capabilities across units
at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Secretaries of the military departments and the Director of
the Defense Logistics Agency, to provide a briefing, not later
than February 1, 2026, on: (1) How the military services
currently determine how advanced manufacturing capabilities are
deployed; and (2) Challenges to equipping operational units
with advanced manufacturing capabilities for maintenance and
repair in the field.
Briefing on Defense Language and National Security Education Office and
future planning for foreign language programs
The committee recognizes that, in partnership with
universities and senior military colleges across the country,
the Defense Language and National Security Education Office
provides important training for servicemembers for the purposes
of accelerating the development of foundational expertise in
critical and strategic languages and regional area studies. The
committee notes that these programs support critical language
acquisition and training for the U.S. active duty military,
National Guard and Reservists, other Department of Defense
personnel, Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) cadets and
midshipmen, and U.S. graduate and undergraduate students who
are committed to federal service.
The committee notes with concern that, due to budget
constraints, fewer programs were funded in fiscal year 2024. In
the case of Language Training Centers, no programs are expected
to be funded in fiscal year 2025, reducing capacity at higher
education partners and significantly limiting access to
critical and strategic languages including Chinese, Russian,
Arabic, and Korean. Further, the committee believes these
constraints present challenges for retention and recruitment of
existing program infrastructure capabilities and qualified
academic instructors with the language fluency and expertise in
the areas of the world critical to current and long-term U.S.
national security interests. The committee believes the inroads
made by higher education partners such as the University of
Mississippi, the University of Rhode Island, the University of
Arizona, and James Madison University, as well as many others,
are crucial to sustaining and growing these vital programs, but
adequate resources are required. The committee is concerned
that despite section 575 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) amending the
statute authorizing the Language Training Center to require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out the program, the Department
failed to budget any funding in fiscal year 2025, effectively
halting the program.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the congressional defense committees, not later than
January 1, 2026, on maintaining critical and strategic language
proficiency for servicemembers and ROTC students. This briefing
shall include: (1) Optimal requirements for training in
languages and cultures critical to national security, to
include the necessary funding levels to meet and sustain such
requirements; (2) An evaluation of the Department's readiness
posture as it relates to language capabilities; (3) The
capacity to increase strategic languages in response to
emerging language requirements; and (4) The Department's
funding plan across the future years defense program for the
Language Flagship Program, Project Global Officer, Language
Training Centers, and Boren Awards.
Further, the committee encourages the Department to
continue placing a high priority on the Language Flagship
Program, Project Global Officer, Language Training Centers, and
Boren Awards, with an emphasis on quality of instruction and a
preference for programs that provide college credit and have
strategic value to U.S. national security interests.
Briefing on software development and acquisition capabilities for U.S.
Special Operations Command
The committee notes the critical role that software plays
in enabling military capabilities, including those of U.S.
Special Operations Forces. However, the committee is concerned
that U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) may require more
robust software development and acquisition capabilities to
fulfill special operations-peculiar requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Commander, SOCOM, in
coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, to provide a briefing, not later
than December 31, 2025, to the Senate Armed Services Committee
regarding the feasibility and advisability of establishing more
robust software development and acquisition capabilities,
sometimes referred to as a software factory, to enable the
fielding of special operations-peculiar software solutions,
enhance cyber security, and support the classified defense
technology projects of SOCOM. At a minimum, the briefing should
address: (1) The extent to which the establishment of such
software development and acquisition capabilities would improve
the development and acquisition of software to fulfill special
operations-peculiar requirements; (2) The resources,
facilities, personnel, and authorities that would be required
to establish such software development and acquisition
capabilities; (3) How SOCOM software development and
acquisition capabilities would augment, coordinate with, and
add value to existing Department of Defense software
development activities; (4) Whether the establishment of such
SOCOM software development and acquisition capabilities would
facilitate the recruitment and transition of qualified
personnel into full-time employment with SOCOM and other
elements of the Department of Defense, including through
internship opportunities; and (5) Any other matters deemed
relevant by the Commander, SOCOM.
Comptroller General review of capabilities and planning for sensitive
crisis response operations
The committee notes that the joint posture statement for
2025 provided to the committee by the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and
the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) states,
``In the past three years, the requirements for SOCOM to
fulfill its crisis response remit increased more than 170% over
the previous decade's annual average . . . Presidentially
directed crisis response operations are inherently
unpredictable and vary year-to-year in timing, duration, and
total cost. Operational and logistics costs for crisis response
increased more than 250% from FY20 to FY23. With increases in
the frequency of crises and compounded costs, SOCOM has paid
for previous crises response deployments, drawing away from
SOCOM's total modernization efforts that aim to meet future
challenges.''
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has not planned or budgeted for the increased use of and
reliance on crisis response forces, including responding forces
and critical enabling support. Specifically, it is unclear if
the DOD has budgeted appropriately and sustainably for these
operations or if it has taken needed steps to ensure crisis
response forces maintain appropriate levels of readiness and
availability. Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to review the DOD's planning and
budgeting for sensitive crisis response operations by
assessing: (1) Effects of changes in the strategic environment
on guidance, preparation, and planning for sensitive crisis
response operations; (2) Trends in the number and nature of
sensitive crisis response operations and corresponding
readiness impacts to responding units and enabling support; (3)
Assumptions the DOD and other agencies make for enabling
support for sensitive crisis response operations; (4) Processes
and procedures that the DOD and other federal agencies follow
when planning and budgeting for sensitive crisis response
operations to ensure resources, personnel, and exquisite
capabilities are available; (5) Plans that the DOD may have for
responding to multiple simultaneous crises that require
intelligence and sensitive activity capabilities and the extent
to which the DOD has coordinated these plans with other
relevant agencies; and (6) Other matters that the Comptroller
General deems to be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than April 1,
2026. A determination of a final product will be made at the
time of those briefings.
Expanding Arctic training
The committee notes that much of the Department of
Defense's (DOD) Arctic expertise resides in the reserve
components, including the National Guard. The committee further
notes, however, that the DOD will need to rely on the
capabilities and expertise provided by the total force to
achieve success in the Arctic. To operate in the changing
Arctic environment, the committee believes that the Joint Force
must have the requisite skills, training, and experience.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to submit a report to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than January 15, 2026, on locations in which the Army
could establish or expand Arctic training and exercises in
order to test soldiers and equipment to meet requirements for
operating in Arctic and cold weather conditions. The report
should include additional sites to conduct the Army's Cold
Weather Orientation Course, Cold Weather Leader Course, and
Isolation Survival in Cold Regions Course. Additionally, the
report should examine tactical, technical, and logistical
challenges unique to operating in extreme cold weather
conditions and how additional cold weather training locations
would impact readiness.
Feasibility of floating drydock
The committee recognizes the critical strategic and
logistical role public shipyards play in the security of the
Nation. The committee strongly supports efforts to modernize
and improve facilities at the Navy's four public shipyards,
including the multi-mission dry dock, and to address the
complex maintenance needs of the Navy's current and future
active fleet. The current modernization plans for Navy
shipyards include converting dry docks to focus on depot-level
maintenance for nuclear submarines.
To better understand the Navy's options for a floating dry
dock to address any infrastructure shortfalls, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 1, 2026,
detailing:
(1) Potential locations for mooring a floating dry
dock;
(2) A list of the individual major military
construction projects needed to support a floating dry
dock;
(3) The earliest a floating dry dock could be brought
into service and a description of constraints; and
(4) How a floating dry dock would be used to ensure
extra capacity for potential crisis in the event of a
military conflict.
FireGuard
The committee continues to support the FireGuard program as
an essential tool for federal, state, and local firefighters to
aggregate, analyze, and assess multi-source remote sensing
information for interagency partnerships in the detection and
monitoring of wildfires, given their increasing frequency and
scope of damage across the United States.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than March 1, 2026, identifying where in the
Department of Defense FireGuard should reside as a program of
record. The briefing should also include: (1) A plan for
funding and manning to the levels required; (2) The number and
names of states, territories, counties, municipalities, and
tribal governments to whom FireGuard has provided fire
intelligence services; (3) A comparative analysis of polygons
provided by FireGuard for wildfires and end-state perimeters of
the same wildfires; (4) An analysis of the time between
detection via raw satellite data and the alerts being sent to
local responders; and (5) A review of efforts undertaken to
integrate emerging satellite and aerial surveillance
technologies from qualified private, nonprofit, and public
sector sources.
Guam invasive species mitigation
The committee notes the importance of Guam in supporting
the forward presence of U.S. forces. The committee further
notes that the Department of Defense relies on equipment and
infrastructure that is currently deployed to Guam and that the
tyranny of distance can lead to long lead times for replacement
parts.
The committee understands that Guam is currently combatting
the Vespa Tropica, or the greater banded hornet, which is an
invasive species that was first discovered on the island in
2016. The committee further understands that this species is
extremely aggressive and can wreak havoc on mission critical
systems, such as aircraft engines and generators, which would
lead to degraded readiness for potentially long periods of
time. As a major inter- and intra-theater logistical point for
the Indo-Pacific region, Guam also has the potential to serve
as a source of spread for such invasive species to other areas,
if mitigation or eradication measures are not taken seriously.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with relevant local authorities, to
provide a one-time briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than November 3, 2025, on an action plan
to combat the greater banded hornet, and any other similar
invasive species, to help mitigate potential readiness
concerns. Such a briefing should include the following: (1) A
plan for a baseline survey for mapping nest occurrences to
identify infestation areas, as well as the parties with
responsibility over those areas; (2) A plan for conducting a
baseline scientific survey on greater banded hornet territory
area to determine colony size, life cycle, and seasonality in
order to estimate the eradication planning needs for required
personnel, technology, eradication strategy, and other safety
concerns; (3) An estimate of personnel hours, technology, and
resources needed for each phase, including for post-eradication
verification and potential long-term management issues; and (4)
A plan for consultation with local authorities from other areas
facing similar infestations to apply lessons learned and
propose efficiencies leveraging prior and current efforts,
including with outside groups that specialize in etymological
infestations.
Head and hearing protection for aircraft maintenance personnel
The committee understands that head and hearing protection
systems are widespread across the Department of Defense.
However, occupational safety extends beyond traditional combat
arms roles and should also include protective measures for
personnel in career fields such as aircraft maintenance. The
committee recognizes that the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps
require head impact and hearing protection for maintenance
personnel working on or near military aircraft. This
requirement has proven to be an effective tool in mitigating
the risk of injuries in dynamic and hazardous work
environments. However, the committee understands that U.S. Army
and U.S. Air Force maintenance personnel are not currently
required to wear similar protective gear while working on
military aircraft. While fall-prevention systems are often in
use, they do not fully address the risk of impact injuries to
the head and neck, prevent long-term hearing loss, or provide
necessary eye protection. With widely available solutions
already in existence, such as those already fielded by the U.S.
Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, the committee believes that U.S.
Army and U.S. Air Force maintainers should be provided with
similar protective capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
Army and Air Force to coordinate a joint brief to the Senate
Armed Services Committee, not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1)
Each service's current policies on head and hearing protection
for maintenance personnel working on or near military aircraft;
(2) An assessment of injury rates and risk factors related to
head trauma and hearing loss in aviation maintenance career
fields; and (3) A plan for evaluating and potentially fielding
commercial head protection solutions to address these risks.
Inclusion of personal protective equipment and organizational clothing
and individual equipment items in Army Transformation in
Contact
The committee supports U.S. Army efforts to accelerate
operational testing and integration of emerging, commercially
available capabilities into its Transformation in Contact (TIC)
initiative and to identify opportunities to provide funding
more efficiently across capability sets. The committee also
applauds the U.S. Army's efforts to incorporate a range of
environments and climate conditions in its experimentation.
The committee notes its longstanding support of the Soldier
Enhancement Program (SEP) as a rapid innovation pipeline for
soldier gear and equipment. As designed, the SEP has served as
an effective process designed to help the U.S. Army move at
``the speed of industry'' by evaluating existing prototypes or
commercially available items that could enhance soldiers'
ability to execute their combat mission. The SEP continues to
serve a unique and critical function in enabling the
accelerated evaluation and procurement of off-the-shelf items
that have the potential to substantially improve weapons and
support equipment that are focused on critical war-fighting
functional areas of fires, mission command, movement and
maneuver, sustainability, and protection. In particular, the
committee believes that personal protective equipment (PPE) and
organizational clothing and individual equipment (OCIE) should
be included in U.S. Army TIC efforts given the robust
availability of commercial, off-the-shelf PPE and OCIE
alternatives.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing, not later than March 31, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, on how the U.S. Army is including PPE and OCIE
into its TIC efforts and how the U.S. Army is leveraging
existing programs such as the SEP to facilitate and expand
rapid operational testing of those items.
Interagency integration on Arctic planning, testing, and operations
The committee recognizes that the Arctic region presents
geopolitical challenges and opportunities affecting national
security interests and is supportive of efforts to better
understand the emerging needs for enhanced operations in the
Arctic region. The committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to seek opportunities to partner with interagency
organizations, the Center for Arctic Security and Resiliency,
and the Joint All Domain Weather Operations Center, to
coordinate Federal agency planning for Arctic operations as
well as testing of systems to support Arctic operations.
Intermittent fault detection and isolation technology
One of the major cost drivers for the Department of Defense
(DOD) is the maintenance of electronics and electrical systems
that control and operate a wide range inventory of weapons and
weapon systems. The Department spends billions per year
maintaining electronics and electronic systems. One of the
highest contributing causes for these costs is operationally
induced intermittent electronic faults that result in no fault
found, cannot duplicate, or no trouble found test results--
essentially false readings to the effect that there is no
problem. Per a Department report to Congress dated October 5,
2021, ``Assessment of Electronics Maintenance as a Leading
Driver of Weapon Systems Non-Availability'', there is an
available test technology that could detect and reverse the
intermittent fault problem across the spectrum of DOD weapon
systems with the initial targets being various aircraft,
including the F-35, F-16, and F/A-18. Additionally, a January
14, 2020, Government Accountability Office report titled
``Senior Leaders Should Emphasize Key Practices to Improve
Weapon System Reliability'' (GAO-20-151) highlighted the major
improvements in flight hours, repair times, and cost savings
that resulted from the use of the technology.
Accordingly, the committee recommends that the Department
sustain funding for this critical intermittent fault detection
and isolation technology.
Military working equid report
The committee understands that the U.S. Army intends to
eliminate all military working equid detachments other than the
Caisson units at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Joint Base San
Antonio, and the mules at the United States Military Academy.
These detachments did not fall under formal authorization
documents and were, therefore, perpetually under-resourced and
lacked sufficient oversight. While, in response to committee
urging, the U.S. Army initiated more rigorous, centralized
oversight by U.S. Army veterinarians, the U.S. Army has
continued to manage and resource these detachments in an ad hoc
manner. As a result, there remains high risk to the safety and
welfare of the equids and insufficient resources. The committee
is concerned that the U.S. Army did not conduct rigorous
analysis or consider the historic significance of these
detachments in its decision to disestablish. Additionally,
previous U.S. Army efforts to retire military working equids
have been marred by mismanagement and lack of concern for equid
welfare after the end of their service to the U.S. Army.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report, not later than January 15, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives that includes the following:
(1) A description, to include home station, of all
military working equid (MWE) detachments eliminated;
(2) The detailed analysis that led to the U.S. Army's
decision to disestablish MWE detachments, including:
(a) A detailed review of the health of the
herd in each location, to include information
on the health of each horse, nutrition and
fitness, as well as an assessment of turnout
and space requirements and whether host
installation possessed necessary space;
(b) A detailed assessment of borrowed
military manpower and necessary manpower
required at each detachment, to include cost
and how manpower needs were determined;
(c) A detailed cost assessment for the
facility and operational requirements for each
program, broken out by investments made in
prior years, estimates for necessary future
improvements to facilities, and standard
operating costs required to maintain each
detachment as appropriate to their mission;
(d) A description of consultations between
U.S. Army leadership and host unit,
installation, community, and associated
historic military unit association conducted as
part of the U.S. Army's decision; and
(e) Any other matters the Secretary
determines relevant; and
(3) A description of the U.S. Army plan, to include
timelines, processes for assessing suitability, and
conditions to be met before a determination is made, to
transition a MWE associated with disestablished
detachments out of care by the U.S. Army.
Northern Strike Exercises
The committee notes that the annual Northern Strike
Exercise is a large, all-domain reserve forces exercise. The
committee believes it provides a realistic, decisive action
training environment as well as robust training experiences for
units and leaders to strengthen joint all-domain warfighting
capabilities. Further, it fills a critical gap in resourced
readiness building multi-domain exercises for National Guard
combat formations. Resident within the State of Michigan,
Northern Strike is conducted twice a year (winter and summer)
within the four-season National All-Domain Warfighting Center's
contested multi-domain operating environment. Using a
combination of integrated live, virtual, and constructive
models and simulations, participants increase Mission Essential
Task proficiencies and build readiness through repetitive task
iterations at echelon by training for combat operations as part
of the joint team. The committee believes that Northern Strike
is at the forefront of unmanned aerial systems and counter
unmanned aerial systems training that provide individual
servicemembers critical exposure to current, real-world
threats.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department of
Defense to establish recurring funding for this critical
exercise series.
Operational energy
The committee notes that longer operating distances, remote
and austere geography, and anti-access/area denial threats have
challenged the Department of Defense's (DOD) ability to deliver
fuel. Without fuel, the DOD cannot deploy and sustain forces
around the globe. Reducing these burdens, even if just in the
margins, enables warfighters to be more lethal. As such, the
committee supports reducing the footprint of the Joint Force in
expeditionary operations, which increases the survivability of
warfighters while reducing strain on sustainment requirements.
For example, the Air Force saved at least $124.0 million in
fiscal year 2023 compared to fiscal year 2019 using operational
energy advances. Microvanes on C-17 aircraft reduce drag by
about 1 percent, pay for themselves in just 7 months, and save
at least $12.7 million each year in fuel costs. Unfortunately,
the committee understands that microvanes are currently on only
10 C-17 aircraft. Aft body drag reduction devices on C-130
aircraft yield about $18.0 million in fuel savings each year.
KC-135 finlets reduce drag by about 2 percent yet save $13.2
million each year. Mission planning software programs like
Jigsaw and Pythagoras lead to about 10 percent improvements in
flight efficiency across the fleet.
The committee notes that the blended wing body (BWB)
aircraft is a promising design that can operate more
efficiently in contested environments by offering at least 30
percent more aerodynamic efficiency versus a 767. The committee
understands that the BWB offers 90 percent more range, a 94
percent increase in fuel offload capability at a 2,500 nautical
mile radius resulting in increased fighter sortie generation,
upwards of 50 percent more fuel efficiency, takes up 40 percent
less space on airfields, flies 2,000 feet higher, and requires
less landing and takeoff distance. Beyond these tactical
benefits, the BWB design would save the Air Force at least
$900.0 million per year on fuel.
The committee notes that on the ground, hybrid vehicle
capabilities offer longer operational duration and lower fuel
consumption. For example, the Army successfully demonstrated a
hybrid tactical vehicle in Europe last winter that operated a
brigade command post for 10 days on just 10 gallons of fuel.
Accordingly, the committee continues to support energy
demand reduction efforts and programs that extend the
operational reach for warfighters and enable our military's
lethality and readiness.
Organic industrial base expansion
The committee remains convinced of the imperative to
accelerate the modernization and expansion of the Army's
organic industrial base. To ensure that the Army is moving
forward with this effort, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Army to provide a report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than March 1, 2026, on the Army's plans and way forward
on establishing production lines for: (1) A secondary domestic
source of military-grade nitrocellulose; or (2) Any of 13
precursor chemicals used widely across the Joint Program
Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition portfolio that are
currently sourced solely from China; or (3) Producing any of
the 300 chemicals identified as single point failures by the
Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition; or (4) A
load and pack facility capable of servicing multiple calibers
of ammunition; or (5) A combination of the above options.
This report should include the Army's plans to either
modernize, expand, or use military construction funds to build
new facilities.
Quantum sensing technologies for addressing perfluoroalkyl and
polyfluoroalkyl contamination
Over 700 U.S. military sites are known to have, or known to
have likely, discharged per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS)
chemicals. The committee notes that current available methods
to detect PFAS include gas or liquid chromatography, which is
expensive, time consuming, and unsuitable for on-site testing
or identification. In November 2024, the Strategic
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) released
a Statement of Need to develop a real-time sensor for detecting
and quantifying PFAS chemicals, which would allow for more
time- and cost-efficient site investigations and remediation.
To date, no field-based rapid screening technologies are
commercially available for PFAS detection. While the Department
of Defense (DOD) has significantly invested in PFAS
remediation, current detection methods are limited by cost,
speed, and sensitivity.
The committee is encouraged by the potential promise of
quantum technology to fill this gap. Quantum sensors can
leverage the principles of quantum mechanics to achieve levels
of extreme precision that were previously considered
unattainable. In this context, quantum science could be used to
help detection platforms achieve unprecedented sensitivity and
allow for ultra-sensitive, real-time detection and mapping of
PFAS in soil and groundwater.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment, in
coordination with the SERDP and the Environmental Security
Technology Certification Program, to brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 15, 2026, on:
(1) The technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness,
and performance potential of quantum sensing
technologies for the detection and monitoring of PFAS
at DOD sites;
(2) A comparison of quantum sensing capabilities with
existing and emerging technologies for the detection of
PFAS;
(3) A framework for integrating quantum sensing with
strategies for remediating PFAS, including sensor-
informed degradation approaches; and
(4) Recommendations, as appropriate, for next steps
to accelerate the development, deployment, and
transition of quantum sensing tools for environmental
monitoring and cleanup of PFAS.
Report on hexavalent chromium
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to provide a comprehensive report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than March 1, 2026, that addresses: (1) A status review
of every installation where sanding, blasting, or stripping
operations involving hexavalent chromium occur, with specific
attention to the adequacy of the infrastructure, including
ventilation systems and clean rooms, to meet current safety
codes and regulations; (2) An assessment of the Department of
Defense's interim control measures in place at installations
where the infrastructure is not up to code, including any
additional safeguards to protect servicemembers and civilian
personnel; and (3) Recommendations for improving existing
infrastructure, practices, and policies to ensure a safer
working environment, ultimately protecting the health and well-
being of military personnel and civilian employees exposed to
hazardous materials during these operations.
Special Operations Digital Force Protection
The committee notes that adversaries increasingly exploit
the commercial digital surveillance economy as a low-cost, low-
risk method of targeting U.S. forces. By reducing U.S. forces'
digital signature exposure and adversary tracking, digital
force protection strengthens overall force protection,
operational security, and strategic deception efforts across
all domains of warfare. The committee believes digital force
protection is a critical enabler of multi-domain operations,
ensuring that U.S. forces can operate seamlessly across land,
air, sea, space, and cyberspace without adversarial digital
exploitation undermining mission success. Effective digital
force protection also imposes costs on adversaries by
complicating their ability to detect, track, or exploit U.S.
personnel and assets through commercial data aggregation, as
well as related open-source intelligence, signals intelligence,
and adversarial artificial intelligence-powered analytics.
The committee believes that U.S. Special Operations Forces
(SOF) are especially vulnerable to adversarial exploitation of
the commercial digital surveillance economy and ubiquitous
technical surveillance (UTS) capabilities given the sensitive,
multi-domain operations they carry out globally.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
and the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to
provide the congressional defense committees a briefing, not
later than October 1, 2025, which includes: (1) An assessment
of the threat posed by UTS to the force protection and mission
effectiveness of SOF; (2) A description of ongoing or planned
efforts by SOCOM to address the threat posed by UTS; (3) An
assessment of available technical solutions to address the
threat posed by UTS, including government-owned and
commercially available technologies; (4) A description of any
challenges to address the threat posed by UTS, including
Department of Defense policies, authorities, and resourcing;
and (5) Any other matters deemed relevant by the Assistant
Secretary and the Commander.
Survival, evasion, resistance, and escape complex
The committee notes the importance of Survival, Evasion,
Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training for U.S. Army aviators
during the course of their training at Fort Novosel. The
committee is concerned that continued delays in completing this
essential training facility could adversely impact the
readiness of deployed U.S. Army aviators.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on the
progress and timeline for completion of the SERE training
facility at Fort Rucker.
United States-made Army training aircraft
The committee understands that the Army is considering
transitioning the Initial Entry Rotary Wing (IERW) pilot
training to a contractor owned and operated training model, as
part of its Flight School Next initiative. The committee is
aware that such a change may result in the use of a new primary
training helicopter. The committee appreciates the use of
domestically manufactured helicopters in IERW pilot training
and, therefore, urges the Army to ensure that any new contract
for IERW pilot training is performed on a domestically produced
helicopter.
Wing additive manufacturing
The committee notes that wing-level additive manufacturing
(AM) capability provides a significant increase in mission
readiness and meets the demands of aircraft maintainers with
cost and time savings compared to legacy repair methods and
supply system alternatives. The committee believes that
expanding this organic capability is necessary for our Nation's
premier conventional and nuclear long-range strike force to
maintain peak mission readiness and to support strategic
deterrence.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the U.S. Air Force to
establish AM facilities at additional installations to better
support conventional and nuclear long-range strike platforms
and mission support systems. The committee believes this will
improve aircraft readiness and decrease reliance on lagging
supply chains, better enabling aircraft maintainers to conduct
timely and precision repairs.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
Sec. 401--End strengths for active forces
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Active-Duty end strengths for fiscal year 2026, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Change from
FY 2025 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2026 FY 2025
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army.......................................... 442,300 454,000 454,000 0 11,700
Navy.......................................... 332,300 344,600 344,600 0 12,300
Marine Corps.................................. 172,300 172,300 172,300 0 0
Air Force..................................... 320,000 321,500 321,500 0 1,500
Space Force................................... 9,800 10,400 10,400 0 600
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 1,276,700 1,302,800 1,302,800 0 26,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
Sec. 411--End strengths for selected reserve
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
end strengths for Selected Reserve personnel for fiscal year
2026, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Change from
FY 2025 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2026 FY 2025
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 325,000 328,000 328,000 0 3,000
Army Reserve.................................. 175,800 172,000 172,000 0 -3,800
Navy Reserve.................................. 57,700 57,500 57,500 0 -200
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 32,500 33,600 33,600 0 1,100
Air National Guard............................ 108,300 106,300 106,300 0 -2,000
Air Force Reserve............................. 67,000 67,500 67,500 0 500
Coast Guard Reserve........................... 7,000 ......... 7,000 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 773,300 764,900 771,900 0 -1,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 412--End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the
Reserves
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2026, as shown
below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Change from
FY 2025 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2026 FY 2025
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 30,845 ......... 30,845 ......... 0
Army Reserve.................................. 16,511 ......... 16,511 ......... 0
Navy Reserve.................................. 10,132 ......... 10,132 ......... 0
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 2,400 ......... 2,400 ......... 0
Air National Guard............................ 25,982 ......... 25,982 ......... 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 6,311 ......... 6,311 ......... 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 92,181 ......... 92,181 ......... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 413--End strengths for military technicians (dual status)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military technician (dual status) end strengths for fiscal year
2026, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Change from
FY 2025 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2026 FY 2025
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 22,294 ......... 22,294 ......... 0
Army Reserve.................................. 6,492 ......... 6,492 ......... 0
Air National Guard............................ 10,744 ......... 10,744 ......... 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 6,697 ......... 6,697 ......... 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 46,227 ......... 46,227 ......... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provision would also establish limits on the number of
temporary technicians authorized to be employed within the end
strengths set forth by this section to not more than 25 percent
of the total authorized strength for each component.
The provision would also prohibit the coercion of a
military technician (dual status) by a State into accepting an
offer of realignment or conversion to any other military
status, including as a member of the Active, Guard, and Reserve
program of a reserve component. The provision would further
specify that if a technician declines to participate in such a
realignment or conversion, no further action may be taken
against the individual or the individual's position.
Sec. 414--Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
end strengths for reserve personnel on Active Duty for
operational support for fiscal year 2026, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Change from
FY 2025 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2026 FY 2025
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 17,000 ......... 17,000 ......... 0
Army Reserve.................................. 13,000 ......... 13,000 ......... 0
Navy Reserve.................................. 6,200 ......... 6,200 ......... 0
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 3,000 ......... 3,000 ......... 0
Air National Guard............................ 16,000 ......... 16,000 ......... 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 14,000 ......... 14,000 ......... 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 69,200 ......... 69,200 ......... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 421--Military personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for military personnel activities at the levels
identified in section 4401 of division D of this Act.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
Sec. 501--Statutory adjustment to reflect transfer of certain general
officer billets from the Air Force to the Space Force
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 526(a) of title 10, United States Code, to increase the
authorized maximum number of Space Force brigadier generals by
three and reduce the authorized maximum number of Air Force
brigadier generals by three, in response to the transfer of
responsibilities from the Air Force to the Space Force.
Sec. 502--Notice of removal of Judge Advocates General
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 7037, 8088, and 9037 of title 10, United States Code,
to require the Secretary of Defense to submit a minimum of 5
days notice to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives that a Judge Advocate General
is being removed and a statement of the reason for the removal.
Sec. 503--Qualifications for judge advocates
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 806 of title 10, United States Code (Article 6 of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice), to require judge advocates
to be admitted to the practice of law before the highest court
of a State, Territory, Commonwealth, or the District of
Columbia and to maintain an active license to practice before
such court, subject to the jurisdiction's disciplinary
requirements and in compliance with such other requirements as
the cognizant authority has set to remain eligible to practice
law. The provision would also authorize the Judge Advocates
General of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard, as well
as the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine
Corps, to suspend the authority of judge advocates in their
respective services to perform legal duties if such officers
become noncompliant with such requirements. The provision would
also prohibit any judge advocate or legal officer who is
suspended or disbarred from the practice of law within a
jurisdiction from performing legal duties.
The committee notes the importance of judge advocates
maintaining baseline qualifications and competence in order to
execute their duties as legal professionals.
Sec. 504--Modification of waiver authority related to joint qualified
officer requirement prior to promotion to general or flag grade
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 619a(b)(3) of title 10, United States Code, to remove
the explicit authority of the Secretary of Defense to waive the
requirement that an officer be joint qualified prior to
promotion to general or flag officer for officers in medical-
related specialties. The committee notes that the Secretary
will continue to have authority to waive this requirement for
the good of the service.
Sec. 505--Notification of removal of officers from selection board
reports and promotion lists
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 618, 629, and 14111 of title 10, United States Code,
to require notification to the Congress when officers are
removed from selection board reports and lists for reasons
other than misconduct.
Sec. 506--Space Force general officer management
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 525 and 526 of title 10, United States Code, to
address the composition of the Space Force without component as
authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31).
Specifically, this provision would amend section 525 of
title 10, United States Code, to clarify that distribution
limits apply only to Space Force general officers serving on
sustained duty orders and to authorize up to two general
officers to serve for more than 1 year but not more than 3
years in non-sustained duty roles without counting against
statutory limits.
Additionally, this provision would amend section 526 of
title 10, United States Code, to allow the Secretary of the Air
Force to authorize up to two general officers in active status
to serve for a period between 180 and 365 days in non-sustained
duty roles and to account for transitional periods for officers
departing sustained duty assignments so they are not counted
against statutory limits.
Finally, this provision would add a new section 20110 to
title 10, United States Code, to authorize up to five Space
Force general officers to serve in an active status but not on
sustained duty.
Sec. 507--Temporary increase in fiscal year percentage limitation for
reduction or waiver of service-in-grade requirement for general
and flag officers to be retired in pay grades O-7 and O-8
The committee recommends a provision that would temporarily
increase authorizations for general and flag officer time-in-
grade waivers for retirement.
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management
Sec. 511--Expansion of authority to waive limitations on release of
reserves from active duty within two years of retirement
eligibility
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12686(b) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
a member of a reserve component to waive the limitation on
release from active duty within 2 years of retirement
eligibility when ordered to active duty (other than for
training) for up to 365 days, providing greater flexibility for
the services to effectively manage operational needs without
using active-duty funds for short-term requirements.
Sec. 512--Disestablishment of Navy Reserve Center system
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Navy or their designee to disestablish the
Navy Reserve Center system and return administrative readiness
functions to Navy reserve unit commanding officers or Navy
reserve community managers, as appropriate. Additionally, the
provision would direct the Secretary of the Navy or his or her
designee to reassign servicemembers assigned to the Navy
Reserve Centers to other duty assignments within the Navy or to
transfer them to the Individual Ready Reserve, as appropriate.
This provision addresses the changes in leadership roles within
the Navy reserve system and does not otherwise imply any
limitations on the use for other purposes of physical buildings
currently being used for Navy reserve centers.
The committee is concerned that the Navy Reserve Center
system duplicates workforce requirements traditionally overseen
by Navy reserve unit commanders and thereby artificially
inflates the annual Navy reserve end-strength requirement. The
committee notes that this has resulted in a confusing,
duplicative, and bifurcated chain of command that is contrary
to Navy custom and tradition and to sound organizational
management practices.
Moreover, the committee is aware of multiple instances
where Navy Reserve Centers have failed to perform basic
readiness functions for Navy reserve units, including by losing
paperwork; assigning additional administrative requirements to
personnel that are inconsistent with statute and regulation;
refusing to perform unit urinalysis; failing to respond to
emails or complete administrative processes related to
essential personnel, pay, and mobilization actions; and being
unaccountable to Navy reserve unit commanding officers who have
raised these issues with Navy Reserve Center commanding
officers.
Therefore, the committee is concerned that the Navy Reserve
Center system has resulted in inefficiency, increased costs,
and an overall decrease in mobilization readiness.
Sec. 513--National Guard personnel authorities
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary concerned to promulgate regulations to authorize an
officer or warrant officer in the National Guard who fills a
vacancy in a federally recognized unit to be transferred from
the active National Guard to the inactive National Guard. The
provision would also allow such officers to transfer from the
inactive National Guard back into a federally recognized unit
of the National Guard.
Sec. 514--National Guard personnel disaster response duty
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 3 of title 32, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to authorize Governors to direct National
Guard personnel performing Active Guard and Reserve duty to
conduct disaster response duties under certain conditions for
up to 14 days, while ensuring that such duties do not interfere
with primary responsibilities.
Subtitle C--General Service Authorities and Military Records
Sec. 521--Chief of Naval Personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 8081 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Chief of Naval Personnel to be responsible for the overall
management, oversight, and administration of Navy military and
civilian employees.
Sec. 522--Enhanced efficiency and service discretion for Disability
Evaluation System reviews
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 524 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) to authorize the
Secretaries of the military departments to require a statement
of contention as part of a servicemember's appeal of a physical
evaluation board's fitness for duty determination. The
provision would also allow the Secretaries of the military
departments to decide whether a formal appeal will be reviewed
through a records examination or an impartial appellate
hearing. Additionally, the proposal would amend section 1214 of
title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretaries of
the military departments to require a statement of contention
when a servicemember requests a full and fair hearing before
being retired or separated due to physical disability.
Sec. 523--Technical correction related to convalescent leave for
academy cadets and midshipmen
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 702 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
provision of convalescent leave to military service academy
cadets and midshipmen.
Sec. 524--Recognition of remotely piloted aircraft crew
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments, in consultation with
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to establish a status
identifier or equivalent recognition to denote the combat
participation of remotely piloted aircraft crew members who
conduct operations in direct support of combat missions.
Subtitle D--Military Justice and Other Legal Matters
Sec. 531--Notification of military sex offenders at military
installations
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish and implement a policy to
ensure that military-connected registered sex offenders are
identified to the military community where they work or live,
including through the use of agreements with State and local
authorities. The policy would be required not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The provision would also require the Secretary to assess
the feasibility and desirability of legislation designating the
Department of Defense as a jurisdiction under the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act (title 1 of Public Law 109-
248).
Sec. 532--Quarterly reports on sexual assault prevention and response
efforts
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a quarterly report on the
activities, progress, and performance metrics of the Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Office.
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, and Transition
Sec. 541--Military service academy nominations
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 7442(a), 8454, and 9442(a) of title 10, United States
Code, to clarify that Members of Congress may rank-order all
persons that a Member is permitted to nominate for appointment
to a military service academy.
Sec. 542--Asynchronous instruction in distance education option for
professional military education
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2154 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
virtual learning pathways in distance education programs under
such section must be offered asynchronously.
The committee notes that the mission of professional
military education programs within the Department of Defense is
to train military officers to operate as effective thinkers,
strategists, planners, problem solvers, and operators in a
joint warfighting environment. To the extent that the service
war colleges offer a remote advanced degree program to fulfill
this joint training requirement, in order to ensure the
effective administration of such a program for reserve
component personnel, the committee directs the services to make
use of modern best practices in remote graduate education by
including an asynchronous option for mandatory lecture course
components.
Sec. 543--Army University
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
new section in chapter 751 of title 10, United States Code, to
codify the Army University and its constituent schools and to
integrate all Army professional military education institutions
under the leadership of the Army University.
Sec. 544--Integration of the Secretary of Defense Strategic Thinkers
Program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to designate an appropriate office within
the Department of Defense to manage the Secretary of Defense
Strategic Thinkers Program (STP) and to provide annual
briefings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the administration of the STP,
with the first briefing to take place not later than January
12, 2026.
Sec. 545--Improvements to information-sharing to support individuals
retiring or separating from the Armed Forces
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 570F of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to strengthen information
sharing with State veterans agencies by establishing an opt-out
framework.
Sec. 546--Mandatory training on government ethics and national security
law
The committee recommends a provision that would require
annual training for members of the Armed Forces on ethics and
standards of conduct, as well as training for servicemembers on
the law of armed conflict, rules of engagement, defense support
to civil authorities, standing rules for the use of force, and
the Code of Conduct, as applicable, including within 90 days of
a mobilization or deployment.
Sec. 547--Prohibition on consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity,
national origin, or religion in service academy admissions
decisions
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
military service academies from considering race, sex, color,
ethnicity, national origin, or religion in admissions
decisions.
Sec. 548--Prohibition on participation of males in athletic programs or
activities at the military service academies that are
designated for women or girls
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that the military service
academies do not permit a person whose sex is male to
participate in an athletic program or activity that is
designated for women or girls.
Sec. 549--Pathway for cadets and midshipmen to play professional sports
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 553 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263).
The provision would also amend sections 7448, 8459, and 9448 of
title 10, United States Code, to authorize graduates of
military service academies to seek employment as a professional
athlete upon graduation. The provision would also require any
graduate of a military service academy to return as a regular
officer in the active component for a 5-year service obligation
when no longer employed as a professional athlete.
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness and Dependents' Education
Part I--Dependents' Education
Sec. 551--Certain assistance to local educational agencies that benefit
dependents of military and civilian personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$50.0 million in operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, for
continuation of the Department of Defense (DOD) assistance
program to local educational agencies impacted by the
enrollment of dependent children of military members and DOD
civilian employees. The provision would also authorize $10.0
million in operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, for impact
aid payments for children with disabilities as enacted by the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), using the formula set forth in
section 363 of that Act, for continuation of DOD assistance to
local educational agencies that benefit eligible dependents
with severe disabilities. Furthermore, the provision would
authorize the Secretary of Defense to use an additional $20.0
million for payments to local educational agencies determined
by the Secretary to have higher concentrations of military
children with severe disabilities. Finally, the provision would
require the Secretary to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than September 30, 2026, on the
Department's evaluation of each local educational agency with
higher concentrations of military children with severe
disabilities and DOD's subsequent determination of the amounts
of impact aid each such agency should receive.
Sec. 552--Management of special education in schools operated by
Department of Defense Education Activity
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the
Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) to: (1)
Implement certain measures to improve the staffing of special
education teachers and staff at DODEA schools; (2) Clarify
guidance and implement certain measures to improve special
education offerings provided by DODEA schools; (3) Brief the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than April 1, 2026, on certain
special education processes, data, and guidance at DODEA
schools; and (4) Brief the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on a semi-annual basis
on the progress of implementing the requirements of this
provision until all are complete.
Sec. 553--Enrollment of children of certain American Red Cross
employees in defense dependents' education system
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1404(d)(1) of the Defense Dependents' Education Act of
1978 (Public Law 95-561) to authorize children of employees of
the American Red Cross who are performing, on a full-time
basis, services for the Armed Forces, enrollment in a
Department of Defense Education Activity school.
Sec. 554--Regulations on the use of portable electronic mobile devices
in Department of Defense Education Activity schools
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the
Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) to update
existing regulations, not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, on the student use of portable
electronic mobile devices in DODEA schools to prohibit
disruption in the learning environment. The provision would
also require the Secretary of Defense to brief the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than 60 days after completing the
updated regulations, on the updated regulations.
Sec. 555--Administration of college admissions tests by the Department
of Defense Education Activity
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Department of Defense Education Activity
(DODEA) to direct DODEA schools to offer to administer, and, if
such an offer is accepted, administer at least one college
admissions test to each student in the eleventh grade of the
parent's choice.
Sec. 556--Support for expanding early childcare options for members of
the Armed Forces and their families
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to direct the Secretaries of the
military departments to: (1) Identify gaps between existing
early childcare needs and available eligible childcare
providers; (2) Use resources of the Department of Defense to
support eligible childcare providers in recruitment and
retention of employees; (3) Seek to enter into an interagency
partnership with a federal agency with the ability to place
national service participants and volunteers at military child
development centers; and (4) Provide training and resources
subsidies to eligible childcare providers.
Sec. 557--Improved counseling and access to information relating to
foster care for military families
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to: (1) Require that all counselors
assigned to a Family Advocacy Program or Military and Family
Life program at a military installation be trained in the
requirements and resources relating to foster care in the state
in which the installation is located; (2) Require the inclusion
of foster care information on Military OneSource; and (3) Seek
guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services with
respect to obtaining resources relating to foster care.
Sec. 558--Pilot program on recruitment and retention of employees for
child development programs
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a pilot
program to assess the effectiveness of increasing compensation
or other benefits for employees of child development programs
on military installations.
Sec. 559--Report on unmet need for childcare in areas with significant
populations of members of the Armed Forces
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than September 30, 2027, to
submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the unmet need for
childcare in certain areas.
Part II--Other Matters
Sec. 561--Legal assistance for guardianship transfers
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to provide members of
the Armed Forces serving on active duty access to legal
services provided by an attorney specializing in guardianship
transfers in each state in which a military installation is
located. The provision would also require the Secretaries of
the military departments to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than September 1, 2026, with: (1) An
implementation plan to provide access to the legal services
required by the provision; (2) Any challenges associated with
implementation; (3) Data on the number of members of the Armed
Forces with guardianship of incapacitated adult dependents, or
a plan to gather such data; and (4) Any other matters the
Secretaries of the military departments consider relevant.
Subtitle G--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
Sec. 571--Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps instructor
qualifications
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary concerned from issuing a policy under section
2031(d)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, that would
require more than 8 years of service before a former officer or
noncommissioned officer may be approved to serve as a Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps instructor.
Sec. 572--Temporary authority to provide bonuses to Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps instructors
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary concerned to provide a one-time cash bonus
payment of not more than $10,000 to any member or former member
who agrees to be a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
instructor for at least 1 academic year.
Sec. 573--Number of Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps units
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 545(a) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159) to increase the number of required Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps units to at least 3,600 and no
more than 4,200.
Subtitle H--Decorations and Other Awards, Miscellaneous Reports, and
Other Matters
Sec. 581--Honorary promotions on the initiative of the Department of
Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1563a of title 10, United States Code, to rescind the
discretion of the Secretary of Defense to make honorary
promotions and authorize the Secretaries of the military
departments to make an honorary promotion, including a
posthumous honorary promotion, if the honorary grade given to a
servicemember is commensurate with a servicemember's
contributions to the Armed Forces or the national defense and
if the Secretary of a military department receives a favorable
recommendation by a board of at least three independent
officers convened specifically to review the proposed honorary
promotion. This authority shall not be used to award an
honorary promotion solely on the basis that a servicemember was
recommended for such promotion prior to separating from
service.
The committee is concerned with potential misuse of the
honorary promotion authority. Honorary promotions are intended
for exceptional or unusual circumstances, rather than as
preferential treatment unrelated to service or exceptional
circumstances.
Sec. 582--National Week of Military Recruitment
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, to designate the
last full week of September as the National Week of Military
Recruitment.
Sec. 583--Clarifying the calculation of enlistments for persons whose
score on the Armed Forces Qualification Test is below a
prescribed level for the future servicemember preparatory
course
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 546 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to clarify how individuals
who improve their Armed Forces Qualification Test scores
through the Future Servicemember Preparatory Course are counted
under accession limits, and to refine reporting requirements
related to Category IV enlistments and course outcomes.
Sec. 584--Recruiter access to secondary schools
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 503(c)(1)(A) of title 10, United States Code, to
require secondary schools to facilitate not fewer than four in-
person recruitment events per academic year, across different
grading periods. This provision would also require secondary
schools to provide directory information to military recruiters
within 60 days of the commencement of the academic year and
thereafter within 30 days of a recruiter request.
Sec. 585--Compliance with travel charge card deactivation requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that Department of Defense
policies and procedures are consistent with section 3(h)(1)(H)
of the Government Charge Card Abuse Prevention Act of 2012
(Public Law 112-194).
Items of Special Interest
Adverse childhood experience response teams
The committee recognizes that adverse childhood experiences
can cause long-term impacts on affected individuals and that
the Department of Defense has a critical interest in protecting
and caring for the children of members of the Armed Forces.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, a
report assessing the feasibility and advisability of
establishing an adverse childhood experience response team
program at the Department of Defense to address adverse
experiences associated with exposure to trauma among children
of members of the Armed Forces, to include:
(1) Establishing protocols to follow when
encountering a child of a member of the Armed Forces
who has been exposed to trauma to facilitate access to
services;
(2) Developing referral partnership agreements with
behavioral health providers, substance treatment
facilities, and recovery services for family members of
children of members of the Armed Forces who have been
exposed to trauma;
(3) Integrating law enforcement, mental health, and
crisis services to respond to situations where such
children have been exposed to trauma;
(4) Implementing comprehensive programs and practices
to support such children;
(5) Identifying barriers for such children to access
trauma-informed care in their communities;
(6) Providing training in trauma-informed care to
emergency response providers, victim service providers,
child protective service professionals, educational
institutions, and other community partners;
(7) Supporting cross-system planning and
collaboration among officers and employees who work in
law enforcement, court systems, child welfare services,
correctional reentry programs, emergency medical
services, health care services, public health, and
substance abuse treatment and recovery support;
(8) Providing technical assistance to communities,
organizations, and public agencies on how to prevent
and mitigate the impact of exposure to trauma and
violence;
(9) Integrating an adverse childhood experience
response team program into existing programs of the
Department of Defense and assessing the impact on
existing programs; and
(10) Providing a cost estimate for establishing such
a program and a timeline for implementation across the
Department.
Briefing on after-hours childcare options
The committee recognizes the ongoing challenges military
families face in securing high-quality childcare options,
particularly during non-traditional hours. Despite efforts to
overcome the challenges, current initiatives to expand after-
hours childcare are struggling to meet the needs of
servicemembers, especially those stationed at remote or high-
demand locations like Creech Air Force Base.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the military departments, to brief the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, on Department of
Defense efforts to create and implement incentive programs that
would encourage Family Child Care (FCC) providers--typically
military spouses--to expand their services and provide
additional childcare options for military families. These
programs should be designed to alleviate the burden on
servicemembers and their families by increasing the
availability of childcare during after-hours times and non-
traditional times. The briefing should also include: (1) The
feasibility and advisability of increasing compensation or
other benefits for FCC providers to incentivize after-hours
care; (2) An assessment of existing barriers to expanding FCC
providers, including resource requirements; and (3)
Recommendations for overcoming those barriers, with special
concern for remote installations or off-hours mission
requirements.
Briefing on childcare exceptions to policy
The committee understands that servicemembers and their
families can experience extenuating circumstances or challenges
that may require a waiver from an installation commander for a
dependent to attend a Child Development Center (CDC) outside of
the normal priority system. Ideally, waivers to the priority
list are intended to be used rarely, for severe extenuating
circumstances. However, the lack of clear guidelines creates a
risk of these exceptions being misused. The committee is not
aware of any established criteria for exceptions to policy, and
the process or criteria for attaining an exception is not
publicized.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1) The number of authorized
exceptions to the priority system for CDCs for the last two
calendar years, delineated by unique mission-related
requirements or for standard operations; (2) Any guidance
provided to the components or installation commanders about
when to grant exceptions to policy; (3) Any guidance provided
to servicemembers regarding the ability to ask for an exception
to policy; (4) Any guidance provided to CDC Directors and
Resource and Referral specialists regarding the execution of
exceptions to policy; and (5) Any other matters relating to
exceptions to policy for CDC priority lists that the
Secretaries of the military departments deem necessary.
Briefing on general and flag officer reductions
Pursuant to the memorandum entitled ``General/Flag Officer
Reductions,'' dated May 5, 2025, the Secretary of Defense
directed a force-wide reduction in general and flag officers.
In order to conduct congressional oversight on this matter, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than February 2, 2026.
This briefing should include, at a minimum: (1) Each
military department's methodology for identifying general and
flag officer reductions; (2) Expected force reduction outcomes
by service; (3) Detailed implementation plans and timelines for
each service; and (4) An analysis of potential consolidation or
grade reduction of the general and flag officer positions
assigned to joint duty assignments, as well as all other
general and flag officer positions currently exempted from
authorized strength by statute.
The Secretaries of the military departments and the Chief
of the National Guard Bureau should support the development of
this briefing and provide the necessary service-specific data
and implementation plans to the Secretary of Defense in a
timely manner.
Briefing on military recruits who participated in Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps
The committee notes that section 512 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) expanded the purpose of Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) programs to include
``an introduction to service opportunities in military,
national, and public service.'' This provision was based on a
recommendation from the congressionally chartered National
Commission on Military, National, and Public Service.
While not designed to be a military recruiting program,
JROTC has proven to be a valuable way to expose young Americans
to the virtues and benefits of military service. Yet, despite a
general awareness of the link between JROTC participation and
military recruiting, the Department of Defense has been
reluctant to systematically track whether new military recruits
have participated in JROTC. This limits the ability of leaders
in the Department and in the Congress to gain valuable insights
that may make JROTC more effective.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than May
1, 2027, that includes: (1) The number and percentage of
military recruits in fiscal year 2026 who participated in the
JROTC program; (2) An assessment of the quality of recruits who
participated in JROTC compared to those who did not; and (3) An
assessment of basic training attrition rates of recruits who
participated in JROTC compared to those who did not.
Briefing on section 555 of Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
The committee notes that section 555 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) amended section
2154 of title 10, United States Code, to require the military
services to establish a pathway for members of the reserve
component to complete any distance education program offered to
satisfy Phase I or Phase II of joint professional military
education (JPME), as established under such section, in a
virtual setting and without having to attend in-person
sessions.
The committee acknowledges and values in-person educational
settings, including for members of the reserve component
enrolled in JPME courses. However, the committee is aware of
the many demands placed on members of the reserve component who
must balance their participation in rigorous JPME programs with
the obligations of their reserve component military duties,
civilian occupations, and personal lives.
The committee notes that in many cases members of the
reserve component with the greatest civilian responsibilities
are also leaders who provide essential capabilities to the U.S.
military during times of armed conflict. Given limited
resources and educational technology that can offer incredible
learning experiences in a remote, asynchronous setting,
inflexible JPME instructional modalities should not become a
barrier to advancement for high-performing and high-potential
military officers.
The committee believes that the military services must do
more to ensure that the many demands they place on members of
the reserve component are prioritized and optimized to best fit
the most critical needs of the services. Section 555 was passed
into law in the spirit of that belief. However, the Army War
College's implementation of Section 555 has resulted in an
inflexible virtual program that requires real-time
participation during the work day throughout a two-week session
when other students are present in class, and only if approved
by a general officer. This option offers no real flexibility to
members of the reserve component and results in additional
unnecessary bureaucratic barriers.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than January 31, 2026, on
the Army's plan to fully implement section 555 of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
Such briefing shall include the Army War College's
communications plan for ensuring its students are aware of the
statutory option to complete JPME in a virtual setting, any
policies or procedures associated with implementing this
provision, and any recommendations for policy changes related
to this law.
Careers in mapping and surveying
The committee recognizes the important role that mappers
and surveyors perform in American society. The committee
encourages the military departments to provide to members of
the Armed Forces who are enrolled in the Transition Assistance
Program information and resources about follow-on civilian
career opportunities with occupational specialties related to
surveying and mapping. Furthermore, for such members seeking
opportunities in the Department of Defense's SkillBridge
program, the committee encourages the military departments to
facilitate SkillBridge internship programs in mapping and
surveying fields.
Cell phone-free Department of Defense Education Activity schools
The committee acknowledges that the Joint Explanatory
Statement to Accompany the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) contained a requirement for the
Secretary of Defense to provide the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
briefing, not later than July 1, 2025, on the use of cell
phones within the academic environment at Department of Defense
Education Activity schools, including an assessment of such use
on student achievement. Civilian school districts are
increasingly trending toward prohibiting cell phone use during
school hours to limit student distractions, with much success.
The committee encourages the Secretary to complete the required
briefing by the required due date.
Clarity in communications for Exceptional Family Member Program legal
assistance
The committee understands that certain dependents of
servicemembers enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member
Program experience challenges receiving proper special needs
educational assistance when moving from one school to another.
Section 582 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283)
required the military services to provide special education
attorneys or legal assistance to military families. The
committee is aware that, while the military services have
implemented section 582, there is still confusion at joint
military installations about whether a servicemember in one
service can receive legal assistance from another military
service.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to brief the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
April 1, 2026, on: (1) How each service manages special
education legal assistance at joint installations; (2) The
level of support authorized by legal assistance attorneys for
special education matters; (3) Any barriers to providing
special education legal assistance to military dependents at
Department of Defense Education Activity schools; and (4) Any
relevant feedback or insight into the efficacy of the special
education attorney authority.
Comptroller General review of military service academy curricula and
staffing practices
The committee recognizes the importance of the U.S.
Military Academy, the Naval Academy, and the Air Force Academy
(hereafter referred to collectively as military service
academies) in developing future military leaders. The military
service academies provide a tuition-free, 4-year undergraduate
education designed to educate and graduate students with the
knowledge and character needed to lead as officers in the U.S.
Armed Forces. While enrolled at the military service academies,
students are Active-Duty cadets or midshipmen who live in
military barracks, wear uniforms, and, in addition to the
academic curricula, participate in military training and
professional development. The military service academies employ
a mixture of military and civilian faculty and staff to educate
and train students in the required academic and practical
skills.
The committee is interested in how the military service
academies ensure curricula and staffing practices remain
current and relevant to the dynamic environment into which
their graduating students will be entering.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the extent to which the military
service academies adapt their curricula and staffing strategies
to meet their respective missions. The review should provide a
description of current curricula at each military service
academy and identify trends in staffing, including the mix of
military and civilians, tenured faculty, and individuals with
specializations or subject matter expertise to provide needed
curricula. The review should also assess the extent to which
the military service academies have: (1) Implemented plans or
processes for reviewing curricula to ensure alignment with the
strategic needs of the military; (2) Implemented plans or
processes to identify and address staffing needs, including the
determination of billet type and subject matter expertise
needed to support the administration of the curricula and other
strategic needs; (3) Modified their curricula and staffing to
adapt to changes to the strategic environment or in response to
recent related Executive Orders or other relevant guidance, as
appropriate; and (4) Any additional issues that the Comptroller
General deems relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than April 15, 2026, with
the results of the review to follow in a mutually agreed upon
format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of military service compassionate
reassignment policies
The committee remains concerned about reports from military
families concerning the difficulty in securing reassignment
under certain circumstances raising compassionate,
humanitarian, or safety concerns, where such reassignment is in
the best interests of the family. In the committee report
accompanying S. 4638 (S. Rep. 118-188), the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, the committee directed
the service secretaries to provide a briefing on service
reassignment policies under circumstances relating to
compassionate, humanitarian, or safety concerns of a
servicemember or military family.
The briefings provided by the services raise further
questions about the circumstances under which reassignment
would be approved for personal hardship and under other
circumstances of injustice or severe iniquity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the military service
compassionate reassignment policies as described in the service
responses to S. Rep. 118-188 and to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than December 1, 2025, with a report
to follow at an agreed upon date.
Crew complement of F-15E and F-15EX programs
The committee recognizes the critical role that F-15E
Weapon System Officers (WSOs) have played in recent operations,
including their significant contributions to the successful
downing of more than 80 Iranian attack drones in April 2024.
While the operational environment was relatively permissive,
the WSO's ability to manage sensors, coordinate fires, and
communicate with external agencies was instrumental to mission
success.
As the Air Force proceeds with the phased divestment of
certain F-15E aircraft and the procurement of the F-15EX
platform, the committee notes a lack of detail regarding how
the Air Force intends to retain and leverage its investment in
the F-15E WSO workforce. Furthermore, the committee is
interested in understanding the range of options being
considered for the employment of officers operating in the F-
15EX rear cockpit.
The committee is concerned that the Air Force has yet to
clearly define the primary mission profile for the F-15EX,
whether it is intended to be primarily an air-to-air or an air-
to-ground platform. This lack of strategic clarity complicates
planning for crew requirements, training pipelines, and
capability development. A firm decision is particularly
critical given the F-15EX's potential to support advanced
missions such as facilitating long-range kill chains,
conducting non-traditional command and control, contributing to
electronic warfare missions, and conducting air-to-surface
strike missions that may be more effectively executed with two
crew members.
The committee notes that potential tasks for an operator in
the rear cockpit of the F-15EX could include a wide range of
mission-enhancing functions such as operating advanced sensors,
conducting electronic warfare tasks, managing multi-domain
command and control responsibilities, and coordinating complex
tactical scenarios in real time. These functions could increase
overall mission effectiveness of U.S. forces in contested and
dynamic operational environments.
Given the demonstrated value of the WSO in recent
operations and the evolving mission demands for the F-15EX, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees, not later than
March 31, 2026. This report should include: (1) An assessment
of how any planned F-15E divestitures may affect overall WSO
career field manning requirements; (2) The Air Force's strategy
for managing WSOs with remaining service obligations in the
context of F-15E divestiture; (3) A description of current and
potential future operational concepts for the F-15EX, including
how and when the rear cockpit may be utilized across various
mission profiles, including command and control functions; (4)
The extent to which rear-cockpit occupants are necessary in F-
15EX operations; (5) Any plans under consideration to ensure
sufficient personnel are available to support F-15EX operations
that may require or benefit from a two-crew configuration; and
(6) A timeline for making a determination on the F-15EX's
primary mission role and how that decision will shape crew
requirements and capabilities development.
Enhance Department of Defense science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics education and career-connected pathways
The committee is encouraged by continued Department of
Defense efforts to support the science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) ecosystem, including
efforts under the Defense STEM Education Consortium and similar
activities. These activities support K-12, higher education,
and workforce development programs necessary to build a 21st
century workforce with the skills and talents to meet evolving
defense challenges. The committee encourages the Department to
ensure its activities include career-connected learning, as
well as research and evaluation efforts, necessary to scale and
adopt practices that can support military-connected families.
Enhanced career counseling in Transition Assistance Program
The committee acknowledges the critical role of the
Transition Assistance Program (TAP) in preparing servicemembers
for transition to civilian life well in advance of their
separation from service. The committee also recognizes that the
timelines prescribed by section 1142 of title 10, United States
Code, may conflict with the retention efforts of the military
services. The committee believes servicemembers should be fully
informed of all their career options, including remaining in
the active component, transitioning to the reserves, or staying
in the reserve component, as well as the comprehensive benefits
of continued service.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
integrate retention specialists into the TAP curriculum to
ensure servicemembers are aware of their full range of options,
including continued active duty or reserve service, as well as
the long-term career and financial advantages of staying in
uniform, alongside civilian employment opportunities. By adding
retention specialists to the pre-separation counseling brief
and standardized TAP curriculum, servicemembers will be better
equipped to make informed decisions, ultimately supporting both
their career goals and overall force readiness.
Ensuring statutory compliance in accession classification and reporting
The committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense's (DOD) current interpretation and implementation of
section 520 of title 10, United States Code, as it relates to
the classification and reporting of accession quality.
Specifically, the Army's practice of reclassifying trainees who
originally scored at or above the tenth percentile and below
the thirty-first percentile on the Armed Forces Qualification
Test (AFQT)--based on improved scores achieved during the
Future Soldier Preparatory Course--was made possible by
exceptions to policy granted by the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness.
The committee notes that these exceptions contradict
section 520 of title 10, United States Code, which requires
that the AFQT score used to determine compliance with statutory
limitations must be the score at the time of original
enlistment--not a retest score. This reinterpretation
undermines transparency and congressional oversight and should
be discontinued. The committee understands the value of the
Future Servicemember Preparatory Course and acknowledges that
increases in AFQT should be reflected in a military recruit's
profile and career options. Likewise, these higher scores
should be reflected in overall reporting and tracking of
accessions data. However, the current practice is not
consistent with the law.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretaries of the military departments to track and
report both the original AFQT scores and the improved AFQT
scores for any recruits who attend the Future Servicemember
Preparatory Course for purposes of academic improvement. As of
now, all accessions data and analysis must include the AFQT
score at the time of original enlistment, in accordance with
the law.
The committee strongly supports the services' efforts to
improve recruit quality and expand opportunities for
individuals who may benefit from additional training. Nothing
in this requirement prohibits the continued use of preparatory
courses or similar programs. In fact, the committee encourages
the services to build on the early successes of these
initiatives. However, reporting and classification must align
with statutory definitions--specifically, using the AFQT score
recorded at the time of original enlistment, in accordance with
section 520 of title 10, United States Code.
Additionally, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than October 1, 2025. The briefing
must include: (1) An updated response to the recommendations
provided by the DOD Inspector General's May 1, 2025, report
titled ``Review of the Army's Future Soldier Preparatory
Course''; (2) Accurate accession quality data for each military
service since the inception of the Future Soldier Preparatory
Course and the Future Sailor Preparatory Course, based on AFQT
scores at the time of enlistment; (3) A plan to ensure full
compliance with section 520 of title 10, United States Code;
(4) Any legislative or policy proposals that would improve the
Department's ability to report accessions data to reflect
improvements in pre-basic training candidates who attend a
Future Servicemember Preparatory Course as well as its ability
to improve the overall transparency and integrity of accessions
reporting; and (5) Any other information that the Under
Secretary deems necessary and relevant.
Filling short-term servicemember childcare needs with Kinderspot
The committee is aware that the Air Force has utilized a
mobile application called Kinderspot to help servicemembers
find short-term childcare needs on an installation. Kinderspot
allows parents to sublet their childcare spaces at Air Force
Child Development Centers (CDCs) when they do not need the
spaces, connecting them with other eligible servicemembers who
may need short-term childcare. Short-term childcare can often
be a challenge for servicemembers and their families. The
committee commends the Air Force for using Kinderspot, a Small
Business Innovation Research awardee, to provide military
families additional flexible childcare options. The other
military services may benefit from a similar capability.
Therefore the committee directs the Secretaries of the military
departments to provide the Senate Armed Services Committee a
briefing, not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1) The existing
capabilities of each military service to allow for short-term
sublets of CDC spots; (2) Any resources necessary to create or
utilize a capability to allow short-term sublets of CDC spots;
(3) Any additional short-term childcare options the military
services are providing to servicemembers and their families;
and (4) Any other matters a Secretary determines to be
relevant.
Implementation report on self-initiated mental health referrals
The committee acknowledges and commends the Department of
Defense for its efforts to implement a self-initiated referral
process for mental health evaluations, as required by section
1090b(e) of title 10, United States Code, across the active
duty force and recognizes the steps taken to expand access to
mental health care. These efforts reflect a growing commitment
to reducing stigma and increasing support for servicemembers in
crisis.
However, the committee is concerned by reports of
inconsistent application of, and education and training on,
this self-initiated referral process across active-duty units
and applicable Reserve Component troops on active-duty orders.
The committee notes that, although the military departments and
services have made progress in executing the law, more work is
required to fully implement the law, educate servicemembers on
the policy, and ensure transparency and accountability for
those responsible for enforcing the law.
Additionally, the committee is concerned that Phase II of
the implementation plan, to implement within the Reserve
Component, to include the Reserves and the National Guard,
serving less than 30 consecutive days on active orders, has not
yet occurred.
Therefore the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments and the Director of the
Defense Health Agency, to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than December 31, 2025, a briefing on the implementation
of the self-initiated referral process required under section
1090b(e) of title 10, United States Code. The report should
include:
(1) Any Department of Defense instruction or other
document issued by the Secretary of Defense since May
5, 2023, with respect to the implementation of the
self-initiated referral process required under 1090b(e)
of title 10, United States Code;
(2) Any memorandum or guidance issued by:
(a) the Department of the Navy since July 11,
2023 directing the implementation of such
process;
(b) the Department of the Air Force since
July 28, 2023, directing the implementation of
such process; and
(c) the Department of the Army since August
29, 2023, directing the implementation of such
process;
(3) A description and timeline of any communications
made to members of the Armed Forces with respect to the
implementation of such process;
(4) A description and timeline of efforts by the
Secretary of each military department to implement the
annual training required under subsection (f) of such
section; and
(5) A description and timeline of efforts to ensure
that such process reduces stigma in accordance with
subsection (b) of such section.
In addition, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness and each military
department to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives biannually on
implementation progress, training effectiveness, and report
adherence to section 1090b(e) of title 10, United States Code.
This biannual reporting requirement should terminate on
December 31, 2030.
Importance of independent legal advice by military judge advocates
The committee notes that the ability to provide independent
legal advice is a fundamental principle in the military legal
system and is integral to the core values of military judge
advocates. The committee further notes that judge advocates are
military officers who take an oath to support and defend the
Constitution of the United States. The committee believes that
this oath cannot be upheld by simply telling superior officers
what they want to hear or by offering advice based on personal
beliefs. Finally, the committee notes that judge advocates are
ethically required to provide candid advice based on their
independent legal judgement.
Accordingly, the committee affirms the value of the
independent legal advice of judge advocates.
Integration of military service outcome data with state educational
systems
The committee recognizes the importance of understanding
the postsecondary outcomes of students who pursue military
service and the role this information can play in both
enhancing military readiness and informing educational policy
and practice.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Education and
relevant stakeholders, to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than May 1, 2026, on the feasibility
and advisability of establishing a data sharing system related
to individual servicemember outcomes into state educational
agencies' longitudinal data systems to enhance military
readiness and student success. Data elements to consider should
include, but should not be limited to, enlistment dates,
military occupational specialties, initial military rank, Armed
Forces Qualification Test scores, separation dates, and
completion of initial training or credentialing programs. Such
a briefing should include an assessment of any data or personal
privacy concerns implicated by such a data sharing system, the
projected costs and resource requirements to establish such a
system, and an assessment of how such a system would enhance
military recruiting efforts.
Navy Personnel Command Records Analysis Branch process briefing
The committee is concerned about the lengthy response times
and challenges receiving accurate information when inquiries to
the Navy Personnel Command's Records Analysis Branch are
submitted by Members of Congress on behalf of their
constituents. There have been significant challenges to
receiving accurate updates on constituent cases and receiving
adjudications in a timely manner. In certain circumstances, it
appears that records may be misplaced during the process.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing, not later than July 1, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives describing the existing process within Navy
Personnel Command's Records Analysis Branch designed to
expedite congressional inquiries and cases to and from the
Board for Correction of Naval Records. The briefing should also
include: (1) Data on the Navy Personnel Command's Records
Analysis Branch response times over the previous 5 years; (2)
The average time to close cases, including those initiated
through congressional inquiries, as well as the average time to
issue final determinations on all cases; and (3) The response
times for cases that require records after receipt of the
record from the National Personnel Records Center, specifically
highlighting the length of time to receive records.
Oversight of suicide prevention policy and access to mental health care
The committee remains concerned about the persistent rates
of suicide among servicemembers and believes suicide prevention
must remain a top priority for the Department of Defense and
the military services. While the Department has made notable
investments in prevention, response, and resiliency efforts,
the committee continues to have concerns regarding consistency
and coordination of policies across the services.
The committee emphasizes the importance of sustaining
momentum in suicide prevention by ensuring that servicemembers
are fully aware of, and empowered to utilize, available mental
health resources. The committee is particularly concerned about
perceived or actual barriers to self-referral for mental health
care and encourages the Department to evaluate policies,
procedures, and unit-level cultures that may discourage
servicemembers to seek needed care.
The committee supports the Department's continued efforts
to improve the quality, accessibility, and visibility of
suicide prevention resources. However, the success of these
initiatives depends on clear leadership, accountability,
transparent data sharing, and a servicemember's ability to
access care without stigma or delay. The committee expects the
Department to maintain robust oversight and ensure timely
implementation of suicide prevention recommendations,
particularly those of the Suicide Prevention and Response
Independent Review Committee.
Potential school choice options for Department of Defense Education
Activity
The committee notes that the January 29, 2025, Executive
Order Number 14191 ``Expanding Educational Freedom and
Opportunity for Families,'' required the Secretary of Defense
to review available mechanisms under which military-connected
families may use funds from the Department of Defense to attend
schools of their choice, including private, faith-based, or
public charter schools. The Executive Order further directed
the Secretary to submit a plan to the President describing such
mechanisms and the steps that would be necessary to implement
them beginning in the 2025-2026 school year.
Accordingly, not later than 30 days after the publication
of this report, the committee directs the Secretary to provide
to the congressional defense committees a whole and identical
copy of the plan that the Secretary submitted to the President.
Preservation of the Force and Family program
The committee strongly supports U.S. Special Operations
Command's (SOCOM) Preservation of the Force and Families
(POTFF) program and recognizes its vital role in sustaining the
readiness of special operations forces by building resilience
and optimizing performance. The committee notes that SOCOM
utilizes its Human Performance Data Management System to
improve its data collection, governance, and management. In an
effort to ensure SOCOM provides clear guidance on achieving an
integrated and holistic care system for POTFF, the committee
encourages SOCOM to continue these efforts and seek
opportunities to enhance its use of data to optimize support
through the POTFF program.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
and the Commander, SOCOM, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than October 1, 2025, detailing
ongoing efforts to fully utilize the Human Performance Data
Management System.
Recognition of military-friendly schools
The committee recognizes the critical role high schools
play in supporting military recruiting and fostering a culture
of service among young Americans. Accordingly, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to assess the feasibility and
advisability of recognizing high schools with military
enlistment rates above their state average. As part of this
assessment, the Secretary should evaluate potential criteria
for recognition, the likely impact of such a designation on
enlistment rates and school culture, and options for
implementation, including, but not limited to, issuing a formal
letter of recognition from the Secretary to each qualifying
school. The committee further directs the Secretary to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than April 1, 2026,
outlining proposed criteria for recognition, the anticipated
impact of recognizing military-friendly schools, and
recommendations for implementation or expansion.
Report on human performance technologies
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than July 1, 2026, on
opportunities to improve collaboration across the military
departments in the development, integration, and coordination
of human performance technologies that support warfighter
readiness.
The report should focus specifically on technological tools
and systems--such as wearable devices, performance tracking
software, cognitive enhancement tools, and other physical or
digital technologies--designed to improve physical, cognitive,
nutritional, psychological, and sleep readiness.
The report should include: (1) Opportunities to align
requirements development, resource sharing, and best practices
for human performance technologies across the military
departments; (2) Mechanisms to improve coordination of service-
specific human performance efforts, including data
interoperability, shared research priorities, and program
evaluation standards; (3) An assessment of the utility of
existing or potential collaborative structures--such as cross-
service working groups or cross-functional teams--to support
enterprise-level integration of human performance technologies
without establishing a centralized governing authority; and (4)
An assessment on how data collected through such technologies
is protected against misuse, including the sale or unauthorized
transfer of sensitive servicemember information to third-party
data brokers, as highlighted in recent research on risks to
military personnel privacy.
For the purposes of this report, ``human performance
technologies'' refers to tools and systems that enhance
performance in domains such as physical fitness, cognitive
function, mental resilience, sleep health, and nutrition, as
described in the Army's October 1, 2020, Holistic Health and
Fitness (H2F) Operating Concept.
Report on implementation of notification requirements relating to
prohibition on post-service employment with certain governments
The committee notes that section 989 of title 10, United
States Code, prohibits former servicemembers from accepting
employment in positions related to certain foreign governments.
This statute requires the Secretary of Defense to establish a
process under which each member of the Armed Forces, before the
member retires or is otherwise separated from the Armed Forces,
is: (1) Informed in writing of the prohibition, and the
penalties for violations of the prohibition; and (2) Required
to certify that the member understands the prohibition and
those penalties.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a briefing, not later than January 12, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the efforts of the Department of Defense
(DOD) to implement the requirement to inform members of the
Armed Forces with respect to this prohibition. The briefing
should include information on the following: (1) The manner in
which the DOD has implemented a process for providing the
required notification to each member of the Armed Forces; (2)
Any assessment the Department has made on its ability to
provide adequate notification in writing with respect to the
prohibition and the penalties for violations of the
prohibition; (3) The progress the Department has made in
obtaining the certification required from each member of the
Armed Forces before the member retires or otherwise separates
from the Armed Forces; and (4) Any recommended changes to
policies, procedures, or resources to improve the ability of
the Department to provide adequate notification with respect to
the prohibition.
Report on public service loan forgiveness
In section 559B of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), the Congress directed the
Department of Defense and Department of Education to, within 1
year, implement a data match enabling servicemembers to
automatically receive credit for Public Service Loan
Forgiveness (PSLF). The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to publish on a publicly available website of the
Department of Defense a report on the efforts of the Secretary
of Defense and the Secretary of Education to implement section
559B. The report shall include, but not be limited to,
information on: (1) How many servicemembers, disaggregated by
active-duty servicemembers and civilians, had received PSLF
before implementation of the data match; (2) How many
servicemembers to date have received PSLF through the data
match; and (3) Whether the data match has been completed and,
if not, the agencies' efforts to complete the data match to
date. The report shall be submitted by March 1, 2026, and shall
be submitted quarterly until the data match has been completed.
Report on training records for post-9/11 servicemembers
The committee remains concerned about the transition of
servicemembers from military service to civilian life. In
section 574 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159), the Congress required the Secretaries of
the military departments to provide training and competency
records that reflect a plain-language description of the
training, courses, certifications, and qualifications of
separating servicemembers to facilitate such servicemembers'
prospects of finding well-matched civilian employment. The
committee is aware that many veterans who have already
separated from service would also benefit from such records.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than May 1, 2026, on the feasibility
and advisability of providing training and competency records
to members of the Armed Forces who served on or after September
11, 2001.
Service casualty assistance office resourcing and capacity
The committee is aware that the military service casualty
assistance offices have many significant and sensitive
responsibilities, one of which is to support the Defense POW/
MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) with deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
Family Reference Sample (FRS) collection. Through their
respective Secretary of a military department, service casualty
assistance offices are responsible for conducting genealogy
searches to determine the primary next of kin of missing
servicemembers and appropriate DNA FRS donors and to collect
family artifacts and other material as required for DNA
analysis. Once collected, the DPAA and the Armed Forces Medical
Examiner System's Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory
compares the FRS against DNA extracted from recovered remains
to identify missing servicemembers. The committee understands
that some of the military services are under-resourced for this
important purpose, which then limits the work that the DPAA can
do to identify recovered remains in their care.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to brief the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 1, 2026, on: (1) The existing resources for each military
services' casualty assistance office for the functions they are
required to perform, with a specific delineation for the
genealogy work and FRS collection to support the DPAA; (2) An
assessment from the military services regarding the additional
resources required to remove any limitation on genealogy
caseload to expand efforts to support DPAA; (3) Any additional
resources or authorities that would assist the military service
casualty assistance offices with their existing
responsibilities; and (4) Any other matters the Secretaries
determine relevant.
Study on the readiness and transition impacts of the SkillBridge
program
The committee recognizes the need for greater support to
our servicemembers as they transition out of the U.S. military.
The SkillBridge program is a valuable opportunity for
servicemembers to gain civilian work experience through
specific industry training, apprenticeships, or internships
during the last days of service to better prepare them for life
outside of service. The committee also understands that use of
this program depends on commanders' assessment of unit
readiness and their acceptance of risk to allow for
participation.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a one-time report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than March 1, 2026, on the effectiveness of the
SkillBridge program by providing empirical data and analysis.
This report will include:
(1) The total amount of individuals who apply and
enroll in the SkillBridge program (broken out by rank,
specialty, and length of time);
(2) The application and participation rates across
different military branches and what branch-specific
policies or cultural factors contribute to the
differences;
(3) The specialties and ranks that benefit the most
and least from SkillBridge participation;
(4) The total amount of individuals who have been
denied participation based on readiness concerns (both
before and after branch-specific restriction policy
enactment);
(5) How mission readiness has been affected by
participation;
(6) How the program has affected transition outcomes
measured by hiring rates from SkillBridge companies
and, of those, how many are employed by their
SkillBridge program company or in similar fields;
(7) A list of the companies and industries that
participate;
(8) The number and percentage of participants who
gain employment after completion of the program;
(9) A list of the barriers that are preventing
commanders from making accurate readiness risk
assessments for their units under the current
SkillBridge program; and
(10) Steps to be taken to ensure the services
properly balance the best possible transition outcomes
for all servicemembers and readiness.
Summer camp programs for military-connected youth
The committee recognizes the challenges faced by children
of servicemembers, including the disruptions caused by frequent
relocations and extended deployments. These factors can impact
children's emotional and psychological well-being, affecting
family stability and military readiness. To mitigate these
challenges, the committee encourages the Department of Defense
to explore ways in which it can support summer camp programs
designed specifically for military-connected youth.
These camps provide a structured, supportive environment in
which children can develop resilience, build peer networks, and
acquire life and leadership skills. Furthermore, summer camps
foster a sense of identity and connection to military life
among children of servicemembers, which increases their
propensity to serve in the military themselves. A significant
portion of future military personnel come from military
families, and these programs play a crucial role in inspiring
the next generation to serve. The committee urges the
Department to prioritize programs that integrate mental health
support; Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
education; and leadership development for all eligible
families.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Sec. 601--Modifications to calculation of basic allowance for
subsistence for enlisted members
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 402 of title 37, United States Code, to simplify the
calculation of basic allowance for subsistence and ensure the
allowance shall not decrease from year to year. Additionally,
the provision would update the calculation and amount payable
of basic allowance for subsistence in the case of a member
subject to monthly deductions from pay for meals provided by
essential station messing.
Sec. 602--Inclusion of descriptions of types of pay on pay statements
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that pay statements for
servicemembers include clear, plain-language descriptions for
each type of pay, allowance, and deduction. Additionally, the
provision would require that the descriptions must cover the
legal authority, purpose, eligibility criteria, and potential
changes to each item. They must be easily accessible on the pay
statement and written in language that is understandable to
those without specialized knowledge of military finance. This
requirement would take effect 180 days after the bill is
enacted.
Sec. 603--Increased awareness and improved calculation of rates for
basic allowance for housing
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to publish a clear, accessible document
that explains how basic allowance for housing rates are
determined, including methodology and types of data sources
used. This information would also be provided directly to
servicemembers upon any event that may impact their basic
allowance for housing and shall include an explanation of the
type of rental housing their basic allowance for housing is
intended to support in each locality.
This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop an alternative methodology for calculating basic
allowance for housing, based on the typical cost of housing
units by number of bedrooms rather than solely on pay grade and
dependent status, incorporating both available and verified
occupied rental market data. Once developed, the Secretary of
Defense shall conduct a pilot program using the new
methodology, setting notional rates for the basic allowance for
housing for calendar years 2026 and 2027 for a minimum of 10
military housing areas.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than February 1, 2027,
that includes: (1) A comparison of the notional rates with the
actual rates for basic allowance for housing for 2026 and 2027;
(2) A comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of each
methodology and the use of setting each such rates; (3) A
determination of whether the alternative methodology is more or
less likely than the current methodology to ensure that rates
for basic allowance for housing are set based upon a 95 percent
statistical confidence that the estimated median rent is within
10 percent of the actual median rent in local military housing
areas; (4) A comparison of cost estimates for 2027 using both
methodologies; (5) An identification of any additional
legislative authority required to fully implement the new
methodology; and (6) The recommendation of the Secretary with
respect to whether to implement the use of the new methodology
and the timing for such implementation.
Sec. 604--Military compensation educational campaign
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to initiate a 12-month educational
campaign, not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, to improve knowledge and understanding
of pay and benefits by servicemembers and military families.
The campaign would cover key topics, including: (1) Elements of
regular military compensation as defined in section 101(25) of
title 37, United States Code; (2) Special and incentive pays;
(3) Retirement pay calculations; (4) Educational assistance
programs and benefits; (5) Healthcare for Active-Duty members
and their families; and (6) Nonmonetary benefits.
Subtitle B--Special and Incentive Pay
Sec. 611--Reviews of designations of imminent danger pay areas
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a review of each area
designated by section 351(a)(3) of title 37, United States
Code, as imminent danger pay. This review should validate that
each area is one in which a member is subject to imminent
danger of physical injury due to threat conditions. Not later
than 60 days after each review, a report shall be submitted to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, including any changes to designations
resulting from the review. The initial review and report shall
be conducted not later than March 1, 2026, and subsequent
reviews and reports shall be conducted not less than every 5
years thereafter. If, at any time between the submissions of
required reviews and reports, the Secretary of Defense or the
Secretary of a military department conducts a review of
designated areas and makes a change to any such designation,
that Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the
review and the change not later than 60 days after the change
is made.
Sec. 612--Implementation of aviation incentive pay for members of
reserve components
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 602(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) to require the Secretary
of Defense to assess aviation incentive pay programs across the
services for effectiveness, consistency, and alignment with
retention and readiness needs, and to begin payments based on
that assessment.
Sec. 613--Pilot program on improving retention of members with degrees
in their fields of specialty
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program to assess the
feasibility and advisability of paying incentive pay to
enlisted members of the Armed Forces with degrees in their
fields of specialty to improve the retention of such members.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Sec. 621--Extension of enhanced authority for selective early
retirement and early discharges
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 638a(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to extend
the enhanced authority for selective retirement and early
discharges until December 31, 2030.
Sec. 622--Extension of temporary early retirement authority
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4403(i) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484) to extend temporary early
retirement authority until December 31, 2030.
Sec. 623--Extension of authority to provide voluntary separation pay
and benefits
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1175a(k)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to extend
the authority to provide voluntary separation pay and benefits
in accordance with this section until December 31, 2030.
Sec. 624--Designation of United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll as
remote and isolated military installation
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll as a remote and
isolated installation as set forth in Department of Defense
Instructions 1015.10 and 1015.18, dated July 6, 2009, and May
30, 2024, respectively.
Sec. 625--Designation of Creech Air Force Base as a remote or isolated
installation
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to designate Creech Air Force Base, Indian
Springs, Nevada, as a remote or isolated installation.
Sec. 626--Provision of counseling on housing for members of the Armed
Forces
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 992 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
military departments to enter into contracts to provide
counseling to servicemembers on mortgages and other financial
products related to the lease or purchase of residences.
Sec. 627--Program to provide Government-funded transportation for
certain members of the Armed Forces stationed overseas
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a Government-funded
transportation program for unaccompanied servicemembers
traveling from designated overseas locations to their home of
record. The committee strongly encourages the Secretary of
Defense to prioritize locations that are geographically
isolated, have harsh climates, or lack adequate family and
community support, such as Alaska and Guam.
Sec. 628--Prohibition on procurement and commissary sales of seafood
originating or processed in the People's Republic of China
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense from procuring seafood originating or
processed in the People's Republic of China for use in military
dining facilities and from selling such seafood in commissary
stores.
Items of Special Interest
Analysis of outsourcing Defense Commissary Agency functions for
enhanced efficiency
The committee recognizes the critical role commissaries
play in supporting military families by providing access to
affordable groceries, particularly in high-cost and
geographically remote areas. The committee seeks to explore
opportunities to improve efficiencies within the system without
compromising this core benefit.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to seek to enter into a contract with a federally funded
research and development center to conduct a simulation and
evaluation of outsourcing Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA)
functions for enhanced efficiency.
The simulation should evaluate: (1) Whether a commercial
grocery retailer can consistently deliver a 25 percent savings
benefit to commissary patrons across 235 global locations
without the use of congressional appropriations; and (2)
Whether DeCA could sustain operations in remote and overseas
locations under any proposed model, given that these sites
often depend on cross-subsidies from higher-revenue
commissaries to remain viable.
Additionally, the simulation should analyze a
representative sample of commissary sites, considering factors
such as: (1) Geographic diversity; (2) Patron demographics; (3)
Existing savings rates; and (4) The availability of alternative
grocery options.
Particular attention should be paid to rural and overseas
locations, where the commissary benefit is more essential and
where market conditions may limit the feasibility of commercial
replacement.
Further, the simulation should explore various contracting
options to improve efficiency while preserving core benefits,
but without a presumption that any model would be better than
the current structure. It must also account for the DeCA's
current business model, in which revenue generated from larger
U.S.-based stores is used to subsidize operations at rural and
overseas commissaries. To the extent possible, the simulation
should incorporate input from the Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, defense resale
organizations, and relevant industry stakeholders. The
simulation must require that any future business model for
operating commissary stores would maintain a minimum patron
savings rate of no less than 25 percent.
Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a report of the simulation to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than January 1, 2027, addressing the feasibility,
metrics, and costs of operating commissary stores through
contracted vendor services. The report should cover, at a
minimum: (1) Methods of selection for locations to be analyzed
for contracted services; (2) Market research on commercial
grocery chains that express interest in participating in
contracted commissary operations; (3) The costs and liabilities
incurred by the Government, including the military services,
military installations, and the DeCA, that would result from
operating commissary stores through contracted vendors; (4)
Potential impacts on military family quality of life, morale,
and retention, particularly in high-cost or geographically
isolated locations; (5) An evaluation of the potential impacts
on current DeCA employees; (6) A risk assessment, as well as
proposed contingency measures, to ensure uninterrupted access
to affordable groceries for eligible patrons; and (7)
Recommendations for specific administrative or legislative
action that the Secretary considers appropriate to modernize
and improve the delivery of the commissary benefit.
Briefing on adequacy of cost of living allowances calculations
The committee notes that the 14th Quadrennial Review of
Military Compensation highlighted a concern regarding the
current living pattern survey, which is used to determine cost
of living allowances both in the continental United States and
overseas. The report indicates that this survey may lead to
discrepancies in allowance rates for areas that are
geographically close due to variations in shopping behaviors.
This raises concerns about the survey's accuracy in reflecting
the actual purchasing habits of servicemembers. Additionally,
there may be significant differences between the commissary
usage reported in the survey and actual sales data from
commissaries.
In response to these findings, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to brief the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than February 15, 2026. The briefing
should assess the effectiveness of the living pattern survey in
determining cost of living allowances. This assessment should
include an analysis of any discrepancies between the survey
data and annual commissary usage statistics, as well as
recommendations for more accurate methods of calculating cost
of living allowances, particularly through a better
understanding of Department of Defense commissary and exchange
utilization.
Briefing on separation and retirement policies of certain members of
the Armed Forces
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, by not later than February 1,
2026, assessing the Department of Defense's implementation of
the Secretary's February 7, 2025, memorandum entitled
``Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness'' and the May
8, 2025, Secretary of Defense memorandum entitled
``Implementing Policy on Prioritizing Military Excellence and
Readiness.'' The briefing should include: (1) The processes for
determining affected servicemembers; (2) The number and grades
of affected servicemembers; (3) The number of requests for an
exception to policy with respect to retirement or separation;
(4) The number of requests so granted or denied; and (5) The
overall impact of implementation on the readiness of the Armed
Forces.
Commending the United Service Organizations
The committee recognizes the invaluable role the United
Service Organizations (USO) has played in supporting American
servicemembers for over 80 years, particularly in the face of
rapidly evolving global security challenges. In the wake of the
Israel-Hamas conflict in October 2023, the committee
understands that the USO adjusted its operations to meet the
increased demands for support across the Middle East. Due to
the threat level in the region, many deployed servicemembers
did not have access to their normal recreation activities. In
response, the USO significantly expanded its own in-person and
virtual offerings to ensure that those serving in the region
were supported with the necessary resources to maintain morale
and connection to their families.
The committee understands that the USO has also broadened
its outreach to other critical regions, including the Indo-
Pacific, eastern Europe, Africa, and aboard Navy ships deployed
worldwide. Notably, the USO measured an 11 percent increase in
visits to its centers in 2024, tracking 11.3 million
interactions with servicemembers and their families, and will
open new brick-and-mortar centers in Singapore and Louisiana in
2025. In 2023, the USO launched the first USO Center aboard a
Navy ship, the USS George H. W. Bush (CVN 77), and has since
expanded this initiative to seven additional aircraft carriers
including the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), USS George
Washington (CVN 73), USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72), USS Carl
Vinson (CVN 70), USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), USS Harry S.
Truman (CVN 75), and USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76). Working with
the Navy, the USO plans to open centers on two additional
carriers in 2025 as well as all new Ford-class carriers as they
are completed, per Navy's request for the expansion of this
successful pilot program.
Accordingly, the committee encourages robust funding for
the USO to ensure that it can continue to meet the ever-
evolving needs of servicemembers and their families.
Development of regular military compensation pay table
The committee recognizes the importance of clearly
communicating the full value of military compensation to
servicemembers, their families, and the public. While the
Department of Defense (DOD) currently publishes basic pay
tables annually, these tables do not fully reflect the
comprehensive nature of regular military compensation (RMC),
which includes not only basic pay but also basic allowance for
housing, basic allowance for subsistence, retirement benefits,
educational assistance, medical insurance, and the associated
federal tax advantages.
To enhance transparency and better inform servicemembers
about their total compensation package, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to develop an annual regular military
compensation pay table that presents the total estimated value
of RMC across all ranks and years of service. The pay table
should include explanatory materials to help servicemembers
understand the full scope of their compensation.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
February 1, 2026, outlining the methodology used to calculate
the RMC figures, including assumptions related to housing
location, dependency status, and tax treatment. The briefing
should provide a sample of the aforementioned annual regular
military compensation pay table that presents the total
estimated value of RMC across all ranks and years of service.
The briefing also should address the advisability and
feasibility of publishing the RMC pay table annually alongside
the basic pay table and should describe the steps the DOD would
take to effectively communicate this information to the force.
Exempted positions from Deferred Resignation Program
The committee recognizes the importance of maintaining a
mission-ready civilian workforce within the Department of
Defense (DOD) and ensuring that critical positions are not
adversely impacted by workforce reduction initiatives. The
committee recognizes that the Deferred Resignation Program as
implemented in the Department of Defense permitted voluntary
workforce reductions and included mission essential exemptions.
The committee is aware that certain categories of
personnel, including military personnel, have been historically
exempted from similar programs and that Title 32 Dual Status
Technicians play a critical role in maintaining the readiness
of National Guard formations. Given the urgency of exemption
requests submitted by the National Guard Bureau and the time-
sensitive nature of the program, the committee is concerned
about the lack of clarity regarding the positions that have
been formally exempted by DOD leadership.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 1, 2025, detailing all positions and occupational
categories granted exemptions from the Deferred Resignation
Program. This report should include: (1) A comprehensive list
of all exempted positions, including pay plan, occupational
series, grade, and title; (2) The justification provided for
each exemption; and (3) The process by which exemption requests
were reviewed and approved.
Military housing price setting software report
The committee is concerned about landlords' potential
collusion and use of price-setting algorithms to artificially
raise rents to pocket basic allowance for housing (BAH)
increases. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, by not later than
March 1, 2026, on the Department of Defense's plan to
strengthen oversight into the potential use of algorithmic
pricing in military communities. The report should include
information on the extent to which landlords in military
communities utilize price-setting software, including RealPage,
to set apartment rents paid by servicemembers using BAH.
Report on student loan challenges for servicemembers
The student loan landscape has shifted significantly in
recent years, including for servicemembers. The committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to review
the student loan repayment challenges of servicemembers. This
review should address: (1) What challenges servicemembers face
in student loan repayment, including challenges related to
recent changes in repayment procedures, third-party scams, and
servicer misconduct; (2) How federal agencies help
servicemembers navigate these challenges; and (3) Any
recommendations for the Congress and Federal agencies to
address these challenges. The committee further directs the
Comptroller General to periodically brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the status of this review and publish a report on the review
not later than March 1, 2026.
Use of surcharge funds for Defense Commissary infrastructure
The committee supports efforts to modernize, maintain, and
improve commissary facilities in order to ensure continued
access to affordable, high-quality groceries for servicemembers
and their families. The committee recognizes the importance of
sustained investment in commissary infrastructure and
acknowledges the role that surcharge revenues can play in
enabling these improvements.
To inform future decisions regarding the most appropriate
and effective use of surcharge proceeds in support of
commissary system infrastructure, and to ensure long-term
sustainability of the benefit, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than January 1, 2026, that includes: (1) An
explanation of how current authorities under title 10, United
States Code, particularly section 2484, are being used to
support the repair, maintenance, improvement, or modernization
of commissary facilities, including any constraints encountered
in applying surcharge funds to these purposes; (2) A
description of any additional authorities the Department of
Defense believes are needed to more effectively support
commissary infrastructure, along with the rationale for such
changes; and (3) A summary of how the Department would
prioritize the use of surcharge funds, if such additional funds
are authorized for various facility-related needs--including
maintenance, repair, upgrades, or new construction--to ensure
cost-effectiveness, alignment with operational requirements,
and equitable access for beneficiaries.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Tricare, Brain Health Matters, and Other Health Care
Benefits
Sec. 701--Inclusion of additional requirements in notifications to
modify scope of services provided at military medical treatment
facilities
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1073d(f)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to modify
the elements of the notification the Secretary of Defense is
required to provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives prior to modifying the
scope of services provided by a military medical treatment
facility. The provision would require the notification to
include endorsements from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, as well as the Surgeon General of the military
department concerned, indicating that any proposed modification
of services provided at a military medical treatment facility
would have no effect on operational requirements of the Armed
Forces or on training and readiness of military medical
personnel. The provision would also require the notification to
include an assessment from the Director of the Defense Health
Agency that explains how members of the Armed Forces and
covered beneficiaries receiving services at the facility will
continue to receive care.
Sec. 702--Expansion of eligibility for hearing aids to include children
of retired members of the Uniformed Services enrolled in family
coverage under TRICARE Select
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1077 of title 10, United States Code, to expand
eligibility for hearing aids to include children of retirees
enrolled in family coverage under TRICARE Select.
Sec. 703--Assessment of behavioral health and social health conditions
of military personnel and their families assigned to Creech Air
Force Base, Nevada
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Director
of the Defense Health Agency, to assess the behavioral health
and social health conditions of members of the Air Force
assigned to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada, and their families.
Sec. 704--Authority to provide sexual assault medical forensic
examinations on a nonreimbursable basis to certain otherwise
ineligible individuals
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to authorize medical personnel of the
Department of Defense to provide sexual assault medical
forensic examinations in a military treatment facility to an
individual who is not otherwise eligible for healthcare from
the Department and reports a sexual assault offense for which
the Defense Criminal Investigative Service may initiate an
investigation.
Sec. 705--Fertility treatment for certain members of the Uniformed
Services and dependents
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
fertility-related care for a member of the uniformed services
on active duty, or a dependent of such a member, shall be
covered under TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Select.
Sec. 706--Restriction on performance of sex change surgeries
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit the use
of funds available to the Department of Defense, and the use of
military medical treatment facilities, to perform or facilitate
sex change surgeries.
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration
Sec. 711--Codification of position of Director of the Defense Health
Agency
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1073c of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Director of the Defense Health Agency to hold a rank that is
the same or greater than the rank of any officer serving as the
Surgeon General of any military department. The provision would
also require the Director of the Defense Health Agency to be a
joint qualified officer.
Sec. 712--Establishment of policies for priority assignment of medical
personnel of Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish policies for the priority
assignment of medical personnel of the Department of Defense.
The provision would also require the Secretaries of the
military departments to assign medical personnel consistent
with the Secretary of Defense's priorities.
Sec. 713--Graduate medical education partnership demonstration program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to seek to establish a demonstration
program to expand partnerships between Department of Defense
(DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities for
the purpose of increasing case volume for DOD graduate medical
education programs.
Sec. 714--Modification of administration of medical malpractice claims
by members of the uniformed services
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2733a of title 10, United States Code, by establishing
a third-party review panel, jointly established by the Judge
Advocates of the services, to consider Department of Defense
medical malpractice appeals filed by servicemembers.
Sec. 715--Improvement of transition of medics in the Armed Forces to
the civilian workforce in health care occupations
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary concerned to develop recommendations to improve the
transition of medics into the civilian workforce in health care
occupations. The provision would also require the Secretary to
submit a report to relevant congressional committees on any
recommendations developed and an implementation plan.
Sec. 716--Improvement of provider directory accuracy for specialty care
providers under the TRICARE program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Defense Health Agency (DHA) to ensure that the
accuracy of the provider directory under the TRICARE program
for all specialty care provider types reaches an average
accuracy across all specialty care providers of not less than
70 percent within 5 years of the date of the enactment of this
Act. The provision would also require the Director of the DHA
to provide a report and a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
implementation of this section. Additionally, the provision
would require the Comptroller General of the United States to
conduct an annual review of the TRICARE provider directory and
submit a report to Congress on the results of the review.
Sec. 717--Review of disclosure requirements under processes and forms
relating to health care provider credentialing and privileging
of Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to review all processes and forms relating
to health care provider credentialing and privileging of health
care providers who provide care at a military medical treatment
facility or through the civilian network of the TRICARE
program. The review should focus on any forms or processes that
require disclosure or other information related to the
provider's mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related
health conditions. The provision would also require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress, not later
than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, on the
findings of the review and a detailed plan to update forms and
processes to refrain from requiring providers to disclose metal
health-related conditions when there is no current impairment.
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters
Sec. 721--Strategic infectious disease medical research plan
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of
the military departments, to submit a comprehensive, strategic
infectious disease medical research plan to the congressional
defense committees, not later than 90 days after the date on
which the President submits a budget for fiscal year 2027.
Additionally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a detailed budget for carrying out the
strategic infectious disease medical research plan in
conjunction with the fiscal year 2027 budget request submitted
pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code,
and annually thereafter through fiscal year 2032.
Sec. 722--Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration
Fund
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1704(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) to extend the Joint
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical
Facility Demonstration Fund from September 30, 2026, to
September 30, 2027.
Sec. 723--Pilot program on wastewater surveillance system of Department
of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
development and implementation of a wastewater surveillance
system pilot program for the Department of Defense.
Items of Special Interest
Access to obstetrician-gynecologist care
The committee has heard concerns about the availability of
obstetrician-gynecologist medical care available to TRICARE
beneficiaries, including servicemembers, at Fort Drum, New
York. The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than December 1, 2025, on
the adequacy and sufficiency of obstetrician-gynecologist care
available to TRICARE beneficiaries in the vicinity of Fort
Drum, New York. The briefing shall include: (1) An overview of
the administrative and cost barriers to expanding obstetrician-
gynecologist care in the Watertown, New York area; (2) An
assessment of the feasibility and advisability of expanding
obstetrician-gynecologist care available at Fort Drum, New
York; and (3) Any other relevant matters that the Secretary
deems appropriate.
Anomalous health incidents
The committee continues to strongly support the work of the
Department of Defense's cross-functional team for addressing
the threats posed by emerging directed energy weapons,
including those that could plausibly result in anomalous health
incidents (AHI), and believes the efforts of the cross-
functional team have significantly advanced the Department's
understanding of the threats these technologies pose to U.S.
military, intelligence, and other personnel. The committee
believes the cross-functional team has been an important and
independent contributor to interagency consideration of these
issues.
The committee encourages the Department to continue to
provide the cross-functional team with adequate resources to
continue its efforts, particularly with respect to providing
treatment for those affected by AHIs and ensuring timely
compensation under the Helping American Victims Affected by
Neurological Attacks Act of 2021 (Public Law 117-46). Lastly,
the committee encourages the Department, via the cross-
functional team, to redouble efforts to characterize emerging
directed energy threats, understand their origin, and develop
countermeasures.
However, the committee is concerned that the Defense Health
Program budget request cuts AHI research and seeks to eliminate
the stand-alone project code. The committee strongly encourages
the Department to ensure robust funding for this force
protection research in fiscal year 2027.
Biologic vascular repair for warfighters
The committee notes that recent advancements in biologic
vascular repair technology, successfully deployed to front-line
hospitals in active conflict zones and austere environments,
have resulted in Food and Drug Administration-approved
innovations that present new opportunities to enhance care for
servicemembers with vascular injuries sustained on the
battlefield. These regenerative medicine technologies are off-
the-shelf, universally implantable, demonstrate low
susceptibility to infection, and can mitigate challenges
associated with traditional vascular repair methods.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Joint Trauma System
(JTS) to evaluate and, if advisable, incorporate these
innovations into the standard protocol in military trauma care.
In particular, the JTS should evaluate these advancements for
use in treating extremity arterial injury when urgent
revascularization is needed to avoid imminent limb loss and
when autologous vein graft is not feasible.
Blast overpressure data modernization
The committee notes section 724 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) included a
provision to address servicemember brain health and directed
the Secretary of Defense to establish roles and
responsibilities central to the documentation of blast
overpressure exposure. The committee believes the use of
artificial intelligence (AI) to capture, protect, store, and
disseminate information regarding blast overpressure and
traumatic brain injury (TBI) in training and operational
environments is critical to ensure the health and readiness of
servicemembers and provide decision support to leaders across
the care continuum.
The committee supports the ongoing efforts by the Defense
Health Agency (DHA) to modernize data and analytical
capabilities to support healthcare across the Military Health
System through the Digital Front Door initiative. Therefore,
the committee directs the Office of the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs and the DHA to leverage progress
made in AI and data modernization through the Digital Front
Door initiative to expedite the use of AI and data
modernization capabilities, facilitating the dissemination of
information regarding blast overpressure and TBI in accordance
with the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159).
Briefing on feasibility of Department of Defense partnership with non-
profit academic medical center to study traumatic brain injury
The committee continues to be concerned about emerging
information indicating the detrimental whole-health impact of
repeated blast overpressure exposure on members of the Armed
Forces. Research has shown an association between blast
exposure and altered brain structure, compromised brain
function, and numerous medical comorbidities impacting both
physical and psychological health. Those negative health
impacts are pointing to early maladaptive aging that impacts
force readiness and long-term health. In the post-9/11
conflicts, there has been a surge in training-related demands
and combat exposures for members of the Armed Forces, in
particular among members serving in special operations units.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
June 1, 2026, on the feasibility and advisability of conducting
a longitudinal medical study with a non-profit academic medical
center that specializes in traumatic brain injury and has
documented experience working with special operations personnel
on traumatic brain injury, including medical comorbidity
evaluation and treatment, to analyze special operations
personnel health data.
Briefing on telehealth-enabled solutions for treatment of
musculoskeletal injuries
The committee is aware of the Defense Health Agency's
ongoing efforts to improve access to healthcare for the
millions of beneficiaries enrolled in the military healthcare
system. In addition to broadening accessibility under the
managed care network, recruiting and retaining military medical
providers, and achieving full operational use of military
medical facilities, exploring remote and telehealth
capabilities will be critical in sustaining the military
healthcare system as a high-quality benefit for servicemembers,
retirees, and military families.
Therefore, not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on the
feasibility and advisability of implementing telehealth-enabled
therapeutic solutions for the treatment and prevention of
musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries for members of the Armed Forces.
This report should include: (1) A review of existing
telehealth-enabled MSK solutions, including pilot programs, and
an assessment of the costs and benefits of such solutions
relative to in-person MSK treatments, including physical
therapy; (2) Recommendations for increasing servicemember
access to telehealth-enabled MSK solutions as a means to
enhance readiness and address barriers to compliance with in-
person physical therapy protocols; and (3) Any other relevant
matters that the Secretary deems necessary or appropriate.
Comptroller General review of blast overpressure documentation
implementation
The committee remains concerned about the impact of blast
overpressure exposure on servicemembers and their brain health.
To ensure that the Department of Defense is conducting timely
implementation of congressional reforms in the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct
a review of the following:
(1) The status of implementation of blast
overpressure reforms included in Public Law 118-159,
including Sections 721 through 725, and any related
report language in Senate Report 118-188;
(2) The status of each of the services in
implementing baseline cognitive assessments, as
mandated under the August 2024 memorandum on
``Department of Defense Requirements for Managing Brain
Health Risks from Blast Overpressure,'' and regular
follow-up assessments for servicemembers to track brain
health over their career;
(3) The progress of the Department and services in
establishing and maintaining blast overpressure
exposure logs and traumatic brain injury logs and other
documentation on exposure for servicemembers; and
(4) Any steps the Department is taking to address the
potential link between blast overpressure exposure and
risks of suicide.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee on preliminary
findings, not later than April 1, 2026, with the results to
follow in a report and in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General study on impact of behavioral and mental health
staffing shortfalls at military medical treatment facilities
The committee recognizes the importance of robust mental
and behavioral health care for military personnel and their
families. The committee is aware of a shortfall of behavioral
and mental health staffing in military medical treatment
facilities, resulting in the lack of timely mental health care
for authorized beneficiaries.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to conduct a study on: (1) Behavioral and
mental health staffing shortfalls at military medical treatment
facilities within the contiguous United States; (2) The impact
of such shortfalls on access to care for Active-Duty members of
the Armed Forces; and (3) The effectiveness of steps to
mitigate those impacts and improve access to behavioral and
mental health care for such members.
The study should include an assessment of the following:
(1) The number of positions filled and the number of positions
vacant at military medical treatment facilities, including
positions for behavioral health and mental health providers in
specialty clinics, behavioral health consultants in primary
care clinics, and other positions that affect appointment
availability for behavioral health services; (2) The
availability and timeliness of behavioral health and mental
health appointments for Active-Duty members of the Armed Forces
at military medical treatment facilities and through civilian
provider networks under the TRICARE program (as defined in
section 1072 of title 10, United States Code); and (3) An
assessment of the steps to be taken by the Department of
Defense to help military medical treatment facilities alleviate
demand on behavioral health and mental health providers and
increase appointment availability for behavioral health
services, including by implementing new triaging approaches,
increased use of telehealth and behavioral health technicians,
hiring and retention support, or other strategies.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to brief the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on this study, not later than January 12, 2026,
with a report to follow by a date mutually agreed upon at the
time of the briefing.
Continuing medical education for military professionals
The committee recognizes the important role of attendance
at professional conferences for military health professionals.
Attendance and participation in local, national, and
international conferences benefits military medical
professionals and improves our military's readiness.
The committee understands that conference attendance is a
vital way to transfer and acquire knowledge and lessons learned
to improve patient care and reduce casualties, foster
collaboration and innovation, and obtain Continuing Medical
Education (CME) credits. Professional conferences improve
readiness by connecting junior military medical professionals
with experienced combat veterans who have deployed multiple
times to combat regions, many of whom are no longer in the
military but remain active at national conferences. They also
provide settings to strengthen military-civilian partnerships.
Furthermore, attendance is a retention tool as it improves
morale, allows for professional development, and provides
opportunities for academic recognition that improves military
physicians' promotions into leadership positions.
Despite these benefits, military attendance at professional
conferences has declined over the last decade, at least in part
due to bureaucratic obstacles, lack of support from leadership,
inadequate funding, and a general undervaluing of the role
national academic medical conferences can play in maintaining
our national strategic advantage. The committee encourages the
Department of Defense to allocate resources toward and
facilitate increased attendance of military health
professionals at professional conferences.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Director
of the Defense Health Agency, Service Secretaries, and the
Defense Health Board, to deliver a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026, on opportunities for the
Department to allocate resources toward and facilitate military
health professionals' increased attendance at professional
conferences, as well as recommendations to overcome barriers to
doing so.
Department of Defense pharmaceutical supply chain report
The committee is concerned by the challenges to ensuring
servicemembers have access to safe, high-quality, and effective
pharmaceutical drugs. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing and report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than July 1, 2026, on the Department of Defense's
(DOD) purchasing of drugs and medical countermeasures,
including the volumes purchased and costs of these purchases,
whether it has experienced any difficulties with supply
challenges, including but not limited to shortages related to
each of these drugs, and any shortfalls. The report shall
include the following information:
(1) DOD's annual procurement of each of these drugs
and medical countermeasures, over the past 5 years,
including the number of purchased units, the cost, and
the procurement method used;
(2) The percentage of the U.S. commercial marketplace
that the DOD represents for each of these drugs and
medical countermeasures and explanations for any cases
in which the DOD is unable to determine that
information;
(3) The country or countries from which the active
pharmaceutical ingredient (API) is manufactured for
each of these drugs and medical countermeasures, and,
if unable to determine, an indication of and reason for
that inability;
(4) Whether each of these drugs or medical
countermeasures has experienced a shortage within the
past 5 years under the drug shortage list maintained by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under Section
506E of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 356e) or under the American Society of Health
System Pharmacist Drug Shortage database;
(5) Notation of limitations in reporting to the FDA
and the range of drugs used by the DOD which may not be
commonly used by the public, including but not limited
to medical countermeasures, including whether each of
these drugs experienced any other supply challenges.
These include but are not limited to: products that are
not available, products that are not available at
desired quantities, or products with significant delays
in procurement;
(6) The impact of these shortages on the DOD for each
of these drugs and medical countermeasures, including
any impact on military readiness, costs resulting from
direct additional healthcare expenditure, indirect
costs resulting from higher rates of illness, the
shortfall in units that the DOD experienced for each of
these drugs, and the number of DOD personnel unable to
receive each of these drugs due to shortages and supply
challenges, if any;
(7) Whether the DOD has responded to shortage and
supply challenges for each of these drugs and medical
countermeasures by purchasing them at a higher cost
from another manufacturer and, if so, the increased
unit cost and total expenditure; by using a different,
less-optimal medication; by adjusting dosages or
dispensing of the drug; or taking other related
actions;
(8) Whether the DOD has responded to shortages and
supply challenges by purchasing drugs or medical
countermeasures from another manufacturer considered
less secure under the Defense Logistics Agency
hierarchy of drug security provided in the ``Report on
the Department of Defense Pharmaceutical Supply Chain
Risks'' in response to Section 860(a) of the James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263);
(9) Any other actions the DOD has taken, including
any requests to or collaborations with other Federal
agencies, to respond to the shortages and supply
challenges for each of these drugs or medical
countermeasures;
(10) The number of finished pharmaceutical products
purchased by the DOD that are produced exclusively in
China and the number of pharmaceutical products
purchased by the DOD that contain APIs produced
exclusively in China; and
(11) Any other legislative changes necessary to help
the DOD improve visibility into the supply chains for
drugs and medical countermeasures purchased by the DOD.
Foreign adversary threats to genetic medicine supply chains
The committee remains concerned over potential threats to
the supply chains for genetic medicine, particularly for
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA)-based
technologies. It is imperative to protect advanced technologies
from supply chain disruption. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than April 1, 2026, on: (1) Vulnerabilities related to
bulk transfer of genetic information to foreign adversaries
with potential application for further development of
adversarial DNA and RNA technologies; (2) Recommendations for
how foreign adversary access to bulk genetic information and
technology can be restricted; (3) Recommendations for further
restricting foreign adversary participation in U.S. supply
chains for DNA and RNA technologies; and (4) Any other items
the Secretary determines relevant.
General temporary military contingency payment adjustment for
children's hospitals
The committee is aware that a recent 2023 Defense Health
Agency (DHA) rule modifies general temporary military
contingency payment adjustment policy and affects the
reimbursement process for children's hospitals. In light of
these changes, the committee seeks to clarify the scope of the
children's hospital reimbursement policy and ensure
transparency in its implementation. The committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than March 1, 2026. The report shall include:
(1) A definition of the term ``essential'' as defined
in DHA rule 2023-06452 and criteria for making that
determination;
(2) A list of the criteria that would warrant
reimbursement as the rule is written;
(3) The total number of reimbursement claims
submitted since the implementation of the policy;
(4) The total dollar amount reimbursed under the
policy during that period;
(5) A breakdown of which children's hospitals have
received reimbursements and by geographic region, if
available;
(6) Any identified challenges or inconsistencies in
the applications of the reimbursement policy; and
(7) An assessment of any access to care issues
resulting from the revised contingency payment
adjustment policy.
The committee expects this report to inform future
oversight and potential legislative action related to
children's hospital reimbursement policy and personnel support.
Medical licensure portability for the National Guard
The committee recognizes the essential role that National
Guard (NG) healthcare providers (HCPs) play in contributing to
our Armed Forces' medical corps and medical enterprise. They
are asked to maintain a high level of readiness to deploy at a
moment's notice to provide expert medical care to and save the
lives of Americans during natural disasters or to
servicemembers during military operations. This high level of
readiness depends on the ability of NG HCPs to maintain expert
proficiency through regular hands-on trainings and
certifications, especially on the kind of trauma care most
relevant to injuries during emergency or conflict scenarios.
The committee is aware that to obtain such specialized
training, NG HCPs may be required to travel to a completely
different State for annual training or other stateside
operational missions requiring medical support. The committee
supports NG HCPs having ready and easy access to the best
cross-state training opportunities.
In order to streamline access by NG HCPs to cross-state
training, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs, in consultation with the Chief of
the National Guard Bureau, to provide a briefing, not later
than March 31, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on licensure
portability for National Guard medical providers and whether
existing law presents barriers to generating readiness.
Military efforts to mitigate risks of antimicrobial resistance
The committee notes that one of the risks for
servicemembers with traumatic injuries is developing wound
infections, especially in austere environments. Bacteria or
fungi that are resistant to multiple antibiotics are growing
domestically and globally. This has become an increasing
challenge for military causalities in Europe, Asia, and Africa.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs, in consultation with the Joint
Staff Surgeon, to provide a briefing, not later than May 2,
2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives summarizing Department of Defense
efforts to detect and mitigate antimicrobial resistance in the
military health system. The briefing should include the
following: (1) An assessment of the risk to military forces
associated with antimicrobial resistance; (2) A summary of the
actions taken by the Director of the Defense Health Agency and
the Surgeons General of the military departments to mitigate
the risks identified; and (3) Any other matters the Secretary
determines to be relevant.
Military Health System facilities
The committee is concerned that there are not enough
civilian or military healthcare centers to treat the high
number of casualties likely to result from large-scale combat
operations. Furthermore, Military Health System care facilities
face large, under-funded infrastructure requirements to upgrade
often aging buildings. Given the rising costs of healthcare
coverage, which divert funding from operational medical
requirements, and other pressures on the Department of
Defense's budget, there is an opportunity to consider other
financing mechanisms for improving Military Health System care
facilities. One option that has been successfully employed for
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare facilities is
the Communities Helping Invest through Property and
Improvements Needed for Veterans Act (CHIP-IN Act), which
established a pilot program to empower local communities to
assist in the planning and construction of VA healthcare
facilities by leveraging private financing and support. The
committee believes that such a mechanism might hold similar
promise for Department of Defense facilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs that the Secretary of
Defense brief the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 1, 2026, on the feasibility and advisability of
establishing a similar program whereby local communities can
assist with the planning and construction of Department of
Defense healthcare facilities through privately subsidizing
projects and other means of support. The briefing should
specifically address whether the CHIP-IN Act could serve as a
model for the Department of Defense to establish a similar
initiative which will effectively address any potential
shortfalls in military medical services during large-scale
combat operations.
Military medical personnel timecards
The committee notes that the Defense Health Agency (DHA)
requires military medical personnel to submit timecards to
document how these personnel are allocating their duty and
leave hours. The data from these timecards is important to
address military staffing challenges in military treatment
facilities (MTFs). The committee is aware that there are many
limitations, inconsistencies, and inaccuracies associated with
the current timecard system.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs to submit a semi-annual briefing on
the timecard data compiled by the Defense Health Agency, not
later than January 15, 2026, and continuing every 6 months
thereafter until December 31, 2028. These briefings should
include the following: (1) The number of hours military medical
personnel are spending in each timecard category, broken out by
type of provider (e.g. exclusively assigned to an MTF, dual-
assigned to a non-MTF unit, or period-intermittently assigned
to an MTF), military department, and Defense Health Network;
(2) An assessment of whether military personnel are accurately
completing timecard submissions as required by the DHA; and (3)
Any other matters as determined by the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs.
National Disaster Medical System pilot program
The committee notes that section 740 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92), as amended by Section 741 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283), directed a pilot program to
establish civilian and military partnerships to enhance
interoperability and medical surge capability and capacity of
the National Disaster Medical System. While the committee
continues to support implementation of this pilot program, the
Department of Defense has been inconsistent in providing the
committee with timely updates on the execution of the program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Health Agency (DHA), in consultation with the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, to provide a briefing
to the congressional defense committees, not later than March
1, 2026, on the implementation of the pilot program both as a
whole and at each of the five pilot sites. Specifically, the
briefing should discuss DHA initiatives to test and scale
effective site-specific projects; any initial analysis of the
pilot program in terms of cost and effectiveness; and any
preliminary recommendations for legislative or administrative
actions such as extending the pilot program or making its
authority permanent.
Nonaddictive opioid alternatives
The committee remains concerned about the continued use of
opioids by active-duty and retired servicemembers for the
treatment of pain. The committee directs the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to provide a report to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives and publicly post on their website, not later
than March 1, 2026, on steps the Department will take to ensure
that nonaddictive alternatives to opioids are on the TRICARE
Uniform Formulary. The report shall include a timeline
detailing when these medications will be available to TRICARE
beneficiaries once they have received Food and Drug
Administration approval.
On-demand intravenous fluids for expeditionary medicine
The committee recognizes that intravenous (IV) fluids have
been in limited supply domestically since 2014, even prior to
the widespread shortages caused by Hurricanes Maria and Helene.
The committee also recognizes the large quantities of resources
required by the Department of Defense to ship IV fluids around
the world. The committee supports the efforts undertaken by the
Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human
Services to develop a modular, self-contained, distributed, and
sterile manufacturing platform for IV fluids. The committee
recognizes that this platform requires modifications to succeed
in the contested logistics domains, including rapid detection
of endotoxin.
Therefore, the committee encourages budgeting for sterile
IV fluids for expeditionary medicine in fiscal year 2027 and
beyond. Additionally, the committee encourages the military
services to engage directly with the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration in order to expedite the review process related
to on-demand fluids in forward operating locations.
Private sector support for multi-patient movement contingency
requirements
The committee notes that rapid movement of wounded, ill,
and injured servicemembers is critically important in
contingency operations. The committee is aware that the Joint
Staff, U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), and the Global
Patient Movement Joint Advisory Board have analyzed the
projected military airlift capacity and medical operations
required to support patient movement from outside the
continental United States to the continental United States
(CONUS) and then to distribute patients within CONUS in
accordance with the National Disaster Medical System guidance
and the Integrated Continental United States Medical Operations
Plan. The analysis demonstrated a shortfall of military airlift
and fully equipped medical crews to provide comprehensive
aeromedical services.
To address these gaps, the committee understands the
Defense Health Agency issued a request to augment the
Department of Defense's (DOD) aeromedical evacuation system
with commercial wide-body aircraft capable of interoperability
with the military system to achieve patient movement within
CONUS. As a proof of concept, TRANSCOM invited private sector
partners to participate in the Ultimate Caduceus 2024 exercise
at Travis Air Force Base. The private sector demonstrated an
ability to provide an appropriately configured aircraft with
supplies and medical crews identical to current DOD patient
movement standards.
With appropriate planning, this exercise proved a civilian
capability to provide large-volume patient movements to augment
the military aeromedical evacuation system during
contingencies. The committee applauds this outstanding example
of a military-civilian partnership critical to enhancing
medical casualty evacuation worldwide and encourages the DOD to
continue exercising these capabilities with regularity.
TRICARE contingency planning
The Defense Health Agency (DHA) administers the TRICARE
program to provide healthcare benefits to beneficiaries in
Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs
hospitals and clinics, as well as through participating
civilian healthcare provider networks. In the event of
significant numbers of combat casualties that exhaust the
current Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs' capacity,
the National Disaster Medical System exists to supplement
military healthcare systems and response capabilities. However,
the committee believes that further analysis is required to
understand the ability of DHA to efficiently coordinate care
among civilian providers in the event of large-scale combat
operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director, DHA, in
consultation with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs, to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on the feasibility
and advisability of modifying TRICARE's Managed Care Support
Contract to better prepare for the high casualties likely to
result from large-scale combat operations. The briefing should
specifically consider the feasibility and advisability of
adding an emergency clause to private medical providers'
contracts with TRICARE that would account for all medical needs
of the Department of Defense in the contiguous United States.
TRICARE pharmacy briefing
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
confidential briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee
once each 180 days, beginning February 1, 2026, and ending on
February 1, 2029, on the difference in reimbursement rates or
practices, direct and indirect remuneration fees or other price
concessions, and clawbacks between: (1) Pharmacies that are
affiliates of TRICARE's contracted pharmacy benefit manager;
and (2) Pharmacies that are not affiliates of TRICARE's
contracted pharmacy benefit manager.
The briefing shall also include the amount of any
administrative fee received by the contracted pharmacy benefit
manager for each prescription such contractor processes under
TRICARE's pharmacy program.
TRICARE provider and beneficiary complaint mechanism
The committee continues to hear from TRICARE providers and
beneficiaries about issues that cannot be resolved directly
through regional managed care support contractors. The
committee is further aware that when providers and
beneficiaries are faced with these situations, they do not have
effective mechanisms through which they can file complaints
directly to the Defense Health Agency (DHA).
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Health Agency to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, describing: (1)
How DHA oversees complaint resolution processes operated by the
TRICARE-managed care support contractors; (2) How DHA assesses
the performance of those complaint resolution processes; (3)
How DHA assists beneficiaries and providers who have been told
that a managed care support contractor cannot resolve the
issue; (4) How DHA makes beneficiaries and providers aware of
that process; and (5) How DHA is seeking to address concerns
from beneficiaries and providers that they cannot resolve
issues through the existing complaint resolution processes.
U.S. Naval Hospital Guantanamo Bay
The committee is aware that the Defense Health Agency is
considering realigning healthcare resources in military
treatment facilities, including U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, where over 4,000 personnel are permanently assigned
and have no access to care within the immediate area of the
base. The committee notes that Section 715 of the James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023
(Public Law 117-263) prevents the Secretary of Defense from
modifying the scope of medical care before certifying to
Congress the extent to which the commander at each military
installation has been consulted regarding the proposed
modification. The committee notes that despite deliberations
regarding the downsizing of the U.S. Naval Hospital in
Guantanamo Bay, the committee has not received the required
notification under law.
Due to the lack of alternative providers adjacent to U.S.
Naval Station Guantanamo Bay; potential inpatient
responsibilities assigned in certain U.S. Southern Command
plans; and the requirement to treat TRICARE beneficiaries,
local employees, law of war detainees, and future contingency
operation personnel, the committee urges the Department of
Defense to maintain adequate medical services and justify to
Congress as required under statute any proposed reduction of
medical care at U.S. Naval Hospital in Guantanamo Bay.
Unified joint military trauma system
The committee is aware of the challenges the future
battlespace will place on combat medical operations and the
need for modernized casualty care. The committee recently
received testimony on the readiness of the Military Health
System, which noted that the Department of Defense lacks ``a
coherent, unified strategy for military medical readiness that
will deliver expert trauma/burn care on future battlefields
while also benefitting civilian trauma care and public
health.'' Additionally, the testimony suggests the Uniformed
Services University is currently developing a comprehensive
military trauma system policy roadmap that considers the direct
care component, civilian partnerships, the role of the National
Guard and Reserve, synergy with the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and involvement with the National Disaster Medical
System and National Trauma Emergency Preparedness System.
The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Health Affairs to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the status of the military trauma system policy roadmap not
later than March 1, 2026. The briefing shall include the
following elements:
(1) A list of the organizations involved in the
development of the military trauma system policy
roadmap effort;
(2) An explanation of the objectives, status, and
anticipated completion date of the updated policy;
(3) An assessment of any barriers inhibiting the
Department from implementing the updated military
trauma system policy; and
(4) Any other matters the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Health Affairs considers relevant.
Wound care and management in future combat
The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
continued activities focused on treating injuries sustained by
servicemembers in austere environments. The committee is aware
of the challenges the future battlespace will place on medical
support operations and the need for modernized casualty care
capabilities for combat operations, including wound care and
management.
The committee is concerned with the lack of a comprehensive
Military Health System strategy to address wound care and
management, encompassing advances in research, development,
clinical care, and education and training to deliver lifesaving
pre-hospital wound care, stabilize battlefield casualties, and
enhance readiness with robust return to duty rates.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Health Affairs to convene a working group of
subject matter experts to develop a strategy for wound care and
management, including prevention, treatment, and advanced wound
care to address wound infection in future operational
environments.
The committee also directs that, not later than March 1,
2026, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs
submit a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives that includes: (1)
Identification of and recommendations to amend clinical
practice guidelines to treat combat wounds in future
battlespaces; (2) Identification of and recommendations for
education and training needs and military-civilian partnerships
applicable to the advancement of wound care and management
following combat injury; and (3) A summary of any engagement
with industry and academic medical institutions to support
partnerships to address the wound care and management needs of
servicemembers in future operational environments.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management
Sec. 801--Transition of program executive officer role to portfolio
acquisition executive
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1737(a) of title 10, United States Code, to redefine
program executive officers as portfolio acquisition executives
and provide such portfolio acquisition executives with greater
authorities and responsibilities for requirements, resourcing,
and acquisition.
Sec. 802--Capstone requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
new section, 3209, to title 10, United States Code, to
establish capstone requirements for three or more portfolio
acquisition executives in consultation with the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council to enable greater speed,
agility, and innovation in fielding military capabilities.
Sec. 803--Modification to acquisition strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4211 of title 10, United States Code, by modifying
specific requirements for acquisition strategies.
Sec. 804--Modifications to modular open systems approach
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 4401-4403 of title 10, United States Code, by
clarifying definitions of the modular open systems approach and
mandating implementation plans, enforceable contract clauses,
and centralized digital repositories for modular system
interfaces. The committee notes that the provision seeks to
reduce supplier dependency and vendor lock by requiring non-
proprietary, machine-readable interfaces to facilitate third-
party integration and system upgrades.
Sec. 805--Alternative test and evaluation pathway for designated
defense acquisition programs
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
an alternative pathway for the test and evaluation (T&E) of
software acquisition programs using authorities in section 3603
of title 10, United States Code, and other programs designated
by the Secretary of Defense.
The committee notes that the alternative test and
evaluation pathway would require programs to develop unified
T&E strategies integrating developmental and operational
testing, exempt covered programs from traditional requirements
like T&E Master Plans and milestone-specific tests, and require
robust data strategies with government-owned test data.
Finally, the committee notes that, under this provision, the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation retains independent
oversight, focusing on data sufficiency and continuous analysis
without mandating specific test plans. Under this provision,
the Secretary of Defense must issue implementation guidance,
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act. The Secretary must also submit a report to the
congressional defense committees on the pathway's
effectiveness, not later than 3 years after the enactment of
this Act.
Sec. 806--Department of Defense member of Cost Accounting Standards
Board
The committee recommends a provision that, pursuant to
section 1501 of title 41, United States Code, would designate
the Director of Defense Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition
Policy as the Department of Defense member of the Cost
Accounting Standards Board.
Sec. 807--Combatant command experimentation authority
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
combatant commands the authority to conduct experimentation,
prototyping, and technology demonstrations to support the
development and testing of innovative technologies and
capability solutions to address operational needs identified by
the combatant command.
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Sec. 821--Modifications to nontraditional defense contractor
definitions
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3014 of title 10, United States Code, to add to the
definition of a nontraditional defense contractor those
business entities that do not qualify as a covered segment as
defined under the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement 231.205-18 or successor regulation.
Sec. 822--Financing for covered activities
The committee recommends a provision that would allow
financing costs to be allowable and allocable as a cost for
federal contracts and subcontracts with certain stipulations.
The committee recognizes the increasing availability of
private-sector financing opportunities to support, complement,
and reinforce defense and national security needs. The
committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense and
defense companies are exploring ways to boost production of
critical defense articles with private sources of capital,
which can support investments in supply chains and capital
improvements. Such investments are vital to fill gaps where
defense investment is unavailable or cannot be leveraged
quickly enough to take advantage of fast-paced business cycles.
They can also help smooth over the uncertain cycles of
government appropriations.
The committee is increasingly aware that the distinctions
between these types of private sector financing, including
private capital, private equity, and venture capital, is
important for the Department to understand in order to make
sure that is it using the right tool for the right job.
However, the committee notes that more training, education, and
encouragement is needed for a wider range of acquisition
officials in the Department to become familiar and comfortable
with using these tools. The committee encourages the Secretary
of Defense to do more to update Department regulations and
training in order to facilitate these arrangements.
Sec. 823--Exemptions for nontraditional defense contractors
The committee recommends a provision that would exempt
nontraditional defense contractors as defined by section 3014
of title 10, United States Code, from certain business
requirements.
Sec. 824--Modifications to treatment of certain products and services
as commercial products and commercial services
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3457 of title 10, United States Code, to require
contracting officers to treat nontraditional defense
contractors at any tier of the contract as commercial products
and commercial services unless a written determination is
approved by the head of the contracting activity, delegable no
lower than the senior contracting official. The committee notes
that the provision would not make products and services that
are treated as commercial as a result of the contractor's
nontraditional defense contractor status eligible for the
commercial item preference as specified in section 3453 of
title 10, United States Code, unless a commercial item
determination is also made for the product or service.
Sec. 825--Modifications to commercial products and commercial services
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 3453 and 3456 of title 10, United States Code, to
establish a formal process for determining the non-availability
of commercial products or commercial services and require the
contracting officer and program manager of the Department of
Defense (DOD) to submit written memoranda before using non-
commercial solicitation procedures, explaining the decision
based on market research and requirements analyses. The
provision would also add consultants, researchers, and advisors
as acquisition officials to ensure their compliance with rules
prioritizing the preference for commercial products and
commercial services when supporting DOD market research and
requirements drafting.
Sec. 826--Modifications to commercial solutions openings
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3458 of title 10, United States Code, by expanding the
purposes for which the commercial solutions openings
solicitation procedure may be used and creating an authority
for sole-source follow-on procurements provided the procedures
of sections 4022 or 3204 of title 10, United States Code, are
followed.
Sec. 827--Modifications to other transactions
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4022 of title 10, United States Code, to allow for
follow-on production authorities of other transaction
agreements without a competitive prototype if the capability
has been demonstrated in a relevant environment and the
acquisition executive makes a written determination.
Sec. 828--Modifications to procurement for experimental purposes
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4023 of title 10, United States Code, by expanding the
purposes for which procurement is allowed for experimentation
purposes.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has, in
certain instances, applied procedures and requirements
established under sections 4021-4022 of title 10, United States
Code, to transactions executed under the authority of section
4023 of title 10, United States Code, including requirements
for competition and certain cost-sharing arrangements. The
committee clarifies that section 4023 constitutes a distinct
and separate authority from sections 4021-4022. Accordingly,
purchases using mechanisms not governed by the Federal
Acquisition Regulation made pursuant to section 4023 are not
subject to the procedures, requirements, or restrictions set
forth in sections 4021-4022. This clarification ensures that
the Department of Defense may fully leverage the flexibility
provided by section 4023 to expedite and streamline
acquisitions to support experimentation as intended by the
statute.
Sec. 829--Consumption-based solutions
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 253 of title 10, United States Code, by adding a new
section designated as section 3605. This section would make
permanent the procedures for consumption-based solutions that
can be metered and billed based on actual usage and have
predetermined pricing based on fixed price units.
Sec. 830--Modifications to prohibition on contracting with persons that
have fossil fuel operations with the Government of the Russian
Federation or the Russian energy sector
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) by clarifying an exemption
to the definition of business operations to include activities
related to fulfilling contracts with a fossil fuel company that
has fossil fuel business operations in the Russian Federation
that were entered into prior to the date of the enactment of
the prohibition established in such section.
Sec. 831--Modifications to relationship of other provisions of law to
procurement of commercial products and commercial services
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3452 of title 10, United States Code, to require
identification of defense-unique contract clause requirements
for the procurement of commercial products and commercial
services that are based on statute, Executive Orders, or
acquisition policies.
Sec. 832--Limitation on required flowdown of contract clauses to
subcontractors providing commercial products or commercial
services
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 247 of title 10, United States Code, by creating a new
section, 3459, that would limit the required flowdown of
contract clauses for subcontracts and supply agreements
providing commercial products or commercial services.
Sec. 833--References in contracts to Department of Defense policy
documents, instructions, and manuals
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that references to Department of Defense policy documents,
instructions, and manuals in contracts shall contain a specific
version or date.
Sec. 834--Uninsurable risk on certain contracts
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to consider equitable adjustments for the
loss of work in process on certain uninsurable contracts.
Sec. 835--Reporting of price increases
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
section 3709 of title 10, United States Code, to require
contractors on cost-reimbursable sole source contracts to
inform the contracting officer of the Department of Defense of
product and services that are 25 percent above the price
specified in the contract bid, 25 percent above the price the
Government paid in the previous year, or 50 percent above the
price paid 5 years earlier.
Sec. 836--Instructions for continued operational readiness
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
section 4664 of title 10, United States Code, to require
contractors for covered equipment to provide maintenance,
repair, and operational information to ensure operational
readiness.
Sec. 837--Indemnification of contractors against nuclear and unusually
hazardous risks
The committee recommends a provision that would define the
process by which the Department of Defense reviews requests by
contractors for indemnification against nuclear and unusually
hazardous risks. The provision would stipulate that final
decisions on approval or denial of such requests be completed
within 90 days.
Sec. 838--Late submission of cost and pricing data as invalid defense
to contract price reductions for defective cost or pricing data
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3706(c) of title 10, United States Code, to limit a
prime contractor or subcontractor from submitting after the
date of agreement on the price of a contract any cost or
pricing data obtained or otherwise made available more than 30
days before the date of agreement on the price of a contract.
Sec. 839--Modifications to submissions of cost or pricing data
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the threshold requiring the submission of certified cost or
pricing data under section 3702 of title 10, United States
Code, from $2.0 million to $10.0 million for prime contracts
entered into after June 30, 2026.
The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to conduct a study on the impacts
of exemptions from, or raising the threshold from $2.0 million
to $10.0 million for, requirements for contractors and
subcontractors to submit certified cost or pricing data under
section 3702 of title 10, United States Code, on the
willingness of companies to participate in the defense
industrial base. The report shall be submitted to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than December 1, 2026, and annually
thereafter until December 1, 2028. The report shall include the
following:
(1) An assessment of the change in the number of
unique contractors and subcontractors required to
submit certified cost or pricing data prior to any
changes in statutory requirements and after such
changes, if applicable;
(2) An assessment of the total dollars covered by
certified cost or pricing data prior to any changes in
statutory requirements and after such changes, if
applicable;
(3) An assessment of the growth in the number of
participants in the defense industrial base following
any modifications to the certified cost or pricing data
requirements, if applicable; and
(4) Qualitative and quantitative evidence
demonstrating whether changes to the certified cost or
pricing data statute and related requirements are
contributing to a change in participation in the
defense industrial base, including any identified
trends, barriers, or incentives affecting contractor
participation.
Subtitle C--Industrial Base Matters
Sec. 841--Repeal of limitations on certain Department of Defense
Executive Agent authority
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 1792 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) and
section 226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).
Sec. 842--Small unmanned aircraft system industrial base remediation
plan
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment,
acting through the Director of the Joint Production Accelerator
Cell and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base
Policy, to develop a roadmap for the desired state of the
small, unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) industrial base to
support existing sUAS programs, not later than March 1, 2026.
The provision also would require that the Secretary of Defense
submit the roadmap to the congressional defense committees. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to seek
to enter into a contract with a federally funded research and
development center to conduct a review of the defense
industrial base of the United States for sUAS components and
finished articles and to provide a report to the Secretary, not
later than September 30, 2026, with the Secretary providing the
report, along with comments, to the congressional defense
committees, not later than 30 days thereafter.
The committee remains concerned about insufficient capacity
and capability within the defense industrial base for sUAS and
the lack of clear guidance and demand from the Department of
Defense (DOD) to industry to create a resilient, competitive,
and effective sUAS industrial base. The committee notes that
the Congress has enacted several provisions to limit Federal
procurement of sUAS and associated components produced in the
People's Republic of China and to incentivize domestic
production of sUAS. The committee believes that the ability to
produce sUAS at scale to meet the demands of the DOD depends on
having access to a robust supply of critical components from
domestic and allied sources, including onshoring production and
incentivizing private and Government-owned manufacturing
facilities to produce sUAS components to support the
development of this supply chain.
Sec. 843--Application of national security waiver for strategic
materials sourcing requirement to sensitive materials
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4872 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense or his authorized delegate to apply a
national security waiver determined under section 4863(k) of
title 10, United States Code, to section 4872 of title 10,
United States Code, for the same covered material and end item.
Sec. 844--Prohibition on acquisition of clothing and fabric from
countries of concern under domestic-sourcing waivers
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4862 of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit the
Department of Defense from purchasing clothing or textiles from
countries of concern when an availability exception is granted
due to the nonavailability of domestically-sourced options.
Sec. 845--Mitigation of risks related to foreign ownership, control, or
influence of Department of Defense contractors or
subcontractors
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation of not more than 90 percent of the travel
expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security until the Secretary of Defense
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the
requirements under section 847 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) have
been implemented and submits a plan and timeline for continued
implementation of such requirements.
Sec. 846--Prohibition of procurement of molybdenum, gallium, or
germanium from non-allied foreign nations and authorization for
production from recovered material
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4872 of title 10, United States Code, to add
molybdenum, gallium, and germanium to the definition of covered
material, as well as authorizes an exception to the prohibition
for certain recovered material.
Sec. 847--Sourcing options for certain critical products
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, as soon as practicable, but not later
than fiscal year 2031, to ensure the Department of Defense
maintains multiple sources for certain critical products.
Sec. 848--Prohibiting the purchase of photovoltaic modules or inverters
from Foreign Entities of Concern
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available to be used
to enter into a contract for the procurement of photovoltaic
modules manufactured by a foreign entity of concern.
Sec. 849--Modernization of Army arsenals
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Army to accelerate the modernization of
the Army's organic industrial base to meet munitions
requirements.
Sec. 849A--Modifications to Defense Industrial Base Fund
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4817 of title 10, United States Code, to provide
additional authorities and eligible uses for the Industrial
Base Fund.
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters
Sec. 851--APEX Accelerators
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4952 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the
purpose of APEX Accelerators, standardize funding limits, and
authorize the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment to create APEX Centers of Excellence to provide
specialized expertise to business entities outside of the
geographic bounds of a center.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 861--Clarification of procurement prohibition related to
acquisition of materials mined, refined, and separated in
certain countries
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 844(a) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to clarify that the authority is intended to apply to a
contract for any covered material mined, refined, or separated
in any covered nation entered into on January 1, 2027, and
after, not to apply to end items delivered by January 1, 2027,
as previously noted by a Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
will have certain domestic or allied suppliers in place by the
effective date of the requirement to allow industry to meet the
requirements associated with section 844 by the required date.
Sec. 862--Independent study on the acquisition workforce of the
Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to contract with a qualified organization
to conduct an independent study of the defense acquisition
workforce, assessing its: (1) Effectiveness; (2) Recruitment;
(3) Retention; (4) Training; (5) Size; (6) Workload; and (7)
Integration with related fields like requirements and
budgeting. The study seeks to assess the use of metrics, career
incentives, and modern tools to achieve positive acquisition
outcomes. The provision would require the Secretary of Defense
to submit the unaltered report from the qualified organization,
along with an assessment of the findings and recommendations,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives, not later than December 31, 2027.
Sec. 863--Expedited acceptance program for supply chain illumination
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an expedited acceptance waiver if a contractor, through the use
of supply chain illumination procedures, discovers an item in
the supply chain that is non-compliant and implements a
corrective plan to ensure future compliance with existing
requirements. The provision would also require the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide
an annual briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, beginning not later
than April 1, 2026, on the expedited acceptances authorized and
corrective action plans of contractors to ensure future
compliance.
Sec. 864--Simultaneous conflicts critical munitions report
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, detailing the stockpiles of critical
munitions required to fight simultaneous conflicts in different
theaters. In addition, the provision would also require, not
later than 90 days after the report's submission, the Secretary
of Defense to submit a plan to implement critical munitions
requirements to fight simultaneous conflicts in the next budget
cycle.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
can no longer assume that our adversaries are divided, that the
United States will be able to fight one war at a time, and that
the United States can fight one war while deterring aggression
elsewhere. The committee believes that the Department of
Defense must be prepared for simultaneous conflicts in multiple
theaters. The committee also believes that, to prevent
simultaneous conflicts, the United States needs the forces
necessary to demonstrate to our adversaries the ability to
fight and win in a conflict should deterrence fail.
Sec. 865--Permanent extension and modification of demonstration and
prototyping program to advance international product support
capabilities in a contested logistics environment
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to remove the 3-year
sunset and to add digital manufacturing as part of the
prototyping program for contested logistics.
Sec. 866--Estimate of ally and partner demand for United States-
produced munitions and specified expendables
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish an annual requirement for an
estimate of the demand by U.S. allies and partners for U.S.-
produced munitions and specified expendables across the future-
years defense plan. Each estimate shall: (1) Be disaggregated
by specific munitions type and ally or partner; and (2) Include
the following: (a) analytical inputs such as information from
foreign military sales cases; (b) foreign partner munitions
needs for operational or contingency planning scenarios; (c)
wargaming results that include foreign partner contributions;
and (d) estimates based on discussions with foreign
governments.
The committee notes that the war in Ukraine, Houthi attacks
in the Red Sea, and other instances have demonstrated the
potential for rapid depletion of munitions during conflict,
which would be exacerbated even further during a protracted
conflict. The committee remains concerned by the ability of the
U.S. defense industrial base to replenish munitions stockpiles
and to surge production. The committee believes that
collaboration with allies and partners offers economies of
scale to maintain consistent production demand and increase
interoperability.
Sec. 867--Reform of contractor performance information requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to revise the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (Part 242.15) to reform contractor
performance information requirements by establishing an
objective, fact-based system focused solely on verifiable
negative performance events, such as defective products,
delinquent deliveries, or cybersecurity breaches, in order to
reduce subjectivity and administrative burden while enabling
identification of contractors with poor performance histories.
The revised system would eliminate subjective ratings in the
Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS),
implement a standardized scoring mechanism based on transaction
volume and contract value, and ensure transparency for
contractors. The provision also requires the Secretary of
Defense to update regulations and CPARS guidance within 180
days of the date of the enactment of this Act, with system
modifications completed within 1 year, and to submit a report
on implementation to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act. Additionally, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall review the new
system's effectiveness not later than 3 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 868--Repeals of existing law to streamline the defense acquisition
process
The committee recommends a provision that would amend 86
sections of title 10, United States Code, and prior National
Defense Authorization Acts to repeal various statutory
requirements related to acquisition policies and processes and
to reduce administrative complexity related to reporting
mandates, expired pilot programs, outdated requirements,
limitations, and other matters.
Sec. 869--Enhancement of defense supply chain resilience and secondary
source qualification
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 865 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159) by expanding the scope of covered
capabilities to include: (1) Critical readiness parts and
systems; (2) Parts with sole-source dependencies; (3) Excessive
lead times; (4) Unreasonable pricing; or (5) Other supply chain
issues. The provision would establish Expedited Qualification
Panels in each military department to standardize and
accelerate Source Approval Requests and Parts Manufacturer
Approvals within 14 days, utilizing conditional or full
approvals based on risk criteria. The provision would also
prevent duplicative review processes for aircraft parts already
approved by civil aviation authorities, requiring written
justification for additional reviews. Finally, the provision
would define critical readiness parts and systems, safety
critical items or mission-critical items, and non-safety
critical items or non-mission-critical items.
Sec. 870--Enhanced product support management for integrated
sustainment of weapon systems
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4324 of title 10, United States Code, to enhance weapon
system sustainment by integrating directive authority and
responsibility in product support managers to coordinate
activities across product support providers. The provision
would establish a Major Program Manager in each applicable
Portfolio Acquisition Executive to manage the sustainment of
in-service systems, create a formal career path for product
support managers with expertise in sustainment or logistics,
and institute a liaison officer program to align with the
sustainment working capital funds. Additionally, the provision
would define ``critical readiness parts and systems'' to
address readiness issues such as Mission Impaired Capability
Awaiting Parts and Not Mission Capable Supply.
Sec. 871--Modifications to current defense acquisition requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would amend a
number of defense acquisition requirements. The provision would
amend: (1) Section 1749 of title 10, United States Code, to
remove the requirement that certain funding be provided on a
reimbursable basis; (2) Section 2222 of title 10, United States
Code, to expand the definition of covered defense business
systems; (3) Section 3012 of title 10, United States Code, to
replace ``lowest overall cost alternative'' with ``best value''
in acquisition criteria; (4) Section 3069 of title 10, United
States Code, to simplify buy-to-budget authority by removing
conditions; (5) Section 3204 of title 10, United States Code,
to revise sole-source contract approval thresholds and
authorities; (6) Section 3226 of title 10, United States Code,
to increase the uses of the availability of excess funds; (7)
Section 3243 of title 10, United States Code, to simplify
contractor incentives by removing limitations; (8) Section 3374
of title 10, United States Code, to add pre-award cost risk as
an allowable profit factor; (9) Section 3703 of title 10,
United States Code, to amend the definition of adequate price
competition; (10) Section 3705 of title 10, United States Code,
to amend recourses for data denials of cost or pricing data;
(11) Section 4201 of title 10, United States Code, to amend the
major defense acquisition program thresholds; (12) Sections
4882 and 4884 of title 10, United States Code, to transfer
industrial base assistance and grant approvals to the Secretary
of Defense; (13) Section 4231 of title 10, United States Code,
by removing the requirement to determine low-rate initial
production quantities prior to Milestone B and inserting
limitations on the number of low-rate initial production lots
and shipbuilding options associated with fixed-price
development contracts; (14) Section 890 of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232) to make permanent the pilot program to accelerate
contracting and pricing; and (15) Section 864(d) of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) to
amend the term ``capacity-based'' to be ``capability-based.''
Sec. 872--Minimum production levels for munitions
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 222c of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Chiefs of
Staff of the Armed Forces, to annually determine the minimum
production level for each variant of munitions required to meet
the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
incorporate the determined minimum production levels into the
planning, programming, budgeting, and execution process of the
Department of Defense.
Sec. 873--Processes for incentivizing contractor expansion of sources
of supply
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to enhance military readiness by
incentivizing contractor expansion of supply sources for
critical readiness parts and systems. The provision would also
mandate contractual requirements for supplier diversification,
including Acquisition Method Suffix Code reclassification to
reduce sole-source dependency, expedited qualification
processes, and the use of simulation-based verification for
certification. The provision also would require the Secretary
to enforce data rights and deliverables or initiate reverse
engineering to qualify new suppliers if design activities fail
to comply within 30 days of notification. Finally, the
provision would require the Secretary to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than December 31,
2027, on the implementation and impact of these measures.
Sec. 874--Duty-free entry of supplies procured by Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to issue duty-free entry certificates in
certain circumstances, and requires supply chain tracking.
Sec. 875--Other transactions authority reporting
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to report expenditures carried out
pursuant to section 4021 of title 10, United States Code, for
inclusion in the searchable public website established by the
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
(Public Law 109-282).
Sec. 876--Assessment of competitive effects of defense contractor
transactions
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct an
assessment of the competitive effects of defense contractor
mergers and acquisitions during the 10-year period ending on
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 877--Evaluation of TP-Link telecommunications equipment for
designation as covered telecommunications equipment or services
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to evaluate telecommunications equipment
and services manufactured or provided by TP-Link Technologies
Co., Ltd. and its subsidiaries to determine whether such
equipment should be designated as covered telecommunications
equipment or services under section 889 of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232). The Secretary must brief the congressional
defense committees on the determination not later than December
1, 2026.
Sec. 878--Country-of-origin disclosure requirements for generic drugs
purchased by the Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense from procuring a generic drug for
resale unless the seller discloses the country the generic drug
was manufactured in and the country of origin for all active
pharmaceutical ingredients and key starting materials.
Sec. 879--Phase-out of computer and printer acquisitions involving
entities owned or controlled by China
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from directly or indirectly acquiring
computers or printers manufactured by covered Chinese entities,
with a phased implementation beginning at 10 percent of
Department of Defense total procurement in fiscal year 2026 and
reaching 100 percent by fiscal year 2029. The provision allows
waivers for items used for testing, evaluation, and reverse
engineering missions on adversarial products and capabilities.
Sec. 880--Prohibition on operation, procurement, and contracting
related to foreign-made additive manufacturing machines
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from operating or procuring covered
additive manufacturing machines manufactured in or using
software and data storage from China, Iran, North Korea, or
Russia. The provision includes exceptions for intelligence,
electronic warfare, and information warfare operations and
allows the Secretary to waive the prohibition on a case-by-case
basis by certifying to the congressional defense committees
that it is required in the national interest.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced polymeric composite ammunition materials
The committee understands the importance of developing
sources of production of advanced polymeric composite materials
for large caliber ammunition. These materials have the
potential to provide significant benefits to the warfighter,
such as weight reduction and improving operational mobility.
Advanced polymeric materials have shown promise mitigating
challenges with chamber heat, which may lead to longer lifespan
for weaponry. With the existing supply chain challenges faced
by the Department of Defense (DOD) with critical materials,
alternative options should be reviewed.
There is an urgent and ongoing need for state-of-the-art
ammunition components and nonferrous, non-metallic materials
capable of withstanding extreme operational environments.
Current global threats and near-peer competition have
underscored vulnerabilities in traditional metals-based supply
chains and exposed the necessity for innovative, high-
performance alternatives.
The committee believes the DOD should emphasize domestic
material sourcing and manufacturing to ensure resilient, secure
supply chain integrity to support the warfighter.
Biosurveillance for servicemember readiness
The committee commends the Department of Defense (DOD) for
its coordinated efforts within the biodefense and medical
research community to support servicemember health and
readiness. There are a variety of existing efforts the
Department undertakes to support early detection and risk
awareness to inform decision-making against naturally
occurring, accidental, and deliberate biological threats. The
committee understands that the Global Emerging Infections
Surveillance (GEIS) program was created to improve infectious
disease surveillance, prevention, and response capability to
better protect the health of the Joint Force. The GEIS program
receives input from multiple data sources.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
April 1, 2026, on the overall biosurveillance strategy designed
to sustain a biosurveillance program capable of forecasting
potential threats to servicemember health and readiness. The
briefing should include: (1) Efforts to integrate
biosurveillance platforms and data streams supported through
military-civilian partnerships with the DOD's laboratories; (2)
Resourcing challenges or delays associated with the platforms;
(3) Agile acquisition instruments utilized to sustain or deploy
biosurveillance platforms; (4) The role the GEIS program, the
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and any other service-
connected labs or surveillance entities play in sending or
analyzing biosurveillance data; (5) How the Department
anticipates utilizing biosurveillance data moving forward; and
(6) Any other items the Secretary determines relevant.
Briefing on feasibility and advisability of biomanufacturing in Indo-
Pacific
The committee understands the supply chain benefits
associated with advanced biomanufacturing capabilities. Working
toward forward-deployed biomanufacturing capabilities could
enhance the readiness and lethality of the warfighter.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than June 1, 2026, on the
feasibility and advisability of conducting a pilot program on
advanced bio-manufacturing for supply chain resilience and
improved lethality in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. The
evaluation of a potential pilot program should include, but not
be limited to: (1) The feasibility of local sourcing of
critical biologic materials in the region; (2) An assessment of
existing technology or capabilities that could be forward-
deployed to enhance readiness and lethality; (3) An evaluation
of the cost-effectiveness of using raw materials as close to
the point-of-manufacturing as possible; (4) A determination on
the feasibility and advisability of conducting such a pilot
program and what the associated costs would be; and (5) Any
other matters the Secretary determines relevant.
Briefing on Neodymium Iron Boron Magnets
The committee believes that investments in rare earth
magnet manufacturing and manufacturing equipment show potential
to make domestic rare earth magnet manufacturing more
competitive in the global marketplace. This would reduce
reliance on foreign adversaries for rare earth magnets such as
neodymium iron boron magnets (NdFeB), which are necessary for
Department of Defense requirements. NdFeB magnets are necessary
for submarines, aircraft, and missile guidance systems, but
also for non-defense critical infrastructure. As such, the
committee encourages the Department of Defense to facilitate
public and private sector cooperation to establish
manufacturing facilities and manufacturing equipment produced
in the United States. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing to the committee, not later than
March 1, 2026, on an analysis of domestic NdFeB manufacturing
in the United States or allied nations and identify barriers,
including resource constraints, to domestic rare earth magnet
production.
Briefing on textile war reserve stocks
The committee is aware that the Defense Logistics Agency
commissioned a wargame exercise in late 2023 to identify
critical areas of concern within the domestic clothing and
textiles defense industrial base. This exercise, conducted by
the Center for Naval Analyses, confirmed the weakness of the
current supply chain and highlighted deficiencies and
production gaps that could occur during future operations. The
wargame report highlighted how stockpiling of critical material
components and end items could provide a logistical advantage
by adding strategic excess of critical safety items such as
uniforms, footwear, and personal protective equipment.
The military departments are required to maintain strategic
war reserve stocks of ``go-to-war'' items, including clothing
and textiles such as uniforms, footwear, and personal
protective equipment, to support the initial surge in
requirements during a contingency. The committee is concerned
that the military services may not have sufficient items in
their existing war reserve stocks.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the
military departments to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than April 1, 2026, detailing their ``go-to-war''
textile items whose demand may surge in the case of a
contingency, including uniforms, footwear, and personal
protective equipment. The briefing should include the status of
each service's textile war reserves, including a list of items
and quantities. The briefing should also address ongoing
efforts to increase commonality and standardization of uniform
and personal protective equipment items across the military
services.
Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear protective equipment
The committee remains concerned that the Department of
Defense is dependent on materials containing per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to produce individual
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
protective equipment. The committee notes that a growing number
of private companies are exiting the PFAS manufacturing
business, given the adverse impact of PFAS on the health and
safety of servicemembers. The committee understands that PFAS-
free textile technologies can provide new performance
capabilities for individual CBRN protective equipment and other
key defense functions. The committee believes individual CBRN
protection is a key part of strategic deterrence against our
adversaries and is concerned that the Department will not be
able to provide the Joint Force with advanced individual CBRN
protection equipment unless it accelerates efforts to acquire
and field PFAS-free textile technologies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 30, 2026, on the Department's strategy and plans to
acquire PFAS-free textile technologies for individual CBRN
protective equipment as soon as feasible. The briefing should
include: (1) Current efforts to secure the industrial base for
PFAS-free textile technologies for individual CBRN protective
equipment; (2) A description of how advanced performance may
enable new CBRN doctrines that enhance survivability and
lethality in contested environments; and (3) The appropriations
and authorities necessary to ensure these new technologies can
be fielded by the start of fiscal year 2028.
Combatting viral pathogens and bioengineered viruses
The committee is aware of concerns regarding the rapid
evolution of viral pathogens and the potential for
bioengineered viruses to be weaponized by foreign adversaries,
posing significant threats to national security and global
stability. The committee is encouraged by the ongoing work of
the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological,
Radiological and Nuclear Defense on the Generative
Unconstrained Intelligent Drug Engineering program, which began
last year. The Department of Defense Chemical and Biological
Defense Program is adapting to the rapid evolution of viral
pathogens and the potential of bioengineered viruses, and it is
doing so by developing capabilities that could rapidly produce
medical countermeasures and other solutions to address and
combat the threat, regardless of the specific threat source,
and by creating additional medical countermeasures that are
less risky altogether. The committee believes that the way to
combat these unknown risks is to invest in capabilities that
can prepare the Nation to tackle any challenge rather than
working toward a specific threat.
Commercial requirements evaluation
The committee is concerned that in some cases Department of
Defense (DOD) program managers apply non-commercial
requirements against commercial products, negating the benefits
of cost and speed in using commercial products. Therefore, the
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to submit a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than February 1, 2026, on policies
and procedures to prevent the unnecessary application of non-
commercial requirements upon commercial systems. Such a report
shall also assess how the Department can better leverage
commercial test data to satisfy DOD developmental, operational
test, and safety release decisions.
Comptroller General assessment of information technology contracts
The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense has
issued several memoranda related to cost efficiency and the
elimination of wasteful spending related to how certain
information technology (IT) programs are managed within the
Department of Defense (DOD). The memoranda, ``Implementation of
Executive Order 14222--Department of Government Efficiency Cost
Efficiency Initiative,'' dated May 27, 2025, and
``Implementation of Department of Government Efficiency Cost
Efficiency Initiative,'' dated June 23, 2025, directed the
Department to take actions to, among other things, terminate
certain IT services contracts and move IT consulting and
management services from contract staff to government
employees. The latter memorandum articulates additional review
and approval requirements for such contracts.
The committee is concerned that such moves may have
unforeseen consequences by misunderstanding or
mischaracterizing some relationships between commercial
providers and integrators and may not be informed by adequate
cost analysis, which would help understand the impacts on
contract spending. In addition, the move to eliminate some
contract services and bring some functions in-house seems
divorced from a full understanding of the impact of ongoing
reductions in force, civilian workforce cuts, and hiring
freezes. The committee is concerned that such moves may
exacerbate contracting timelines rather than make the process
more efficient or effective.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the potential impact
of these memoranda, including: (1) Any additional
implementation plans and activities being undertaken by the
DOD; (2) Input from industry partners on their perception of
the impacts of the memoranda; (3) Assessment of any data on the
cost impacts of such decisions; (4) Assessment of the
sufficiency of the civilian workforce to take on identified
insourcing initiatives; and (5) Any other items as 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,
not later than March 1, 2026, with a report to follow at a
mutually agreed upon date.
Comptroller General review of Office of the Director of Operational
Test and Evaluation
The committee acknowledges the Secretary of Defense's
initiative to reorganize the Office of the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), as outlined in the
March 27, 2025, memorandum titled ``Reorganization of the
Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.''
The committee recognizes DOT&E's statutory responsibility under
section 139 of title 10, United States Code, to provide
independent oversight of operational and live-fire testing for
Major Defense Acquisition Programs and other programs
designated by the Director or the Secretary of Defense. This
role is essential to ensuring that weapons systems are
evaluated for suitability, survivability, and effectiveness in
realistic operational environments.
The committee seeks additional information on the proposed
reorganization, which adjusts DOT&E's workforce by more than 50
percent, to understand the balance between flexible acquisition
processes and effective oversight. To better understand the
implications of this reorganization, the committee requires an
objective assessment of its impact on DOT&E's mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 31, 2026, on the
effects of the DOT&E reorganization. This briefing shall
include an evaluation of: (1) The personnel adjustments and
resulting organizational structure of DOT&E; (2) The capacity
of DOT&E to sustain independent oversight of all Major Defense
Acquisition Programs as required by statute under the new
structure; (3) The ability of DOT&E to conduct independent
oversight of additional programs on its oversight list,
including Middle Tier Acquisition Programs, classified
programs, and those added at the discretion of the Director or
request of the Secretary of Defense; and (4) Any other relevant
considerations the Comptroller General deems appropriate
regarding the reorganization's impact on DOT&E's mission.
Comptroller General review of role of distributors in supply chain
The committee is aware that manufacturers sometimes partner
with distributors for the sale of subsystems, components, and
spare parts to both commercial and government customers. The
committee is also aware that in certain cases, such as when a
part is out of production or a manufacturer no longer supports
a part, the manufacturer may only sell the part through
distributors to enable manufacturers to focus on core business.
However, the committee is concerned that manufacturers may
have limited alternatives for parts and subcontractors in the
market, which influences their decision to enter into
distributor relationships. The committee is further concerned
about escalating part pricing on weapon-system components and,
in particular, sole source spare parts for weapon systems that
are out of production.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a one-time report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than April 1, 2026, assessing the
role of distributors in the Department of Defense weapons
system supply chain. The assessment should include a
statistically significant representative sample of parts sold
through distributors for weapon systems that are in production
as well as weapon systems that are no longer in production, and
should include an assessment of: (1) Any pricing trends before
and after the manufacturer established distributor
relationships for the part, taking into consideration relevant
factors such as inflation, material costs, production
quantities, unique Government requirements, and manufacturing
set up costs; (2) Why the manufacturer chose to partner with
distributors; (3) Categories of terms and conditions that
create undue burdens on the supply chain such that the direct
manufacturers of subsystems, components, or spare parts may
only sell through distributors; (4) Any benefits that
distributors provide, including for parts no longer in
production or with low production output; (5) The impact of
unique Government requirements on pricing of subsystems,
components, and spare parts offered through distributors; (6)
Whether distributors may apply downward pressure on part
pricing, such as through competition of one or more
distributors or by placing orders in higher quantities than
manufacturers would otherwise keep as stock on hand; (7)
Whether the part is a commercial product; and (8) Any other
matters the Comptroller General deems necessary.
Department of Defense battery strategy
The committee is aware that section 883 of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159)
required the Secretary of Defense to establish a Department of
Defense-wide battery strategy, coordinated with the military
services, to identify and address the risks to the defense
supply chain and material shortages for legacy system
batteries. The committee believes that the strategy should also
look forward with a plan for transitioning the Department to
safer batteries with higher energy capabilities with
opportunities for supply chain growth. Currently, the committee
understands that the Department is working not only to
standardize battery requirements across the military services
but also to look forward at advancements in battery technology
and how to leverage commercial industry investment for defense
needs.
The committee notes that some of these advancements include
fast-charging battery technology, with availability for Arctic
conditions. Significant investment continues to be made in the
domestic battery supply chain, and the committee encourages the
Department to prioritize batteries manufactured and sourced
within the United States or through allied partner nations
pursuant to established defense trade agreements. Innovation in
cell and pack development and manufacturing, pursued within a
standardization orientation, could lead to warfighter and
platform superiority as well as increase demand and
predictability for the Department's requirements while ensuring
consistent domestic supply and reduced costs.
As the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense of
Acquisition and Sustainment, the Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering, and the military
services work together to standardize battery procurement,
strategy, and innovation, the committee encourages the
consideration of the following: (1) The ability of batteries to
operate and recharge at temperatures as low as -75F; (2)
Possible approaches for the creation and development of cell,
pack, and supply-chain and manufacturing innovation and
infrastructure; and (3) Existing efforts by the Office of Naval
Research on a seawater-activated lithium-ion battery that may
possess more power than commercial alternatives. The committee
looks forward to the continued partnership with the Department
on ensuring advanced and standardized battery options for the
warfighter that come from domestic or allied sources.
Department of Defense coordination with broader chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear threats
The committee understands the critical role that the
Department of Defense (DOD) has in broader Federal Government
and private sector efforts to address chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats as well as emerging
infectious diseases. The Department possesses unique
capabilities that contribute to interagency efforts to prevent,
detect, and respond to outbreaks of infectious disease
worldwide. It is important for the Department to prioritize and
align investments in medical countermeasures among all Federal
stakeholders to ensure that effective countermeasures are
developed and to avoid duplication of efforts across agencies.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
leverage private industry expertise to meet these requirements,
to increase efforts to coordinate capabilities at organizations
with DOD CBRN priorities, and to coordinate with civilian
priorities through the Public Health Emergency Medical
Countermeasures Enterprise.
Department of Defense supply chain mapping efforts
The committee remains concerned that there are far too many
places where the Department of Defense (DOD) and the defense
industrial base are reliant on single sources of supply or
adversary sources for key components, subcomponents, critical
minerals, and raw materials. The committee is aware of several
ongoing efforts within the DOD to create internal supply chain
mapping tools, as well as efforts to contract for commercial
products and services to improve supply chain illumination
across the Department. In working toward a more robust and
resilient industrial base, the Department should consolidate
around one supply chain mapping tool rather than working
separately, in silos, on the problem.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, on a
supply chain mapping strategy. This strategy should include:
(1) An assessment of existing supply chain mapping or
illumination capabilities developed by or contracted for the
Department; (2) Progress on the Supply Chain Risk Evaluation
Environment (SCREEn) implementation, including any challenges
with expansion; (3) An assessment of commercially available
tools that may be used to complement or supplement SCREEn; (4)
Any additional supply chain illumination efforts ongoing within
the Department; (5) An assessment of the Department's
capability to utilize existing tools to determine country of
origin for materials and single points of failure; and (6) Any
additional resources required to support the Department in
improving supply chain mapping and illumination Department-
wide. The briefing may include a classified annex if required.
Efforts to accelerate bioindustrial manufacturing innovation
The committee recognizes the importance of bioindustrial
manufacturing capabilities as essential to maintaining the
United States' national security and global competitiveness.
Biotechnology and biomanufacturing provide innovative tools and
capabilities that directly support Department of Defense (DOD)
missions, strengthen domestic supply chains, and reduce
reliance on foreign sources for critical materials. The
committee is encouraged by DOD investments in a Bioindustrial
Manufacturing Innovation Institute called BioMADE. Despite
substantial federal funding, slow deployment of industry
support risks placing the United States at a competitive
disadvantage compared to nations such as China, India, and
countries within Europe that are rapidly advancing their own
biomanufacturing capabilities.
The committee acknowledges the National Security Commission
on Emerging Biotechnology's recommendations for Congress to
work with the DOD to ensure that BioMADE is using previously
appropriated funds effectively and quickly to establish
facilities as a part of a network of precommercial facilities,
while also establishing clear mechanisms for collaboration and
the leveraging of these investments with other federal
agencies.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than March 1, 2026, on the progress of the BioMADE
manufacturing institute. The briefing shall include: (1) A
timeline outlining BioMADE's plans to obligate and expend all
remaining DOD-provided funds allocated, including timelines for
issuing requests for proposals, selecting sites, and initiating
construction or partnership activities; (2) A detailed
description of the selection criteria BioMADE uses when
implementing DOD funding to support infrastructure and
workforce development investments; and (3) An accounting of how
DOD-provided funds and those collected through BioMADE
membership fees or other cost-sharing arrangements have been
utilized by the institute to date, specifying funded projects,
partnerships established, outcomes achieved thus far, and how
these expenditures align with broader DOD strategic objectives
in biomanufacturing.
Feasibility and advisability of a critical minerals index
The committee recognizes that the fluctuations of the
critical minerals market significantly impact private
investment in non-commodity materials. Without stable pricing,
growth of the domestic critical and strategic materials
industry may not be able to meet the Department of Defense's
requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy to brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than April 1, 2026, on the feasibility and
advisability of establishing a price index for certain
strategic and critical materials. The briefing shall include
but not be limited to: (1) A determination of strategic and
critical materials in shortfall for the National Defense
Stockpile or currently under any trade or export restrictions
by a foreign entity of concern; (2) An assessment, in
consultation with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), of how the Assistant Secretary could determine the
maximum acceptable exponential acquisition price for the
materials; (3) A plan for how the indexes could be utilized for
the National Defense Stockpile or any other Department material
acquisitions or investments; (4) An analysis on the most
appropriate forecasting capability, and any potential for
collaboration with private sector market participants through
the Open Price Exploration for National Security project of
DARPA; and (5) Any other materials the Secretary determines
relevant.
Feasibility and advisability of establishing biosurveillance network at
United States embassies and military installations overseas
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is
conducting ongoing efforts to improve infectious disease
surveillance, prevention, and response capability to better
protect the health of the Armed Forces across the world. With
existing Department of Defense capabilities, there could be
opportunities to enhance the biosurveillance networks through
working with the interagency.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, to brief the
Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than June 1, 2026,
on the feasibility and advisability of expanding existing
biosurveillance efforts to establish networks at U.S. embassies
and military installations overseas. The briefing should
include: (1) The feasibility and advisability of expanding
existing biosurveillance efforts to U.S. embassies, including a
cost assessment; (2) A review of military and diplomatic
facilities under the jurisdiction or control of the United
States that could be ideal candidates for an expanded
biosurveillance network based on the proximity of the
facilities to high-risk research, biological weapons research,
geographic zoonotic spillover risk, and the public health
surveillance capacity in the country where the facility is
located; (3) Data protections required at the potential
locations to protect privacy and medical data; (4) A
determination regarding the redundancy of this effort with
ongoing Department efforts in biosurveillance; and (5) Any
other matters the Secretary of Defense determines relevant.
Government Accountability Office defense industrial base review
The committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense's efforts to improve how it identifies and mitigates
risks to the defense industrial base. For many years, the
Department did not have a consolidated or comprehensive
strategy to address industrial base risks. In its report
published on July 7, 2022, titled ``Defense Industrial Base:
DOD Should Take Actions to Strengthen Its Risk Mitigation
Approach,'' the Government Accountability Office reported that
the Department lacked such a strategy and did not have
performance measures to monitor the effectiveness of its
mitigation efforts (GAO-22-104154). Further, the report found
that the Department struggled to report its progress in Annual
Industrial Capability Reports. In 2024, the Department issued
its first National Defense Industrial Strategy and
corresponding implementation plan. Together, these documents
provide a roadmap for the Department's efforts to mitigate
industrial base risks. However, the extent to which the
Department is implementing this strategy is unclear.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review of the Department's
current efforts to mitigate risks to the defense industrial
base. This review should examine: (1) The Department's actions
to implement the National Defense Industrial Strategy,
including steps taken to link the strategy to other efforts
across the Department; (2) The status of the Department's
effort to provide resources for planned and ongoing risk
mitigation activities; (3) The Department's progress in
mitigating industrial base risks; and (4) Any other information
the Comptroller General determines appropriate with respect to
defense industrial base risk mitigation. The committee directs
the Comptroller General to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than June 1, 2026,
with a report to follow at a date agreed upon at the time.
Hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene supply chain
The committee remains strongly supportive of the
establishment of the Joint Energetics Transition Office,
mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31), and of the requirement for the
Department of Defense to develop a strategic plan and
investment plan for incorporating novel energetic materials
into new and existing programs. The unacceptable delays in
creating the office are preventing the Department of Defense
from identifying shortfalls in the supply chain for energetic
materials and developing plans to alleviate these issues. For
example, the committee understands that the supply chain of
hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) is very fragile and
relies on one single production facility in the United States.
HTPB is the primary binder that holds fuel together in solid
rocket motors. Without it, the United States cannot adequately
produce solid rocket motors without relying on foreign sources.
The committee also understands that enhanced derivatives of
HTPB offer improved performance characteristics, including
increased energy output, stability, and manufacturability,
which are essential for maintaining technological superiority
in propulsion and energetics over our adversaries.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than February 1, 2026, on:
(1) An assessment of the current shortfalls in domestic HTPB
production capacity and supply chain risks associated with HTPB
production; (2) A summary of ongoing and planned efforts to
enhance domestic manufacturing and innovation in HTPB-related
technologies, including efforts to improve performance and
manufacturability; and (3) Opportunities to enter into
contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements with domestic
manufacturers to sustain and expand production capacity of both
traditional and enhanced HTPB.
Organic industrial base governance
The committee understands the critical importance of the
organic industrial base to ensuring the Nation has the supply
of critical munitions it requires to deter, and, if necessary,
fight and win our Nation's wars. The committee commends the
Army's recent efforts to modernize the organic industrial base
but remains aware of multiple deficiencies within the organic
industrial base. Many of these facilities are now sustaining
obsolete platforms or being forced to find alternate commercial
work, in part because there is no coherent, centralized plan to
guide their workload and modernization efforts. The organic
industrial base's governance is fractured across multiple
commands and functions, including the Army Materiel Command who
owns and operates the facilities and the Assistant Secretary of
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASA(ALT))
who funds the majority of workload and acquisition priorities.
Further, the use of the Army Working Capital Fund prevents the
kind of sustained investment that is required to properly
modernize the organic industrial base. To that end, the
committee recognizes that the Army requires an effective,
efficient governance and resourcing model to ensure the organic
industrial base is modernized and expanded to meet our Nation's
military requirements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 1, 2026, with the following information: (1) An analysis
of the Army Working Capital Fund's impact on the operating and
production costs for each facility, with a focus on government-
owned, government-operated facilities; (2) A cost-benefit
analysis of moving away from the Army Working Capital Fund
model and instead utilizing direct appropriations, or a hybrid
approach; (3) A breakout by relevant budget accounts of
workload at each organic industrial base facility; (4) An
analysis and explanation of how the Army ensures the workloads
for each site are in line with broader Army production and
maintenance goals, including an assessment of the feasibility
of establishing an annual workload plan that integrates input
from each of the program executive offices; (5) The
advisability of implementing the recommendation from the Army
Science Board's September 2023 report, ``Surge Capacity in the
Defense Munitions Industrial Base,'' which said that, ``A
single authority for munitions be assigned, reporting to the
ASA(ALT), to assist in the Single Manager for Conventional
Ammunition role and to oversee and advise on capital
investments, Science and Technology investments, and new
manufacturing advances''; (6) An explanation of how the
integration of Joint Munitions Command into Army Sustainment
Command will impact organic industrial base governance; and (7)
An explanation of how the Joint Energetics Transition Office
will interact with the organic industrial base.
Predictive manufacturing analytics at Army depots
The committee applauds the military departments for their
efforts to modernize the organic industrial base and encourages
the military departments to continue collaborating with the
Nation's digital manufacturing institute on this endeavor. The
committee urges the continued implementation of industrial
control networks across our Army's arsenals, depots, and plants
to enable the collection, aggregation, and analysis of data
associated with the manufacture and repair of equipment and
supplies. This investment is a foundational element to achieve
digital transformation of the Army's organic industrial base
and prepare these government-owned industrial facilities for
wartime production and support.
Rapid hull production of unmanned vessels
The committee recognizes that investing in additive
manufacturing approaches, such as large format polymer additive
manufacturing, could enable production of unmanned systems at
scale. Such flexible approaches could enable a single machine
to fabricate hull structures for multiple different missions in
days versus months, supporting the proliferation of low-cost,
expendable, or attritable platforms compared to traditional
manufacturing methods. These capabilities align innovation and
modernization efforts, addressing demands for rapid, scalable
production in contested environments, particularly in the Indo-
Pacific region.
The committee further encourages the Department of Defense
to look for opportunities to transition proven research in
robotic advanced manufacturing to the defense industrial base
in order to reduce production time and costs, enhance workforce
efficiency, and strengthen overall domestic manufacturing
capacity. The committee also believes such efforts can
radically increase operational effectiveness of maintenance
activities under contested logistics scenarios by pushing such
activities closer to the forward edges of conflict, rather than
at the end of long and untenable logistics supply lines within
the continental United States.
The committee encourages the Department to invest in and
implement relevant advanced manufacturing capabilities such as
large-format polymer additive manufacturing within the defense
industrial base. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than March 1, 2026, regarding the Department's plans
to incorporate additive manufacturing methods, techniques, and
processes for production and manufacturing of unmanned vessels.
Report on addressing acquisition and merger review shortfalls
The committee is concerned that the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy (ASD IBP) does
not have adequate resourcing or personnel to monitor mergers
and acquisitions, especially for sub-tier suppliers in the
defense industrial base. The committee directs the ASD IBP to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on actions to implement
the Government Accountability Office's recommendations in its
report titled ``Defense Industrial Base: DOD Needs Better
Insight into Risks from Mergers and Acquisitions'' (GAO-24-
106129), not later than June 1, 2026. This report should
include but not be limited to: (1) The actions the ASD IBP will
take to ensure the office is adequately staffed to review all
mergers and acquisitions associated with all major defense
suppliers, including any required resources necessary to do so;
and (2) How it will monitor and mitigate the risks associated
with those transactions, including any required resources to do
so.
Review of reporting requirements
The committee understands that statutory reporting
requirements, while valuable at the time, may ultimately become
less valuable over time.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than February 1, 2026,
a one-time list of statutory reporting requirements with no
sunset date which the Secretary determines provide little or no
value for consideration of termination.
Review of sole source awards in cloud computing contracting
The committee is concerned that as the Department of
Defense (DOD) increasingly transitions to commercial cloud
computing environments for critical data processing and
networking infrastructure, it is becoming more dependent on a
small number of providers. Continuing challenges in processes
and protocols to effectively operate across single cloud
infrastructures and manage multi-cloud environments exacerbate
this concentration. The committee believes this convergence
introduces risks of technological stove-piping, reduction of
competition, and balkanization within DOD networks. However,
the committee also recognizes that such impressions may also be
based more on anecdotal observation rather than any firm
analysis of Department-wide data and documented behavior.
Therefore, the committee directs the DOD Inspector General
to conduct a review of the instances of sole source awards
within the cloud computing contracting sphere and to provide a
briefing on the results of this review to the congressional
defense committees, not later than June 1, 2026. Such review
should examine the sole source task orders awarded by the DOD
heads of contracting over the past 3 years to determine if
there are any discernible trends and to compare such trends
against similar sole source awards for other types of
contracting. This review should also examine the sole source
justifications and approval and market research documents to
determine their thoroughness. Finally, the review should make
some assessment if the trends identified in the review point to
any systemic concerns regarding competition and make
recommendations regarding means to mitigate any concerns
identified.
Silica fabric manufacturing
The committee acknowledges the critical importance of
safeguarding shipbuilding and repair operations from fire and
extreme heat. These operations demand robust protection not
only for costly equipment and shipyard infrastructure but also
for the workforce engaged in high-risk activities such as
welding, cutting, and grinding. As domestic defense
manufacturing has expanded, the demand for advanced thermal
protection materials, including silica fabric, has increased
significantly.
The committee is concerned that the domestic industrial
base for silica fabric is limited, with only two U.S. producers
of silica fabric and one domestic supplier of the requisite
fiberglass yarn. This constrained supply chain poses potential
risks to national defense readiness. The committee is also
concerned that the Department of Defense continues to choose to
place orders of silica fabric products made in China instead of
the United States; since February of 2025 the Department of the
Navy chose to award Chinese-based manufacturers over U.S.
manufacturers for delivery of carbon silica fabric. To address
this vulnerability, the committee urges the Department of
Defense to invest in U.S.-made silica fabric, to prioritize
investment in downstream requirements for silica fabric, and to
bolster the existing domestic production capacity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy to deliver a briefing to the
Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 1, 2026.
The briefing shall address the following: (1) Current efforts
to procure silica-based fabrics for defense applications; (2)
The rationale for choosing Chinese-made silica fabric over
U.S.-made silica fabric; (3) Challenges encountered in securing
silica-based fabrics; and (4) Strategic plans to invest in and
strengthen the silica fabric industrial base in the United
States to mitigate identified challenges.
Small Business Innovation Research to support organic industrial base
The committee is aware that the Army's Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) program partnered with Letterkenny
Army Depot to develop open topic solicitations for mobile
sustainment tools, shop tools and enablers, and to reverse
engineer equipment to help address these priority areas of the
organic industrial base. While SBIR is primarily used for
emerging technology, there are significant opportunities to use
SBIR to tailor emerging technology with sustainment
requirements to better support depots across the enterprise.
The committee encourages all of the military services to
facilitate integration of innovative solutions by conducting
SBIR topics to meet manufacturing process improvement needs.
Small business support for Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
requirements
The committee acknowledges the critical importance of
safeguarding Department of Defense (DOD) sensitive information
while ensuring small businesses can continue to participate in
the defense industrial base. The committee recognizes that the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program,
while necessary for national security, presents potential
significant financial and technical challenges for small
businesses. The committee notes that assessments conducted by
Certified Third-Party Assessment Organizations are estimated to
cost between $45,000 and $100,000 depending on the size and
scope of a business. While the policy allows for small
businesses to continue to self-certify without requiring third-
party assessment, there still exists some barrier to entry for
small contractors to comply. The committee believes this cost
burden has the potential to restrict competition and limit DOD
access to innovative solutions from non-traditional vendors if
the Department does not take sufficient action to help support
and mentor such providers through this process.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense
Chief Information Officer, in coordination with the Director
for the Department of Defense Office of Small Business
Programs, to provide the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on a
comprehensive small business cybersecurity support strategy,
not later than January 31, 2026. Such a strategy should support
the implementation of the CMMC program to balance security
requirements with accessibility and affordability.
Under this strategy, the committee encourages the
Department of Defense to pursue innovative approaches to reduce
compliance costs, including shared assessment resources, tiered
evaluation pathways based on contract sensitivity, and
alignment with existing cybersecurity frameworks such as the
National Institute of Standards and Technology Special
Publication 800-171, as required by section 1712 of the James
M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2023 (Public Law 117-263). The strategy should also include
practical, shareable resources for small businesses, such as
user-friendly self-assessment tools that provide clear,
actionable guidance for small businesses preparing for CMMC
certification and mentoring support through existing programs
such as the APEX Accelerators or the DOD Mentor-Protege
Program. The committee also believes this implementation
process should evaluate the option of creating a grace period
for small businesses to complete CMMC requirements after their
contract award, provided they demonstrate a good-faith effort
toward compliance, as well as the potential to make such costs
allowable contract costs for small businesses.
Streamline authorities to establish Navy rapid capabilities office
The committee commends the Army and the Air Force for
establishing rapid capabilities offices to quickly deliver
novel capabilities to the warfighter at speed and scale. The
committee also notes that section 215 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31)
established a Naval Air Warfare Rapid Capabilities Office.
However, the committee is concerned that the Navy has not fully
implemented and utilized this office.
The committee also believes that the Navy should seek to
establish similar rapid capability offices for the surface and
undersea domains, among other strategic capability priorities
for the Navy and Joint Force. The committee is encouraged by
the Navy's initial efforts but remains concerned about the pace
and broader implementation of these initiatives across the
Service. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a report, not later than March 1, 2026, on the
following:
(1) The status of establishing the Naval Air Warfare
Rapid Capabilities Office, including the strategic
priorities, organizational structure, and manpower of
the office;
(2) A list of capabilities delivered by the office
and plans for the iterative development and fielding of
future capabilities including any use of agile
acquisition approaches so far by the office;
(3) A comprehensive plan for establishing similar
rapid capability-like offices at the Service-wide level
to facilitate the rapid and iterative development and
deployment of surface and undersea capabilities. This
plan should include and consider:
a. How to optimize and integrate relevant
existing Navy organizations, such as Project
Overmatch, NavalX, and other similar
initiatives, into a rapid capabilities office
to eliminate redundancy and streamline rapid
acquisition workflows across the Navy;
b. A framework to advance collaboration with
program executive officers, the Defense
Innovation Unit, and other Department of
Defense innovation hubs to ensure fielding of
accelerated capabilities into the Navy's
acquisition ecosystem; and
c. An assessment of the potential benefits
and risks associated with such an office,
including potential impacts on ongoing programs
and statutory authorities; and
(4) Any additional information the Secretary of the
Navy finds appropriate, including recommendations for
changes to statute that would support the effective
operation of a rapid capabilities office.
The report shall be unclassified but may have a classified
annex if necessary.
Study on contracting official workload
The committee recognizes the critical role of the
Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition workforce in supporting
the National Defense Strategy by ensuring timely, effective,
and efficient procurement of capabilities for the warfighter.
The committee acknowledges the complexity of DOD contracting
processes and the need for the workforce to meet evolving
demands while maintaining accountability and fairness in the
use of taxpayer dollars.
The committee notes that the DOD cut its civilian
acquisition workforce nearly in half between 1989 and 1999, as
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published in a
report on April 26, 2002, titled ``Acquisition Workforce:
Department of Defense's Plans to Address Workforce Size and
Structure Challenges'' (GAO-02-630). The DOD further decreased
the military and civilian acquisition workforce 15 percent
between 1998 and 2008, to 126,000 total personnel, as the GAO
published in an August 15, 2019, report titled ``Defense
Acquisition Workforce: DOD Increased Use of Human Capital
Flexibilities but Could Improve Monitoring'' (GAO-19-509),
during a time when contract obligations more than doubled in
constant dollars. While the acquisition workforce has increased
to roughly 180,000, the committee is concerned that the
acquisition workforce in general, and the contracting workforce
specifically, has not kept pace with the workload they are
assigned.
To better understand the contracting workforce and the
processes they follow, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
commission a one-time study on the DOD contracting workforce,
to be delivered to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 1, 2026. The report should provide an analysis
of contracting processes and opportunities for improvement.
Additionally, the report should include: (1) An assessment of
the historical workload for the DOD contracting official,
including the average dollar value and number of contract
actions per contracting official; (2) An assessment of the
years of age and years of service within the contracting
workforce by role and warrant levels; (3) An examination of the
steps DOD contracting officials take to award different types
of contracts, including large, complex contracts and smaller,
modular contracts with performance-based statements of work;
(4) An identification of external dependencies that impact
contract award timelines and an evaluation of the potential to
convert sequential contracting tasks into parallel processes by
enhancing stakeholder collaboration, including recommendations
for implementation; (5) A comparison with commercial industry
practices, including benchmarks for how industry contracting
officers measure success, efficiency, and process
effectiveness; and (6) Recommendations for the DOD about the
size of the contracting officer community and metrics to
measure the workload and productivity of contracting officers.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related Matters
Sec. 901--Economic Defense Unit
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
an Economic Defense Unit (EDU) to centralize requirements
generation, programming, planning coordination, and execution
oversight of economic competition activities at the Department
of Defense (DOD). The EDU would report directly to the Deputy
Secretary of Defense and act as the Principal Staff Assistant
to the Secretary of Defense on all matters related to economic
competition. The provision would amend other authorities to
make the EDU co-chair the National Security Capital Forum and
chair the National Defense Economic Competition Research
Council.
The committee strongly believes that enhanced coordination
in the economic competition space can drastically improve the
ability of the DOD to counter adversary defense industrial base
activities, counter adversary mobilization activities, and
secure access, basing, and overflight opportunities for the
U.S. military. The Department possesses a significant number of
programs and authorities in this space, which, while
individually impressive, are rarely coordinated to requirements
or harmonized into campaign plans with layered effects. A non-
exhaustive list of relevant entities involved in economic
competition at the Department of Defense includes the Office of
Strategic Capital, U.S. Special Operations Command, and
numerous organizations within the offices of the Secretary of
the Air Force, the Under Secretary for Intelligence and
Security, and the Under Secretary for Acquisition and
Sustainment. Further, dozens of innovative U.S. commercial
entities are actively working in this space and can bring
significant capability to bear with little to no taxpayer
funding. Additionally, the DOD currently does a poor job
informing the U.S. interagency of its activities in this space
or sharing intelligence with the U.S. interagency for potential
prosecution of targets using non-DOD authorities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to brief the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later
than January 15, 2026, on a plan to implement the Economic
Defense Unit.
Sec. 902--Additional authorities for Office of Strategic Capital
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 149 of title 10, United States Code, and authorize the
Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) to collect fees for the costs
of services provided by the Office and associated with
administering OSC loan programs, including for project-specific
transaction costs and direct costs relating to such services.
Further, this provision would require the Director of the OSC
to provide an annual report on how those fees were allocated.
The provision also would require an audit by the Inspector
General of the Department of Defense at least once every 2
years.
Sec. 903--Modifications to responsibilities of Director for Operational
Test and Evaluation
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 139(b) of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Director for Operational Test and Evaluation to maintain, on
behalf of the Secretary of Defense, certain enabling and cross-
cutting activities that support operational test and evaluation
across the Department of Defense.
Sec. 904--Directive authority for matters for which Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering has responsibility
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 133a(b) of title 10, United States Code, by granting
directive authority for research and development matters to the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.
The committee notes that before the split of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
(AT&L) into two separate organizations, the Under Secretary of
Defense for AT&L had specific authorities to be able to weigh
in, and if necessary, halt the services' research and
development efforts if they were not realizing the original
goals set forth by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Under the current statute, section 133a of title 10, United
States Code, only the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment has such authority. This provision
would provide the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering with a similar authority and bring parity between
the two organizations.
Sec. 905--Modification of energetic materials strategic plan and
investment strategy of Joint Energetics Transition Office
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 148(c)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to add a new
element for the energetic materials strategic plan and
investment strategy of the Joint Energetics Transition Office
to identify raw material waste produced during the explosives
manufacturing process and to develop plans to reduce waste and
optimize production.
Sec. 906--Limitation on availability of funds pending establishment of
Joint Energetics Transition Office
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of not more than 90 percent of
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide funds authorized to be
appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026
for travel expenses for the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering until
the Secretary of Defense notifies the congressional defense
committees that the Department of Defense has established the
Joint Energetics Transition Office as required by section 148
of title 10, United States Code, and provides that Office with
the staff and resources necessary to carry out its
responsibilities.
Sec. 907--Modification of covered technology categories for Office of
Strategic Capital
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 149 of title 10, United States Code, to add nuclear
fission and fusion energy, and associated infrastructure,
including advanced nuclear reactors, to the list of covered
technologies eligible for support by the Office of Strategic
Capital.
Sec. 908--Modification of organization and authorities of Assistant
Secretaries of Defense with duties relating to industrial base
policy and readiness
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
new Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Armaments
Cooperation, eliminate the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Readiness, and rename the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities as the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Strategy, Plans, Capabilities, and Readiness.
Subtitle B--Other Department of Defense Organization and Management
Matters
Sec. 911--Modifications to Joint Requirements Oversight Council
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 181 of title 10, United States Code, by modifying the
responsibilities of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council
and make conforming amendments.
Sec. 912--Transfer of responsibility for countering small unmanned
aircraft systems
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 133b(b)(5) of title 10, United States Code, to transfer
the responsibility for Countering small Unmanned Aircraft
Systems (C-sUAS) from the Department of the Army to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.
The committee notes that this change highlights the
committee's continued emphasis on the importance of the C-sUAS
program and puts the management and synchronization
responsibility at the appropriate level in the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 913--Study on feasibility and advisability of establishing a Joint
Capabilities and Programming Board
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a study on the feasibility and
advisability of establishing a Joint Capabilities and
Programming Board within the Department of Defense to enhance
joint military capability prioritization and program budgeting.
The study would evaluate the Board's proposed structure,
including its co-chair leadership by the Director of Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation and the Chairman of the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council; its membership, including the
military services and acquisition executives; its decision-
making processes, which would include dissenting opinions; and
its dedicated staff support. The study would also assess
integrating the Board with existing Department of Defense
entities, as well as implementation challenges and potential
benefits versus drawbacks. The Secretary of Defense would be
required to submit a report on the contents of the study to the
congressional defense committees, not later than July 1, 2026.
Sec. 914--Briefing on restructuring of Army Futures Command and
Training and Doctrine Command
The committee directs the Secretary of Army to provide a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, prior to the expenditure of the
funds authorized to be appropriated to restructure commands, on
its proposed plan to combine Army Futures and Training and
Doctrine Commands.
Sec. 915--Designation of senior official for military-to-civilian
transition
The committee recommends a provision that would designate a
senior official responsible for overseeing servicemember
transition from active duty to civilian life or reserve
components.
Sec. 916--Removal of members of Joint Chiefs of Staff
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 151 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
President to notify Congress of the removal of a member of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff from office or transfer to another
position or location before the end of the member's term of
office not later than 5 days after the removal or transfer
takes place.
Sec. 917--Longer term and eligibility for appointment to rank of
Admiral of Commander of Naval Sea Systems Command
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 526 of title 10, United States Code, to establish an 8-
year term for the Commander of Naval Sea Systems Command and
authorize eligibility for appointment to the rank of Admiral
during the final 3 years of that term. The provision would also
require a report from the Secretary of the Navy on options and
incentives to promote private investment in new shipyard
capacity on the Pacific Coast.
Sec. 918--Delay of disestablishment of Navy Expeditionary Combat
Command Pacific
The committee recommends a provision that would provide a
1-year delay in execution of any Navy plans to disestablish the
Navy Expeditionary Combat Command Pacific.
Sec. 919--Limitation on use of funds for consolidation,
disestablishment, or elimination of geographic combatant
commands
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
availability of funds to consolidate, disestablish, or
otherwise eliminate a geographic combatant command of the
Department of Defense until not earlier than 90 days after the
Secretary of Defense submits an analysis to the congressional
defense committees.
Sec. 920--Elimination of statutory provisions relating to diversity,
equity, and inclusion in the Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would strike
various statutory requirements and other provisions in United
States Code related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Sec. 921--Defense Science Board study on optimal organizational
structure for digital engineering solutions
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to require the Defense Science Board to
conduct a comprehensive study on the optimal organizational
structure within the Office of the Secretary of Defense to
support digital solutions engineering activities.
Sec. 922--Establishment of Advanced Nuclear Transition Working Group
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to establish an Advanced Nuclear
Transition Working Group that would identify critical energy
requirements that may be addressed with advanced nuclear
reactors and develop and execute a strategy to acquire them.
Items of Special Interest
Civilian oversight and advocacy for special operations forces
The committee remains strongly supportive of the ``service
secretary-like'' role of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict for oversight of
and advocacy for special operations forces (SOF). The joint
posture statement submitted to the committee by the Assistant
Secretary and the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM), states, ``The success of SOF is strengthened by the
close civilian-military partnership between [the Assistant
Secretary] and the Commander, [SOCOM]. Our partnership
strengthens America's warfighting edge for the Joint Force. In
its service secretary-like role, [the Assistant Secretary] is a
force-multiplier for SOF's readiness, fiscal responsibility,
and sustainability . . . [Special Operations and Low-Intensity
Conflict] requires the requisite tools, workforce, and
resources to accelerate the implementation of these priorities
and enable SOF to be the most effective, disciplined, and
strategically relevant force it can be.''
The committee believes the workforce and resources
allocated to the Assistant Secretary in recent years, as
mandated by section 922 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and subsequent
reforms, have played a critical role in enabling the
operational success and transformation of SOF to meet current
and future challenges without adding bureaucracy. The committee
urges the Department of Defense to sufficiently staff and
resource the Office of the Assistant Secretary to meet his or
her responsibilities under section 138(b)(2)(A) of title 10,
United States Code, including through the establishment of a
permanent Senior Enlisted Advisor and the allocation of
additional military personnel to ensure operational
perspectives are appropriately represented.
Furthermore, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to expeditiously complete the actions required by
section 907 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159) to enable the further institutionalization
of the Assistant Secretary. The committee directs the
Secretary, not later than October 1, 2025, and quarterly
thereafter, to provide the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives with update briefings
on each line of effort established under section 907 of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159)
until each such activity is completed.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
Sec. 1001--General transfer authority
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $6.0 billion of
fiscal year 2026 funds authorized in division A of this Act to
unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal
reprogramming procedures. Transfers of funds between military
personnel authorizations would not be counted toward the dollar
limitation in this provision.
Sec. 1002--Amendments and repeals to budgetary requirements for defense
acquisition
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
certain budgetary requirements for Department of Defense
acquisition programs. The provision amends requirements for
budget displays from the following: section 141 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84) for body armor procurement; section 2284 of title 10,
United States Code, for the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Defense
Program; section 219 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 113-66) for the Distributed
Common Ground System; section 213 of the Ike Skelton National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383) for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle; and sections 111,
214, and 1502 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417) for
Future Combat Systems, Sky Warrior Unmanned Aerial Systems, and
Afghanistan and Iraq operations, respectively.
Sec. 1003--Briefing on beginning balance issues for audit purposes
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to deliver a one-time
briefing to the congressional defense committees on any
anticipated issues in establishing beginning balances for
audits of the financial statements of the Department of
Defense. The briefing, due not later than March 1, 2026, should
include: (1) An identification of each budgetary account
expected to have unsupported beginning balances; (2) A
description of the issues preventing beginning balances from
being established for each account; (3) An explanation of
whether beginning balances could be established through
generally accepted accounting principles and, if not, the other
methods that could be used to resolve the issues; and (4) The
projected impact to receiving an unmodified audit opinion of
that account without a supported beginning balance.
Sec. 1004--Defense Business Audit Remediation Plan reporting
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 240g(b) of title 10, United States Code, to eliminate
the semiannual briefing requirement and to bring the annual
reporting date in line with the due date of the audited
financial statements outlined in section 240a of title 10,
United States Code.
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels
Sec. 1011--Requirements related to Medium Landing Ships and Light
Replenishment Oilers
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Navy, in implementing the Medium Landing Ship and Light
Replenishment Oiler programs, to utilize a Vessel Construction
Manager (VCM) acquisition strategy, employing commercial design
standards, construction practices, and an external entity to
contract for construction. This approach aims to maximize cost
efficiency and leverage proven commercial construction
methodologies for non-warship naval vessels.
The VCM acquisition strategy, as demonstrated by the
Maritime Administration's National Security Multi-Mission
Vessels (NSMV) program, has yielded significant cost savings
and operational efficiencies. The NSMV, built using commercial
design and contracting processes, has achieved a cost of
approximately $300.0 million per ship, compared to an estimated
$750.0 million to $900.0 million per ship, if the Navy were to
use traditional Navy shipbuilding requirements and Department
of Defense contracting processes. By utilizing off-the-shelf
commercial technology and streamlined contracting using a
third-party entity, the VCM approach reduces bureaucratic
overhead, accelerates delivery schedules, and ensures vessels
meet mission requirements without the cost premiums associated
with military-specific standards, making it particularly
suitable for naval logistics and support vessels that do not
include complex weapon systems.
The committee recognizes the potential for broader
application of the VCM strategy to enhance the outcomes in the
Navy's shipbuilding portfolio. Therefore, the committee directs
the Secretary of the Navy to submit a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2026, identifying additional vessel classes, such as hospital
ships, cable layers, and logistic supply ships, that could
benefit from the VCM acquisition strategy. The report shall
include recommendations for integrating VCM into future
procurement plans and strategies to overcome any institutional
barriers to adopting commercial practices.
Sec. 1012--Modification of authority to purchase used vessels under the
National Defense Sealift Fund
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, to raise the
limitation on the procurement of used sealift vessels from 10
vessels to 12.
Sec. 1013--Exemption of unmanned surface vessels and unmanned
underwater vehicles from certain technical authority
requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would exempt
unmanned surface vessels and unmanned underwater vehicles from
the Senior Technical Authority requirement under section 8669b
of title 10, United States Code, and limit certain technical
requirements from the Chief Engineer of the Naval Sea Systems
Command without prior approval of the program manager.
Sec. 1014--Prohibition on retiring and decommissioning oceanographic
research vessels of the Navy
The committee recommends a provision that would prevent the
Navy from retiring or decommissioning any of its oceanographic
research vessels until the Navy has received the delivery of a
suitable replacement research vessel to take the place of any
such vessels to be retired.
The Navy's requirement for oceanographic research vessels
is six ships, matching the current inventory. The committee
understands that the Navy may be considering retiring or
decommissioning of one or more of these vessels before any
replacement vessels are available.
The committee believes that oceanographic research vessels
play a critical role in advancing scientific understanding.
This is particularly true in the Pacific Ocean, the largest and
most complex body of water on earth. These research vessels
facilitate the study of marine ecosystems, oceanic currents,
climate change, marine geology and geophysics, coastal
geohazards, biodiversity, fisheries science, and much more.
Given the strategic significance of the Pacific Ocean,
sustained oceanographic research is essential for informed
decision-making on international policy and national security.
Sec. 1015--Report accompanying requests for new flights or blocks of
major shipbuilding programs
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 863 of title 10, United States Code, by adding section
8669d, which requires the Secretary of the Navy to submit a
report to the Congress alongside any budget request for a new
flight or block of ships under a major shipbuilding program.
The report would include: (1) The results of a production
readiness review detailing design completion, changes from
prior authorizations, and associated risks; (2) A certification
that the review supports construction; (3) Assessments of
shipyard readiness, delivery timelines, risk management
processes, and metrics; and (4) Plans for overseeing the first
ship's construction to ensure design supports the schedule.
Sec. 1016--Report on auxiliary vessel co-production
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Army, in
consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretary of Transportation,
and the Secretary of State, to provide a report on the
feasibility, plans, and barriers of co-production of non-
nuclear auxiliary ships with foreign partner nations.
Sec. 1017--Report on vessel leasing program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to report on the extent to which the use
of vessels secured under a long-term leasing program could help
meet the Navy's needs.
Sec. 1018--Pilot program on use of automated shipbuilding technologies
and capabilities
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
pilot program to identify novel automated hull assembly
technologies for demonstration on at least one shipbuilding
program and require the Secretary of the Navy to provide an
annual report until the pilot program finishes.
Subtitle C--Counterterrorism
Sec. 1021--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
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1033 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), as
most recently amended by section 1041 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to extend
through December 31, 2026, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to the United States. The provision would also
clarify the detainees this section would apply to by modifying
the applicable date when detainees were required to be held.
Sec. 1022--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
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1034(a) of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), as
most recently amended by section 1042 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to extend
through December 31, 2026, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to construct or modify
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The
provision would also make a technical correction by removing
unnecessary language from a citation.
Sec. 1023--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
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1035 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232), as
most recently amended by section 1043 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to extend
through December 31, 2026, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to certain countries. The provision would also
direct that the term ``individual detained at Guantanamo,'' as
defined in section 1034(f)(2) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92),
applies to this section.
Sec. 1024--Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or
relinquish control of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1036 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), as most recently amended
by section 1044 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to extend through the end of
fiscal year 2026 the prohibition on the use of funds provided
to the Department of Defense to: (1) Close or abandon United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; (2) Relinquish
control of Guantanamo Bay to the Republic of Cuba; or (3)
Implement a material modification to the Treaty between the
United States of America and Cuba, signed at Washington, D.C.,
on May 29, 1934, which modification would constructively close
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Sec. 1025--Clarification regarding definition of individual detained at
Guantanamo
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1034(f)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to clarify the
definition of the term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' as
defined in that section.
The committee notes the importance of clarity as it
pertains to existing law applicable to detainees held at United
States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay.
Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Sec. 1031--Prohibition on use of funds to support entertainment
projects with ties to the Government of the People's Republic
of China
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act to be made
available for providing active and direct support to any film,
television, or other entertainment project if the Secretary of
Defense has demonstrable evidence that the project has
complied, or is likely to comply, with a demand from the
Government of the People's Republic of China or the Chinese
Communist Party to censor content of the project in a material
manner to advance the national interest of the People's
Republic of China.
Sec. 1032--Prohibition on destruction or scrapping of World War II-era
aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense from scrapping or destroying any
World War II-era aircraft that remain in the custody of the Air
Force.
Sec. 1033--Support for counterdrug activities and activities to counter
transnational organized crime
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 284 of title 10, United States Code, support for
counterdrug activities and activities to counter transnational
organized crime, to expand the criteria to be included in
quarterly reports to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives to include: (1) The
agency to which support is provided; (2) The budget; (3) A
description of the arrangements for the sustainment of the
project; (4) A description of the project's objective; and (5)
Information about support provided in previous fiscal years.
The provision would also change the recipients of reports under
such section to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 1034--Senior leaders of the Department of Defense and other
specified persons: authority to provide protection
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 714 of title 10, United States Code, to require
enhanced notifications to the congressional defense committees
when the Secretary of Defense makes determinations with respect
to providing physical protection and security to former senior
officials of the Department of Defense who face serious and
credible threats arising from duties performed while employed
by the Department of Defense. The provision would also require
the Secretary to provide written notification to former senior
officials at least 90 days before terminating or denying the
renewal of physical protection and personal security or
reimbursement for such individuals.
Sec. 1035--Notification of the use of military aircraft for immigration
enforcement operations
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, within 7 days of providing military
aircraft to support the Department of Homeland Security
immigration enforcement operations, to provide a written
notification to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives on the type of aircraft, the
cost of support provided, the destination country of the
aircraft, reassignment of Department of Defense personnel to
support alien detention operations, and any facility
maintenance or upgrades to support such operations.
Sec. 1036--Modification of requirements relating to support of civil
authorities by Armed Forces
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Section 723 of title 10, United States Code, to require members
of the Armed Forces, including the National Guard, to visibly
display the name of the armed force, Federal entity, or other
organization by which such individual is employed when
supporting civilian law enforcement agencies.
Sec. 1037--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
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the 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 after January 1, 2028. The
Secretary of Defense must establish and publish a list of
prohibited connected vehicles by January 1, 2027, and provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on an
implementation plan by June 1, 2027.
Subtitle E--Studies and Reports
Sec. 1041--Annual report on contract cancellations
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report on any
cancelled contracts for the preceding fiscal year, for each of
the fiscal years 2027 through 2031, to the congressional
defense committees, not later than 10 days after the
President's budget submission. In the first report required to
be submitted under this provision, the Secretary of Defense
should also include reporting on any cancellations of contracts
during fiscal year 2025.
The committee notes the Department of Defense's efforts to
implement the President's ``Department of Government
Efficiency'' cost efficiency initiative, as directed by
Executive Orders 14158 and 14222. The committee commends the
Department for its efforts to find efficiencies through reviews
of existing contracts, but notes that cancelled contracts
should be codified through reprogramming requests or rescission
packages that are approved by the Congress. Furthermore, the
committee is disappointed in the lack of detail provided to
date by the Department on the total amount of savings
announced, which does not include any specifics by contract
item line number and are, therefore, unverifiable.
Sec. 1042--Streamlining of total force reporting requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 115a and 129 of title 10, United States Code, to
streamline and realign total force reporting requirements.
Specifically, this provision would repeal subsection (g) of
section 115a to eliminate redundant reporting requirements on
military technicians, as this data is included in annual budget
materials provided by the Department of Defense. Additionally,
this provision would consolidate the civilian personnel report
required by section 129(c) of title 10, United States Code,
into the Defense Manpower Profile Report required by section
115a of title 10, United States Code, to better align with the
annual President's budget request and to eliminate duplicative
reporting.
Sec. 1043--Report on National Guard sexual assault prevention and
response training
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, in coordination with the
Secretary of Defense, to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the number of National Guard members who have received
sexual assault prevention and response training in the
preceding calendar year.
Sec. 1044--Reports to Congress on Department of Defense support for
immigration enforcement operations
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the Department of Defense's support to the Department of
Homeland Security's (DHS) immigration enforcement operations,
not later than 30 calendar days after the Secretary approves a
Request for Assistance from DHS and every 30 calendar days
thereafter.
Sec. 1045--Military Sealift Command
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to submit annual reports to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, commencing not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, on efforts to improve
recruitment and retention of Military Sealift Command mariners.
Sec. 1046--Report on aliens held at installations of Department of
Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report containing the number of aliens held at Department of
Defense (DOD) installations and the total cost of detention of
aliens at DOD installations, not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act and monthly thereafter.
Sec. 1047--Briefing on expenditures or planned expenditures of funds
allocated for exploration and development of existing Arctic
infrastructure
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the combatant
commander for IndoPacific Command and Northern Command, to
provide a briefing every 90 days to the congressional defense
committees on a spending plan for Arctic infrastructure. The
committee recognizes the geostrategic importance of the Arctic
to both the United States and its adversaries, China and
Russia. The committee supports the Department's strategic
efforts in the Arctic region in to include Alaska, Greenland,
and Iceland.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Sec. 1051--Modification of limitation on assistance in support of
Department of Defense accounting for missing United States
Government personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 408(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to increase
the maximum amount of assistance to foreign nations authorized
by section 408 to $15,000,000 per fiscal year.
Sec. 1052--Extension of admission to Guam or the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands for certain H-2B nonimmigrants
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 6(b)(1)(B) of the Joint Resolution titled ``A Joint
Resolution to approve the 'Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the
United States of America', and for other purposes'' (48 U.S.C.
1806(b)(1)(B)), approved March 24, 1976, by extending the
deadline for certain nonimmigrant H-2B workers to 2031.
The committee notes that this provision would support the
realignment of U.S. forces to Guam by addressing limited
workforce availability on Guam. The committee understands that
current labor market conditions are constrained by recovery
from Typhoon Mawar and that, without this provision,
construction costs for the Department of Defense will increase
due to labor shortages as well as degraded readiness, since
construction would also be delayed. Finally, the committee
understands that lead times are crucial to planning and cost
estimates for contractors. Should an additional extension be
necessary, the committee strongly encourages the Department of
Defense to begin engagements with the Congress, specifically
the committees of jurisdiction, not less than 3 years before
the authority expires.
Sec. 1053--Prohibiting Secretary of Defense from developing voting
technology or methodology
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from developing or facilitating any
voting technology or methodology for voting in Federal and
state elections.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
Federal Voting Assistance Program has been highly successful in
carrying out its mission to ensure that all servicemembers are
provided the opportunity to vote in their respective state and
local elections, regardless of where servicemembers are
stationed or deployed. The committee notes that the DOD has
successfully facilitated servicemember overseas voting using
all voting methodologies approved by states and localities and
that this success has been built upon the DOD taking a neutral
position with respect to voting methodology. The committee is
concerned that any action taken by the DOD that endorses, or
results in the appearance of endorsing, any voting methodology
over another could undermine the success of this vital mission.
Furthermore, the committee notes that researching and
developing technology that supports one type of voting
methodology over another is not a DOD mission.
Sec. 1054--Assessment of the feasibility and advisability of using
personnel of the Department of Defense to support U.S. Customs
and Border Protection
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee of the
Senate, and the Homeland Security Committee of the House of
Representatives, within 180 days of the date of the enactment
of this Act, assessing the advisability, feasibility, and cost
of using qualified Department of Defense personnel in support
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to provide translation
and interpretation services in connection with border security
operations.
Sec. 1055--Limitation on availability of funds for travel expenses of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of 25 percent of the funding
authorized or otherwise made available for the travel expenses
of the Office of the Secretary of Defense until various overdue
reports and other documents are submitted to the congressional
defense committees.
Sec. 1056--Department of Defense sensitive activities
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to keep the congressional defense
committees fully and currently informed of Department of
Defense sensitive activities. The provision would also require
the Secretary to provide a notification to the congressional
defense committees not later than 48 hours after the compromise
or failure of a Department of Defense sensitive activity and
establish a process for coordinating and deconflicting
contracts that support or enable sensitive activities with
other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, as
appropriate.
Sec. 1057--Irregular Warfare Exercise Laboratory
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to establish and maintain an Irregular
Warfare Exercise Laboratory. The laboratory would support the
training, experimentation, preparation, and validation of the
Armed Forces of the United States to conduct full-spectrum
irregular warfare activities, and it would enable activities to
build the capacity and interoperability of the security forces
of friendly foreign countries.
The committee recognizes the importance of training with
partner nations to develop the interoperability of irregular
and unconventional warfare tactics, techniques, and procedures
in the face of an increasingly complex global security
environment. The committee notes that the Ridge Runner
irregular warfare exercise hosted by the West Virginia National
Guard and the Department of Defense Irregular Warfare Center
brings together U.S. Special Operations Forces, allies and
partners, and other stakeholders to provide validation for
deploying special operations elements in dynamic and realistic
irregular warfare scenarios. The committee encourages the
expansion of such activities, as appropriate.
Sec. 1058--Semiannual report on Department of Defense operations at the
southern land border
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Commander, U.S. Northern Command to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, and semiannually
thereafter, on the Department of Defense's efforts at the
southwest border.
Sec. 1059--University-based secure innovation incubator program of
Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a program to develop,
operate, and maintain incubator programs for secure facilities
and networks at select universities across the United States.
Sec. 1060--Priority consideration of energy projects that are likely to
experience significant temporal impact due to seasonal Arctic
climate conditions
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
prioritize, to the maximum extent possible, for purposes of
consideration by the Manufacturing Capability Expansion and
Investment Prioritization office, the clearance of mining and
energy project applications and white papers for projects where
the operation or completion of which is likely to experience
significant temporal impact due to seasonal Arctic climate
conditions.
Sec. 1061--Non-reimbursable support for Afghanistan War Commission
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1094(f)(2) of the Afghanistan War Commission Act of
2021 (Public Law 117-81) to make modifications relating to non-
reimbursable support for the Commission.
Sec. 1062--Contracting authority for Afghanistan War Commission
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1094(g) of the Afghanistan War Commission Act of 2021
(Public Law 117-81) to authorize the Co-Chairpersons of the
Commission to enter into contracts to enable the Commission to
discharge its duties.
Sec. 1063--Commission on the National Defense Strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
legislative commission to review the forthcoming National
Defense Strategy. The commission would be established in
January 2026, and it would be required to deliver a report to
Congress not later than February 2027.
Sec. 1064--Provision by Air Force of meteorological and environmental
services for intelligence community
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to provide meteorological and
environmental services to the intelligence community.
Sec. 1065--Expansion of Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to expand the Individual Longitudinal
Exposure Record (ILER) to document all exposures of
servicemembers to environmental hazards and to make the ILER
available to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs when
servicemembers separate or retire from military service. The
provision would also require the Secretary to document in a
servicemember's personnel records whether the servicemember
served at a location where there was a potential of toxic
exposure.
Sec. 1066--Classification of Nevada Test and Training Range as location
where contamination occurred and members of the Armed Forces
were exposed to toxic substances
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to classify the Nevada Test and Training
Range as a location where contamination occurred.
Subtitle G--Defense Workforce Integration
Sec. 1081--Integration of military and civilian hiring processes
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a pathway for medically
disqualified entry-level servicemembers to be hired into
civilian positions for which they are qualified within the
Department of Defense and its components.
Sec. 1082--Provision of information on career opportunities in the
defense industrial base to persons ineligible for military
service
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 50 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense to create a program to provide individuals
who are not medically qualified for military service employment
opportunities in support of the national interests of the
United States.
Sec. 1083--Provision to Navy personnel of information on career
opportunities at Military Sealift Command
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to provide to Navy personnel information
about career opportunities at Military Sealift Command and
workforce training programs for shipbuilders.
Sec. 1084--Report on defense workforce integration
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
describing the implementation of the requirements under title
X, subtitle H of this Act.
Items of Special Interest
Adopting and scaling commercially available extra-large unmanned
underwater vehicles
The committee remains supportive of the Navy's efforts to
integrate large diameter and extra-large unmanned underwater
vehicles (UUVs) capable of executing high-value missions in
contested environments. Section 1032 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) requires the
Navy, in coordination with the Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command, and in consultation with the Director of the Defense
Innovation Unit, to carry out a competitive demonstration of
large and extra-large UUVs leveraging commercial solutions. The
demonstration builds on the open competition directed by
section 862 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) and
held by the Navy and the Defense Innovation Unit in late 2023.
This demonstration culminated in the signing of three prototype
agreements just months later, in early 2024. The committee is
pleased to note that the first large diameter UUV was delivered
to a Navy operational unit for experimentation in late 2024 as
a result of the 2023 competition.
The committee is encouraged by the rapid delivery of these
capabilities from prototype award to unit experimentation in
only 2 years. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary
of the Navy to continue leveraging commercial solutions to
deliver large diameter and extra-large UUVs with accompanying
support equipment, joint Command and Control software, and
sustainment and support services. The committee recognizes the
complementary nature of extra-large UUVs for the submarine
industrial base to provide additional capacity and lethality.
The committee also believes that these vehicles should be
capable of integrating a broad array of payloads and sensors
and should be delivered quickly to operational commands for
fleet integration and interoperability development, fielding,
and operations. Further, the committee believes that the
Secretary of the Navy should expedite fielding of capabilities
selected during the 2025 competition to deliver mission-capable
extra-large UUVs for operational testing, user training, and
fleet integration.
Briefing on commercial technology for shipbuilding
The committee acknowledges the importance of the Navy's
shipbuilding goals and recognizes shipyards as a critical
national security asset. The committee is also aware of the
need to improve the output and drive down costs associated with
Navy shipbuilding. The committee notes that in testimony on
March 11, 2025, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research, Development, and Acquisition, stated that, for
shipbuilding programs, ``On balance, cost and schedule
performance remain poor; deliveries are approximately 1 to 4
years late, and costs continue to rise faster than overall
inflation.''
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than February 1, 2026, on
the Navy's plans to utilize commercially available software to
help reduce the current shipbuilding backlog.
Briefing on DOD Record Management
The committee affirms its support for the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report titled ``DOD Law of War
Policies: Actions Needed to Ensure Proper Reporting and
Retention of Alleged Violations'' (GAO-24-107217), published
February 13, 2024. This report recommended that the Department
of Defense (DOD) develop and maintain a system to
comprehensively retain records of alleged law of war
violations.
Accordingly the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees,
not later than May 1, 2026, on the status of this
recommendation, including: (1) A designated lead agency or
office within the DOD; and (2) A plan to ensure that
regulations regarding reporting on such issues remain current
and appropriately disseminated within the DOD.
DDG-51 shipbuilding
The committee supports the Department of the Navy's efforts
to maintain a robust and capable surface fleet through the DDG-
51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program, a cornerstone of
naval power. The committee commends the Navy's progress in
sustaining the industrial base and encourages continued
investment to ensure long-term stability for shipbuilders and
suppliers.
However, the committee notes with concern that the
Department of the Navy did not submit the required 30-year
shipbuilding plan with its fiscal year 2026 budget materials,
as required by section 231 of title 10, United States Code.
This plan is essential for providing Congress and industry
stakeholders with a clear, long-term vision for naval
shipbuilding requirements. The committee urges the Department
of the Navy to promptly fulfill this statutory requirement to
enhance transparency and support effective planning.
The committee recognizes congressional intent in the budget
reconciliation package, H.R. 1 (One Big Beautiful Bill Act), to
add a third destroyer in fiscal year 2027 and fiscal year 2029.
This approach aims to provide a consistent demand signal to the
shipbuilding industrial base, which has relied on Congress to
fund a third destroyer every other year to maintain a healthy
production backlog. The committee is concerned that the
Department of the Navy's decision to allocate these funds to
subsidize the two fiscal year 2026 ships, rather than planning
for the additional destroyers, introduces uncertainty for
shipbuilders and risks destabilizing the industrial base. The
committee strongly encourages the Department of the Navy to
prioritize predictable, sustained funding for the DDG-51
program in its base budget requests, ensuring stability for the
industrial base without dependence on congressional
interventions.
Department of Defense sites for purposes of national security reviews
The committee remains concerned that foreign nations,
including the People's Republic of China, have sought to
purchase land near military installations that have not yet
been listed on Appendix A to 31 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 802. As a result of this, the committee believes that some
military installations may not have been appropriately reviewed
for national security concerns.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
February 1, 2026, regarding which military installations,
training routes, military airspaces, controlled firing areas,
and military operations areas he or she deems appropriate for
review because of national security concerns.
Dissemination of civilian legal services (549C) review
The committee finds the Department of Defense (DOD) is
inconsistently implementing section 549C of the James M. Inhofe
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263) and the requirement to distribute information on
legal rights to victims of military-connected sexual assault. A
review of how each service is implementing this requirement is
necessary to best protect the victims of military-connected
sexual assault and ensure that section 549C is properly
implemented.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in consultation with the
DOD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, to submit a
briefing on implementation of section 549C to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026. The briefing should include: (1)
An analysis of how each service is implementing the
requirements of 549C, including any forms that are provided to
victims to make them aware of their rights; (2) Justification
for the Department's reliance on veterans' services instead of
victims' services, and the viability of providing victim-
centric services; (3) The extent to which the implementation of
the requirements of 549C can be improved and enhanced, to
include consideration of a Department-hosted website; and (4)
The viability and appropriateness of developing uniform
standards and procedures across all the military services for
implementing 549C, including information directly in forms made
available to victims or scripts provided to Military Criminal
Investigative Organizations for agents to read to victims.
Economic considerations in tabletop exercises
The committee believes that the private sector and other
departments and agencies of the Federal Government will play a
critical role in any future conflict, especially involving the
People's Republic of China. The committee believes these non-
Department of Defense stakeholders are uniquely positioned to
provide insight about how various contingencies may impact the
global and U.S. economies and how the economic elements of
national power may contribute to success in such contingencies.
Therefore, the committee believes that the Secretary of
Defense should invite representatives from U.S. departments and
agencies focused on economic issues, including but not limited
to the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Commerce,
the Department of Transportation, the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative, the National Economic Council, as well as the
private sector as appropriate, to participate in unclassified
Department of Defense tabletop exercises for the purposes of:
(1) Assessing the economic impacts of Department of Defense
decisions during crisis and conflict; and (2) Evaluating the
economic tools available to the U.S. Government to augment
Department of Defense capabilities in competition, crisis, and
conflict.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, not later than December 31, 2025, to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on the
Department's current and planned efforts to include
representatives from U.S. departments and agencies focused on
economic issues and the private sector in unclassified
Department of Defense tabletop exercises.
The committee notes that the Economic Defense Unit,
established elsewhere in this Act, should contribute to these
efforts.
Government Accountability Office review of costs of supporting civil
authorities
The committee notes that since 2002, the Department of
Defense (DOD) has supported the Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS) requests to secure the Nation's borders. Over
the years, the DOD has seen an increase in requirements for
supporting civil authorities including the deployment of
additional active-duty military personnel and other assets to
the United States-Mexico border. Published on February 23,
2021, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) produced a
report entitled ``Southwest Border Security: Actions Are Needed
to Address the Cost and Readiness Implications of Continued DOD
Support to U.S. Customs and Border Protection'' (GAO-21-356),
which found weaknesses in the DOD's estimates of the costs to
support DHS activities. Further, GAO found that the DOD did not
track all costs or give Congress timely information on the full
costs the DOD incurred for DHS support, as it was mandated to
do. The committee is interested in ensuring that it has an
accurate assessment of DOD and National Guard support of
operations to the DHS and therefore directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to assess the extent to which the
DOD has tracked the costs, including reimbursement and
reprogramming actions, for its support to the DHS since fiscal
year 2025 and the extent to which the DOD is following
statutory reporting requirements for support to the DHS since
fiscal year 2025.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to brief the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, with the results of
the review to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Increased access to ocean data
The committee notes that improved access to Navy data that
no longer needs to be classified could have wide and far-
reaching impacts across ocean interests, including for research
related to the physical and biological properties of the ocean,
ocean health, fisheries, and ocean exploration.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of the
Navy, as part of broader Navy efforts to standardize and make
available oceanographic data, to take the steps necessary to
ensure the release of, and public access to, unclassified and
declassified oceanographic data, subject to existing regulatory
restrictions.
Irregular warfare
The committee believes irregular warfare is a critical
component of the Department of Defense's ability to effectively
deter and counter threats across the continuum of competition
and conflict. The committee notes that, in recent years, the
Department has released multiple strategic-level documents,
including the 2018 Irregular Warfare Annex to the National
Defense Strategy and the Joint Concept for Competing, in an
attempt to bring greater clarity and cohesion to its irregular
warfare and other asymmetric activities. Yet, the committee is
concerned that the Department's approach to institutionalizing
irregular warfare as a core component of its planning and
steady-state activities around the world has been ad-hoc and
inhibited by institutional and bureaucratic impediments.
The committee notes that section 1091 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) affirmed that the Secretary of Defense has the authority to
conduct irregular warfare operations, including clandestine
irregular warfare operations, to defend the United States,
allies of the United States, and interests of the United
States. The committee believes the Secretary's authority
includes the conduct of steady-state irregular warfare military
operations short of hostilities in areas outside of areas of
active hostilities, including, but not limited to, operational
preparation of the environment, information operations, cyber
operations, civil-military operations, and building partner
capacity.
The committee directs the Secretary to provide a briefing
to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than December
31, 2025, on the Department's ongoing and planned efforts to
institutionalize irregular warfare within the Department. The
briefing should, at a minimum, include the following: (1) A
detailed description of the Department's overarching campaign
plan for irregular warfare operations within and across
geographic combatant command areas of responsibility; (2) A
description of the roles and responsibilities for the planning,
resourcing, and conduct of irregular warfare in the Department;
(3) An overview of existing execute orders relevant to the
conduct of irregular warfare activities around the world; and
(4) Any other matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Irregular Warfare Center
The committee notes that pursuant to the authority provided
in section 1299L of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283), the Department of Defense (DOD) established the Irregular
Warfare Center to serve as the DOD's Center of Excellence for
Irregular Warfare. The Irregular Warfare Center is responsible
for developing and disseminating irregular warfare knowledge
across the defense enterprise and international community, with
particular emphasis on countering the Chinese Communist Party's
malign activities around the world. The committee further notes
that the Irregular Warfare Center is partnering with a
consortium of institutions of higher education to provide
academic research to support the Center's efforts relating to
irregular warfare.
The committee notes the critical importance of irregular
warfare to the Department's efforts to create dilemmas, impose
costs, and counter the malign activities of adversaries around
the world, particularly the Chinese Communist Party. The
committee further believes that a dedicated entity within the
Department focused on irregular warfare provides military
commanders, policy makers, and foreign partners with valuable
insight and support. The committee encourages the Department to
continue efforts to mature the Irregular Warfare Center and
integrate its work into policy-making, professional military
education, and engagement with foreign partners and allies.
Large surface combatant briefing
The Navy's DDG(X) program aims to procure a new class of
guided-missile destroyers to replace the Ticonderoga (CG-47)-
class Aegis cruisers and older Arleigh Burke (DDG-51)-class
Aegis destroyers. The Navy plans to procure the first DDG(X) in
2032, with introduction to the fleet prior to 2040. The DDG(X)
class of destroyers is designed to serve through the 2060s.
Given the program's complexity, the need to avoid past
shipbuilding errors, and the importance of a robust industrial
base, the committee has taken the following legislative steps
to support the Navy's efforts:
(1) Section 131 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) directed
the Navy to conduct a robust land-based testing program
to prove out items designated as critical risks and
also the complete propulsion system in a prototype
form, prior to milestone B;
(2) Section 221 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) directed a
continued, robust, and land-based testing program prior
to ship delivery to fully test the propulsion plant in
its final form, replicating the final ship
configuration;
(3) Section 130 of the James M. Inhofe National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public
Law 117-263) affirmed the need for a close
collaborative partnership with the large surface
combatant shipyards and the Navy during design and
development of DDG(X); and
(4) Section 820 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) made
changes to multiyear procurement authorities in title
10 to ensure the Department of Defense accounts for the
industrial base when making procurement decisions.
The committee encourages the Department to make timely
design decisions to move forward with the program with a firm
set of requirements that balance warfighter needs and
shipbuilder feasibility. To ensure progress, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing on the
DDG(X) program to the congressional defense committees, not
later than January 30, 2026. The briefing shall include:
(1) The current status of warfighting and technical
design requirements;
(2) The plan to ensure sufficient design margin,
including size, weight, power, and cooling (SWAP-C)
requirements, for the program's 30-year lifespan;
(3) The status of partnerships with large surface
combatant prime contractors, including specific actions
to achieve design improvements and cost savings;
(4) The impacts of accelerating the award of the
detail design and construction contract in fiscal year
2030; and
(5) Any additional relevant information the Secretary
finds pertinent.
Maritime industrial base supplier funding
The committee encourages additional opportunities for
capability expansion within the Maritime Industrial Base (MIB)
supply chain and notes that second- and third-tier submarine
industrial base suppliers are challenged by several factors,
including workforce availability and training, material costs,
and production schedule inconsistencies. The committee further
notes that the Supplier Development Funding program has
demonstrated positive results by increasing production capacity
and providing investment for machinery and equipment within the
MIB. The committee is concerned, however, that second- and
third-tier suppliers remain challenged by current economic
conditions as they struggle to meet the build schedule for
Virginia-class and Columbia-class submarines.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees,
not later than January 1, 2026, on opportunities for: (1) A
capital loan authority for MIB suppliers; and (2) Private-
sector financing options, including such authorities proposed
elsewhere in this bill.
Medium unmanned surface vessel program requirements and acquisition
The committee strongly supports the Department of the
Navy's efforts to transition to a hybrid fleet integrating
unmanned systems to enhance operational flexibility and
resilience. The committee commends the Navy's decision to defer
the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel program, with its complex
requirements, in favor of prioritizing the near-term scaling of
the Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel (MUSV) program to address
urgent operational needs, including those articulated by the
U.S. Pacific Fleet.
However, the committee is concerned that the current MUSV
approach, redesignated as the Modular Attack Surface Craft
(MASC) program and centered on converting seven commercial
Offshore Support Vessels for delivery by 2027, does not fully
align with the Navy's long-term strategic objectives. The
committee believes that the MASC program, as structured, may
fail to meet critical mission profiles, requires significant
manning and sustainment resources, and will not yield a
scalable design representative of a future MUSV program of
record. This approach risks delaying critical learning
opportunities and hindering the Navy's ability to field
operationally relevant unmanned systems at scale.
The committee recognizes that multiple industry partners
are developing mature, purpose-built MUSV solutions that
leverage advanced commercial technologies, offering significant
advantages in performance, autonomy, scalability, and cost-
effectiveness. To capitalize on these advancements, the
committee strongly recommends that the Navy revise the MUSV
program requirements and adopt an open, competitive
solicitation process, such as a Commercial Solutions Opening,
in coordination with the Director of the Defense Innovation
Unit. This approach should prioritize near-term, scalable
solutions that maximize the use of privately financed,
commercially derived technologies to accelerate development and
deployment while fostering robust competition.
To ensure alignment with these objectives, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with the
Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees, not later than November
1, 2025. The briefing shall include, at a minimum, the
following elements: (1) An explanation of the updated
operational and technical requirements for the MUSV program,
emphasizing scalability and alignment with validated
operational needs articulated by the Commander, U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command; (2) An outline of the Navy's acquisition
strategy, including the use of an open solicitation process to
maximize competition and incorporate commercially derived and
privately developed technologies; (3) A plan for rapid
prototyping, including timelines, milestones, and metrics for
evaluating prototype performance, with a focus on iterative
development to accelerate learning and refine designs for
scalability; (4) A strategy for transitioning successful
prototypes to a program of record, including projected
timelines, cost estimates, and plans for integration into the
Navy's hybrid fleet architecture; and (5) An analysis of risks
associated with the current MASC approach compared to a
purpose-built MUSV solution, including sustainment, manning,
and operational effectiveness considerations.
The committee urges the Navy to prioritize innovative,
commercially driven solutions to deliver a scalable MUSV
capability that meets the urgent needs of the fleet while
fostering a competitive industrial base. This approach will
ensure the Navy achieves operational advantages in contested
environments and maintains technological superiority.
Narrative intelligence and cognitive warfare
The committee recognizes that the rapidly evolving global
security landscape and the increasing sophistication of
information-centric threats pose significant strategic
challenges, particularly as peer and near-peer competitors
increasingly prioritize efforts and investments in this domain
of warfare. The committee notes that the People's Republic of
China, for example, is actively engaged in developing what it
terms ``informatized warfare'' and ``intelligentized warfare,''
with a strong emphasis on cognitive domain operations,
involving the integration of information warfare across
military and civilian sectors and viewing information as a
critical domain for achieving strategic advantage in great
power competition. The committee believes there is an urgent
need for a coherent understanding of and investment in
cognitive warfare to address these challenges.
The committee notes that despite multiple congressional
actions, there remain ambiguities and challenges in core
definitions relating to information warfare, with frequent
conflation of terms such as information warfare, information
operations, cyberwarfare, cognitive warfare, and influence
operations. The committee believes this definitional ambiguity
contributes to a lack of strategic clarity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report on cognitive warfare and narrative
intelligence to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, not later than March 31,
2026. In this report, the Secretary of Defense shall define
cognitive warfare as it relates to the Department of Defense
and assess how this definition aligns with or relates to
existing doctrinal elements, including information warfare,
psychological operations, and military information support
operations. Additionally, the committee directs the report to
include an assessment of which Department of Defense
organizations contribute to and have functional responsibility
for cognitive warfare efforts. Finally, the report must include
an examination of the relative value of narrative intelligence,
defined as intelligence of the story or narrative an adversary
is attempting to build, to cognitive warfare and related
disciplines. The committee expects this evaluation to consider
how narrative intelligence can enhance military operations,
including information operations and irregular warfare.
Navy water purification system upgrades
The committee notes that the Navy has been using hazardous
bromine cartridges in smaller surface combatants as the means
of purifying non-potable water, despite the fact that safer,
non-hazardous alternatives, such as Mixed-Oxidant Electrolytic
Disinfectant Generator equipment, have been successfully
deployed on large-deck ship classes for nearly two decades.
Despite this proven track record, the transition to such
technologies on smaller ships has been stalled.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit
to the congressional defense committees a report, not later
than March 30, 2026, on the removal of hazardous bromine
cartridges currently used in surface combatants as the means of
potable water purification. The report should include an
explanation and assessment of: (1) The use of the non-hazardous
water purification technologies; and (2) The timeline for
broader implementation of such technologies as previously
directed and funded by the Congress.
Safety Investigation Board report
The committee is very concerned that the Army, Air Force,
and Navy continue to report near record rates of serious Class
A flight mishaps. Congress created the Joint Safety Council in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
(Public Law 117-81), upon the recommendation of the National
Commission on Military Aviation Safety, to focus on operational
safety challenges, as well as to augment existing safety
programs.
The committee also supports the use of both Accident
Investigation Boards and Safety Investigation Boards to
identify root causes of accidents and recommendations for
corrective actions to prevent future accidents, including
improved training, maintenance, and oversight. In order to
ensure the key findings and recommendations of these
investigations are addressed and implemented, the committee
directs the Joint Safety Council, in coordination with the
military services, to provide a report to the Senate Armed
Services Committee, not later than April 1, 2026, that contains
executive summaries for Safety Investigation Boards conducted
from January 1, 2022, to July 1, 2025, and summaries of any
corrective actions implemented in response to the Board's
findings.
Shipbuilding industrial base cost estimate
The committee recognizes the critical importance of having
a robust shipbuilding industrial base to achieve the Department
of the Navy's battle force ship inventory goals. In the Senate
report accompanying S. 4638 (S. Rpt. 118-188) of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159),
the committee directed the Secretary of the Navy, in
consultation with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation, to deliver an unconstrained cost estimate of
industrial base investments necessary to meet the inventory
plan for conventional surface ships. The committee reiterates
its directive for the Navy to deliver this report to the
congressional defense committees.
The committee emphasizes specific elements of the report to
address pressing priorities. First, the report should provide a
detailed assessment of strategic outsourcing opportunities for
ship modules, such as steel fabrication, machining, and
outfitting workload, to manufacturers across the nation. This
is critical to addressing workforce shortages in major
shipbuilding regions and to enhancing distributive shipbuilding
as a core component of program design, rather than as a
corrective measure to deal with shipbuilding programs after
they develop cost and schedule problems. The second element
concerns infrastructure investments. The report should
prioritize infrastructure improvements at major shipyards,
including Bath Iron Works, Ingalls Shipbuilding, General
Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company, Fincantieri
Marinette Marine, and Austal USA. These improvements should
encompass facilities, equipment, quality of life, and other
capital expenditures to bolster capacity and ensure timely
production of surface combatants and other naval vessels.
Additionally, the committee is interested in evaluating the
feasibility of investing in new ship construction or repair
yards, including those capable of supporting nuclear naval
shipbuilding. The committee understands that the Navy, in
collaboration with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation, is conducting a study on the potential for such
facilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to brief the congressional defense committees on the
findings of this study, not later than September 1, 2025,
including providing an assessment of whether such investments
are advisable to meet future force structure goals.
Software colors of money
The committee remains interested in ensuring that the
Department of Defense is postured to procure and operate
software programs in the most effective and efficient manner
possible. The committee notes that the Commission on Planning,
Programming, Budgeting, and Execution Reform recommended, in
its March 2024 final report, that the Department revise the
Financial Management Regulation related to funding for software
refreshes or upgrades. The committee is also aware of ongoing
efforts in the Budget Activity 8 initiative.
Therefore, not later than January 1, 2026, the Under
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit a report to the
congressional defense committees detailing proposed changes to
the Department's Financial Management Regulation that would be
needed to implement the Commission's recommendation #11A to
allow procurement; research, development, test, and evaluation;
or operation and maintenance funds to be used for the full
cycle of software development, prototyping, testing, fielding,
revision, and sustainment, while ensuring full oversight over
the totality of software spending by activity type.
Special operations forces promotions, assignments, and retention
The committee notes that section 167(e)(2)(J) of title 10,
United States Code, states that the Commander, U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM), is responsible for monitoring the
promotions of special operations forces (SOF) and coordinating
with the military departments on matters related to SOF
assignments, retention, training, professional military
education, and special and incentive pays. The committee also
notes that section 907 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) requires the Secretary of
Defense to establish a process for the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict to
monitor the promotions of members of special operations forces
and to coordinate with the military departments regarding the
assignment, retention, training, professional military
education, and special and incentive pays of members of special
operations forces consistent with the ``service secretary-
like'' responsibilities assigned to the Assistant Secretary.
The committee is concerned about the extent to which the
Assistant Secretary and the Commander, SOCOM are exercising
their authority to monitor the promotion opportunities for SOF
to meet staffing requirements and coordinating with the
military departments on the assignment of leaders to special
operations, service, and joint positions. Therefore, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to review SOF promotions, assignments, and retention by
assessing: (1) To what extent the Assistant Secretary and the
Commander, SOCOM monitor SOF promotions; (2) To what extent the
Assistant Secretary and the Commander, SOCOM coordinate with
the military departments on SOF assignments, retention,
training, professional military education, and special and
incentive pays; (3) The extent to which the DOD has processes
for assigning SOF officer and enlisted personnel to key
leadership positions within the SOF service components and
other SOF units, service, and joint positions; (4) To what
extent the Assistant Secretary; the Commander, SOCOM; and the
military departments have guidance concerning their respective
authorities, roles, and responsibilities to monitor SOF
promotions and coordinate on assignments, retention, training,
professional military education, and special and incentive
pays; and (5) Any other related matters the Comptroller General
considers appropriate.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a preliminary briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than December 31, 2025, and to provide the final results
of the review to these committees on a mutually agreed upon
date.
Status of the Department of Defense financial audit
The committee remains steadfast in its commitment to
achieving a clean financial audit opinion for the Department of
Defense (DOD), as mandated by the Chief Financial Officers Act
of 1990 and subsequent legislation. As of the end of fiscal
year 2024, the DOD continues to make incremental progress, with
10 of 28 major reporting entities receiving unmodified or
qualified audit opinions. However, significant challenges
persist, including serious financial management problems, the
inability to adequately account for intragovernmental activity
and balances between Federal entities, and weaknesses in the
process for preparing consolidated financial statements. These
issues, compounded by inadequate controls over financial data
and outdated financial management systems, continue to hinder
the DOD's ability to achieve a clean audit opinion, undermining
fiscal transparency and accountability in the stewardship of
taxpayer resources.
Section 1005 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) establishes a deadline of
December 31, 2028, for the DOD to achieve an unmodified audit
opinion across all financial statements. To support this
deadline, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
deliver a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than February 1, 2026, detailing implementation of a plan
to address deficiencies and meet the statutory deadline. This
plan shall include the following elements:
(1) A timeline for consolidating DOD data systems for
audit purposes;
(2) Identify and resolve critical material weaknesses
in financial reporting, internal controls, and systems
integration, as identified in prior audit findings;
(3) Establish robust processes to fully reconcile
intergovernmental transactions;
(4) Implement standardized procedures to accurately
account for and value all property, plant, and
equipment held by third parties, including contractors
and other entities;
(5) Develop and enforce protocols to ensure
compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP), Federal Accounting Standards
Advisory Board (FASAB) standards, and other established
audit requirements;
(6) Ensure all assets, liabilities, and financial
transactions are accurately accounted for and valued in
accordance with federal standards;
(7) Implement processes to fully document, validate,
and support all open obligations, ensuring transparency
and traceability in financial commitments;
(8) Integrate procure-to-pay processes into all
appropriate general ledgers, ensuring seamless tracking
of financial transactions from procurement to payment;
and
(9) Leverage artificial intelligence (AI) and
automation technologies to enhance audit readiness.
Study on Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program grant
administration and compliance
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to review activities that the Department of Defense
(DOD) Federal Voting Assistance Program has undertaken to
provide assistance to voters and states to facilitate voting
for military and overseas citizens voters. This review should
include the DOD's efforts to administer and oversee grants
provided to states and localities under section 6304 of title
31, United States Code, and section 20311 of title 52, United
States Code, for the purpose of conducting one or more pilot
programs on new election technology for the benefit of
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA)
voters. It should also review how the Secretary of Defense
oversees whether states and localities use those grant funds in
a manner consistent with the grant agreement terms. The review
should also include what is known about the use and security of
systems for the electronic delivery, marking, and return of
ballots for federal elections for UOCAVA voters.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide an
interim briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on this review, not
later than January 12, 2026, with a final product to follow by
a date mutually agreed upon at the time of the briefing.
Study on integration of force management, budgeting, and requirements
processes and combatant commands headquarters funding
The committee recognizes the need for greater alignment
among the Department of Defense's force management, budgeting,
and requirements determination processes to enhance efficiency
and operational effectiveness. The committee notes that both
the military services and the combatant commands (COCOMs) face
budget constraints. The committee also understands that the
COCOMs rely on the military services to develop and acquire
capabilities that allow the COCOMs to execute and sustain their
missions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a one-time report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on the feasibility,
advisability, benefits, risks, and potential implementation
options for ways to improve the integration of global force
management with resourcing and programming decisions to enhance
cost awareness and strategic prioritization, to include an
evaluation of shifting COCOM headquarters budgets from the
military services to improve financial transparency and
flexibility while ensuring continued host-service support.
The committee encourages the Secretary to seek input and
recommendations from qualified independent federally funded
research and development centers in drafting the required
report.
Support for clarifying budget materials for industry consumption
The committee supports the importance of a consistent,
clear demand signal regarding defense spending and priorities
for the defense industrial base. The committee encourages the
Department of Defense--consistent with recommendations made by
the Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
Execution Reform in its March 2024 final report--to examine the
structure, content, and format for annual budget justification
books and to strive for some uniformity on these components
across services and agencies. The Department of Defense should
consider how to improve its communication of budget information
to traditional, non-traditional, large, and small defense
companies to spur innovation and participation across the
defense industrial base. The committee acknowledges that small
startup defense firms in particular are frustrated by the lack
of clarity and plain language of defense budgets and programs.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to work with
Congress to rectify this issue.
Transportation to and from Naval Station Guantanamo Bay
The committee remains concerned about the challenges
servicemembers and their families face when stationed at Naval
Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with traveling to and from the
installation. There are limited options for flights, which
makes it challenging for planning purposes, and there are no
commercial flight options. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with United States
Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), to brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026, on how the transportation
challenges impact servicemembers, dependent family members, and
other patrons with a need for travel to and from Naval Station
Guantanamo Bay. The briefing shall include, but not be limited
to: (1) How existing contracts can be expanded and utilized to
include mission specific transportation as well as morale,
welfare, and recreation travel for servicemembers and their
families; (2) Any additional resources required to expand
existing flight options; (3) Any existing challenges or
limitations to expand and offer additional options for
servicemembers, families, and other patrons; and (4) Any other
matters the Secretary of the Navy or TRANSCOM determine to be
relevant.
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Charter
The committee continues to believe that the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security
(OUSD(I&S)) must be properly organized to fulfill its statutory
and policy responsibilities in order to ensure that the defense
intelligence enterprise is providing American warfighters with
the intelligence they need to deter, and if necessary, fight
and win our nation's wars. The committee remains concerned that
USD(I&S) governing documentation, particularly its chartering
directive, does not accurately reflect its roles and
responsibilities. The committee urges USD(I&S) to use the
findings of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
on OUSD(I&S) roles and responsibilities, titled ``Roles and
Responsibilities of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security.'' That GAO information paper was
required by the committee report (S. Rept. 118-188)
accompanying the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159), to inform updates to all relevant Department of
Defense policy documentation.
Therefore, the committee directs USD(I&S) to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees by April 6,
2026, on its plan and timeline to update the USD(I&S)
chartering directive and to ensure all chartering directives
for the organizations under USD(I&S) authority, direction, and
control are updated in line with the USD(I&S) chartering
directive.
Weather wing cloud modernization
The committee recognizes the 557th Weather Wing's critical
role in delivering operational weather intelligence to
combatant commanders, planners, and the Joint Force. Current
legacy infrastructure significantly hinders the timely
dissemination of high-fidelity meteorological and atmospheric
data, creating risks to force readiness, mission effectiveness,
and operational safety in dynamic and contested environments.
The committee notes that transitioning to secure cloud-based
systems, integrated with artificial intelligence (AI) and
machine learning (ML) capabilities, would enable faster
ingestion, automated analysis, and seamless sharing of weather
data from a diverse and growing array of sources. Real-time
forecasting and predictive analytics would enhance mission
planning, better illuminate the operational environment,
support time-sensitive operational decisions, and reduce the
impact of weather-related disruptions across global theaters of
operation.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Chief of Staff of the Air Force
and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2026, that includes: (1) An
assessment of operational limitations imposed by current
forecasting, data management, and cloud infrastructure systems
at the 557th Weather Wing; (2) A detailed roadmap for secure,
scalable cloud migration of the Wing's enterprise
infrastructure, including anticipated technical milestones; (3)
A comprehensive survey of available commercial and government-
developed AI/ML tools capable of supporting advanced weather
modeling, anomaly detection, and automated threat alerting; (4)
A discussion of interoperability benefits that could be gained
through cloud integration, particularly as they relate to
multi-domain operations, Joint Force coordination, and allied
information-sharing; (5) A discussion of benefits that could be
gained through the integration of AI/ML tools with cloud-based
data sets, including classified data; and (6) Recommendations
for infrastructure modernization, along with a summary of
anticipated improvements in forecasting accuracy, data
dissemination speed, and overall mission readiness. The report
shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a
classified annex.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
Subtitle A--Personnel Matters
Sec. 1101--Educational travel authority for dependents of certain
employees
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding section 1599b of title
10, United States Code, to direct the Director of the Defense
Travel Management Office to update the Joint Travel Regulations
to authorize educational travel for a dependent of a covered
employee without regard to whether the Federal agency
responsible for the employment of the covered employee
anticipates that the covered employee will be transferred or
travel to a location in the United States for home leave. This
authority is limited to Department of Defense Education
Activity (DODEA) employees assigned to Naval Station Guantanamo
Bay.
The committee acknowledges the unique challenges posed by
Naval Station Guantanamo Bay. There are no commercial flight
options to ensure a dependent could return home. Additionally,
the committee understands that the existing flights are quite
limited, and the priority list does not guarantee a seat for a
dependent to return home within the mandated window of time
prior to the end of a DODEA teacher's school year and
subsequent leave.
Sec. 1102--One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation
on premium pay and aggregate limitation on pay for Federal
civilian employees working overseas
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1101 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as
most recently amended by section 1104 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to extend for 1
year the authority of heads of executive agencies to waive the
limitation on the aggregate of basic and premium pay of
employees who perform work supporting certain military or
contingency operations.
Sec. 1103--One-year extension of temporary authority to grant
allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on
official duty in a combat zone
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
1 year the discretionary authority of the head of a Federal
agency to provide allowances, benefits, and gratuities,
comparable to those provided to members of the Foreign Service,
to the agency's civilian employees on official duty in a combat
zone.
Sec. 1104--Modifications to Defense Civilian Training Corps
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2200h of title 10, United States Code, to provide
direct hiring authority for up to 60 graduates of the Defense
Civilian Training Corps every calendar year. The provision
would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives, not later than January 31, 2026, and annually
thereafter until January 31, 2030, on the use of this hiring
authority.
Sec. 1105--Modifications to requirements for the President of the
Defense Acquisition University
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1746(e)(3) of title 10, United States Code, to modify
requirements related to the President of Defense Acquisition
University by striking ``term'' in both places it appears and
inserting ``tenure.''
Sec. 1106--Modification of direct hire authority for domestic defense
industrial base facilities
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1125 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to clarify that the
direct hire authority provided by that section includes the
Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair
positions. The provision would also require the Secretary of
the Navy to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, the Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate,
and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the
House of Representatives on the use of this authority.
Sec. 1107--Cyber workforce recruitment and retention
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1599f of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to expand the cyber excepted service to
include any position the Secretary considers necessary to carry
out the cyber mission of the Department of Defense. The
provision would also authorize the Secretary to appoint
personnel to the cyber excepted service without regard to any
provision in title 5, United States Code, governing the
appointment of employees in the civil service. Additionally,
the provision would authorize the Secretary to provide basic
pay to employees in the cyber excepted service that is
consistent with comparable positions in the Federal Government,
but not to exceed 150 percent of salary paid for positions at
Level I of the Executive Schedule, and additional compensation
up to a maximum amount that is equivalent to the salary of the
Vice President of the United States. Finally, the provision
would authorize the Secretary to establish a Defense Digital
Executive Service for positions in the cyber excepted service
that are comparable to positions in the Senior Executive
Service.
Finally, the provision would require the Comptroller
General of the United States to review implementation of this
section and provide a report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the
Senate, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the
House of Representatives, and the Committees on Appropriations
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The committee expects the Department to use this expanded
authority judiciously, consistent with the pay practices of
other agencies for similar positions.
Sec. 1108--Prohibition on use of funds to reduce the workforce at
public shipyards
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
funds authorized by this Act from being used to reduce the
workforce at public shipyards.
Items of Special Interest
Civilian workforce policy
The committee recognizes that the current locality pay
system under the General Schedule may not adequately account
for the evolving economic and labor conditions that affect
federal employees, particularly those in regions experiencing
significant economic growth and rising costs of living. The
existing system may rely on outdated methodologies that do not
fully capture regional cost-of-living differences or emerging
workforce trends.
The committee is concerned that limitations in the current
locality pay system have led to recruitment and retention
challenges in critical mission areas, including national
security and defense-related functions. This issue is
particularly evident in states like Utah, where defense
installations, such as Hill Air Force Base, play a vital role
in national security. The Salt Lake City, Utah, metropolitan
area and surrounding regions have experienced rapid economic
growth, rising housing costs, and increased private-sector
competition, yet these factors may not be adequately reflected
in current locality pay adjustments.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management, to assess the locality pay system for Department of
Defense employees. This assessment should include: (1) A review
of current methodologies used to determine locality pay
adjustments and their alignment with actual cost of living and
labor market data; (2) An evaluation of regional disparities
that impact recruitment and retention of Federal employees in
defense-related roles; (3) Consideration of alternative models,
including adjustments based on broader economic indicators,
private-sector wage comparisons, and regional housing market
trends; and (4) Recommendations for legislative or
administrative changes necessary to improve the accuracy,
fairness, and effectiveness of locality pay adjustments.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report on these findings and recommendations to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than April 1, 2026.
Scholarship for service hiring
The committee supports the scholarship for service programs
of the Department of Defense (DOD), including the Science,
Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) program,
the Defense Civilian Training Corps (DCTC), and the Cyber
Service Academy (CSA), recognizing them as effective recruiting
tools for the Department. In exchange for the Department paying
for some portion of a participant's post-secondary education,
the participant agrees to work as a civilian employee in the
DOD.
The committee notes that the DOD is currently developing
guidance to address the placement of this year's graduating
students from the SMART, DCTC, and CSA programs, enabling them
to fulfill their service commitments. The committee appreciates
the Department's efforts to ensure these students contribute to
DOD missions, aligning with the significant investment in their
education.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
January 31, 2026, on the status of scholarship for service
program participants (including SMART, DCTC, and CSA) who
completed their agreed-upon education from December 1, 2024,
through September 31, 2025. The briefing shall include: (1)
Whether these students were hired by the Department as part of
their service obligation; (2) If these students were not hired,
an explanation of the status of a participant's DOD civilian
service obligation; and (3) If a participant's service
obligation was waived, an assessment of the costs to the
Department to provide the participant students' education.
Hiring freeze and scholarship programs
The committee recognizes the critical importance of the
Department of Defense Cyber Service Academy (DOD CSA)
scholarship program, which provides tuition-free education to
students in exchange for a commitment to serve in DOD or
Intelligence Community cybersecurity roles. This innovative
program, established with strong congressional support,
addresses significant gaps in the national cybersecurity
workforce by developing a pipeline of highly qualified cyber
professionals. The committee also recognizes the important role
that other scholarship programs play, such as the SMART Defense
Scholarship Program and the David Boren Scholarship Program,
and the benefits the Department receives from graduates of non-
DOD scholarship programs such as the National Science
Foundation CyberCorps Scholarship-for-Service program.
The committee is concerned that despite the President's
memorandum on the hiring freeze including an exception for
positions related to national security, a hiring freeze remains
in place for key cyber and science and technology roles. The
DOD CSA alone invests over $100,000 per student per year. The
Department has informed the committee that without a hiring
exemption the Department's only course of action is to forgive
graduates' service commitments and forgive any payback. The
continued hiring freeze therefore risks wasting significant
taxpayer money and ensures that key national security roles
remain unfilled.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to press for the authorized exception to the hiring
freeze for scholarship program graduates and ensure that the
exception is in place before our investments in spring 2025
graduates are lost.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Sec. 1201--Modification of authorities
The committee recommends a provision that would make
various modifications to chapter 16 of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 1202--Modification of payment of costs for Regional Centers for
Security Studies
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 342(f)(3)(A) of title 10, United States Code, by
modifying the waiver authority for reimbursement related to the
Regional Centers for Security Studies.
Sec. 1203--Modification of authority for Naval Small Craft Instruction
and Technical Training School
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 352 of title 10, United States Code, relating to the
operation and sustainment of the Naval Small Craft Instruction
and Technical Training School.
Sec. 1204--Permanent extension of acceptance and expenditure of
contributions for multilateral security cooperation programs
and activities
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1208 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
(Public Law 118-159) related to the acceptance and expenditure
of specified contributions.
Sec. 1205--Building capacity of the armed forces of Mexico to counter
transnational criminal organizations
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
State and with the agreement of the Government of Mexico, to
submit to the appropriate congressional committees, within 180
days of the date of the enactment of this Act, a plan for a
pilot program under which the armed forces of Mexico and the
United States Armed Forces will train jointly in the United
States on tactics, techniques, and procedures for countering
the threat posed by transnational criminal organizations. Not
later than 15 days after the date on which the plan is
submitted, the Secretary of Defense shall begin implementing
the pilot program described in the plan.
Sec. 1206--Cybersecurity cooperation with the Government of Panama and
the Panama Canal Authority
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program to deepen
cybersecurity cooperation with the Government of Panama and the
Panama Canal Authority and report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until 2031, on
the implementation of this provision.
Sec. 1207--State Partnership Program selection analysis
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to modify Department of Defense
Instruction 5111.20, or any successor instruction, to ensure
that in performing selection analysis for the State Partnership
Program, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall consider
the number of current partnerships assigned to the National
Guard of a state and give preference to states that have only
one active assigned country under the program.
Sec. 1208--Modification of authority to build capacity of foreign
security forces
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 333 of title 10, United States Code, to add disaster
risk reduction or response operations, space domain awareness
and space operations, and foreign internal defense operations
to the authorized capability areas. Additionally, the provision
would make a technical modification to the availability of
funds under the authority.
Sec. 1209--Extension and Modification of Pilot Program to Improve Cyber
Cooperation with Foreign Military Partners in Southeast Asia
and the Pacific Islands
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1256 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) by extending and modifying a pilot program to improve
cyber coordination with foreign military partners in Southeast
Asia and the Pacific Islands and expanding the program's scope
to include Pacific Islands Forum member countries and extend
the timeline from 2027 to 2029.
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran
Sec. 1211--Extension of authority for reimbursement of certain
coalition nations for support provided to United States
military operations
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) and extend through
December 31, 2026, the authority for reimbursement of certain
coalition nations for support provided to United States
military operations.
Sec. 1212--Extension and modification of authority to support
operations and activities of the Office of Security Cooperation
in Iraq
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1215 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) and extend the authority
of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq through December
31, 2026, and make other modifications to that office's
authority.
Sec. 1213--Extension of authority to provide assistance to vetted
Syrian groups and individuals
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1209 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public
Law 113-291) and extend the authority to provide assistance to
vetted Syrian groups and individuals through December 31, 2026.
Sec. 1214--Extension and modification of authority to provide
assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1236 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public
Law 113-291) by extending the authority to provide assistance
to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and making
other modifications.
Sec. 1215--Extension and modification of authority to provide certain
support
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to extend the authority to
provide support to certain governments for border security
through December 31, 2027, and make other modifications.
Sec. 1216--Security and oversight of al-Hol and Roj camps
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
State and pursuant to authorities available to the Secretary of
Defense, to take appropriate measures to support the defenses
of al-Hol and Roj camps and the security for detainees within
such camps, including through support for vetted foreign
partner security forces, so as to prevent escape and
radicalization efforts that could contribute to a resurgence of
the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The provision would also
require a report on an annual basis through 2028 on the
security and oversight of al-Hol and Roj camps.
Sec. 1217--Limitation on use of funds for reduction or consolidation of
United States Armed Forces bases in Syria
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
availability of funds to reduce the number of, or consolidate,
bases of the U.S. Armed Forces located in Syria until the
Secretary of Defense provides a certification to the
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 1218--Limitation on availability of funds for the Office of
Security Cooperation in Iraq
The committee recommends a provision that would limit
funding to the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq until the
Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense
committees certification that the Government of Iraq has
undertaken specified actions.
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian Federation
Sec. 1221--Extension of prohibition on availability of funds relating
to sovereignty of the Russian Federation over internationally
recognized territory of Ukraine
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1245(a) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-236) to
extend the prohibition of funds authorized to be appropriated
by this Act for fiscal year 2026 from being obligated or
expended to implement any activity that recognizes the
sovereignty of the Russian Federation over the internationally
recognized territory of Ukraine.
Sec. 1222--Extension of annual report on military and security
developments involving the Russian Federation
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
section 1234 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) through January 31, 2031.
Sec. 1223--Extension and modification of Ukraine Security Assistance
Initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to extend the Ukraine
Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) through December 31,
2028, and authorize $500.0 million for fiscal year 2026. The
provision would also modify USAI to provide an additional 2
years for the period of performance across fiscal years. The
provision would also waive section 2571 of title 10, United
States Code, with respect to the use of reimbursable support
from one component of the Department of Defense to perform work
on behalf of another component in support of USAI.
The committee affirms that USAI has proven effective in
providing the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) with critical
capabilities to defend their sovereignty and territorial
integrity while also investing in U.S. defense industries. USAI
will remain an important avenue through which to support the
continued development of the UAF and the fulfillment of the 10-
year bilateral security agreement signed in 2024.
Sec. 1224--Weapons depot maintenance strategic plan for Ukraine
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, to partner with the Ukrainian
Ministry of Defense to create a Ukrainian depot maintenance
plan and to provide that plan to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Sec. 1225--Oversight of United States military posture in Europe
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act to reduce the total number of members
of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the
U.S. European Command area of responsibility below 76,000, to
divest of property, to remove or redeploy major equipment, or
to relinquish command of the position of the Supreme Allied
Commander Europe until 90 days after the Secretary of Defense
submits an assessment and certification to the appropriate
committees of the Congress regarding such action.
Sec. 1226--Acceptance back into stock of equipment procured under the
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to establish conditions
under which items procured under the Ukraine Security
Assistance Initiative (USAI) may be treated as Department of
Defense stock.
The provision would allow items procured under USAI to be
treated as Department of Defense stocks if: (1) The equipment
procured has not yet been transferred to the Government of
Ukraine and is no longer needed to support a USAI program; or
(2) The equipment procured has been transferred to the
Government of Ukraine and is returned by Ukraine to the United
States.
The provision would also prohibit the Secretary of Defense
from returning any items to U.S. stock until 15 days after a
notification to Congress has been sent describing which of the
conditions were met.
Sec. 1227--Statement of policy relating to Ukraine Security Assistance
Initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to add a Statement of
Policy that it is the policy of the United States to: (1)
Assist Ukraine in maintaining a credible defense and deterrence
capability; (2) Bolster security cooperation to help build a
future force of Ukraine; and (3) Advance institutional reforms
in order to advance Euro-Atlantic integration.
Sec. 1228--Intelligence support for Ukraine
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to provide intelligence support to the
Government of Ukraine for the purpose of supporting military
operations to defend or take back the internationally
recognized territory of Ukraine.
Sec. 1229--International Security Cooperation Program funding for
United States European Command
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that not less than 15 percent of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act for the International Security
Cooperation Program shall be available for use by the U.S.
European Command.
Sec. 1230--Promotion of the Joint Ukrainian Multinational Program--
Services, Training and Articles Rapid Timeline (JUMPSTART)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should employ
existing programs and authorities including the Joint Ukrainian
Multinational Program--Services, Training, and Articles Rapid
Timeline (JUMPSTART) to work with European partners to support
and expedite the delivery of weapons, training, and logistics
to Ukraine. The provision would also require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees describing opportunities to expand the use of the
JUMPSTART program, a summary of Department efforts to
accelerate delivery of equipment to Ukraine, an analysis of
opportunities and advantages of pooling resources with allies
for such efforts, and any regulatory and legislative changes
needed to enhance the effectiveness of JUMPSTART.
Sec. 1230A--Modification of United States basing and training, and
exercises in North Atlantic Treaty Organization member
countries
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to direct the Secretary of
Defense, when considering decisions related to U.S. military
basing and training in North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) countries, to consider among the factors whether a
country has submitted its annual plan to meet, and has made
progress toward, the NATO spending pledge to spend 5 percent of
Gross Domestic Product on defense by 2035.
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region
Sec. 1231--Extension of Pacific Deterrence Initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1251 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to extend the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI) through
fiscal year 2026.
The committee reaffirms its support for the PDI as a
mechanism to strengthen U.S. posture in the Indo-Pacific and to
enhance transparency into the Department of Defense's
activities that support deterrence, reassure allies and
partners, and build readiness and operational capability in the
region--primarily west of the International Date Line. However,
the committee remains concerned that the Department's approach
to identifying programmatic investments for PDI lacks
consistency, alignment with strategic priorities, and internal
accountability. Additionally, there is significant variation in
how the Office of the Secretary of Defense, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command, the military services, and others in the Department
interpret and apply criteria to select programs for the PDI
budget exhibit--making it difficult for the Congress to
evaluate progress, assess tradeoffs, and identify trends over
time.
To improve the transparency and utility of the PDI budget
exhibit, the committee directs the Department to annually
include operation and maintenance budget estimates for all
operational forces and supporting enablers west of the
International Date Line, along with any enhancements to those
forces. While the focus of PDI should be on enhancements, these
cannot be properly evaluated without visibility of the baseline
they are intended to enhance. Enhancements may include
operation and maintenance, procurement, and military
construction programs. In all cases, however, enhancements
should be primarily west of the International Date Line or
necessary for missions west of the International Date Line. The
committee further directs the Department to include budget
estimates related to deployments or rotations of units west of
the International Date Line. The committee also directs the
Department to include routine costs west of the International
Date Line if they are directly supporting a PDI category and
selected consistently across the Department's components; for
example, such costs could include facilities sustainment
restoration and modernization. The committee notes that this
direction is intended to supplement, not replace, existing
statutory requirements for the PDI budget exhibit.
As noted in the committee report accompanying S. 4638 (S.
Rept. 118-188), the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement
and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, as
passed by the Senate, the committee believes the PDI could be
used more effectively to incentivize additional investments by
the military services in joint enabling capabilities needed in
the Indo-Pacific theater. The committee continues to urge the
Department to utilize a total obligation authority withhold
technique for a significant portion of the PDI. The committee
notes that the Department still has not complied with the
requirement expressed in last year's committee report to
provide the congressional defense committees with a plan for
utilizing a total obligation authority withhold technique, as
appropriate, for future PDI budget requests across the Future
Years Defense Plan.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
with input from the military services, Indo-Pacific Command,
and other relevant stakeholders, to revise the Department's
guidance for PDI program selection. This revised guidance
should reflect the direction above and establish consistent
processes for component-level review of PDI selections. The
committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the
congressional defense committees on this revised PDI guidance,
not later than June 30, 2026.
Sec. 1232--Extension of authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin
cleanup
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1253(b) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to extend the authority of the Secretary of Defense to
transfer funds to the Secretary of State for the Bien Hoa
dioxin cleanup in Vietnam through fiscal year 2026.
Sec. 1233--Oversight of United States military posture on the Korean
Peninsula
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act to reduce the total number of members
of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the
Republic of Korea below 28,500 or to complete the transition of
wartime operational control of the United States-Republic of
Korea Combined Forces Command from United States-led command to
Republic of Korea-led command until 90 days after the Secretary
of Defense submits an assessment and certification to the
appropriate committees of the Congress regarding such action.
Sec. 1234--Limitation on availability of funds for travel expenses of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of 25 percent of the funding
authorized for travel expenses for the Office of the Secretary
of Defense until various overdue reports related to the Indo-
Pacific are submitted to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 1235--Bolstering industrial resilience with allies in Indo-Pacific
region
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, to establish and maintain a security cooperation
initiative to strengthen cooperation among the defense
industrial bases of the United States and allied and partner
countries in the Indo-Pacific region. In addition, the
Secretary of Defense is required to provide the congressional
defense committees with a report outlining progress in
establishing the initiative on a recurring basis beginning on
January 1, 2027 and annually thereafter until 2031. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than December
1, 2026 and annually thereafter until 2030.
Sec. 1236--Modification of Taiwan security cooperation initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative authorized by section
1323 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159) by adding medical equipment, supplies, and related
combat casualty care capabilities as a category of authorized
assistance under the initiative.
Sec. 1237--Joint program with Taiwan to enable fielding of uncrewed
systems and counter-uncrewed systems capabilities
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than March 1, 2026, to seek to
engage with appropriate officials of Taiwan in a joint program
for the purpose of enabling the fielding of uncrewed systems
and counter-uncrewed systems capabilities, including co-
development and co-production of such capabilities, for the
Armed Forces of the United States and the military forces of
Taiwan, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law
96-8).
Sec. 1238--Report on critical digital infrastructure of Taiwan
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, analyzing the critical digital
infrastructure capabilities of Taiwan and identifying potential
Department of Defense actions that could help to enable the
protection of such infrastructure, consistent with the Taiwan
Relations Act (Public Law 94-469).
Sec. 1239--Report on Japanese counterstrike capabilities
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense
committees with a report, not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, outlining Department of
Defense efforts to support Japan in the fielding of an
operational counterstrike capability.
Sec. 1240--Report on enhanced security cooperation with the Philippines
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than June 1, 2026, to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs
of the House of Representatives on enhancing United States
security cooperation with the Philippines.
Sec. 1241--Modification to annual report on military and security
developments involving the People's Republic of China
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1202(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), as amended, to direct the
Secretary of Defense to include in the report on the military
and security developments involving the People's Republic of
China a section analyzing China's strategy for the Tibetan
Plateau.
Sec. 1242--Strategic partnership on defense industrial priorities
between the United States and Taiwan
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to seek to establish a partnership between
the Defense Innovation Unit of the Department of Defense and
appropriate counterparts of Taiwan.
Sec. 1243--Invitation to Taiwan to Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise
The committee recommends a provision that would strongly
encourage the Secretary of Defense to invite the naval forces
of Taiwan to participate, as appropriate, in any Rim of the
Pacific exercise that is to take place after the date of the
enactment of this Act. The provision would also require the
Secretary to provide a written justification to the
congressional defense committees in the event that a decision
is made not to invite participation by the naval forces of
Taiwan.
Sec. 1244--Extension of Indo-Pacific extended deterrence education
pilot program
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1314(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) by changing the sunset date of
the program from December 31, 2027, to December 31, 2030.
Sec. 1245--Inclusion on list of Chinese military companies of entities
added to certain other lists
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1260H(b)(3) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to require the review of each entity added to any other
list of Chinese entities subject to restrictions or scrutiny
maintained by the United States Government during the annual
revision in which such entity was added.
Sec. 1246--Preventing circumvention by Chinese military companies in
third-party countries
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1260H(g)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283) to prevent circumvention by requiring review of
those specified entities operating inside or outside of China.
Sec. 1247--Sense of Congress on defense alliances and partnerships in
the Indo-Pacific region
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress on the importance of defense alliances and
partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Sec. 1251--Middle East integrated air and missile defense architecture
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to continue efforts to cooperate with
allies and partners in the Middle East with respect to
implementing an integrated air and missile defense architecture
to protect the people, infrastructure, and territory of such
allies and partners from cruise and ballistic missiles, manned
and unmanned aerial systems, and rocket attacks from Iran and
groups linked to Iran, as well as require the Secretary to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than May 31, 2026, on matters related to air and missile
defense in the region.
Sec. 1252--Modification of program and processes relating to foreign
acquisition
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 873 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to direct the geographic
combatant commands to hire not more than two members of the
acquisition workforce to advise the combatant command on the
Department of Defense processes for Foreign Military Sales
(FMS) and security cooperation to facilitate effective
implementation of those processes. The provision would also
make this authority permanent.
The committee encourages the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the Director
of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, to maximize
opportunities to leverage the defense acquisition workforce and
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Account to
support the security cooperation workforce in meeting FMS
demands.
The committee notes that section 873 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-
31) also required the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with representatives of the defense industrial base, to
establish an advisory group focused on the role of the
Department in FMS and security cooperation. The committee
directs the Secretary to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than February 1, 2026, on the establishment and
progress made by this advisory group.
Sec. 1253--Enhancing security partnership with Jordan and Lebanon
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, pursuant to authorities available to the
Secretary, to seek to provide assistance, including training,
equipment, logistics support, supplies, and services to the
Government of Jordan and the Government of Lebanon for the
purposes of supporting and enhancing efforts of the military
forces of Jordan and the military forces of Lebanon to ensure
the territorial security of Jordan and Lebanon. The provision
would also require, not later than December 31, 2025, the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Commander, U.S.
Central Command (CENTCOM), to submit to the congressional
defense committees a report that describes the plan of the
Department of Defense to provide assistance to the military
forces of Jordan and the military forces of Lebanon for such
purposes.
The committee notes the longstanding security relationship
between the Department of Defense and the military forces of
Jordan and Lebanon and the critical role these relationships
play in promoting stability and security in the region. In
light of the significant changes in regional security dynamics
in recent years, the committee views strengthening these
relationships as an important component of the Department's
efforts in the CENTCOM area of responsibility and notes that
chapter 16 of title 10, United States Code, as well as other
provisions of law, provide the Secretary with relevant
authorities to enable such efforts.
Sec. 1254--Joint Program Office for Non-Programs of Record to support
foreign acquisition
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish and charter, within the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, a Joint Program Office for Non-Programs of Record,
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act. In addition, the provision would require the Secretary to
provide a briefing, not later than 30 days after the
establishment of the Joint Program Office, to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the charter, responsibilities, resources, and plan of
activities for the Joint Program Office for the subsequent
fiscal year.
Sec. 1255--Extension and modification of United States-Israel anti-
tunnel cooperation
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1279 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) by extending the authority
through December 31, 2028, and increasing the amount authorized
for such activities.
Sec. 1256--Extension and modification of United States-Israel
cooperation to counter unmanned aerial systems
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1278 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to extend the existing
authority through December 31, 2028, and to increase the amount
authorized for such activities.
Sec. 1257--Guidance for coordination of international arms transfers
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in accordance with section 382 of title
10, United States Code, to streamline and align the roles,
responsibilities, and authorities, as well as improve
transparency, relating to Department of Defense processes for
international arms transfers, including Foreign Military Sales
(FMS). The provision would also require the Secretary of
Defense to designate a lead ``data czar'' responsible for
collecting, tracking, coordinating, and sharing data and
information on FMS cases. The provision would also require the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives,
not less than 30 days after the issuance of the updated
guidance, on the implementation of that updated guidance.
Sec. 1258--Requirement to update the National Disclosure Policy
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a framework for revising and
updating the National Disclosure Policy (NDP-1), not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and on an
annual basis thereafter to maintain currency with the rapid
pace of technology change. In addition, the provision would
direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees, on an annual
basis, describing updates to the NDP-1 and any associated
implementation challenges.
Sec. 1259--Improvements to security cooperation workforce and defense
acquisition workforce
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to issue guidance regarding foreign
military sales to the security cooperation workforce and the
acquisition workforce and modify the Foreign Military Sales
Continuous Process Improvement Board established by section
1210 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159) to specify that three members of the board shall
not be employees of the Department of Defense or members of the
Armed Forces.
Sec. 1260--Expansion of country prioritization
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that the Secretary of Defense may assign a Defense Priorities
Allocation System rating for foreign military sales.
In an effort to expedite the delivery of defense items to
strategically important American partners and allies, the
committee urges the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Sustainment (USD(A&S)) to prioritize systems for sale to
Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan,
member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
major defense partners, and members of the national technology
and industrial base, including through use of Defense
Priorities and Allocations System ratings. Filling the
requirements of America's closest allies as quickly as possible
once defense articles have been approved for transfer is a
force multiplier in pursuit of U.S. national defense. The
committee believes the USD (A&S) should recognize this and
fully account for it in its contracting practices.
Sec. 1261--Streamlining and expediting sales of defense articles and
services
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to develop an acquisition strategy that
establishes alternative acquisition paths for the procurement
of Foreign Military Sales. The provision also allows prime
contractors to begin the process of acquiring long-lead
government furnished equipment prior to the execution of a
signed commercial contract or of a letter of offer and
acceptance.
Sec. 1262--Redesignation of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies as
the James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 342 of title 10, United States Code, to designate the
Africa Center for Strategic Studies as the James M. Inhofe
Center for Africa Security Studies.
Sec. 1263--Establishment of program to promote participation of foreign
students in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
program to promote the participation of foreign students in the
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.
Sec. 1264--Modification of authority for assistance in support of
Department of Defense accounting for missing United States
Government personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 408(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Department of Defense to procure goods and services from
foreign nations to assist the Department in its mission to
recover and account for missing United States Government
personnel.
Items of Special Interest
AUKUS senior civilian official
The committee reaffirms the requirement for the Department
of Defense, as required by section 1332 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to:
(1) Designate a senior civilian official of the Department who
shall be responsible for overseeing the Department's activities
relating to the AUKUS partnership; and (2) Provide semiannual
briefings to the congressional defense committees on the status
of the AUKUS agreement not later than April 1st and October 1st
of each year. Therefore, the committee directs that the
Department's senior civilian official for AUKUS be identified
to the committee in writing and that the semiannual briefing be
provided to the committee not later than October 1, 2025.
Contracting support relative to Taiwan
The committee notes that section 6 of the Taiwan Relations
Act (Public Law 96-8) directs that transactions by any agency
of the U.S. Government relative to Taiwan shall be carried out
by or through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT). The
committee understands that AIT has limited capacity to provide
contracting support for non-AIT requirements. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to engage with the
Secretary of State, the Director of the AIT, and the heads of
other departments and agencies, as appropriate, for the purpose
of establishing a process for ensuring timely contracting
support for non-AIT requirements. Furthermore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than December 31,
2025, describing the outcome of such engagements.
Cooperation between United States and Vietnam
The committee notes the critical role that joint United
States-Vietnam efforts to address legacy issues related to the
Vietnam War have played in fostering bilateral security
cooperation and strengthening the United States-Vietnam
Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. The committee commends the
Departments of Defense and State for continuing to fulfill U.S.
commitments to fund dioxin (Agent Orange) clean-up operations
at former U.S. bases and unexploded ordnance (UXO) clearance
programs, to assist those severely disabled as a result of UXO
accidents and dioxin exposure, and to enhance Vietnam's
capacity to identify the remains of Vietnamese missing since
the war. The committee supports the continuation of such
efforts.
Department of Defense support to maritime law enforcement activities in
Indo-Pacific region
The committee believes that the Department of Defense must
continue to support the U.S. Coast Guard as it works with our
allies and partners to address challenges in the Indo-Pacific
region, including those posed by illegal, unreported, and
unregulated fishing (IUU) and illegal trafficking of people and
drugs. The committee notes that section 1252 of the James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023
(Public Law 117-263) authorized the use of funds under the
Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative to facilitate the
participation of U.S. Coast Guard personnel in, and the use of
U.S. Coast Guard capabilities for, training, exercises, and
other activities with foreign countries.
Therefore, not later than October 1, 2025, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees on the demand for U.S.
Coast Guard capabilities and expertise in the U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command area of responsibility. At a minimum, the briefing
should include an identification of: (1) Opportunities for the
U.S. Coast Guard to play a greater role in supporting the
Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance in the Indo-Pacific
region; (2) Opportunities for the U.S. Coast Guard to assume
additional responsibilities in the Indo-Pacific region to
alleviate the demand for U.S. Navy capabilities; (3)
Opportunities to increase engagement with and support to
foreign partners; and (4) Any additional legislative or
resourcing changes necessary to take advantage of opportunities
identified above.
Enhancing United States-Mexico military communication in support of
border operations
The committee notes that the Government of Mexico has
surged Mexican National Guard troops to the Mexican side of the
United States-Mexico border. The committee recognizes that
Department of Defense (DOD) support to the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) may benefit from clear and consistent
communication channels with Mexican military forces operating
across the United States-Mexico border.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Secretary of State, to submit a report, not later than March 1,
2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee
on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives detailing
current practices, identified gaps, and planned enhancements to
United States-Mexico military communication during border-
related DOD support to DHS. The report should: (1) Identify
existing communication protocols, liaison arrangements,
Memorandums of Agreement, or other coordination instruments
between the United States military and the Mexican Secretariat
of National Defense and Secretariat of the Navy relevant to
border operations; (2) Assess gaps or limitations in current
bilateral military communication that may affect coordination,
deconfliction, or situational awareness during DOD support
missions along the southern border, including identifying any
statutory or regulatory changes needed to facilitate better
communication; (3) Ensure that appropriate communication
procedures, language capabilities, and liaison officers are in
place to support operational coordination, consistent with
operational security and applicable legal authorities; and (4)
Develop and implement improvements as necessary to strengthen
real-time operational communication between United States and
Mexican military personnel in the context of United States
border support activities.
Foreign Military Sales contract modifications
The committee notes that there may be an understanding in
the defense acquisition workforce that an existing contract for
defense articles may not be modified more than once a year for
the purposes of filling a foreign sale with economy of scale.
This results in a delay of at least a year, assuming changes in
price over that period do not create additional delays to get
on contract. The committee is aware of no legal, regulatory, or
policy directive supporting this practice.
Foreign Military Sales timeline
The committee continues to be concerned regarding the
timeliness of the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program,
particularly delays in deliveries of defense articles to
foreign partners, which can undermine partners' military
readiness and defense.
Therefore, not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and not less frequently than once every
180 days thereafter until the earlier of either the date all
recommendations developed by the Department of Defense's
``Tiger Team'' to optimize the FMS process are implemented or
otherwise closed or the date that is 3 years from the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, as well as the Comptroller
General of the United States, a report on the progress of the
Continuous Process Improvement Board (CPIB), including the
status of its implementation of these recommendations.
The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct
an independent evaluation of the actions taken by the Secretary
of Defense to carry out the requirements of this section. The
Comptroller General shall brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
contents of the evaluation of the Secretary of Defense's report
not later than 12 months after it is submitted. The Comptroller
General will also conduct a report on the progress and
effectiveness of CPIB efforts, including any legislative and
administrative recommendations to enhance CPIB timelines and
outcomes. This report will be delivered to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
in a mutually agreed upon timeframe.
Illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing
The committee believes that illegal, unreported, and
unregulated (IUU) fishing constitutes a threat to the
sovereignty, economic viability, and national security of
allies and partners of the United States, particularly in the
Indo-Pacific region. The committee notes that IUU fishing has
been used as a form of coercion by the People's Republic of
China and, according to the annual Department of Defense report
titled ``Military and Security Developments Involving the
People's Republic of China,'' Chinese vessels participating in
IUU fishing have been protected and facilitated by the Chinese
Maritime Militia. The committee also notes that addressing the
challenges posed by IUU fishing requires coordination across
various departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense, as
appropriate, to: (1) Continue engagement with allies and
partners in the Indo-Pacific region, especially in the Pacific
Islands, to address the challenges posed by IUU fishing; (2)
Provide assistance, using existing authorities available to the
Secretary of Defense, to build the capacity of priority foreign
partners to address the challenges posed by IUU fishing; (3)
Leverage maritime domain awareness capabilities, including
those available under the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security
Initiative, to enhance the capabilities of priority partners to
address the challenges posed by IUU fishing; (4) Support the
collection and analysis of data on IUU fishing; (5) Consult
with the Interagency Working Group on IUU fishing and develop
recommendations for establishing an IUU fishing data and
information sharing center; and (6) Ensure Department
components coordinate IUU-related activities with the Economic
Defense Unit established elsewhere in this Act.
The committee also directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than October 1, 2025, regarding contributions by the
Department to addressing the challenges posed by IUU fishing in
concert with other interagency and foreign partners.
Indo-Pacific Multilateral Security Cooperation Initiatives
The committee notes that section 1208 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) authorizes the
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of
State, to accept funds, defense articles, and defense services
from foreign governments for mutually agreed upon purposes to
carry out security cooperation programs and activities of the
Department of Defense. The committee believes this authority
holds significant potential for facilitating multilateral
security cooperation activities in the Indo-Pacific region.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to seek to engage with appropriate officials from Japan,
Australia, the Republic of Korea, and other partners, as
appropriate, for the purpose of establishing multilateral
security cooperation initiatives with the national security
forces of mutual foreign partners in the Indo-Pacific region.
The objective should be to: (1) Build the capacity of the
national security forces of mutual foreign partners in the
Indo-Pacific region; (2) Enhance interoperability among
participating national security forces of such partners; and
(3) Coordinate, de-conflict, and efficiently leverage the
security assistance efforts of the United States, Japan,
Australia, the Republic of Korea, and other partners in the
Indo-Pacific region.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, not later than December 31, 2025, to provide a report
to the congressional defense committees regarding efforts to
establish multilateral security cooperation initiatives in the
Indo-Pacific region, including using the authority provided
under section 1208 of Public Law 118-159. At a minimum, the
report should include: (1) A description of efforts to
establish multilateral security cooperation initiatives in the
Indo-Pacific region, including consultations with appropriate
officials from Japan, Australia, the Republic of Korea, and
other partners; (2) An identification of any additional
resources or authorities necessary to support such initiatives;
and (3) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense considers
relevant.
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance strategy Sahel
The committee notes that due to recent security
developments in the Sahel, United States posture in the region
has shifted dramatically. Several changes, like the withdrawal
of United States forces from Niger, have hindered the United
States military's ability to conduct intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions in the Sahel.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, U.S. Africa
Command (AFRICOM) to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026, that describes efforts to develop
an integrated ISR strategy to increase domain awareness in the
Sahel for the purpose of force protection and to assist
partners in the region as they work to protect their people,
infrastructure, and territory from violent extremist
organizations, criminal networks, and other entities that
threaten security and stability in the Sahel.
The report required shall include the following elements:
(1) An assessment of the threats posed to countries in the
Sahel by violent extremist organizations, criminal networks,
and other actors that threaten security and stability; (2) An
assessment of current ISR capabilities in the Sahel, including
overflight rights and basing considerations; (3) A description
of efforts to engage ally and partner countries in AFRICOM's
area of responsibility to establish or enhance ISR
architecture, including overflight rights and basing; (4) An
identification of the elements of such an architecture that may
be acquired and operated by ally and partner countries in
AFRICOM's area of responsibility, and a list of such elements
for each such ally and partner; (5) An identification of the
elements of such an architecture that may only be provided and
operated by members of the U.S. Armed Forces; (6) An
identification of any challenge to optimizing such an
architecture in AFRICOM's area of responsibility; and (7) Any
other matter the Commander considers relevant.
Kurdish Peshmerga forces
The committee commends the Department of Defense's
commitment to defeating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
(ISIS) by supporting vetted partner forces to maintain pressure
against ISIS. The committee also commends the Department's
support for the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund as it
provides targeted support to sustain partner forces and
increasing vetted partner force capability.
The committee notes that the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment
by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence assesses
that ISIS remains the world's largest Islamic terrorist
organization and has sought to gain momentum from high-profile
attacks and continues to rely on its most capable branches and
globally dispersed leadership to weather degradation. The
committee also notes that the Kurdish Peshmerga forces and the
Iraqi Security Forces have long served as vital partners of the
United States in degrading and defeating the threat from ISIS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing, not later than December 30, 2025, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund, the
status of equipment delivery to Kurdish Peshmerga forces, and
plans to improve the ability of the Kurdish Peshmerga forces to
support counterterrorism operations with the Iraqi Security
Forces and the United States.
People's Republic of China security detection equipment at strategic
ports
The committee is aware that Tongfang Technology, a state-
owned enterprise in the People's Republic of China and the
parent company of Nuctech Company Ltd. (Nuctech), was added to
the Department of Commerce's Entity List in 2020. Nuctech
provides security detection equipment and technology, including
cargo scanning systems deployed at seaports and border
crossings in more than 170 countries. This includes a heavy
presence in North Atlantic Treaty Organization member nations
and in countries that facilitate the transit of U.S. military
supplies and equipment. The committee is concerned that a
subsidiary of a Chinese state-owned enterprise overseeing
screening technologies at strategic transit points could pose a
threat to military operational security and operational
effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than January 30, 2026, on measures being taken to
assess and mitigate the security threats posed to operational
security and possible covert identification and tracking of
U.S. defense articles traversing through transportation hubs
that use Nuctech scanners.
Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreements
The committee emphasizes that defense-related acquisitions
from qualified sources under Reciprocal Defense Procurement
Agreements should remain exempt from any tariffs or trade
restrictions. The committee urges the Department of Defense and
relevant interagency stakeholders to preserve existing
exemptions and ensure that future trade actions do not hinder
defense procurement or compromise national security priorities.
Security cooperation with Co-operative Republic of Guyana
The committee notes that in 2025, the U.S. Secretary of
State and the Guyanese Minister of Foreign Affairs signed a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) to deepen security
cooperation between the two countries and to address regional
challenges to counter transnational crime and deter drug
trafficking in the Caribbean region. The committee encourages
the Department of Defense to strengthen the military-to-
military partnership with the Co-operative Republic of Guyana
to build upon the 2025 MOU.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
not later than October 1, 2026, to submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report on: (1) U.S. security cooperation with the Co-operative
Republic of Guyana for the past 5 years; and (2) Any plan for
future security cooperation with the Co-operative Republic of
Guyana.
State Partnership Program
The committee notes the importance of the State Partnership
Program (SPP) in building cooperation with our allies and
partners. This cooperation can include working together to
build innovative defense capabilities to address the security
needs of the United States, its State Partnership Program
partner, or both.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau, in consultation with the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering, and other relevant
elements of the Department of Defense, to provide a briefing to
the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 31,
2026, on the SPP. The briefing should, at a minimum, address
the following: (1) A description of SPP activities that involve
collaboration on technology; (2) A description of any
opportunities to utilize SPP activities with foreign partners
to collaborate on and develop emerging technologies; and (3)
Any other matters the Chief of the National Guard Bureau deems
relevant.
Strategic ports reporting
The committee notes that the People's Republic of China
(PRC) is seeking to establish a stronger logistics and basing
infrastructure overseas to allow the PRC to deploy and sustain
military forces at further distances. The committee notes that
PRC access to select foreign ports poses a potential impact to
U.S. national security.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with relevant Federal departments and agencies,
to provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than March
10, 2026, outlining:
(1) A list of strategic foreign ports operated,
controlled, or owned directly or indirectly by the PRC;
(2) An assessment of any impact to U.S. national
security resulting from PRC control of such foreign
ports;
(3) A description of Department of Defense efforts to
coordinate with other Federal departments and agencies
to counter or mitigate the national security threats
posed by PRC control of such foreign ports; and
(4) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Secretary.
Strategy on increasing membership in the Comprehensive Security
Integration and Prosperity Agreement
The committee recognizes the strategic importance of the
Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement
(CSIPA), signed in Washington, D.C., on September 13, 2023, as
a mechanism for enhancing regional cooperation on defense,
economic development, and technological innovation. CSIPA has
played a key role in improving joint military readiness,
fostering shared economic interests, and advancing scientific
collaboration among member states in the Middle East.
The committee is particularly interested in how CSIPA has
supported effective multinational responses to emerging
security threats, including Houthi attacks on merchant vessels
in the Red Sea following October 7, 2023, and the deterrence
posture maintained through U.S. naval operations in the region.
The potential of further expansion of CSIPA membership would
strengthen regional stability, improve collective deterrence
against the Islamic Republic of Iran and other malign actors,
and advance U.S. strategic objectives.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
July 1, 2026, that includes, at a minimum: (1) An assessment of
the strategic benefits of CSIPA to regional and global
security; (2) An assessment of CSIPA's operational value to the
Department of Defense and partners in the region following the
Red Sea attacks; (3) An assessment of how CSIPA leverages U.S.
military assets such as the Fifth Fleet to address regional
threats; (4) Identification of potential modifications to the
CSIPA framework that would support broader regional
participation; (5) An evaluation of the resource and capability
requirements necessary to expand CSIPA membership; and (6)
Recommendations for further collaboration between the U.S.
military and CSIPA members.
United States-Morocco defense partnership
The committee notes the importance of the United States-
Morocco defense partnership to regional security across a range
of interests, including U.S. Africa Command-led African Lion
training exercises, which are the largest of their kind on the
African continent; counterterrorism cooperation and
intelligence sharing; and the National Guard's State
Partnership Program. The committee continues to monitor the
relationship with an eye toward facilitating greater security
cooperation.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
Sec. 1301--Cooperative Threat Reduction funds
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$282.8 million for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
Program, define the funds as authorized to be appropriated in
section 301 of this Act, and authorize CTR funds to be
available for obligation for fiscal years 2026, 2027, and 2028.
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Sec. 1401--Working capital funds
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the 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
The committee recommends a provision that 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
The committee recommends a provision that 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
The committee recommends a provision that 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
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for Defense Health Program activities at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile
Sec. 1411--Modifications to Strategic and Critical Materials Stock
Piling Act
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 98d(b) of title 50, United States Code, to authorize
disposal of materials from the National Defense Stockpile if
such disposal was included in the annual materials plan
submitted to congressional defense committees and if the
Stockpile Manager notifies congressional defense committees not
later than 15 days after disposing of the material. The
provision would also amend sections 98d(a)(2), 98e(d)(1),
98e(d)(2) of title 50, United States Code, to standardize
existing wait periods to all be 30 days.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Sec. 1421--Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement
Home
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an appropriation of $77.0 million from the Armed Forces
Retirement Home Trust Fund for the operation of the Armed
Forces Retirement Home for fiscal year 2026.
Items of Special Interest
Advancing cobalt production in the United States
The committee continues to emphasize the importance of
mitigating dependencies on the People's Republic of China (PRC)
for batteries and other defense component supply chains by
investing in U.S. processing and refining capability. Cobalt
sulfate is essential to battery technologies, and cobalt metal
is vital in a variety of aerospace and defense weapon systems.
Both are fundamental to a secure military and high-technology
economy. Without assured access to them, nearly every military
platform and advanced technology that the United States depends
on would be inoperable. The committee remains concerned that
America's substantial dependence on the PRC for processing of
cobalt poses significant risks to military readiness and
economic competitiveness.
Domestic recycling of critical minerals
The committee commends the ongoing work of the Department
of Defense to expand sources for the National Defense Stockpile
for germanium through recycling. The committee believes that
programs like the Strategic Material Recovery and Reuse Program
(SMRRP) can foster the creation of new sources for strategic
and critical materials to improve supply chain shortfalls.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a one-time
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
March 1, 2026, on an assessment of the ability to leverage best
practices from existing recycling efforts of the SMRRP to
potentially expand and increase the scale to recycle, reuse, or
otherwise recover any additional materials, such as cobalt,
lithium, nickel, and any other materials determined to be a
strategic and critical material under section 3(a) of the
Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C.
98b(a)).
Material preference for the National Defense Stockpile
The committee remains concerned that the Department of
Defense (DOD) is vulnerable to supply chain uncertainty for
certain critical and strategic materials. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1) The
identification of 10 materials or products already included in
the DOD National Defense Stockpile, which the DOD could procure
to improve domestic production and decrease national security
vulnerabilities; (2) Recommended or required amounts of
material for domestic procurement for each identified material
or product for the next 3 years; (3) A public list of materials
or products and target percentages that is releasable to
industry, allies, and partners; and (4) Any potential
challenges encountered by increasing domestic sourcing for such
materials.
Reimbursement of Armed Forces Retirement Home for medical care provided
to TRICARE-eligible beneficiaries
The committee is aware that the Armed Forces Retirement
Home (AFRH) continues to face challenges in receiving
reimbursement for medical care it provides to residents who are
eligible for health care under the TRICARE program. The Joint
Explanatory Statement to Accompany the Servicemember Quality of
Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) required the Secretary of
Defense to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives on the legal and policy issues
related to the inability to provide reimbursement for AFRH
resident healthcare. Based upon that briefing, the committee is
aware of two existing impediments to TRICARE reimbursing the
AFRH for the care provided to eligible TRICARE beneficiaries.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1)
Progress made on transitioning the AFRH's current health
records system to MHS Genesis; (2) The determination made on
the ability of the AFRH's existing health record system to
provide data needed for TRICARE billing and reimbursement,
including specifics about any changes to the system required to
effectuate TRICARE billing and reimbursement and an estimate of
the cost for making these changes; (3) Any statutory
impediments related to appropriations issues; and (4) Any other
matters the Secretary determines relevant to enabling
reimbursement for healthcare offered to TRICARE-eligible
beneficiaries at the AFRH.
Securing niobium supply
The committee supports the ongoing efforts of the
Department of Defense to increase the domestic production of
high-purity niobium to meet the requirements of the defense
industrial base. The committee encourages the Department to
continue eliminating dependence on foreign sources for
strategic and critical materials, especially those in supply
chains located in, or with beneficial ownership in, foreign
entities of concern.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to brief the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
March 1, 2026, on the: (1) Progress of niobium-related
investments or projects within the Department; (2) An estimate
of how many Department of Defense programs rely on foreign
sources of niobium; and (3) Approximate timelines to transition
the niobium supply chain to domestic or allied sources of
supply.
Support for continued focus on critical mineral investment
The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts
to secure domestic and allied sources of critical minerals and
materials through Industrial Base Resilience program
investments. The committee encourages continued investment with
particular focus on domestic mining and processing components
for strategic materials and minerals recently added to China's
export ban list. These minerals and materials include antimony,
bismuth, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, low-carbon
ferrochromium, molybdenum, scandium, superalloys or superhard
materials (and their component minerals), and tungsten.
TITLE XV--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Space Activities
Sec. 1501--Delay in implementation of environmental assessment for
rocket cargo test and demonstration at Johnston Atoll
The committee recommends a provision that would delay the
implementation of the Environmental Assessment for Rocket Cargo
Test and Demonstration at Johnston Atoll, United States (EAXX-
007-57-USF-1728497279, March 3, 2025) until the notice of
intent is further modified to include the consideration of the
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, U.S. Army
Garrison--Kwajalein Atoll, Republic of the Marshall Islands.
The committee notes that this test site has long been the
Major Range Test Facility Base for missile defense and rocket
launch activities and should be considered in such a site
selection for cost, environmental impact, and existing
capability for range instrumentation, given the concept of
operations for rocket cargo.
Sec. 1502--Study on future space launch capacity
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive study on future
space launch capacity, including long-term capacity,
infrastructure, and strategic viability of existing and
potential heavy and super heavy space launch sites. A report of
the findings of this study will be delivered to the House and
Senate Committees on Armed Services not later than March 31,
2026.
The committee supports the Department of Defense's effort
to assess the long-term capacity and sustainability of domestic
space launch infrastructure for heavy and super heavy vehicles.
As national security space launch demand continues to increase,
driven by both defense and commercial sector growth, the
committee believes it is critical to ensure that existing
sites, including Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and
Vandenberg Space Force Base, remain capable, efficient, and
resilient. The committee also supports the consideration of
alternate or complementary launch locations that could enhance
strategic flexibility, reduce congestion, and support future
mission requirements.
Sec. 1503--Acquisition and operation of space systems for space
warfighting and control
The committee recommends a provision stipulating that any
weapon systems intended to produce space control effects to
adversary satellite systems be acquired and operated by the
U.S. Space Force, with commercial augmentation as required. The
provision would further allow for a national security waiver to
be granted, with the stipulation that the Secretary of Defense
would be required to provide notice to the congressional
defense committees within 10 days of exercising any such
waiver.
Sec. 1504--Blast damage assessment guide for space vehicles at Air
Force launch complexes
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to publish a liquid oxygen (LOX) and
methane blast damage assessment guide for space launch vehicles
using U.S. Air Force launch range complexes within 1 year of
the date of enactment of this act, with a notice and one-time
briefing to the congressional defense committees within 30 days
of publication. The provision would provide for a waiver based
on reasons of national security or impracticability, provided
that the Secretary proposes to the congressional defense
committees a one-time alternate date of publication of the LOX-
methane blast damage assessment guide.
The committee notes that the provision expresses the
committee's expectation that the LOX-methane blast damage
assessment guide be developed consistent with section 1601 of
the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-
159).
The committee further notes that the provision requires the
1 year date of publication of the LOX-methane blast damage
assessment guide will be approximately 2 years since the
original requirement, established in section 1601(b) of the
Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159), to
determine a process through which a scientifically based yield
determination can be assessed for space launch vehicles while
in flight, and that 2 years should provide ample time for the
publication of such a guide, given the heavy demand that is now
occurring on U.S. Air Force launch range complexes.
The committee notes that section 172(h), title 10, United
States Code, delegates such authority to the Commanders of the
Space Launch Deltas responsible for the launch of space flight
vehicles. Therefore, the ability to execute the proposed
provision should be within the purview at a minimum of the
Secretary of the Air Force and more appropriately at the Space
Launch Delta in order to comply with the timeframe of the
provision.
Sec. 1505--Acquisition of space-based tactical data capability
The committee recommends a provision that ensures, to the
maximum extent practicable, that space acquisitions employ
procedures to maximize competition for programs to deliver
space-based tactical data and that the products from such
vendors comply with interfaces and standards that maximize
resilience and interoperability with Department of Defense
systems.
Sec. 1506--Use of middle tier acquisition program for proliferated
warfighter space architecture of the Space Development Agency
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Director of the Space Development Agency to use a middle tier
acquisition program for the rapid fielding of satellites and
associated systems for tranches 4, 5, and 6 of the proliferated
warfighter space architecture.
Sec. 1507--Continuation of operation of Defense Meteorological
Satellite Program
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to continue to operate the Defense
Meteorological Satellite Program until the end of the
functional life of the satellites in orbit as of the date of
the enactment of this Act. The provision would further direct
the Secretary to brief the congressional defense committees on
the status of the program, its requirements and capabilities,
its projected annual and lifecycle costs, and the projected
costs to replace the program's functions.
Subtitle B--Nuclear Forces
Sec. 1511--Matters relating to intercontinental ballistic missiles of
the United States
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
target date of initial operational capability for the LGM-35A
Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) weapon
system and minimum inventory requirements for ICBMs and ICBM
launch facilities. The provision would also prohibit the use of
fiscal year 2026 funds to reduce the quantity of deployed ICBMs
to a number less than 400, with exceptions for maintenance,
sustainment, or replacement.
Sec. 1512--Matters relating to Air Force Global Strike Command
The committee recommends a provision that would: (1)
Reverse any changes made to Air Force Global Strike Command
(AFGSC) manpower, composition, roles, or responsibilities
related to efforts to establish an Integrated Capabilities
Office or an Integrated Capabilities Command (ICC) since
October 1, 2023; (2) Limit the expenditure of Air Force funds
until the congressional defense committees are notified of such
reversal; (3) Limit the authority of the Secretary of the Air
Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force to make future
changes to AFGSC without concurrence from the Secretary of
Defense and the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM);
(4) Make several technical amendments to section 9040 of title
10, United States Code; (5) Codify Air Force Mission Directive
63; and (6) Require the Secretary of the Air Force to update
Air Force Program Action Directive D16-01 within 90 days of the
date of the enactment of this Act.
The committee is deeply troubled by the Air Force's
apparent disregard of the limitations on alterations to AFGSC
enacted by section 1631 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159). The Air Force's failure to
fully inform the committee of plans to ensure that future
adjustments to the composition, roles, or responsibilities of
AFGSC will not adversely affect the command's capability to
meet operational requirements of STRATCOM or Department of
Defense activities to achieve presidential nuclear employment
guidance objectives prior to such alterations appear to
contravene the clear intent of the provision.
The committee appreciates recent Air Force announcements
that nuclear forces will be exempted from further development
of the ICC until the concept has further matured. The structure
of AFGSC as a four-star major command is a direct result of
institutional lapses in senior Air Force leadership in, and
inadequate prioritization of, the nuclear deterrence mission
immediately prior to AFGSC's elevation. Any efforts to
dismantle such organizational reforms without deliberate review
and thoughtful consideration of the ramifications would
indicate to the committee an ignorance of the causes that led
to such failures and risk reducing our confidence in future
reform efforts, well-intentioned as they may be. The committee
is adamant that such lapses cannot be allowed to recur and
remains wary of any adjustments to AFGSC's roles,
responsibilities, or composition that could reduce the
prioritization of, or leadership attention to, this critical
capability.
The committee will closely monitor Air Force compliance
with the requirements of this provision and will consider the
use of all available mechanisms in pursuit of this objective,
including reviews by the Government Accountability Office and
the Department of Defense Inspector General.
Sec. 1513--Adjustment to bomber aircraft nuclear certification
requirement
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the
timing for the Air Force to complete operational certification
of the B-21 bomber with the AGM-181 Long Range Standoff Weapon.
Sec. 1514--Limitation on availability of funds pending establishment of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence,
Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2026 funds for the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment and for the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy until the Department of Defense has: (1)
Updated all applicable regulations, polices, and departmental
guidance to reflect the establishment of the Office of the
ASD(NDCBDPP); and (2) Realigned personnel, facilities, and
budgetary resources to reflect the implementation of section
138(b)(4) of title 10, United States Code.
The committee welcomes the establishment of the position of
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence,
Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs
(ASD(NDCBDPP)) but remains deeply concerned about the
Department of Defense's approach to establishing the
organization intended to assist the ASD in carrying out his or
her assigned responsibilities. The Department's decision to
artificially separate the personnel management systems for
employees formerly assigned to the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment
(OUSD(A&S)) undermines the cohesion of the newly established
Office of the ASD(NDCBDPP) and adds unnecessary redundancy and
complexity to the management activities therein. Further, the
Department appears to have failed to reallocate resources and
staff expertise from within the OUSD(A&S) to support the
ASD(NDCBDPP)'s statutory mandate to serve as the ``principal
Department of Defense civilian responsible for oversight of
portfolio management for nuclear forces established by section
499c of [title 10, United States Code]''. The Congressional
Budget Office recently released a report that estimates the
Department of Defense expects to spend approximately $95.0
billion annually over the next decade to operate, sustain, and
modernize all aspects of the nuclear forces of the United
States. In order to effectively discharge the statutory
responsibilities assigned to it, the OASD(NDCBDPP) must be
provided with the expertise and resourcing required to
effectively serve as the ``principal civilian adviser to the
Secretary of Defense on nuclear deterrence policies,
operations, and associated programs within the senior
management of the Department of Defense''. The committee notes
that the primary rationale for establishing the ASD(NDCBDPP)
was to improve collaboration among the various offices within
the Office of the Secretary of Defense with responsibilities
relating to the nuclear deterrence mission by organically
consolidating the various lines of effort under a unified
organization. The Department's initial approach to implementing
this direction fails to meet this objective and highlights
precisely why Congressional action was required.
Sec. 1515--Adjustment to responsibilities of Nuclear Weapons Council
The committee recommends a provision that makes a series of
technical adjustments to section 179 of title 10, United States
Code, to further clarify the responsibilities of the Nuclear
Weapons Council.
Sec. 1516--Limitation on availability of funds pending notification of
tasking authority delegation
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2026 travel funds for
the Secretary of the Air Force until the Secretary of Defense
submits the notification required by section 1638(e) of the
James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263).
Sec. 1517--Modification of requirement for nuclear-armed, sea-launched
cruise missile initial operational capability
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1640 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to authorize a middle-tier
acquisition pathway and adjust the target date of initial
operational capability for the nuclear-armed, sea-launched
cruise missile from 2034 to 2032.
Congress established section 3602 of title 10, United
States Code (10 U.S.C. 3602), ``Middle tier of acquisition for
rapid prototyping and rapid fielding,'' as one of six adaptive
acquisition pathways for the Department of Defense to improve
the Department's capability ``to rapidly develop fieldable
prototypes to demonstrate new capabilities and meet emerging
military needs.''
The sea launched cruise missile-nuclear (SLCM-N), as
authorized by section 1640 of the Fiscal Year 2024 National
Defense Authorization Act, is intended to rapidly deploy a
cruise missile using existing technologies and mature designs
as much as possible to reduce cost and shorten fielding
timelines. As such, the committee believes the use of a middle-
tier rapid prototyping authority found in 10 U.S.C. 3602 has
the potential to support the objectives of the SLCM-N program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Government
Accountability Office to assess the effectiveness of this
authority, and any related authorities, in supporting the
objectives of the SLCM-N program and brief the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the
results of this assessment and offer recommendations for
improving its utilization for this ongoing effort.
Sec. 1518--Pilot program for unmanned aerial vehicle resupply to launch
control facilities
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to carry out a pilot program
over a period of up to 3 years to assess the feasibility and
effectiveness of resupplying intercontinental ballistic missile
facilities using unmanned aircraft systems. The provision
further requires the Secretary, should he or she carry out said
pilot program, to provide an annual report, not later than
December 1 of each year, on how the pilot program is supporting
Air Force Global Strike Command requirements. Finally, the
provision requires the Secretary to brief the congressional
defense committees on any statutory adjustments required to
enable or continue the efficient execution of such program, not
later than 180 days after the Secretary establishes a pilot
program.
Sec. 1519--Limitation on availability of funds pending commencement of
annual briefings on implementation of recommendations by the
Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United
States
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2026 funds for the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment until the Under Secretary completes the first
annual briefing to the congressional defense committees
required by section 1637 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
Sec. 1520--Deep cleaning of launch control centers of the Air Force
Global Strike Command
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
deep cleaning of the underground crew capsules at the three
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) wings every 5 years.
The committee notes that the capsules in some cases are
more than 60 years old, and each crew must spend 24 hours
within each capsule. The Department of Defense's 2014 Force
Improvement Program required such a deep cleaning, which has
since not been institutionalized. The committee hopes that this
provision will help institutionalize a deep cleaning cycle
until such time as the Sentinel ICBM program decommissions and/
or replaces the launch control center and its crew capsule.
Sec. 1521--Limitation on compensation caps
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
any action to establish or implement a requirement to establish
a cap on reimbursement of compensation and benefits for non-
federal employees under contract with the National Nuclear
Security Administration or employees of federally funded
research and development centers supporting U.S. atomic energy
defense activities; the sustainment and modernization of
Department of Defense nuclear forces; or the development,
testing, or fielding of technologies supporting the Golden Dome
missile defense architecture.
The committee is concerned that the Office of Management
and Budget's proposed rule to limit direct compensation is
based on an arbitrary comparison of unrelated factors and
imposes unnecessary restrictions on the capabilities of
federally funded research and development centers to attract
and retain highly qualified technical personnel at a time when
such expertise is in exceptionally high demand. While the
committee supports efforts to ensure costs are appropriately
managed and controlled, actions to address specific
expenditures should be taken within the context of maximizing
overall value of returns on investments of taxpayer dollars.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense and the
Department of Energy expect to spend potentially hundreds of
billions of dollars over the next decade to operate, sustain,
and modernize U.S. nuclear forces and missile warning and
defense capabilities and does not believe that artificially
limiting the ability of either Department to access critical
skill-sets will improve the likelihood of success in either
mission area.
Subtitle C--Missile Defense
Sec. 1531--Matters relating to the Golden Dome missile defense system
The committee recommends a provision that would revise the
national missile defense policy outlined in section 5501 of
title 10, United States Code; require an annual briefing on the
development and deployment of the Golden Dome missile defense
system until it reaches full operational capability; codify the
establishment of the position of Golden Dome for America Direct
Reporting Program Manager; and direct the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency to take such actions as necessary to
enter into a contract for the construction of two replacement
missile range safety vessels.
The committee recognizes that the development and
deployment of the Golden Dome missile defense system
potentially represents a profound shift in how the United
States deters and defends against missile and aerial threats to
the homeland. The committee understands that, given the
purported scale and scope of the Golden Dome system, the
requirements, costs, and timing for producing and fielding the
full capability will likely evolve over time. Ensuring this
effort successfully delivers the improved defensive
capabilities intended will require close cooperation with and
oversight by the Congress.
The committee also directs the Secretary of Defense, acting
through the designated senior defense official or military
officer appointed to lead the development and deployment of the
Golden Dome missile defense system, to provide a one-time
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than February 1, 2026, on: (1) The feasibility of expanding the
operational deployment of Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System
emplacements to include Hawaii, Alaska, and the continental
United States, as well as an identification of proposed
locations, as applicable; (2) An assessment of the cost-
effectiveness of expanding existing Ground-Based Midcourse
Defense system sites and/or constructing additional sites; (3)
An assessment of opportunities for expanding technology
exchanges and collaborative missile defense system development
with U.S. allies; (4) A description of the activities required
to modernize existing terrestrial radars, including Cobra Dane,
Thule Ballistic Missile Early Warning System, Upgraded Early
Warning Radars in Greenland and Cape Cod, the Alaska Radar
System, and the Perimeter Acquisition Radar Attack
Characterization System; (5) An assessment of desired locations
for the construction of a southern hemisphere-facing missile
early warning system, including initial cost estimates and
projected completion timelines, as applicable; (6) An
evaluation of areas where statutory adjustments may
substantially improve the affordability and/or accelerate the
fielding of the overall Golden Dome architecture or composite
systems; and (7) Any other issues the Secretary believes
relevant.
Sec. 1532--Inclusion of Hawaii and Alaska in plans for Iron Dome for
America
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that plans, reviews, strategies,
and capabilities to improve the missile defense of the United
States also include improvements for the missile defense of
Hawaii and Alaska, in addition to the continental United
States, when implementing Executive Order (EO) 14186, titled
``The Iron Dome for America.'' The provision would also
establish a one-time briefing requirement for the Secretary of
Defense to brief the congressional defense committees, not
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
on the implementation of EO 14186.
Sec. 1533--Inclusion of air and missile defense in unconstrained total
munitions requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 222c(c) of title 10, United States Code, to include air
and missile defense munitions in the unconstrained total
munitions requirement.
Sec. 1534--Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli
cooperative missile defense program co-development and co-
production
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for the procurement of the Iron Dome short-range rocket
defense system, David's Sling Weapon System, and Arrow 3 Upper
Tier Interceptor Program as outlined under the Memorandum of
Agreement between the United States and the Government of
Israel for cooperative missile defense programs.
Sec. 1535--Requirement for Aegis Combat Systems operationally deployed
under United States Indo-Pacific Command
The committee recommends a provision that removal of the
Aegis Guam Combat System from the Indo-Pacific Command area of
responsibility (currently sited on Guam) shall be consistent
with section 162(a) of title 10, United States Code, using
procedures outlined under Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Manual 3130.06D (relating to global force management allocation
policies and procedures). The provision would obligate the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide a notice to
the congressional defense committees not later than 10 days
after the date of commencement of such removal.
Sec. 1536--Amendments to technical authority of Director of Missile
Defense Agency regarding integrated air and missile defense
activities and programs
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 5531 of title 10, United States Code, by adding
``system-level architectures'' to the technical authority of
the Missile Defense Agency.
Sec. 1537--Assessment of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense
Test Site
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Test Resource Management Center (TRMC) to visit
the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Test Site each year until
March 31, 2030, and assess the site and the state of
infrastructure supporting test and evaluation facilities.
Further, the provision would require the director to brief the
congressional defense committees on the findings of the visit
not later than 30 days after the visit. The provision would
provide a waiver to delegate the visit to a senior official
within the TRMC.
The committee has made it a priority to visit the Ronald
Reagan Ballistic Missile Test Site on a regular basis to assess
conditions on the ground and believes that TRMC senior staff
can only get a true picture of facility conditions by visiting
the site in person.
Sec. 1538--Biennial assessments of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile
Defense Test Site
The committee recommends a provision that would, beginning
in 2027, require biennial assessments of the capability of the
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on U.S. Army
Garrison Kwajalein Atoll. The assessment would be conducted in
each odd-numbered year by the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command
(STRATCOM), in consultation with the Commanders, U.S. Space
Command and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, and other such combatant
commands as appropriate. The assessment would include a study
of the site's ability to meet the operational and weapon system
developmental testing needs of the combatant commands,
including the suitability of garrison infrastructure to support
operations. The provision would further direct the Commander,
STRATCOM, to submit a written assessment to the Secretary of
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff not later
than February 28 of each even-numbered year following that in
which the biennial assessment is written, beginning in 2028.
The provision would further direct the Secretary to submit the
unedited assessment and any additional views submitted by the
Secretary and/or the Chairman to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 15 of each even-numbered year
following the year in which the biennial assessment is written,
beginning in 2028.
Sec. 1539--Limitation on availability of funds for Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment pending
commencement of annual briefings on missile defense of Guam
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation and expenditure of not more than 90 percent of the
funds authorized for fiscal year 2026 for operation and
maintenance for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment until the Under Secretary
provides the first annual briefing on the missile defense of
Guam required by section 1648 of the Servicemember Quality of
Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
Sec. 1540--Limitation on availability of funds for Missile Defense
Agency pending arrangement for independent analysis of space-
based missile defense capability
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation and expenditure of fiscal year 2026 funds for
operation and maintenance of the Missile Defense Agency until
it enters into an arrangement in accordance with section
1671(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) and notifies the congressional
defense committees of such arrangement.
Sec. 1541--Limitation on authority to reduce sustainment for or halt
operation of the AN/FPS-108 COBRA DANE radar
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to reduce sustainment for
or halt operation of the AN/FPS-108 COBRA DANE radar located at
Eareckson Air Station in Alaska until the Secretary certifies
in writing to the congressional defense committees that a
replacement capability is available to meet combatant command
requirements.
Sec. 1542--Accelerating development of autonomous agents to defend
against cruise missiles and unmanned systems
The committee recommends a provision encouraging the Direct
Reporting Program Manager for the Golden Dome for America to
accelerate development of autonomous agents to defend against
cruise missiles and unmanned systems.
Sec. 1543--Missile defense testing requirements
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Program Manager for the Golden
Dome system to ensure that a robust testing regime is
established for all interceptors or similar systems used
throughout the lifecycle of the Golden Dome system. The
provision would further direct the Secretary and Program
Manager to present detailed test plans to the congressional
defense committees and submit an annual report to the
congressional defense committees detailing key regulations
preventing rapid, iterative testing of systems vital to Golden
Dome.
Sec. 1544--Improving United States missile defense capabilities
The committee recommends a provision that would require a
series of funding assessments relating to acceleration of
various missile defense technologies and programs; require
combatant commanders to include sensor and counter-unmanned
system requirements as part of the President's annual budget
submission; and, subject to appropriations, that testing and
initial fielding of the Next Generation Interceptor be
completed not later than January 1, 2028.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Sec. 1551--Independent assessment of the Department of Defense National
Industrial Security Program
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
(NASEM) to conduct an independent assessment of the National
Industrial Security Program. Such assessment would be required
to be submitted by the NASEM to the congressional defense
committees, within 1 year of entering the agreement. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
the views of the Secretary with respect to the report's
findings, within 90 days of delivery by the NASEM.
Sec. 1552--Reforms relating to inactive security clearances
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to update the Department of Defense Manual
5200.02, or any successor manual, to ensure that an individual
who has been retired or otherwise separated from service in the
Armed Forces or employment with the Department of Defense for a
period of not more than 5 years and who was eligible to access
classified information on the day before the individual retired
or otherwise separated will be granted eligibility by the
Secretary to access classified information under specified
circumstances. The provision would also require the Secretary
to conduct an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of
subjecting inactive security clearances to continuous vetting
and due diligence and to provide a briefing, not later than
June 30, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the findings of the
required assessment.
Sec. 1553--Annual review of the Joint Electromagnetic Battle Management
Software Program
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department of Defense
(DOD) to enter into a contract with a federally funded research
and development center to review, on an annual basis, the
development of the Joint Electromagnetic Battle Management
(EMBM) Software Program, ending October 1, 2031. The provision
would also require the CIO to brief the congressional defense
committees annually, not later than September 30 of each year
through 2031, on the results of the review.
The committee notes that the EMBM effort is part of the
2021 implementation plan issued by the CIO to ensure that the
DOD coherently and holistically manages its electromagnetic
spectrum operations. The committee believes it is critical for
the combatant commands to have such a planning tool to
understand both permissive and non-permissive spectrum
environments of the Joint Force.
Sec. 1554--Integration of electronic warfare into Tier 1 and Tier 2
joint training exercises
The committee recommends a provision that would move
section 1091 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) to
chapter 25 of title 10, United States Code, as a new section
500(g) and extend the termination date from fiscal year 2026 to
fiscal year 2030. Additionally, the provision would require the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to annually brief the
congressional defense committees on the results of the
exercises in this provision as it applies to electronic
warfare.
Sec. 1555--Briefings on intercepts of unidentified anomalous phenomena
by North American Aerospace Defense Command and United States
Northern Command
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1683(l) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) to include a new element
for the semi-annual briefing requirement to include details on
any unidentified anomalous phenomena intercepts conducted by
the North American Aerospace Defense Command or U.S. Northern
Command.
Sec. 1556--Consolidated security classification guidance matrix for
programs relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director for the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office to issue
a consolidated security classification guidance matrix for
programs relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena. The
provision also requires the Director to provide a briefing on
the implementation of the security guidance matrix to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than 30 days after the issuance of
the consolidated security guidance matrix.
Sec. 1557--Plan for increasing utility of user activity monitoring
capabilities
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on increasing the use of user activity
monitoring capabilities on Department of Defense unclassified
networks and systems, not later than June 1, 2026.
Sec. 1558--Support by the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing to EA-37B Compass
Call Aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that requires the U.S.
Air Force's 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing to support the EA-37B
Compass Call Aircraft.
The committee notes that the Air Force has begun to produce
the EA-37B Compass Call aircraft to replace the EC-130H Compass
Call aircraft based on a Gulfstream G550 airframe. The
committee further notes, however, that it is not supported by
the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing, which was specifically created
to support and provide spectrum warfare capabilities, such as
software-in-the-loop and hardware-in-the-loop, as well as rapid
reprogramming of electronic systems based on a shortened
intelligence cycle. This support to the EA-37B is essential to
the mission of the aircraft and is the fundamental reason the
350th Spectrum Warfare Wing was established.
Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a brief to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the timeframe to
implement the provision.
Sec. 1559--Report on the technical collection capabilities of the
People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation in the
Republic of Cuba
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of
National Intelligence, to submit a report evaluating the
intelligence capabilities of the People's Republic of China and
the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba to the
appropriate congressional committees, not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 1560--Extension of protection of certain facilities and assets
from unmanned aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 130i of title 10, United States Code, by extending the
authority by 1 year to 2027.
Sec. 1561--Consolidation of reporting requirements applicable to All-
domain Anomaly Resolution Office
The committee recommends a provision that would amend sec.
413 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
(division X of Public Law 117-103) by modifying the reporting
requirements applicable to the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution
Office.
Sec. 1562--Limitation on the divestment, consolidation, and curtailment
of certain electronic warfare test and evaluation activities
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
prior to taking any action to divest, consolidate, or curtail
certain electronic warfare test and evaluation activities.
Sec. 1563--Modification of functions of Electromagnetic Spectrum
Enterprise Operational Lead for Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum
Operations to include dynamic spectrum sharing technologies
The committee recommends a provision that modifies the
functions of the Electromagnetic Spectrum Enterprise
Operational Lead for Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations
under section 500e of title 10, United States Code, to include
coordinating test and evaluation of tactics, techniques, and
procedures for dynamic spectrum sharing technologies. The
provision also requires assessment of current gaps in testing
mechanisms and evaluation of the feasibility of establishing
designated virtual testing ranges for dynamic spectrum sharing
technologies.
Sec. 1564--Limitation on modification of certain electromagnetic
spectrum relied on by Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 488 of title 10, United States Code, to limit the
Secretary of Defense's authority to modify certain
electromagnetic spectrum relied on by the Department of Defense
(DOD) until September 30, 2034, or when dynamic spectrum
sharing is certified as fully operational. The provision
prohibits modifications to DOD systems operating between 3100-
3450 megahertz and 7400-8400 megahertz unless the Secretary and
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff jointly certify to
Congress that such modification would not result in a loss of
capability.
Items of Special Interest
Accelerating space sensors
The committee notes that the President signed The Iron Dome
for America Executive Order (E.O. 14186), which emphasizes that
``the threat of attack by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise
missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks, remains the most
catastrophic threat facing the United States.'' The committee
further notes that the Executive Order directs the
``acceleration of the deployment of the Hypersonic and
Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor layer'' (HBTSS) and is
encouraged that HBTSS has already been demonstrated
successfully on-orbit by the Missile Defense Agency and is in
active production with the Space Development Agency. The
committee believes that the space-based sensor industrial base
has available capacity to accept the additional orders
necessary to respond to the Executive Order's explicit
direction to accelerate the deployment of HBTSS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide the Senate Armed Services Committee a plan, by not
later than December 1, 2025, to field the minimum number of
such vehicles to cover five orbital planes. This plan shall
include a description of how the Department of Defense shall
procure these vehicles.
Advanced manufacturing methods for hypersonic flight bodies
The committee recognizes the need of the services to drive
industrial production capacity to quickly meet urgent needs,
drive innovation at the speed of battle, and deliver advanced
warfighting capabilities. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to transmit a spend
plan and brief the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 31, 2026, on advanced manufacturing practices,
including artificial intelligence-optimized robotic forming as
well as additive and subtractive manufacturing, and advanced
materials and processing practices for hypersonic flight bodies
that will shorten the time for delivering these weapon systems.
All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office future plans
The committee commends the All-domain Anomaly Resolution
Office (AARO) for its efforts to provide Congress with analysis
of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) and for its steps to
enhance coordination and transparency through the public
release of case resolution reports and information papers. The
committee believes this work is critical to ensuring public
trust, providing analysis and credibility to investigations of
UAPs, and advancing the Department of Defense's ability to
detect, analyze, and respond to anomalous activity across all
domains.
As the AARO concludes work on Historical Record Report:
Volume II and advances the GREMLIN sensor suite from research
and development into testing and field demonstration, the
committee affirms that the AARO remains an important focal
point for coordination and execution of the Department's
enduring responsibilities with respect to UAP inquiry.
Sustained investment and strategic planning are essential to
maintaining continuity and mission accomplishment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to brief the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 1, 2026, on the strategic vision for the AARO
across the Future Years Defense Plan. The briefing shall
include: (1) Priority focus areas for the next 5 years; (2)
Identification of elements within the Department that may have
capabilities or activities that could provide support to the
AARO mission; (3) Anticipated challenges during the next 5
years; (4) Projected budgets for the next 5 years that allow
the AARO to continue its role in addressing UAP reports; (5) A
description of any plans to cease, modify, or transition to
another element of the Department the responsibilities of the
AARO over the next 5 years; and (6) Any other such topics
related to long-term AARO activities the Deputy Secretary deems
appropriate.
Army Indirect Fire Protection Capability High-Power Microwave program
The committee strongly supports the Army's ongoing
investment in high-power microwave (HPM) technologies to
counter the escalating threat of unmanned aircraft systems
(UAS) to military installations, assets, and personnel as part
of an overall integrated air and missile defense strategy. The
proliferation of UAS--demonstrated by their increasing
capability, affordability, and use in conflicts in Ukraine and
the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility--underscores
the urgent need for cost-effective, non-kinetic defense
solutions. The committee commends the Army's efforts, led by
its Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, to
evaluate and integrate commercial HPM technologies into the
Indirect Fire Protection Capability High-Power Microwave (IFPC-
HPM) program, delivering prototype systems with residual combat
capability for short-range defense against UAS swarms at fixed
and semi-fixed sites.
The IFPC-HPM program aligns with the National Defense
Strategy, the Army Modernization Strategy, and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering's priority
focus areas for directed energy. Recent progress--including
technology maturation, sensor integration, and prototype
deployments to overseas locations--demonstrates the program's
potential to enhance layered air and missile defense
architectures. Unlike kinetic interceptors with high per-shot
costs, HPM offers a scalable, operationally effective solution
to neutralize UAS threats, including swarms, at reduced
expense. The committee recognizes the Army's collaboration with
private industry as a catalyst for advancing this capability.
To ensure the Army can field IFPC-HPM systems at scale
across domestic and overseas installations, the committee
encourages the Army to transition the program to a program of
record as soon as possible.
Automation of intelligence tipping and cueing
The committee notes the potential for automated tipping and
cueing capabilities to make intelligence collection more
effective and efficient.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than March 1, 2026, on the use of automated tipping
and cueing capabilities for intelligence collection by the
Department of Defense. The briefing should, at a minimum,
include the following: (1) An assessment of ongoing efforts by
the Department to automate tipping and cueing within the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise; (2) Identification of
capability shortfalls or gaps in such efforts; (3)
Recommendations for expanding automation capabilities,
including estimated funding requirements; and (4) Any other
matters deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Autonomous Weapons Stations for Strategic Asset Protection
The committee notes that the rapidly evolving threat posed
by unmanned systems increases the urgency for fielding advanced
counter-unmanned aircraft systems (cUAS) technologies. For
example, the proliferation of small, unmanned aircraft systems,
like first person view (FPV) drones, presents a significant
challenge due to their low-cost, ease of scalability, and high
operational efficiency. These drones have been shown to be
highly effective both in and out of conflict zones where they
have been successfully employed against military targets,
critical infrastructure, and personnel.
Recognizing this urgent threat, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to accelerate deployment of capabilities
that will support a layered defense posture that includes
autonomous cUAS technologies capable of executing the full kill
chain--sense, decide, and act. These systems should be modular,
platform-agnostic, and interoperable with existing command and
control architectures. The Secretary should also consider cost-
effective integration with legacy weapon systems or scalable
effector options to conduct kinetic and non-kinetic
engagements.
Briefing on Defense Property Accountability System applicability to
missile wing vehicles maintained by Air Force Global Strike
Command
The committee notes that the wide range of vehicles used in
missile wing operations at F.E. Warren Air Force Base (AFB),
Malmstrom AFB, and Minot AFB routinely experience mileage and
usage far exceeding any other vehicles in the Air Force. The
committee further notes that maintenance vehicles reach end-of-
life mileage easily exceeding 300,000 miles, much of which
occurs in harsh weather conditions. Given these circumstances,
the committee is concerned that the general standard used in
the Defense Property Accountability System (DPAS) to determine
end-of-life vehicle replacement does not adequately account for
the unique nature of the vehicles used in missile wing
operations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Logistics Agency, in coordination with the Commander of
Air Force Global Strike Command, to provide a one-time briefing
to the congressional defense committees, not later than March
31, 2026, on: (1) The sufficiency and appropriateness of the
DPAS for assessing the end of life of high-mileage vehicles
used under the command of the 20th Air Force; and (2) What, if
any, modifications should be made to the DPAS to ensure these
high mileage vehicles are replaced in a timely manner
consistent with their job mission.
Briefing on infrastructure rehabilitation plan for restoring U.S. Army
Garrison--Kwajalein Atoll and the Ronald Reagan Ballistic
Missile Defense Test Site
The committee acknowledges a moderate increase in senior-
level Department of Defense attention to the condition of the
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site and the
United States Army Garrison--Kwajalein Atoll as a whole.
However, the committee remains deeply concerned that efforts to
sustain the various operational and testing capabilities
resident on the atoll remain insufficient to adequately support
the programs and organizations that depend upon the viability
of the installation to meet warfighter requirements. The
committee is especially mindful of the likely substantial
growth in these demands as development of the presidentially
directed Golden Dome missile defense initiative progresses.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force, the
Secretary of the Navy, the Commanders of United States
Strategic, Space, and Indo-Pacific Commands, and the Director
of the Test Resource Management Center, to brief the
congressional defense committees, not later than December 1,
2025, on a comprehensive, prioritized, and resource-loaded plan
for rehabilitating Department of Defense infrastructure on and
around the atoll to meet current and projected operational and
testing requirements.
Briefing on resource-loaded plans for sustaining Minuteman III until
deployment of Sentinel
The committee remains concerned about the Air Force's
capability to sustain the Minuteman III intercontinental
ballistic missile.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Commander, Air Force
Global Strike Command, not later than December 31, 2025, to
brief the congressional defense committees on sustainment plans
for the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)
weapon system until the Sentinel ICBM reaches full operational
capability. The briefing should provide, at a minimum: (1)
Identification of system, subsystem, and critical component
lifecycle sustainment activities for support equipment, ground
infrastructure, command and control, and flight systems; (2) An
assessment of the capacity--in terms of personnel and support
equipment--of Air Force Global Strike Command to upload
additional warheads onto deployed Minuteman III ICBMs within
existing planned timelines established by the Commander, U.S.
Strategic Command if directed to do so; (3) Resourcing plans to
address any identified shortfalls; (4) Statutory adjustments,
if any, that can streamline efforts to execute outlined
sustainment and upload plans; and (5) Information on any other
matters the Commander, Air Force Global Strike Command believes
relevant.
Briefing on risks to Global Positioning System and associated
positioning, navigation, and timing services
The committee is concerned by potential vulnerabilities to
the Global Positioning System (GPS) and associated positioning,
navigation, and timing services, particularly in the context of
a conflict involving the United States or an attack on a U.S.
ally. These capabilities are critical to national security,
military operations, and global infrastructure, and their
disruption could have significant consequences.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than October 1, 2026, on the most
likely risks to the Global Positioning System and associated
positioning, navigation, and timing services in order to ensure
a comprehensive understanding of these risks and the Department
of Defense's (DOD) preparedness to address them. The briefing
shall include the following elements:
(1) A description of risks posed by a lack of access
to the Global Positioning System and associated
positioning, navigation, and timing services during a
potential conflict in which the United States is
involved or in the case of an attack on a U.S. ally;
and
(2) An assessment of each of the following:
(a) The capabilities of competitor countries,
including the People's Republic of China, to
degrade or deny U.S. access to the Global
Positioning System and associated positioning,
navigation, and timing services during a
potential conflict with the United States or in
the case of an attack on a U.S. ally;
(b) Current DOD efforts to develop or procure
technology or systems to provide redundant
global positioning and positioning, navigation,
and timing capabilities, including space-based
and terrestrial-based efforts; and
(c) The ability of the Resilient Global
Positioning System program of the Space Force
to achieve, not later than 10 years after the
date of the enactment of this Act, full
capacity to provide Global Positioning System
resilience to existing U.S. satellites.
Briefing on Space Force education and potential center for orbital
warfare
The committee notes that in March 2025, Space Force
published a seminal document entitled ``Space Warfighting: A
Framework for Planners'' that establishes the basic principles
for the use of military power in space and defines a common
strategic framework for the force to achieve space superiority.
The committee notes that, in the foreword to this document,
Space Force's Chief of Space Operations stresses the importance
of Guardians ``at every level'' being educated and trained to
carry out the force's mission in accordance with the framework.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to brief the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed-upon date, but not later than March 31, 2026,
on the extent to which professional military education for
Space Force Guardians addresses the elements of ``Space
Warfighting: A Framework for Planners.''
Further, the committee directs that the briefing shall
assess the feasibility and advisability of establishing a
dedicated Center for Orbital Warfare as part of achieving space
superiority within the context of the Framework document. This
assessment shall detail: (1) The benefits to the United States
and our allies and partners of advancing the knowledge of
matters relating to orbital warfare, including cybersecurity,
electronic warfare, astro-geography, sustainment, maneuver,
tactically responsive space systems, and emerging technology;
(2) All relevant policy guidance from the Office of the
Secretary of Defense; (3) Appropriate liaison relationships
with the geographic and functional combatant commands, other
Department of Defense stakeholders, and other government and
nongovernment entities and organizations; (4) An estimate of
the operational costs of such a center; (5) Potential
partnership opportunities with U.S. allies and partners for
collaboration and burden sharing; and (6) Whether such a center
would require legislation to be established.
Briefing on U.S. Navy nuclear propulsion plant trainer
The committee believes that there may be utility in the
fielding of a full-scale, immersive, hands-on nuclear
propulsion plant simulator to instruct officers and enlisted
sailors in the operation and maintenance of naval nuclear
propulsion plants at the Navy's Nuclear Power Training Unit.
The committee further believes that such a simulator could
augment existing training methods, potentially making training
more flexible and less expensive for the Navy.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 1, 2026, on: (1) The
feasibility of fielding a full-scale nuclear propulsion plant
simulator; (2) The ways in which such a simulator could augment
existing training methods; (3) Any cost savings associated with
such a simulator; and (4) Industry capabilities to develop a
simulator.
Commercial ground stations
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
execute efforts to enhance resilience and redundancy in
military satellite communications (MILSATCOM).
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
through the Enterprise Satellite Communication Management and
Control group, to assess how commercial ground-segment
capabilities can be integrated into existing MILSATCOM
infrastructure and to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the
assessment. The briefing should include strategies for
commercial ground-segment integration that: (1) Leverage
existing commercial ground infrastructure for rapid offloading
of MILSATCOM traffic, increasing resilience, reducing
vulnerability, and lowering operational costs; (2) Use
digitized and virtualized satellite communication management
architectures, employing modular, low-impact standards to
enable rapid waveform upgrades and network reconfigurations to
maintain interoperability; and (3) Establish centralized
management procedures and security requirements, allowing
commercial providers to deliver compliant services aligned with
operational needs and warfighter objectives.
Commercial Satellite Bus Integration
The committee recognizes the growing threat posed by
adversary counterspace capabilities, particularly those
developed and deployed by China and Russia. In response, the
U.S. Space Force is pursuing resilient and proliferated space
architectures. However, the committee is concerned that current
acquisition strategies are not fully leveraging the domestic
commercial industrial base, which is capable of producing
configurable, commoditized satellite buses at scale. These
commercially available solutions have the potential to reduce
program cost and schedule risk by eliminating government-
funded, non-recurring engineering efforts, while also enabling
faster and more agile deployment of space assets.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than May 1, 2026, on the Department of the Air Force's plans to
incentivize and increase the acquisition of domestically
produced, configurable satellite buses in current and future
proliferated satellite architectures. The briefing shall
include: (1) An analysis of the benefits and challenges of
identifying domestically produced, configurable satellite buses
as a weighted source selection criterion in proliferated space
architecture acquisition programs; (2) A prioritized list of
mission areas suitable for proliferated satellite architectures
and an assessment of industrial base capacity to support these
requirements; and (3) An evaluation of current acquisition
policies, authorities, and practices that incentivize the
reduction of non-recurring engineering costs to the Department
of the Air Force for satellite bus modification within
proliferated space architectures.
Commercial space domain awareness
The committee is aware that, according to the Department of
Defense's (DOD) annual report to the Congress on China's
military and security developments, China launched over 200
satellites in 2023 alone. More than 360 Chinese satellites are
believed to support intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) missions. Although Russia's growth in
space-based ISR is not as rapid, it remains a significant
concern. As the space domain becomes increasingly contested,
the committee underscores the strategic importance of
leveraging commercial space-based and ground-based observation
systems to enhance the DOD's monitoring and assessment
capabilities.
Commercial space capabilities offer rapid innovation, lower
costs, and scalable access to persistent data that can augment
DOD efforts to detect, track, and characterize foreign ISR
assets. By using commercial observation platforms to the
maximum extent practicable, the committee believes the
Department can reduce reliance on limited government-owned
resources and improve resilience across its space domain
awareness architecture.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees,
not later than March 31, 2026. The briefing shall include: (1)
An assessment of current and projected Chinese and Russian
space-based ISR capabilities; (2) An overview of DOD monitoring
efforts, including the current and planned use of commercial
systems; and (3) Recommendations for expanding the Department's
integration of commercial capabilities to enhance space domain
awareness, ISR detection, tracking, and mitigation strategies.
Comptroller General assessment of coordination with allies on national
security space acquisitions
The committee notes that the Department of Defense spends
billions of dollars per year developing and procuring national
security space programs. The committee further notes that these
programs serve warfighters in a large variety of ways,
including providing protected communications, missile warning
and tracking data, and enabling battlespace awareness. In many
areas of the national security space, the Department has close
working relationships with allies, and it shares information
and resources in some cases. The Department also has multiple
strategies and policies that emphasize the importance of
relationships with allies and coordination with them on space
activities. In the past, the Department has had allies as
financial partners in developing space programs, which served
to decrease development costs for the Department, among other
benefits. The committee notes, however, this type of
partnership is not common.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The extent to which the
Department is partnering with allies on acquisitions of
national security space capabilities; (2) How the Department
identifies and assesses opportunities for these partnerships,
including any cost sharing agreements; and (3) The risks and
benefits of these partnerships.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than May 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General assessment of Department of Defense program
protection for space acquisition programs
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
established various program protection-related policies and
processes to ensure that the Department is developing or
acquiring systems which are protected from cyber, physical, and
other threats. The committee further notes that the importance
of these measures cannot be overstated. Considering a dynamic
threat environment, the accelerating rate of technological
change, and the increasing importance of the space domain, the
committee is concerned about the ability of program offices to
address dynamic threats effectively.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The Department's policies and
processes, such as for the development and execution of program
protection plans, which address protective measures to address
cyber, physical, and other threats for space systems being
developed or acquired; (2) How space system acquisition program
offices prioritize implementation of program protective
measures versus cost and schedule; and (3) The extent to which
the most current data and intelligence is used by program
offices to inform program protection planning and execution
decisions.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives at a mutually agreed upon
date, not later than May 1, 2026, with final results to follow
in a mutually agreed upon format and timeframe. The committee
further directs the Comptroller General to advise the committee
of any identified barrier in conducting this work, including
access to information and systems needed.
Comptroller General review of electromagnetic spectrum needs during
defense acquisition process
The committee notes that the electromagnetic radio
frequency spectrum is critical to the development and operation
of a variety of military systems such as radios, radars, and
satellites. The committee understands that due to the changing
nature of warfighting, more and more military systems depend on
spectrum to detect and identify threats using advanced
technologies, guide precision weapons, and obtain information
superiority. At the same time, the committee notes that demand
for spectrum has increased with advances in commercial
technology. This demand has led to competition between
government and nongovernment users, making spectrum management
vital to prevent harmful interference and to promote spectrum
efficiency. The Department of Defense (DOD) has policy and
guidance documents that require the DOD to consider spectrum
needs during the acquisition lifecycle.
The committee notes that, in 2003, the Government
Accountability Office found that DOD weapon programs often
failed to obtain, consider, or act upon adequate spectrum
supportability knowledge during the early stages of acquisition
(``Spectrum Management in Defense Acquisitions'', April 30,
2003, GAO-03-617R). The committee is concerned that if the DOD
is not intentionally and actively managing spectrum needs early
in the acquisition lifecycle, subsequent modifications could be
excessively costly and could have operational impacts, since
those systems could remain in the DOD's arsenal for decades,
when spectrum is expected to become even more contested and
congested than it is today.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) Whether other Executive Branch
agencies are providing sufficient guidance and information to
the DOD so that it has the necessary information to make
spectrum management decisions early in the acquisition
lifecycle; (2) Whether the DOD is implementing its spectrum
management policy and guidance documents; (3) Whether the DOD
has a process to obtain, consider, and act upon adequate
spectrum supportability knowledge during the early stages of an
acquisition; and (4) Any other matters the Comptroller General
determines to be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a preliminary briefing on the results of its assessment
to the congressional defense committees at a mutually agreed
upon date, not later than April 1, 2026, with final report to
follow in a mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of electromagnetic spectrum operations
The committee notes that, in October 2020, the Department
of Defense (DOD) issued its Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS)
Superiority Strategy to align EMS resources, capabilities, and
activities across the Department to support core national
security objectives while remaining mindful of the importance
of U.S. economic prosperity. The committee further notes that
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(Public Law 118-31) included a provision that required the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chief
Information Officer, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
and the Secretary of each of the military departments, to
submit to the congressional defense committees an annual report
on the EMS Superiority Strategy of the Department. However, the
Government Accountability Office has previously reported and
testified that Department has not implemented its two prior
spectrum strategies (``Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations: DOD
Needs to Address Governance and Oversight Issues to Help Ensure
Superiority,'' December 10, 2020, GAO-21-64), despite
recognition that near-peer countries were developing
capabilities that could undermine our national security.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to assess: (1) The extent to which the DOD
has implemented its EMS Superiority Strategy; (2) Whether there
are accomplishments from the DOD's implementation of the
strategy; (3) Whether the DOD has identified challenges in
implementing the strategy and, if so, taken steps to overcome
the challenges; (4) The extent to which the annual report
complies with the requirements of section 502 of title 10,
United States Code; and (5) Any other matters the Comptroller
General determines to be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a preliminary briefing on the results of its assessment
to the congressional defense committees at a mutually agreed
upon date, not later than April 1, 2026, with final results to
follow in a mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of performance of the Logistics Civil
Augmentation Program contracting structure in supporting U.S.
Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll
The committee recognizes the importance of vital military
assets at Kwajalein Atoll and notes with concern the degraded
state of supporting assets and infrastructure critical to their
operation.
Accordingly, to assist the committee in its oversight of
these assets, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a review and provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees at a mutually agreed upon
time, not later than March 1, 2026. The Comptroller General's
review should assess: (1) The roles and responsibilities of
U.S. Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll and its civilian
contractors, including those managed under the Logistics Civil
Augmentation Program, in operating and maintaining the
supporting assets and infrastructure at the installation, to
include power and cooling plants, stores, clinics, and the
garrison school; and (2) Department of Defense actions to
address challenges related to sustainment of key infrastructure
on Kwajalein Atoll.
Comptroller General review of Space Development Agency ground systems
development
The committee notes that in recent years, the Department of
Defense (DOD) has taken steps to pivot delivery of missile
warning, missile tracking, and missile defense capabilities to
multi-orbit, proliferated constellations. The committee
understands that the Space Development Agency (SDA) plans to
collect, integrate, and disseminate data and products to the
warfighter and broader community through its Proliferated
Warfighter Space Architecture (PWSA), which is predicated on an
autonomous ground segment.
Accordingly, given the critical nature of this capability
for national security and the DOD's longstanding practice of
launching satellites before ground systems are fully
operational, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) How the SDA is ensuring that
the ground system will be available to fully enable the
proliferated and networked space-based architecture; (2) The
extent to which SDA is integrating, processing, and
disseminating the data that supports resilient missile warning
and missile tracking; and (3) The extent to which the SDA's
acquisitions address the needs of the warfighter and broader
community, including emerging needs in response to changing
threats.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than May 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
The committee further directs the DOD to provide the
Comptroller General full access to any relevant information for
this review and directs the Comptroller General to advise the
committee of any identified barrier in conducting this work.
Comptroller General review of Space Fence program challenges
The committee notes the Space Fence ground-based radar was
developed to support the Space Force's mission of tracking and
cataloging objects in multiple orbits. Space Fence was intended
to greatly enhance Space Force's ability to identify and track
smaller objects on orbit and has greatly increased the amount
of space situational awareness data available to the Department
of Defense. The committee further notes that during testing and
in operations, Space Fence experienced significant issues with
the performance of its hardware due to contamination of the
water source used to cool the radar. These issues threaten to
shut down the radar, which cost over $1.0 billion to develop.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the extent to which DOD has
identified and addressed infrastructure and sustainment
challenges that may be inhibiting Space Fence readiness,
including potential cost implications.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
its findings at a mutually agreed upon date, not later than May
1, 2026.
Comptroller General review of space systems data networking
capabilities
The committee notes that in recent years, the Department of
Defense has taken steps to develop a wide range of new space-
based capabilities, including constellations that are intended
to communicate within and across multiple orbits to satisfy a
range of mission needs throughout the Department. To support
the increasing complexity of these space capabilities, the
Department is developing various networking capabilities. The
committee believes, however, it is unclear whether networking
efforts are sufficiently synchronized with the development of
space-based systems for this new and dynamic environment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) Steps the Department is taking
to develop the necessary infrastructure, hardware, and software
to support networking requirements across various space-based
legacy systems and systems currently in development; and (2)
The extent to which the Department coordinates across various
systems to ensure their resiliency and interoperability with
respect to, among other things, network architecture and
protocols.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than May 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
The committee believes that in order to facilitate the
Government Accountability Office's (GAO) efforts, it is
necessary to ensure timely access to program information
including but not limited to cost, schedule, and budget
information, program management reports, and risk and
technology readiness assessments. Given the classified nature
of some of the information, GAO is directed to advise the
committee of any assistance GAO personnel will need to secure
access to information related to this review.
Cybersecurity for space assets
The committee notes that the cybersecurity of the control
network for satellite operations is of paramount importance,
given the attack vectors associated with the number of ground
stations and satellite apertures.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to brief the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 31, 2026, on the cybersecurity of the Air Force
Satellite Control Network (AFSCN). In particular, the briefing
should evaluate principal locations, such as Schriever Space
Force Base, locations in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of
responsibility, and other such sites as appropriate. The
briefing should assess: (1) Recent cyber stress testing of the
network to assess its effectiveness and resilience; (2) The
presence and effectiveness of cyber event detection
capabilities in both information and operational technologies
supporting AFSCN operations; (3) The capability of forces
assigned to AFSCN facilities to respond to and recover from
cyber attacks on critical information and operational
technologies; (4) The ability of defensive cyber forces under
U.S. Cyber Command to provide timely and expert information
technology and operational technology defensive operations to
ensure the wartime functionality of AFSCN sites; (5) The level
of support required from civilian and contractor entities
responsible for defending critical cyber assets; and (6) The
recovery processes needed to ensure the AFSCN can function and
support contingency operations.
Further, the committee directs that the briefing give
recommendations with respect to enhancing cyber detection,
response, and recovery capabilities at AFSCN sites, accounting
for both peacetime and wartime operational requirements as well
as the feasibility and advisability of a lessons learned
repository for both peacetime and wartime cyber stress testing
exercises.
Demonstrate leveraging commercial in-space data purchases and analysis
for unresolved imagery for Space Domain Awareness
The committee recognizes the growing importance of
leveraging commercial capabilities to enhance national security
in space. To that end, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Air Force, not later than March 31, 2026, to brief the
congressional defense committees on the feasibility and
advisability of a study on using ground-based and in-space
commercial data and analytics to capture and exploit unresolved
imagery collected by existing assets in geostationary orbit
(GEO). The study would demonstrate how commercial data and
analytics can be used to realize the value of unresolved
imagery in GEO to increase space situational awareness and
defense capabilities. Results from this initial study would be
used in a demonstration mission where the unresolved commercial
data is leveraged to tip and cue Space Domain Awareness
satellites, an efficient and cost-effective solution to ensure
greater early warning of adversary space activities that could
eventually expand to utilize additional in-space sensors for
observation and data collection as the satellites' secondary
mission set.
Directed energy weapons
The committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense's continued unwillingness to adequately invest in
directed energy weapons and its apparent lack of commitment to
effectively advancing these technologies. The committee has
received consistent testimony regarding the potential value
that directed energy weapons have in supplementing integrated
air and missile defenses. The committee has further received
testimony regarding the imbalances in air warfare in terms of
budget and inventory, and it is clear the United States does
not have sufficient inventory or budget to be able to engage
salvos of missiles and unmanned systems solely with kinetic
interceptors. The committee notes that the fiscal year 2026
budget from the Department lacks the clarity in resources and
planning to meet the needs in integrated air and missile
defense. The committee strongly encourages the Department to
consider the benefits of directed energy systems as part of the
administration's Golden Dome plans and in developing integrated
air and missile defense weapons and platforms.
The committee further directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research & Engineering, in coordination with the
Direct Reporting Program Manager for Golden Dome for America
and the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, to provide the
congressional defense committees with a briefing, not later
than December 1, 2025, on a strategy for comprehensively
expanding the Department's investments in the development of
directed energy weapons over the next Future Years Defense
Program.
Dynamic robotic servicing in space
The committee notes that the development of robotic systems
in space for servicing or refueling satellites is of key
importance for the longevity of space systems. Potential
applications of robotic systems include: (1) Disposing of
derelict satellites to prevent collisions that generate space
debris; (2) Upgrading satellites in situ, instead of replacing
them, to save taxpayer dollars; (3) Refueling satellites so
they can stay in orbit; and (4) Returning science payloads or
manufactured goods to Earth by robotically retrieving and
berthing them in a reentry system vehicle.
The committee believes that, at present, the satellite
servicing industry is nascent. There are no widely accepted
standards for refueling or docking interfaces, and there have
been few demonstrations of such interfaces in space. Of note,
China has already demonstrated a robotic spacecraft to tug
satellites into graveyard orbits approximately 300 kilometers
past geostationary orbit. The committee also notes with concern
that Chinese investment in in-space robotics currently
outstrips that of the United States.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the
feasibility of utilizing existing Department of Defense
expertise in space robotics to determine whether using a
robotic system can capture the Vanguard-1 spacecraft and return
it to Earth for display.
The committee notes that Vanguard-1 is the oldest manmade
object in orbit and constitutes a historically and
scientifically valuable object. Developing the ability to
robotically grapple and manipulate objects in space and return
them to Earth would be a high-profile demonstration of the
United States' scientific expertise and would help lay the
groundwork for routine manufacturing of medicines, industrial
crystalline materials, and other valuable materials in
microgravity. The committee believes that executing such a
mission would advance a multitude of technologies that could
benefit the U.S. industrial base in a variety of mission areas.
Electromagnetic warfare and spectrum operations manpower
The committee notes there has been increased attention to
electromagnetic warfare and spectrum operations (EMSO) as a
result of great power competition. The committee further notes
that the Joint Staff has created a Joint Electromagnetic
Spectrum Operations Center to drive spectrum operations
planning cells at each of the combatant commands. Furthermore,
section 1091 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263)
requires that any tier one exercise by a combatant command
incorporate EMSO planning and that EMSO is codified as a Joint
Force mission in chapter 25 of title 10, United State Code.
In response to the increasing importance of this domain of
warfare, the U.S. Air Force has increased its emphasis on EMSO,
first by establishing the 350th Spectrum Operations Wing in
2021 and then, in December 2023, establishing EMSO doctrine
(``Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations,'' Air Force Doctrine
Publication 3-85). However, the committee understands that the
U.S. Air Force has yet to undertake a holistic review of a
career field for personnel planning that integrates EMSO into
fully developed doctrine, organization, training, materiel,
leadership and education, personnel, and facilities.
Accordingly, not later than February 28, 2026, the
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a
one-time report to the congressional defense committees with a
long-term plan to establish a career field in EMSO for both air
and space operations. The plan should inventory all career
fields within the U.S. Air and Space Forces performing the EMSO
mission set and develop a strategy to integrate, manage, and
train airmen and guardians, both enlisted and officer, on EMSO.
Electronic warfare requirements and testing for Group 1-3 unmanned
aerial systems and loitering munitions
The committee is concerned by the Department of Defense's
current posture regarding the survivability and operational
effectiveness of Group 1 through Group 3 unmanned aerial
systems (UAS) and loitering munitions in contested
electromagnetic environments. In particular, the committee
notes the demonstrated effectiveness of Russian electronic
warfare (EW) capabilities, including Global Positioning System
(GPS) and Radio Frequency (RF) jamming, against U.S.-supplied
Group 1-3 UAS and loitering munitions operating in Ukraine.
These adversary electronic warfare threats highlight critical
vulnerabilities in current Department-fielded systems and
underscore the necessity of resilient UAS platforms capable of
executing mission requirements in RF- and GPS-denied
environments.
The committee is further concerned that the Department has
not established a consistent baseline for operational
performance in contested EW environments for Group 1-3 UAS and
loitering munitions. In addition, there appears to be an
absence of a systematic process for incorporating emerging EW
threat intelligence into requirements development, system
design, or testing protocols. The committee believes that the
Department must implement a live, virtual, and constructive
test and evaluation regime that adequately reflects the
evolving EW threat landscape and that informs the requirements
and procurement decisions for these systems.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 31, 2025, on the Department's current capabilities,
requirements, and testing standards to ensure the effective
employment of Group 1-3 UAS and loitering munitions in
contested EW environments. The briefing shall include the
following: (1) A description of any existing Department or
military service requirements related to Group 1-3 UAS and
loitering munitions operations in RF- and GPS-denied
environments; (2) Minimum performance standards or required
capabilities for these systems in such environments; (3) A list
and description of any assessment mechanisms used to evaluate
adversary RF- and GPS-jamming capabilities, and how these
assessments are integrated into UAS and loitering munitions
requirements development and acquisition processes; and (4) An
overview of the live, virtual, and constructive EW testing
regimes for Group 1-3 UAS and loitering munitions, including
how these testing efforts incorporate the threat assessments
referenced above and inform capability requirements.
The committee expects this briefing to inform future
oversight of DOD's investments in tactical UAS and loitering
munition capabilities and their survivability in modern
conflict environments.
Encouraging investment in deep space telescopes
The committee notes that radio telescopes such as the
National Radio Astronomy Very Large Array (VLA) and the Green
Bank Telescope provide unique capabilities for deep space
situational awareness. The committee believes these federally
funded radio telescopes and data acquisition systems provide
key navigation and tracking information and that these are
unique national security applications utilized by the
Department of Defense.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
invest in the design and planning of important new updates to
these telescopes such as the Next-Generation VLA and the Green
Bank Telescope system.
Extended life operations for U.S. Government satellites
The committee understands that end-of-life satellites are
disposed of every year as they are replaced with newer
satellite constellations. These end-of-life satellites may have
significant mission utility to support operations and training
but are being disposed of due to insufficient funding and
staffing to operate the new and the older constellations
simultaneously. The committee further understands that the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Polar
Operational Environmental Satellites and the Defense Advanced
Research Project Agency's Blackjack constellations both
currently operate a commercial model of operating Government
satellites as a service.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, not later than March 31, 2026, to provide a briefing
that: (1) Assesses how many satellites are disposed of
annually; and (2) Compares the costs and benefits of continuing
to extract mission value from older satellites by operating the
satellites by a commercial entity versus disposing of these
satellites.
High-resolution three-dimensional geospatial data
The committee recognizes the importance of unclassified,
shareable high-resolution three-dimensional (HR3D) geospatial
data in support of Department of Defense operations, activities
by other elements of the U.S. Government, and international
partners. The committee understands that the Army Geospatial
Center's HR3D program has successfully mapped over 4.3 million
square kilometers globally across more than 45 countries,
providing essential geospatial information that enhances force
positioning, mission planning, and coalition effectiveness in
key operational theaters.
The committee notes with concern that despite the abundance
of unclassified geospatial data in existence, there lacks a
single custodian based on geography, service, or agency.
Additionally, geographic combatant commanders currently
maintain separate processes for collecting geospatial data with
a disproportionate emphasis on classified collection, which can
result in inefficiencies and missed opportunities in shaping
operations in Phase 0 or Phase 1 operating environments. The
committee emphasizes that shareable HR3D data provides a
foundation on which other data sources can be layered and is
uniquely positioned to support the changing security
environment with greater emphasis on operations in the
competitive space, including Phase 0 and Phase 1 operations.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report, not later than May 31, 2026, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives that includes, at a minimum, the following: (1)
A description of any plans to sustain and expand the existing
shareable HR3D program capabilities, with particular emphasis
on the Army Geospatial Center's BuckEye program, including a
description of resourcing requirements, organizational
responsibilities, and anticipated timelines for any such plan;
(2) An assessment of the anticipated benefits of implementing a
Global Foundation Layer (GFL) requirements generation process
and organizational structure to coordinate geospatial data
collection, integration, and dissemination across each
geographic combatant command, service, and agency; (3) An
assessment of opportunities to combine shareable HR3D data with
other unclassified data sets to enable blended analysis and
production; and (4) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Secretary.
Integrated sensing roadmap for unidentified anomalous phenomena
The committee notes the scientific and technical challenges
in investigating, identifying, and validating unidentified
anomalous phenomena (UAP). Aside from the credibility gaps that
exist in some communities following this issue, there is a
significant technical challenge to trying to collect necessary
scientific and signature data for something that is inherently
unknown and might appear unpredictably in location and time. To
date, investigations have relied primarily on eyewitness
accounts or from sympathetic sensors of various types that may
have happened to be collecting at the right time and place to
capture evidence of some unknown phenomena.
The committee is aware that the All-Domain Anomaly
Resolution Office (AARO) was established to investigate UAPs
and to try to develop definitive scientific evidence to help
resolve these unknown cases. The committee is also aware that
the AARO has been investing in a set of sensors focused on
airborne UAPs, but, as noted in its annual report to Congress,
gaps still exist in the sensing of space, maritime surface, and
maritime subsurface domains. Additionally, the ability to
correlate data from these domains into a single picture for
analysis by the AARO does not currently exist.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the AARO
to develop an integrated sensing roadmap and to provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
August 1, 2026. Such roadmap should include the following: (1)
A framework for sensing needs and gaps for space, maritime
surface, and maritime subsurface domains; (2) An assessment of
available sensors for each of those domains; (3) Challenges to
developing an integrated picture across those domains; (4) The
ability to integrate sympathetic collection of other sensors
available during data collection events; and (5) An assessment
of resources needed to address any gaps or challenges
identified by the roadmap.
Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor acquisition
The committee strongly supports accelerated integrated air
and missile defense (IAMD) modernization but understands that
the Army has not committed to supporting any partner
procurement of the Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor
(LTAMDS) system unless there is parallel procurement of the
Integrated Battle Command System.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the
following subjects: (1) Potential adjustments to the LTAMDS
acquisition strategy, including advance procurement of up to
three battalions of radars per year and the use of multi-year
procurement to achieve a higher annual production rate; (2)
Possible annual savings associated with bundling partner
procurement of LTAMDS over the period of the multi-year; and
(3) An operational summary of how procurement of LTAMDS at full
rate to meet global demand would enhance IAMD in the U.S.
European, Central, and Indo-Pacific Commands' areas of
responsibility.
Modernizing mission assurance for space launch
The committee reaffirms the importance of robust mission
assurance requirements for national security space launches.
Historically, these requirements have been shaped by factors
such as limited order quantities, demanding orbital parameters,
complex custom integration needs, and the sensitive nature of
national security missions. However, this one-size-fits-all
approach, often costly and burdensome, has been uniformly
applied across all national security launches, despite the
existence of multiple launch programs that are designed with
varying risk profiles aligned to specific mission objectives.
While the National Security Space Launch program has made
progress under Phase 3 to adopt more tailored, modern mission
assurance standards in line with current industry practices,
other programs, such as the Orbital Services Program and the
Sounding Rocket Program, continue to operate under outdated and
unnecessarily rigid frameworks. The committee believes that
these programs play critical roles in supporting military
capabilities and would significantly benefit from a more
flexible, agile mission assurance structure that reflects their
distinct operational purposes.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than September 30, 2025, detailing how the Space Force
will modernize mission assurance requirements across its launch
programs. This modernization plan must include: (1) A specific
timeline, responsible offices, and measurable milestones for
implementing modernized mission assurance requirements for
experimental, test, prototype, and operational payloads in all
Assured Access to Space launch programs, including the Orbital
Services Program and Sounding Rocket Program; and (2) A process
for updating mission assurance requirements on a regular basis
as launch cadence increases and more launch providers are
onboarded into Space Force managed launch contracts.
Multi-use commercial communications for deep space missions
The committee strongly supports operationally relevant
capabilities and infrastructure for secure command and control
and position, navigation, and timing throughout cislunar space
and encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to increase
investments in this area. Further, the committee encourages the
Secretary to develop a coordinated program for commercial
cislunar and deep space communications services to augment the
existing National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Deep
Space Network and to meet U.S. Government requirements for
commercial, civil, and national security space missions. The
program should maximize commercial models, such as public-
private partnerships, to leverage innovative technologies and
approaches to reduce the costs and development schedules of
traditional deep space communication systems.
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
The committee believes the National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency's (NGA) Maven Program is critical to the United States'
ability to provide state-of-the-art artificial intelligence
(AI) capabilities including, but not limited to, the current
computer vision and generative AI efforts. Such capabilities
are important for rapidly detecting, identifying,
characterizing, extracting, and attributing features and
objects in imagery and video data sets at the speed of crisis
and conflict.
The committee urges the Director of the NGA to ensure that
the Maven Program continues to: (1) Operate with agility and
speed; (2) Support a competitive development and collaboration
methodology; (3) Structure as open architecture with both
platform and enterprise engineering infrastructure across U.S.
Government national security systems and classification
domains; (4) Enable open and fair participation from the entire
national defense industrial base; and (5) Ensure operational
continuity from the strategic to the tactical levels.
Further, the committee believes flexible, adaptive
contracts could enable the Maven Program to rapidly execute AI
research and development and adapt to changes in the global
threat environment. The committee further believes the Maven
Program should continue its focus on sourcing from the best and
brightest companies from the national defense industrial base,
regardless of size and maturity, which would increase
competition and provide the best products and services to the
Department of Defense.
Non-propulsive orbital maneuvering technologies
The committee supports continued development of maneuver
technologies that reduce reliance on consumable propulsion. As
the Department of Defense expands activity in low earth orbit
(LEO) and plans for cislunar operations, it must pursue
mobility solutions that avoid burdensome fuel logistics and
enhance survivability. Electromechanical deployment platforms
offer energy-efficient ways to reposition space assets for key
space superiority missions while improving endurance and
enabling new economic benefits in the space domain.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with the Chief of Space Operations and
the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 1, 2026, assessing the feasibility, utility,
integration potential, and barriers to operational use of non-
propulsive maneuver technologies. A classified annex may be
included.
Ongoing Comptroller General review of Minuteman III intercontinental
ballistic missile operations and sustainment
The committee notes that in 2021, the Air Force reported
that the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to retire the
Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system
when the replacement system, Sentinel, reached full operational
capability in 2036. However, in early 2024, the committee notes
that the DOD reported that the Sentinel program had experienced
a Nunn-McCurdy breach triggered by critical cost overruns. The
program also faces significant schedule delays that will likely
require the Air Force to continue operating the Minuteman III
system far longer than planned. Consequently, the committee is
concerned about the Air Force's ability to sustain the aging
Minuteman III system through the transition to Sentinel. In May
2025, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a
review of current preparations to transition from Minuteman III
to Sentinel and made recommendations to use the time provided
by the delay to increase the Air Force's focus on risks (``ICBM
Modernization: Air Force Actions Needed to Expeditiously
Address Critical Risks to Sentinel Transition'' (GAO-25-
107048C, May 13, 2025)). Over the past several years, GAO's
regular reviews of the Sentinel program have been essential to
congressional oversight of this program.
Therefore, to ensure that the committee continues to
receive information on the Minuteman III program and the
transition to Sentinel, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to conduct regular reviews of the
operations and sustainment of the Minuteman III ICBM program
through fiscal year 2030 and to brief the congressional defense
committees on a periodic, mutually agreed upon basis.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
issue written assessments to the congressional defense
committees based on its regular reviews, as needed by the
committees, in formats and at times to be mutually agreed upon,
through fiscal year 2030.
Performance review of security clearance process
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD)
continues to struggle with a backlog in security clearance
investigations and adjudications that hinders industry,
increases risk to the Department, and generally slows down the
ability of the Department to onboard personnel working on
important tasks for the Department. There are many factors
compounding delays, but the committee believes a comprehensive
business process review using lean six sigma or similar
techniques would provide helpful insight into root causes for
these delays. Additionally, the committee believes an outside
review by an entity with experience in these techniques, but
not steeped in the business processes or culture of the
security process, could provide fresh perspectives on problems
and possible solutions.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense
Performance Improvement Officer to conduct a review of the DOD
security clearance process and provide a briefing on the
results of that review to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
October 1, 2026. The review should be focused on finding
opportunities to improve processing timeliness, data to help
measure the progress and effectiveness of the program, and
reciprocity between defense organizations. Elements of the
review shall focus specifically on examining data related to:
(1) Reciprocity within DOD components and the interagency; (2)
Timelines for security process steps, including developing a
metric for timeliness; and (3) Interoperability of all of the
related systems of record related to security clearance
processing.
Protection and advancement of electronic warfare systems
The committee strongly supports continued growth of the
Army Research Laboratory collaboration with academia in the
development of technologies that harden and increase the
resilience of electronic warfare systems. The committee further
supports leveraging advancements in directed energy effects,
coupled with electronic warfare approaches, to ensure mission
success in a contested, congested battlefield environment. The
committee notes that this is consistent with the Secretary of
Defense Memorandum on Army Transformation and Acquisition
Reform, dated April 30, 2025, to achieve electromagnetic and
air-littoral dominance by 2027.
Public-private partnerships in nuclear effects testing
The committee notes that the ongoing nuclear modernization
effort, combined with an expansion of our missile defense
capability, has increased the need to modernize our nuclear
effects testing capability, which has been slow to keep pace.
The committee further notes that most facilities that provide
this capability were designed in the 1980s and need a technical
refresh. Furthermore, many of the facilities are in high
demand, with long waiting queues for component- and system-
level testing. In addition, the industrial base for this field
of technology has shrunk considerably.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Department of
Defense's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, in
coordination with the National Nuclear Security
Administration's Administrator for Nuclear Security, to provide
a one-time briefing to the congressional defense committees,
not later than March 31, 2026, on the following subjects: (1)
Any current gaps in radiation effects testing capacity and any
delays in weapon system testing resulting from a lack of
capacity; (2) The status of existing collaboration efforts with
industry on nuclear effects testing; (3) An analysis of the
feasibility of establishing a public-private partnership for
nuclear effects testing; and (4) Any other relevant issues the
Director or the Administrator deems necessary.
Satellite hyperspectral imaging
The committee notes that hyperspectral imaging is an
advanced technique that captures and analyzes data across the
electromagnetic spectrum, enabling the identification of
objects and materials based on their unique spectral signatures
at the pixel level. The committee believes that commercial
deployment of this technology in space holds significant
promise to reduce costs to the Government and expand
accessibility through broader adoption and use.
Therefore, not later than March 31, 2026, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National
Intelligence, in coordination with the Directors of the
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the National
Reconnaissance Office, to brief the congressional defense and
intelligence committees regarding an assessment of the gaps
that could be filled by hyperspectral imagery capabilities. The
briefing should also address how commercial hyperspectral
imagery capabilities could contribute to addressing existing
and future defense and intelligence gaps.
Sea-based launch platforms for ballistic missile defense targets
The committee recognizes the importance of threat-
representative testing capabilities for ballistic missile
defense systems, as well as challenges inherent to accurately
simulating ballistic missile threats. In particular, the
committee is concerned that mission oversaturation at Cape
Canaveral may limit the Navy's ability to fully test and
evaluate different missiles, including Trident missiles, given
the growing space launch cadence and the likely increase in
missile defense testing as the Golden Dome project proceeds.
The committee is encouraged by efforts to reconstitute sea-
based launch platforms for ballistic missile targets and
encourages the Secretary of the Navy to prioritize the
deployment of such platforms.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency, to provide a one-time
brief to the congressional defense committees, not later than
November 1, 2025, on the viability of expanding the number of
locations available for the Navy's launch and test
capabilities, including through the use of maritime spaceports
as supplementary launch options.
Space access, mobility, and logistics
The committee remains concerned about increasing threats in
space as adversaries continue to develop and deploy advanced
capabilities to hold at risk, degrade, and destroy U.S. and
allied national security space assets. In this new threat
environment, establishing and sustaining freedom of maneuver
and operations in traditional orbits and in cislunar space for
dynamic space operations in peacetime, crisis, or conflict
requires an effective space logistics architecture and
enterprise. For this reason, the committee continues to support
Servicing, Mobility, and Logistics (SML) programs to meet U.S.
Space Command's (SPACECOM) need for sustained space maneuver in
the near-term.
The 2022 U.S. Space Force Operations Doctrine for Space
Forces notes that SML to enable movement and support of
military equipment and personnel into, within, and from space
``is integral to delivering freedom of action and independent
options to the joint force.'' The U.S. Space Force has
established increasingly capable and competitive access into
space.
However, to date, the U.S. Space Force currently lacks
operational, space-resident assets capable of maneuvering
relevant distances consistent with the 2022 doctrine. Also
lacking is a logistics enterprise for mobility throughout the
space domain and for sustaining, redeploying, or reallocating
forces in orbit. U.S. Space Force and SPACECOM thus face
logistical constraints for flexible, cost-effective space
access and on-orbit sustainment beyond low earth orbit. The
committee is aware that commercial providers are currently
developing novel SML capabilities. Developing and deploying
space-resident transportation and mobility capabilities,
including refuellable upper stages or refuellable orbital
transfer vehicles (OTVs) with high delta-v, would complement
traditional launch services to reduce the cost of satellite
deployment to unique or high-energy orbits, increase the
flexibility of space asset deployment, and create resilient on-
orbit response and sustainment capabilities.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in coordination with SPACECOM, to provide a one-time
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than December 1, 2025,
to assess: (1) The operations and acquisition plans necessary
for on-orbit logistics, including for refuellable, high delta-v
OTVs, to deliver space assets to high-energy orbits and provide
capabilities for on-orbit repositioning; and (2) The
advisability and feasibility of assuming responsibility for the
cancelled On-Orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing-1
spacecraft.
Space cooperation with allies and partners in Indo-Pacific region
The committee believes that potential cooperation with
allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, including
Japan, South Korea, Australia, and India, is in our national
security interest given the growing space threat posed by
China.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Space Policy and the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs to brief the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2026, on efforts to coordinate best practices in space with the
governments of Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, and other
relevant allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region,
including best practices on space situational awareness and
space industrial policy and other matters of mutual interest.
Support for Space Development Agency's acquisition model
The committee supports the Space Development Agency's (SDA)
innovative acquisition model, which emphasizes rapid
procurement, scalability, and flexibility in addressing the
growing demands for space-based capabilities critical to
national defense. The SDA's approach has proven to be effective
in reducing bureaucratic delays and ensuring the rapid delivery
of cutting-edge space systems to the warfighter to keep pace
with our adversaries. The committee particularly applauds the
SDA for defining requirements without the lengthy processes
typically associated with the Joint Capabilities Integration
and Development System (JCIDS) and for its use of Other
Transactions Agreements (OTA) that expedite traditional
contracting processes. Through its approach to requirements and
by utilizing OTAs, the SDA has demonstrated its ability to
accelerate procurement timelines, bringing advanced
technologies to the field more efficiently than traditional
acquisition methods allow.
To maintain the rapid delivery of space-based capabilities
to the warfighter, the committee supports the implementation of
recommendations made in the February 26, 2025, report of the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) titled ``Laser
Communications: Space Development Agency Should Create Links
Between Development Phases'' (GAO-25-106838). The committee
encourages the SDA to install an industry integrator for future
tranches of the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture to
ensure that different vendors' satellite optical communications
terminals are able to communicate with each other. The
integration of these capabilities is critical for the rapid
delivery of robust laser communications capabilities for
missile warning and data transport. The committee further
encourages the SDA to use the full range of available
financial, contractual, and policy tools to maintain
development timelines and avoid increasing costs through the
commercial integration process.
The committee encourages continued investment in the SDA's
acquisition approach, which balances the need for rapid
acquisition with the advantages of maintaining a competitive,
multi-provider landscape while considering the role of support
contractors in the rapid acquisition process. The committee
further emphasizes the importance of continued collaboration
between the SDA, other entities of the Department of Defense,
and the commercial space industry to ensure that the United
States remains the global leader in space technology.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the SDA to
provide a one-time briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the following:
(1) The SDA's progress toward implementing the recommendations
made by GAO in GAO-25-106838; (2) The range of financial,
contractual, and policy tools the SDA uses to ensure efficient
acquisition and technology integration; and (3) The activities
the SDA undertakes to collaborate with the Department of
Defense and the commercial space industry.
Tactical Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Tracking program
The committee recognizes the intent behind the U.S. Space
Force's Tactical Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Tracking
(TacSRT) program to enhance operational support through
commercial data analytics. However, the committee is concerned
that TacSRT may be duplicative of existing intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities elsewhere
in the Department of Defense (DOD), including those executed by
combatant commands and agencies such as the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.
Additionally, the committee is concerned that the program
may blur the lines between tactical ISR and intelligence
functions traditionally subject to more robust oversight
mechanisms, raising potential implications for the delineation
of roles and responsibilities, required analytical rigor, and
the proper classification and handling of sensitive
information.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Chief of Space
Operations to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than January 25, 2026. The briefing shall include: (1) A
description of TacSRT's current and planned capabilities and
how they are distinct from or coordinated with DoD ISR
programs; (2) An explanation of the program's governance
structure, including how oversight, data classification, and
interagency coordination are managed; (3) An assessment of the
potential for duplication with existing programs and how such
duplication is being mitigated; (4) A review of how the Space
Force ensures that TacSRT does not encroach upon activities
traditionally subject to intelligence oversight; and (5) A
summary of any policy guidance or memoranda of understanding
that govern the use of commercial ISR in TacSRT operations.
Tactically Responsive Space
The committee notes the progress made on demonstrating
Tactically Responsive Space's (TacRS) capabilities and its role
in securing our Nation's interests in, from, and to space. The
committee notes that TacRS is designed to challenge traditional
assumptions and processes by demonstrating the United States'
capability to rapidly acquire, launch, and operate a space
vehicle on operationally relevant timelines in order to respond
to on-orbit threats while also leveraging the innovation from
commercial contributions and private sector innovation. The
committee believes the Department of Defense should develop a
strategic plan, including the establishment of a program of
record with the appropriate funding and prioritization, to
enable the warfighter to use this capability.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Chief of Space Operations, to
provide a brief to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 31, 2026, on TacRS. This briefing shall
include, at a minimum, the following items: (1) A plan
detailing a 5-year roadmap for the development, demonstration,
integration, and funding of TacRS to include launch and space
systems; (2) An evaluation of the current industrial base for
TacRS that could be used for TacRS, the Space Development
Agency, and space control missions; and (3) An evaluation of
associated actions and milestones required to ensure successful
operational integration of TacRS for both on-orbit and ground-
based space systems.
Unified Data Library (UDL) integration and sensor data fusion
The committee recognizes the critical role of data
integration, real-time sensor fusion, and decision support in
enhancing national defense operations. The committee notes that
the Unified Data Library (UDL) has demonstrated its
effectiveness in consolidating, normalizing, and securely
sharing diverse data streams to support multi-domain awareness,
threat detection, space situational awareness, and health
records across the Department of Defense. The committee further
notes the cost savings and operational efficiencies realized
through the UDL's current implementation within the U.S. Space
Force and its increasing applicability to broader joint and
interagency missions.
Given the rising demand for data-driven decision-making
across combatant commands, the committee encourages the
Department of Defense to prioritize the integration of radar
and sensor systems within the UDL framework to enhance
warfighter decision-making in operationally relevant timelines.
The ability to aggregate and fuse data from space-based,
airborne, and ground-based sensors into a common operational
picture will provide actionable information to warfighters,
enabling rapid and informed decision-making across multiple
domains. The UDL's demonstrated ability to mobilize data and
rapidly connect disparate systems enables dramatic cost savings
across the enterprise and enables rapid operational
modernization across all domains not previously achieved.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a one-time briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 31, 2026, on the Department's
strategy for enterprise-wide UDL adoption. This briefing should
include recommendations for long-term governance, funding
requirements, the integration of radar and sensor data, and the
potential for Office of the Secretary of Defense sponsorship of
the UDL to ensure its availability across all military services
and defense agencies as needed.
TITLE XVI--CYBERSPACE RELATED MATTERS
Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Cyber Operations and Cyber Forces
Sec. 1601--Comprehensive cyber workforce strategy
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Department of Defense
(DOD) Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, to develop a
comprehensive cyber workforce strategy and submit a report to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than January 31, 2027. The provision
directs the report to include eleven specific elements.
The committee recognizes that the United States faces an
unprecedented and rapidly evolving cyber threat landscape that
demands a fundamentally transformed approach to cyber workforce
development and management within the DOD. The committee notes
with concern that current cyber talent acquisition and
retention efforts have not kept pace with the sophistication
and scale of adversarial cyber capabilities, creating critical
vulnerabilities in national defense infrastructure and
operations. The committee believes that this comprehensive
strategy represents a vital step toward addressing systemic
workforce challenges that have hindered the DOD's ability to
effectively counter state and non-state cyber actors who
continue to target critical defense systems and sensitive
information.
The committee also recognizes the increasing challenges
faced by the DOD in combating malicious cyber actors and the
critical need for collaboration with industry and academia to
enhance the development and throughput of highly skilled
cybersecurity professionals through the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification program. The committee directs the DOD to
evaluate the integration of programs to upskill the workforce,
hosted and funded through various academic institutions, into
the activities and efforts of the Cyber Academic Engagement
Office under the DOD CIO. The committee believes these programs
are efficient solutions to support the growth of small
businesses within the defense industrial base.
Sec. 1602--United States Cyber Command artificial intelligence industry
collaboration roadmap
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM), in coordination with
senior Department of Defense (DOD) artificial intelligence and
research officials, to develop a roadmap for industry and
academic collaboration on artificial intelligence-enabled cyber
capabilities for cyberspace operations. The roadmap must
address: (1) Collaborative development lines of effort; (2)
Industry engagement strategies; (3) Contractual mechanisms; (4)
Security clearance requirements; and (5) Organizational
structure options, and be completed by August 1, 2026. The
Commander, CYBERCOM, shall provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on the roadmap, courses of
action, and selected approach by November 1, 2026, with annual
updates beginning with the fiscal year 2028 budget submission
and continuing until 2030.
The committee recognizes that the rapidly evolving cyber
domain requires CYBERCOM to maintain close integration with
entities developing cutting-edge technologies, ensuring the
Cyber Mission Force possesses the most capable tools to hold
adversaries at risk and impose costs across the domain. The
committee acknowledges that while advanced technologies are
being developed in national laboratories and by Department of
Defense research organizations such as the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, industry remains a critical partner
in this endeavor. The committee is concerned, however, with the
current level of industry engagement and collaboration on
artificial intelligence-enabled cyber tools and technologies.
The committee notes that CYBERCOM possesses the necessary
budget and authorities to establish a robust program of
cooperative research, testing, and deployment of artificial
intelligence-enabled cyber tools, yet structured industry
partnerships remain underdeveloped. The committee believes that
given the current threat environment, there is an urgent need
to accelerate these collaborative relationships through a
comprehensive roadmap that maximizes the integration of
commercial innovation with military cyber capabilities.
Sec. 1603--Strategy for deterrence against cyberattacks against defense
critical infrastructure of the United States
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy and courses of
action to create credible deterrence against cyberattacks on
U.S. defense critical infrastructure. The strategy must
evaluate how to deter adversary cyber actions and outline
methods to impose costs on adversaries targeting critical
infrastructure. The provision also establishes requirements for
an interim briefing and a final briefing to the congressional
defense committees on the strategy and courses of action, not
later than March 1, 2026, and June 1, 2026, respectively.
The committee remains concerned that the current strategy
to deter attacks against defense critical infrastructure is not
adequate as evidenced by the activities of the Volt Typhoon and
Salt Typhoon persistent cyber actors. The committee believes
that appropriate options to reestablish this deterrence and
available response options to detected activities is critical.
Sec. 1604--Amendment to annual assessments and reports on assignment of
certain budget control responsibility to Commander of the
United States Cyber Command
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1558 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) to
include a requirement for a review of investments in artificial
intelligence (AI) as compared to roadmap milestones and
identified use cases previously established by the Department
of Defense (DOD), as well as to extend the reporting
requirement until fiscal year 2030.
The committee recognizes the DOD's continued investment in
AI capabilities as a strategic priority to maintain
technological superiority and operational advantage. To ensure
these investments are effectively aligned with the Department's
broader modernization goals and to ensure sustained oversight
and continuity in assessing the Department's AI strategy and
execution, the committee believes that additional review will
provide greater visibility into and sustained oversight of the
Department's progress in developing, integrating, and
operationalizing AI capabilities across mission areas.
Sec. 1605--Report on reserve component integration into cyber mission
force and cyberspace operations
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, in collaboration with the Chief
of the National Guard Bureau and military service component
leadership, to report on reserve component integration into
Cyber Mission Forces. The committee acknowledges the unique
capabilities, skills, and authorities of reserve component
personnel, who often possess advanced technical expertise and
industry relationships from their civilian careers that are
directly applicable to the Department of Defense's cyber
mission. The report shall examine: (1) How to utilize Title 32
authorities to support domestic missions and provide greater
flexibility in integrating talent; (2) Strategies for
leveraging local industry expertise; (3) Methods to track
civilian skills; (4) Resource requirements; and (5)
Recommendations for improved reserve component utilization in
cyberspace operations. The report shall be submitted to the
congressional defense committees by February 1, 2026, with the
officials providing a briefing by March 1, 2026.
The committee is concerned that the Department has not
fully identified, tracked, or integrated these unique
capabilities into its Cyber Mission Force structure and
operational planning. The committee believes that improved
understanding of these issues as articulated by this
comprehensive assessment and implementation plan will help
ensure that the Department is able to fully leverage the skills
and authorities of the reserve component to the maximum extent
possible.
Sec. 1606--Evaluation of cyber range management and funding
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to complete a comprehensive evaluation of
Department of Defense cyber range oversight, not later than
January 15, 2027, examining the separate executive agent
designations for cyber test and training ranges. The evaluation
would assess funding mechanisms, integration possibilities, and
impacts on transferring systems from test to operational use.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
findings of such evaluation and any implementation plans for
changes to cyber range oversight.
The committee is concerned with inconsistent funding across
cyber ranges and the absence of a consolidated test-to-training
strategy in a domain that requires speed. The committee
believes the current construct of two independent executive
agents may impede rapid transition of capabilities to
operational use. The committee notes that as the Cyber Mission
Force matures, it is important to reevaluate periodically
organizational structures supporting its mission. The committee
expects this evaluation to identify efficiencies and
improvements that better support the Department's cyber
requirements.
Sec. 1607--Modification to reporting requirements for Senior Military
Advisor for Cyber Policy
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 392a(b) of title 10, United States Code, by modifying
the reporting requirements for the Senior Military Advisor for
Cyber Policy and Deputy Principal Cyber Advisor. The provision
updates various reporting relationships by replacing references
to ``the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy'' with ``the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy'' throughout
the relevant statutory language. This change streamlines the
chain of command and clarifies that cyber policy matters will
now be reported directly to the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Cyber Policy rather than the broader Under Secretary
position.
Sec. 1608--Planning, programming, and budget coordination for
operations of cyber mission force
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 167b of title 10, United States Code, to codify
enhanced budget authority for Cyber Mission Force operations of
the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command that had previously been
established in section 1507 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81).
Sec. 1609--Expansion of scope of affirmation of authority for cyber
operations to include defense of critical infrastructure of the
Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would expand the
scope of affirmation of authority for cyber operations under
section 394 of title 10, United States Code, to include defense
of critical infrastructure of the Department of Defense.
Sec. 1610--Review of future force employment concepts and associated
personnel policy needs for evolving cyber forces
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a review of future force
employment concepts for cyber forces, including all elements of
the Cyber Operations Force, to assess where additional
personnel policy changes may be warranted.
Sec. 1610A--Evaluation of Joint Task Force-Cyber in support of
geographic combatant commands
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive study on
establishing Joint Task Force-Cyber elements across all
geographic combatant commands and evaluate force employment in
support of combatant commands by July 1, 2026.
Sec. 1610B--Prohibition on availability of funds to modify authorities
of the Commander of United States Cyber Command
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for the
Department of Defense to modify, reorganize, or otherwise
change the responsibilities, authorities, or command structure
of the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command.
Sec. 1610C--Program for talent management of cyber personnel through
active and reserve transitioning
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to design and implement a program, not
later than May 1, 2026, as part of the Defense Cyber Workforce
Framework to support active management of cyber talent
transitioning to the reserve cyber force.
Sec. 1610D--Designation of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber
Policy as principal staff assistant
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 138(b)(8) of title 10, United States Code, to designate
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy as a
principal staff assistant that reports directly to the
Secretary of Defense.
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Department of Defense Cybersecurity and
Information Technology
Sec. 1611--Modernization program for full content inspection
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1515 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) by formally renaming the
modernization program from ``Network Boundary and Cross-Domain
Defense'' to ``Full Content Inspection'' (FCI). The provision
would add a new implementation phase requiring the integration
of artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities into the pilot
program by December 1, 2026, in order to illuminate and
actively counter foreign cyber aggression against Department of
Defense (DOD) networks. The provision also requires briefings
on this program to the congressional defense committees, with
the first briefing not later than November 1, 2026, and
additional briefings to follow every year thereafter until
2028.
The committee acknowledges the increasing sophistication
and capabilities of cyber threats targeting the Department's
networks. The committee notes that the Department must leverage
advanced technologies, particularly AI, to enhance its
cybersecurity posture. The committee believes these
modifications are necessary to broaden the scope of the
modernization program and ensure the Department employs all
available technologies to secure defense networks at the packet
layer. The committee further notes that robust FCI capabilities
will provide essential visibility and control over network
traffic and data flows, which are critical elements for
detecting and mitigating sophisticated cyber attacks that may
otherwise evade conventional security measures.
Sec. 1612--Assessment regarding real-time monitoring of defense weapons
platforms for cyber threats
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of
each military department and the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security, to conduct a comprehensive
assessment of the feasibility and advisability of establishing
a program for implementing real-time monitoring for self-
protection capabilities across Department of Defense weapon
system platforms and provide a report to the congressional
defense committees detailing findings, recommendations, and
implementation strategies not later than January 1, 2027.
The committee remains concerned with the increasing threats
to weapon systems, particularly those built before the
institution of cyber security requirements as part of the
acquisition process, and the lack of progress with remediation
efforts after many years of analysis. The committee believes
that these platforms should be secured more expeditiously than
the 2035 timeline identified in recent comments made by the
Department of Defense Zero Trust Office. Accelerating this
timeline is critical to address current and emerging
cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could compromise operational
effectiveness and security of such weapons systems.
Sec. 1613--Assessment of feasibility and advisability of establishing
an operational technology cybersecurity training center of
excellence
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Chief Information
Officer of the Department of Defense, to determine the
feasibility and advisability of establishing a center of
excellence for operational technology cybersecurity training by
December 1, 2026. The provision would require assessing whether
such a center would effectively institutionalize training on
security and the protection of operational technology and
industrial control systems associated with defense critical
infrastructure. The provision would require the Secretary to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than December 1, 2026, on the findings and
recommendations of this assessment.
Sec. 1614--Framework for integration of information technology
technical debt assessment into annual budget process
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a framework for
integrating technical debt assessment into existing Department
of Defense (DOD) processes, not later than September 1, 2026,
to support the fiscal year 2027 planning, programming,
budgeting, and execution processes. The provision would require
the Secretary to reevaluate the Department's technical debt
definition and ensure budget justification materials include
technical debt assessments, planned investments, and risk
evaluations. The provision would require a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than September 15,
2026, on the framework's implementation and effectiveness.
The committee supports initiatives to remediate extensive
technical debt across the DOD but remains concerned about
inadequate frameworks for identifying, evaluating, and
remediating risks associated with deferred investments. The
committee believes existing organizational structures should be
leveraged to facilitate more effective implementation of
technical debt management. The committee recognizes the Cyber
Investment Management Board as an ideal mechanism for
coordinating these activities throughout the Department. The
committee expects this approach will strengthen governance
while minimizing administrative burden and promoting consistent
application of technical debt standards.
Sec. 1615--Mission Infrastructure Resilience Task Force
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a Mission Infrastructure
Resilience Task Force, within 180 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act, to assess vulnerabilities in defense
critical infrastructure necessary for executing defense
operational and contingency plans. The Task Force would conduct
infrastructure vulnerability assessments, develop remediation
solutions, and establish readiness assessment frameworks for
installation and combatant commanders. The Task Force must also
develop a transition plan for converting into a permanent
Department of Defense organization, not later than 180 days
prior to its September 30, 2030 termination date. The provision
would require the Secretary of Defense to provide annual
briefings to the congressional defense committees, beginning
180 days before termination through September 30, 2033.
Sec. 1616--Plan for deploying private fifth generation Open Radio
Access Networks on Department of Defense bases
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to develop prioritized
lists of bases that merit investment in private fifth-
generation (5G) Open Radio Access Networks (ORAN), pursuant to
section 1526 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) and the Department of
Defense (DOD) Private 5G Deployment Strategy, dated October
2024. The provision would direct the Secretary of Defense to
consolidate these prioritized base lists and determine an
optimal investment, deployment, and spend plan for private 5G
ORAN networks across the DOD. The provision would require
coordination among the Secretaries of the military departments
and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, the Chief Information Officer of the DOD, and
relevant combatant commanders and directors of defense
agencies. The Secretary of Defense would be required to provide
a report on this matter to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2026.
Sec. 1617--Limitation on funds for travel pending briefing on process
for best-in-class cyber data products and services
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated for travel for the Department of Defense (DOD)
Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) until the DOD
CIO, in coordination with military service CIOs and Defense
Information Systems Agency (DISA) Director, provides a briefing
to the congressional defense committees on establishing a
competitive process for procuring best-in-class cybersecurity
solutions. The briefing must detail: (1) The implementation
status of Section 1521 requirements from the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81); (2)
An outline of an acquisition strategy for enterprise-wide
procurement; and (3) Funding estimates for fiscal years 2026-
2030.
The committee is concerned with the Department's failure to
formally establish and identify an executive agent and program
office, as required by law. The committee recognizes that while
certain offices may perform similar functions, the Department
has not officially designated any entity as the executive agent
nor demonstrated how existing structures fulfill the statutory
requirements. The committee believes this lack of formal
designation significantly undermines the Department's ability
to implement a cohesive, enterprise-wide approach to
cybersecurity acquisitions.
Sec. 1618--Limitation of funds for travel expenses for the Office of
the Chief Information Officer
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
obligation or expenditure of funds authorized to be
appropriated for travel for the Department of Defense (DOD)
Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) until the DOD
CIO, in coordination with the military departments' CIOs,
submits to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive
circuit transport transition plan for updating legacy circuits
to more modern Internet Protocol (IP)-based circuits. The plan
must identify: (1) All legacy circuits still being used by the
Department; (2) Establish transition timelines to move to IP-
based circuits; (3) Detail resource requirements; (4) Specify
budget funding lines where such requirements are captured; and
(5) Include Future Years Defense Program investments.
The committee acknowledges that legacy telecommunications
circuits represent one of the most significant examples of
technical debt within the Department. The committee believes
that the Department has been woefully behind in modernizing DOD
telecommunications infrastructure to enhance security and
operational capabilities across defense networks. While the
committee acknowledges the Department has undertaken some
efforts to address this issue, the committee remains concerned
that insufficient progress has been made to eliminate these
obsolete systems, which pose substantial risks to both
cybersecurity posture and operational readiness. The committee
believes that accelerating the transition to modern IP-based
circuits is essential to maintaining technological advantage
and network resilience in contested environments.
Sec. 1619--Limitation on availability of funds for the Combined Joint
All-Domain Command and Control initiative
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
funds authorized to be appropriated for research, development,
test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, for the Joint Staff and the
Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer for the
Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control initiative until
the Secretary of Defense provides to the congressional defense
committees a framework for such initiative that helps guide
investments and measures progress for the initiative.
Sec. 1620--Review of Joint Fires Network program transition
The committee recommends a provision that would require
review of the transition of the Joint Fires Network initiative
to a program of record within the Department of the Air Force.
Sec. 1620A--Prohibition of the elimination of certain cyber assessment
capabilities for test and evaluation
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from divesting, consolidating, or
curtailing current cyber assessment capabilities or National
Security Agency-certified red teams supporting operational test
and evaluation for Department of Defense programs until
providing a comprehensive certification to the congressional
defense committees. The certification must include an analytic
basis for the decision, independent review by the Director of
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, certification by the
Director of the Test Resource Management Center per section
4173(c)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, and a
comprehensive transition plan with funding requirements and
continuity measures.
Sec. 1620B--Modification to certification requirement regarding
contracting for military recruiting
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1555 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to permanently require the
Secretary of Defense to obtain a certification from any entity
that contracts with the Department of Defense for the purpose
of placing military recruitment advertisement, that the entity
does not rate news information sources for factual accuracy or
provide ratings or opinions on news sources regarding
misinformation.
Sec. 1620C--Department of Defense working group, strategy, and report
on ensuring the security, resiliency, and integrity of undersea
cables
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to convene a working group, not later than
March 1, 2026, to develop a strategy and report on ensuring the
security, resiliency, and integrity of undersea cables.
Subtitle C--Data and Artificial Intelligence
Sec. 1621--Public-private cybersecurity partnership for highly capable
artificial intelligence systems
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy to establish a
public-private partnership body not later than 180 days after
the enactment of this Act to address cybersecurity and physical
security threats to highly capable artificial intelligence and
machine learning systems. The partnership would facilitate
engagement between the Department of Defense and commercial
industry partners to align security frameworks against
sophisticated state actors. The provision requires annual
reports to congressional defense committees beginning one year
after establishment and continuing until December 1, 2030.
Sec. 1622--Digital sandbox environments for artificial intelligence
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Chief Digital and
Artificial Intelligence Officer and the Department of Defense
(DOD) Chief Information Officer, to establish a task force on
artificial intelligence sandbox environments, not later than
April 1, 2026. The task force would develop virtual
environments supporting artificial intelligence experimentation
across the DOD for users of all technical proficiency levels.
The provision requires an initial briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than August 1, 2026, with annual
briefings thereafter until the task force terminates on January
1, 2030.
The committee notes with interest the progress made by the
Department of the Army in establishing robust artificial
intelligence sandbox capabilities that support both large
language models and essential data science functionalities. The
committee recognizes similar initiatives underway within the
Department of the Air Force and encourages continued
development of these critical capabilities. The committee
strongly believes these environments are essential for both
workforce development and technical innovation in artificial
intelligence applications. The committee emphasizes that
investments into the development and enhancement of these
environments, ideally across multiple security fabrics, must be
prioritized going forward.
Sec. 1623--Artificial intelligence model assessment and oversight
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a cross-functional team for
artificial intelligence (AI) model assessment and oversight by
June 1, 2026. This team, led by the Department of Defense (DOD)
Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer (CDAO), would
develop a standardized assessment framework for DOD AI models
not later than June 1, 2027, with identification of functional
area leads not later than January 1, 2027. Further, initial
assessments of major AI systems would be required no later than
January 1, 2028, with the cross-functional team sunsetting five
years after enactment. The Secretary would be required to brief
the congressional defense committees within 30 days after
completion of each implementation milestone and submit a
transition plan to the committees 180 days before termination.
The committee believes that establishing coherent
governance structures for model assessment, tracking, and
oversight is critical for successful AI implementation across
the Department. The committee emphasizes this governance is
especially important in military contexts where operational
conditions evolve rapidly and models must adapt accordingly. As
battlefield environments change, AI models require continuous
evaluation to maintain effectiveness. The committee understands
a well-structured governance framework would enhance return on
investment by enabling the development of branch models for
correlated use cases while preserving model lineage information
that is essential for proper evaluation. The committee further
notes this framework would establish groundwork for model
assessment reciprocity, allowing more rapid deployment of
models across different components and use cases. This approach
would maximize the Department's investments in both custom-
developed and commercial AI models.
The committee observes that several federal initiatives
have successfully implemented such governance frameworks and
strongly encourages the Department to build upon these
established best practices when developing its program to
maximize economies of scale and avoid duplicative development
efforts.
The committee emphasizes that this provision is not
intended to create additional bureaucratic hurdles or security
requirements that would impede model development and
deployment. The committee instead intends to facilitate greater
transparency into model capabilities and characteristics,
thereby enhancing collaboration across the Department and
accelerating the development of specialized branch models. The
committee believes this balanced approach will strengthen the
Department's capacity to harness artificial intelligence while
maintaining appropriate oversight of these increasingly
critical technologies.
Sec. 1624--Department of Defense Ontology Governance Working Group
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a Department of Defense (DOD)
Ontology Governance Working Group to develop and implement a
common data ontology and governance structure to improve data
interoperability and enable more effective decision-making. The
Working Group would establish domain-specific data ontologies,
designate functional domain leads, and implement a governance
framework. Key deadlines include establishing the Working Group
not later than June 1, 2026, developing Department-level policy
not later than June 1, 2027, and completing implementation not
later than January 1, 2028, with an interim briefing to
congressional defense committees from the Working Group due not
later than July 1, 2027, and a report to the same committees
from the Secretary due not later than June 30, 2028.
The committee strongly commends the Department's
collaborative efforts with the Chief Data Officer in the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence through the DOD and
Intelligence Community Ontology Working Group in establishing
the Basic Formal Ontology and Common Core Ontology as
foundational elements for cross-domain information exchange.
The committee notes that these policy actions represent a
significant milestone in developing robust mechanisms for data
integration, retrieval, and analysis across disparate systems.
The committee believes it is important to ensure that there is
a clear framework and forum for continuing this work into
building domain-specific ontology at the pace that is needed.
The committee expects that this structured governance approach
will drive substantial advances in ontological interoperability
throughout the DOD enterprise and among mission partners,
critically enhancing decision superiority and operational
effectiveness in an increasingly complex and contested
information environment.
Sec. 1625--Modification of high-performance computing roadmap
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
high-performance computing roadmap requirements in section
1532(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159). The provision would direct the Secretary of
Defense to expand the roadmap to include both Department of
Defense-owned computing assets and commercially procured cloud
services or infrastructure-as-a-service contracts. For any data
centers to be built or expanded on military installations, the
provision would require comprehensive assessments including
physical space needs, electricity and water usage requirements
for artificial intelligence data center footprints, anticipated
impacts on installations and surrounding communities, and
strategies to prevent utility service disruptions while
ensuring community resilience. The Secretary must provide
triennial updates to the roadmap, with the first update due not
later than March 1, 2027, and subsequent updates due every
third year thereafter until March 1, 2033, to be submitted to
the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 1626--Artificial General Intelligence Steering Committee
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
an Artificial General Intelligence Steering Committee within
the Department of Defense (DOD) to analyze artificial
intelligence trajectories and develop DOD adoption strategies.
The provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish the committee by April 1, 2026, with the Deputy
Secretary of Defense and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff serving as co-chairpersons. The committee would assess
adversary capabilities, analyze military applications, and
develop adoption strategies, including ethical guardrails and
resource requirements, with a report due to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than January 31, 2027.
Sec. 1627--Physical and cybersecurity procurement requirements for
artificial intelligence systems
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive cybersecurity
and physical security framework for artificial intelligence
(AI) and machine learning technologies procured by the
Department of Defense. The framework must address workforce
risks, supply chain vulnerabilities, adversarial tampering,
data exposure risks, and security management practices, with
security levels scaled to national security risks and designed
to counter peer and near-peer nation threats. The provision
would authorize the Secretary to amend the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement to require contractors
developing, deploying, storing, or hosting covered AI
technologies to implement the framework's best practices, with
requirements tailored to specific technologies while
considering cost-benefit analysis. The provision would also
require the Secretary to submit an implementation status report
to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, building upon
existing frameworks such as the National Institute of Standards
and Technology Special Publication 800 series and the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification framework.
Sec. 1628--Guidance and prohibition on use of certain artificial
intelligence
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to require all Department of Defense (DOD)
offices and components to exclude or remove covered artificial
intelligence from DOD systems and devices within 30 days of the
date of enactment, including artificial intelligence developed
by Chinese company DeepSeek or entities owned or supported by
High Flyer. Further, the provision also prohibits contractors
from using such covered artificial intelligence for DOD
contract work after 30 days of the date of enactment.
Sec. 1629--Roadmap for advancing digital content provenance standards
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to develop a roadmap, not later than June
1, 2026, to guide potential future adoption and integration of
digital content provenance capabilities across the Department
of Defense.
Sec. 1630--Enhanced protection of data affecting operational security
of Department of Defense personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to identify and prioritize the protection
of personal data related to the operational security of Armed
Forces members and Department of Defense civilian employees and
to review all applicable guidance by June 1, 2026, issuing
revised protection measures if necessary.
Items of Special Interest
Advancing Analytics data platform application integration framework
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's (DOD)
substantial investment in the Advancing Analytics (ADVANA) data
platform and commends the progress achieved in establishing a
foundational enterprise data management and visualization
program. The committee believes that the long-term scalability,
sustainability, and mission utility of the ADVANA platform is
contingent upon establishing a structured, transparent
onboarding framework that aligns with broader DOD digital
modernization objectives. However, the committee is concerned
that the DOD lacks a comprehensive strategy for application
onboarding that includes clear evaluation criteria,
prioritization methodology, and appropriate metrics for
determining integration sequencing. Furthermore, the committee
notes the absence of standardized cost recovery models to
facilitate financial planning between the platform
administrators and component organizations seeking application
integration.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Chief Digital and
Artificial Intelligence Officer (CDAO) to develop and implement
a comprehensive application integration strategy for the ADVANA
data platform. This strategy should: (1) Establish objective
criteria for evaluating and prioritizing applications based on
operational mission impact, data sensitivity classification
requirements, technical compatibility with existing ADVANA
architecture, and overall value to the DOD data ecosystem; (2)
Define standardized reimbursable funding mechanisms, including
potential service-level agreements or other appropriate cost-
sharing models, between the CDAO and requesting DOD components;
(3) Include performance metrics to measure the effectiveness
and efficiency of the onboarding process; and (4) Align with
existing DOD data governance policies and enterprise digital
transformation initiatives.
The CDAO should complete development and commence
implementation of this framework not later than January 31,
2026. The committee further directs the CDAO to provide a
comprehensive briefing to the congressional defense committees
on the framework's structure, implementation status, and
initial outcomes, not later than March 31, 2026.
Artificial intelligence for assistive automation
The committee is aware that the U.S. Army Combat
Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Analysis Center has
an effort to develop an analytical framework for leveraging and
incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) and assistive
automation (AA) into Army operations. This effort supports
human-machine teaming integration by assessing the performance
of individuals and teams assisted with artificial intelligence
or autonomous systems through the development and definition of
metrics which will permit quantitative and comparative
assessment of these new tactical technologies. The committee
believes this will enable the DEVCOM Analysis Center to conduct
analysis on trade-offs of performance, effectiveness, and
vulnerability, as well as analysis on sustainability to enable
senior Army decision makers to better evaluate the impact of
integrating developmental AI/AA systems into the Army
structure.
Accordingly, the committee strongly supports extension of
the AI/AA analytical framework and associated metrics to obtain
a fuller understanding of the broad scope of AI/AA applications
for mission command in the Army's current and future operating
environment.
Artificial intelligence-enabled weapons systems center of excellence
The committee notes that the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) included section 1534, which
required the Secretary of Defense to evaluate the feasibility
and advisability of establishing one or more centers of
excellence to support the development and maturation of
artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled weapon systems. The
committee believes a federated approach to such centers will
accommodate the differing needs for AI in different domains.
The committee notes that the response to that requirement is
still in progress but believes that, in responding to that
provision, the Department of Defense should consider how best
to leverage proximity to relevant platforms, as well as where
technical expertise and infrastructure already exist, and how
such efforts might be more closely tied to prototyping,
experimentation, and operational and sustainment activities, in
order to best provide exposure to use cases that might most
benefit the Department and the military services. The committee
also urges the Department to use this as an opportunity to
identify and codify relevant AI terminology to provide some
consistency, as well as to support future doctrinal
development.
Assessment of cybersecurity vulnerabilities of connected vehicles
The committee recognizes that vehicle digitization and
networking present both critical opportunities and significant
risks for the Department of Defense (DOD). The committee
acknowledges that connected vehicle technologies offer enhanced
sensing capabilities, edge computing, and predictive
maintenance that will benefit military operations. Yet, the
committee is concerned that they also increase the potential
attack surface if the DOD is not proactively prepared to
mitigate such risks, as data from these connected vehicles can
be used to elicit sensitive patterns of life as well as to
provide outright vectors for cyber attacks against DOD systems
and personnel.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Cyber Policy, the Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the DOD,
and the CIOs of the military departments, to provide a briefing
on the cybersecurity vulnerabilities of connected vehicles and
the threats such vulnerabilities might pose to the DOD to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than August 1, 2026. Such briefing
must include: (1) Classes of vulnerabilities presented by
connected vehicles, as such connections might support adversary
ubiquitous technical surveillance; (2) A framework for the
Department to assess the risk of such vulnerabilities, as well
as proposed mitigations; (3) An assessment of the intelligence
related to adversary use or exploitation of connected vehicle
vulnerabilities; and (4) Identification of centers of expertise
within the DOD with capabilities to identify, assess, mitigate,
or remediate the kinds of vulnerabilities identified by the
Department.
Building core synthetic data sets for model development
The committee is aware that the increasing demands for
artificial intelligence (AI) systems are also increasing
demands for data to train and refine such systems. The
consumption of vast amounts of publicly available data with
little or no consideration for the accuracy, bias, or
cleanliness of such data for initial training has, in some
cases, resulted in unintended side effects. The committee is
also aware that a response to these shortcomings has been to
balance that initial training with operational or domain
specific data sets that might help refine or focus the AI on
specific use cases for the Department of Defense (DOD).
However, that approach also presents challenges, like limiting
competition or comparison between AI systems and challenging
the classification of models based on their training data.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the DOD, through test
organizations such as the Test Resource Management Center, to
generate more and better synthetic data sets for AI training
that can be shared more broadly with industry, academia, and
foreign partners and allies. The committee believes that a
focused effort on synthetic data sets for AI model training
would allow the Department to make more equitable comparisons
of system performance in support of acquisition competition as
well as open up the playing field to a wider range of industry
and academic providers.
Collaborative computing environment in support of AUKUS partnership
The committee continues to support the Australia, United
Kingdom, and United States (AUKUS) agreement and understands
the urgency behind accelerating collaborative progress toward
its goals. To enable this progress, the committee believes that
a collaborative computing environment is necessary to enable
Department of Defense (DOD) users and their counterparts in the
United Kingdom and Australia to rapidly share information from
their own systems to a common information domain for allied
collaboration. This environment should have access to
productivity tools, digital engineering, artificial
intelligence, and analytics services so that allies can jointly
develop platforms and advanced capabilities at speed and scale.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, through the
DOD Chief Information Officer, to conduct a comprehensive study
on the feasibility and advisability of establishing a multi-
classification level collaborative computing environment to
support the AUKUS partnership initiatives. The study should
include a thorough evaluation of various infrastructure
options, including cloud-based, hybrid, and physical
infrastructure solutions that would enable secure information
sharing and joint development capabilities across different
classification levels. The study should address how such an
environment could provide agility by enabling the Department to
establish additional secure enclaves rapidly, allowing AUKUS to
enable specific communities of interest or incorporate
additional communities quickly, if required. The Secretary
should provide a report on this study to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 1, 2026.
Competition related to the adoption of artificial intelligence and
commercial cloud computing capabilities
The committee is aware that the market for artificial
intelligence (AI) and commercial cloud computing capabilities
for the Department of Defense (DOD) is growing but remains
focused on growing the number of performers rather than
clustering around a much smaller set. The committee is
concerned that while there are many small, non-traditional
performers in this space, the opportunities to break through an
increasingly consolidated number of AI models and applications,
as well as commercial cloud providers, appear to be fewer and
further between. While the DOD is increasingly focused on the
many technology requirements for the warfighter, the committee
believes that insufficient attention is being paid to longer-
term market dynamics and preventing repeating past mistakes
that have led to challenges resulting from market consolidation
in areas like aviation components, major weapons systems, and
microelectronics.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, in coordination with the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees, not later than February
15, 2026, assessing the current and long-term AI and commercial
cloud computing market. This report shall examine: (1)
Competition dynamics between AI and commercial cloud providers,
including large and small companies; (2) Impacts of these
competition dynamics on overall innovation in AI; (3) Barriers
to entry for small and new performers; and (4) The potential or
perceived impact of concentrations of market power or market
share in the AI space on competition. The report shall also
include recommendations for any legislative or administrative
actions that might improve the DOD's ability to make better
decisions and increase competition with respect to AI and
commercial cloud resource procurements.
Department of Defense software authorization and accreditation reform
The committee notes that modern software development
methodologies are essential to maintaining technological
superiority in an era of strategic competition. Thus, the
committee is strongly supportive of the intent of the
Department of Defense (DOD) to improve upon the historically
slow and burdensome Authorization to Operate (ATO) and Risk
Management Framework (RMF) processes. The committee is aware
that the Department is considering implementation of a new
process known as Software Fast Track (SWFT). The committee
remains concerned, however, with the lack of details
surrounding the process for SWFT, how it will resolve these
issues, or how it interrelates with implementation of section
1522 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159), which also streamlines the ATO process.
In addition to ensuring the efforts within SWFT
appropriately balance the need for cybersecurity with removing
duplicative and unnecessary compliance tasks, the committee
contends that several related elements must be incorporated as
part of any reform efforts. For example, the committee also
notes that congressional direction regarding reciprocal ATO
policies has not been fully implemented across the Department.
The committee observes that continuous Authorization to Operate
(cATO) processes have demonstrated significant time and cost
savings where implemented. The committee also believes that
there is a critical need to address operational technology (OT)
integration and the intersection of information technology (IT)
and OT within authorization frameworks, as defense systems
increasingly converge these domains.
Accordingly, the committee directs the DOD Chief
Information Officer to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2026, on the details of the SWFT
initiative and its status, as well as the plans to integrate
compliance with reciprocal ATO policies, the expansion of cATO
adoption, and the integration of operational technology
considerations into the initiative's lines of effort. The
committee further directs that this briefing should include, at
minimum: (1) Details of the SWFT plan, milestones, and lines of
effort; (2) Metrics on current compliance with reciprocal ATO
policies across the military departments and defense agencies;
(3) Identified barriers to implementation of streamlined
software accreditation processes; (4) Measurable goals for
reducing ATO timelines; (5) Resource requirements to fully
implement these initiatives in fiscal year 2027 and across the
Future Years Defense Plan; and (6) A comprehensive assessment
of how OT and the intersection of IT and OT will be integrated
into authorization evaluation frameworks, including protocols
for evaluating software applications within converged IT and OT
environments.
Evaluation of Department of Defense data residency and retention
policies
The committee recognizes that as the Department of Defense
(DOD) expands its investments in cloud computing and data
storage capabilities to support operational requirements, a
comprehensive evaluation of existing data policies is
essential. For example, the committee understands that while no
singular policy mandates that all DOD data be stored
exclusively within the continental United States, current
frameworks generally prioritize domestic data storage for
sensitive operational and intelligence information.
Additionally, the committee understands that current policies
related to the time in which data can be retained for various
purposes may actually inhibit the ability to collect and store
such operational data for the purposes of training artificial
intelligence (AI) models. The committee believes a thorough
assessment of policies related to data residency and retention
are necessary to make sure that outdated or unnecessary
policies originally intended to serve other purposes do not
stand in the way of effective and efficient operation of the
Department's information technology and AI system or inhibit
the Department's ability to leverage commercial cloud
innovations and affect interoperability with security partners
during combined activities.
Therefore, the committee directs the DOD Chief Information
Officer, through the Defense Information Systems Agency, and in
collaboration with the DOD Chief Digital and Artificial
Intelligence Officer, to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than February 28, 2026, evaluating
current data residency and retention requirements and their
implications for DOD operations. Such briefing should include:
(1) An assessment of the benefits and potential risks
associated with implementing a commercial cloud approach that
is agnostic to data residency for different categories of
information; (2) An evaluation of double encryption principles
and their effectiveness in protecting data regardless of
physical storage location; (3) An analysis of sovereign key
management frameworks that incorporate multiple external
physical key managers to govern decryption processes; (4) An
examination of how current data residency requirements affect
operational capabilities and information sharing with security
partners; (5) The impact of current data retention policies,
either based on policy or statute, on the ability of the
Department to collect and store data to provide for
longitudinal analysis using AI or other machine learning
systems; and (6) Recommendations for policy frameworks that
appropriately balance security imperatives with operational
requirements across different data classification levels.
Evaluation of incentives for acquisition personnel supporting United
States Cyber Command
The committee is aware that based on the significant
expansion of authorities granted to U.S. Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM), specifically the establishment of the Joint Program
Executive Office for the Joint Cyber Warfighting Architecture
by fiscal year 2027 as directed in section 1509 of the James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023
(Public Law 117-263), there has been an increasing demand for
acquisition and contracting professionals to support CYBERCOM.
While the Cyber Excepted Service (CES), established under
section 1599f of title 10, United States Code, was designed to
provide the Department of Defense (DOD) with enhanced
flexibility in recruiting and retaining cyber personnel, the
committee remains concerned that competition for similar
personnel from other Federal agencies, with more competitive
compensation packages and career advancement opportunities, is
putting acute pressure on CYBERCOM to attract and retain such
personnel.
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, CYBERCOM,
in coordination with the DOD Chief Information Officer (CIO)
and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, to
conduct a comprehensive review of existing incentive pay
programs and accelerated promotion pathways available to
acquisition and program management personnel within the CES.
This review should evaluate opportunities to enhance
competitive hiring and retention through improved incentive
structures comparable to those offered by other Federal
agencies.
The committee directs the Commander, CYBERCOM; the DOD CIO;
and the Assistant Secretary to jointly brief the congressional
defense committees on the findings, recommendations, and
implementation plan resulting from this review, not later than
May 31, 2026.
Expansion of Department of Defense Cyber Service Academy Eligibility
The committee affirms its support of the scholarship-for-
service program provided through the Department of Defense
Cyber Service Academy. The committee further appreciates the
Department's compliance with the James M. Inhofe National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-
263) and the effort to rapidly award scholarships before the
fall semester of 2024. Under the law, program scholarships are
permitted for periods of up to 5 years. Yet, current Department
policy limits program eligibility to students who previously
completed the first year of an associate degree or at least 2
years of a bachelor's degree program. The committee is
concerned that these limitations on eligibility will hinder the
Department's efforts to develop and retain the highly skilled
cyber workforce that is necessary to defend the nation against
rapidly evolving threats in cyberspace.
Therefore, the committee strongly encourages the Secretary
of Defense to expand the Cyber Service Academy program to the
full extent permitted by law, extending eligibility to all
qualified students, including first-year students in associate
and bachelor's degree programs.
Implementing open architecture accreditation of encryption in mounted
form factor program
The committee commends the Department of Defense (DOD) for
progress on implementation of Modular Open Systems Architecture
(MOSA) and, in particular, the Army for progress on the
Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Cyber,
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C5ISR) Modular
Open Suite of Standards Mounted Form Factor (CMFF) program of
record. The committee looks forward to the Army's commitment to
a long-term resourced program to realize CMFF benefits
including reduced size, weight, and power of systems, increased
capability integration on armored and tactical vehicles, and
speed of development and technology refresh.
While the committee is encouraged by this progress and the
anticipated award of CMFF Block 1, the committee is concerned
that the long-term CMFF program may experience significant
delay without establishment of program security accreditation
milestones and firm delivery and fielding dates. The committee
understands that CMFF needs a clear security accreditation
strategy for all CMFF delivery blocks to maintain its program
schedule. A prohibitively complicated and unpredictable
accreditation process could negatively impact levels of
industry engagement and investments and lead to lack of program
achievement and accountability.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Army, to provide a
report to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than
February 1, 2026, outlining the strategy for implementing a
MOSA-specific accreditation process for implementing DOD Type 1
encryption security. This report shall include anticipated
timelines for the accreditation process of CMFF systems as well
as details on whether Type 1 encryption will be accredited at
the system, subsystem, or component level. The report shall
also include how such processes would apply to and impact the
Army's CMFF program delivery schedule and associated funding
portfolio for all CMFF blocks.
Improving cyber coordination with foreign partners
The committee is aware that the Comptroller General of the
United States issued a report titled ``Cyberspace Operations:
Department of Defense Should Take Steps to Improve Coordination
with Foreign Partners'' on July 25, 2024 (GAO-24-103716C). The
report outlined several issues related to the ability of the
Department of Defense to carry out certain cyber coordination
activities with foreign partners and made several
recommendations. However, the committee is not aware that the
Department has yet taken any action to begin implementing these
recommendations. Due to the high interest in collaborating with
our foreign partners and allies in cyberspace, the committee
believes it is important for the Department to have a
comprehensive and holistic foreign engagement strategy that
addresses known coordination concerns and improves overall
coordination and prioritization of cyber teams and resources
with the geographic combatant commands to ensure such
activities are best aligned with broader theater security
cooperation plans.
Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Cyber Policy, in coordination with the Commander,
U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) and the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, to develop a comprehensive foreign partner
cyber engagement strategy and to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than November 1, 2026. Such a
foreign partner cyber engagement strategy shall include the
following: (1) A framework to prioritize country engagements
with foreign partners, including a process for factoring the
input of the geographic combatant commands based on their
respective theater security cooperation plans; (2) A process
for factoring in requests from foreign partners; (3) A
repeatable methodology for assessing the resources needed to
execute such engagements, in order to promote long-term
planning for sustained engagements; (4) Assessment of burden
sharing for costs between CYBERCOM, the affected geographic
combatant command, and the affected partner nation; (5) A
system or dashboard for tracking and analysis of such foreign
partner engagements; (6) An implementation plan for how the
Department intends to resolve the recommendations made in said
GAO report (GAO-24-103716C); and (7) Other such items that the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy determines to
be necessary.
Independent review of lessons learned from United States Cyber Command
acquisition activities
The committee notes that United States Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM) was established with the need to have some
distinctive authorities from most other combatant commands.
CYBERCOM is a functional command that at times is a supporting
command and at others is a supported command. The Congress
determined CYBERCOM would also need to have acquisition
authorities to allow it to develop cyber-peculiar technologies.
The committee acknowledges that developing the core competency,
workforce, processes, and experience to effectively manage an
acquisition enterprise takes time. The committee believes
CYBERCOM is making progress in this direction but also
recognizes the opportunity to evaluate CYBERCOM's progress in
this respect to determine areas to aid its growth.
Therefore, the committee directs the Inspector General of
the Department of Defense to conduct an independent review of
the acquisition activities of CYBERCOM and provide a briefing
to the congressional defense committees, not later than
September 30, 2026. Such a review should include an assessment
of the: (1) Sufficiency of the acquisition and contracting
workforce to determine if CYBERCOM has a sufficient mix of
numbers and skill sets based on the scale of acquisition
activities it is executing, including contracted support; (2)
Metrics being used to determine the timeliness and
effectiveness of in-house and assisted acquisition activities;
(3) Processes related to acquisition decision-making to
determine if timelines can be reduced or made more efficient;
(4) Timeliness and effectiveness of entities providing assisted
acquisition support to CYBERCOM; (5) Market research
capabilities of CYBERCOM, including a representative sample of
market research artifacts to assess the sufficiency of such
market research; and (6) Lessons learned from recent
acquisition actions and the extent to which such lessons have
been incorporated into CYBERCOM processes.
Integration of local initiatives, small business programs, and academic
institutions to limit gaps between training events
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
maintaining continuous technical training and skill development
throughout the cyber operator pipeline within the Department of
Defense (DOD). The committee understands that training gaps are
often inevitable due to scheduling constraints, resource
limitations, and the complex nature of multi-phase cyber
education programs.
The committee believes that while complete elimination of
training interruptions may not be feasible, viable options
exist to prevent trainees from experiencing extended periods of
downtime that could result in skill degradation and compromised
mission readiness. The committee is aware that there are local
initiatives, small business partnerships, and academic
collaborations that exist that could be leveraged to bridge
these gaps.
Accordingly, the committee encourages such partnerships
with small business programs and academic institutions that can
offer hands-on training in simulated environments, operational
cyber range experience, and targeted coursework to develop
cyber talent. The committee notes the Mississippi Cyber
Initiative as an example of an effective local partnership that
provides valuable supplementary training opportunities for
servicemembers. The committee believes these programs have the
potential to enhance DOD capabilities, address critical
cybersecurity challenges, and strengthen the national cyber
workforce while ensuring cyber operators remain technically
proficient throughout their training pipeline.
Leveraging artificial intelligence-enabled training environments for
cyber readiness
The committee encourages the Department of Defense (DOD) to
build upon its 2023 Data, Analytics, and Artificial
Intelligence (AI) Adoption Strategy by leveraging machine
learning and natural language processing to create dynamic,
threat-informed training environments. The committee believes
that these capabilities should enable real-time, AI-generated
threat scenarios for faster and more adaptive military cyber
training while also enabling realistic simulation of cyber-
kinetic attack scenarios on military networks to enhance the
protection of critical systems from foreign adversaries. The
committee assesses that adoption of these technologies may
strengthen national security posture across all domains through
agile, cost-effective, and scalable solutions that enable
personnel to engage with AI-driven adversaries in realistic,
scenario-based assessments.
The committee further recommends that the DOD prioritize
investments in autonomous and adaptive learning platforms that
integrate seamlessly with both on-premise infrastructure and
commercial cloud environments. By integrating AI-enabled
platforms into existing test and evaluation frameworks, the
committee believes that the Department could accelerate the
development of resilient cyber, space, and missile defense
capabilities while significantly reducing costs associated with
traditional training models.
Modernization of Department of Air Force reserve component business
applications
The committee recognizes the critical importance of our
nation's reserve components and their invaluable contributions
to the Department of Defense (DOD) and to national security.
The committee has long been a strong advocate for ensuring that
reserve forces receive the necessary resources and support to
maintain peak readiness and operational effectiveness. The
committee understands that for reserve personnel to maximize
their focus on readiness and training activities during
training status, they must be supported by efficient and modern
business support systems that enable core administrative
functions. The committee acknowledges that streamlined
processes for order generation, approval, and other essential
administrative tasks are fundamental to operational success and
personnel satisfaction.
The committee is deeply concerned with the poor state and
clear lack of investment in Air Force reserve component
business systems, particularly the Unit Training Assembly
Processing System (UTAPS) and the Air Force Reserve Online
Workflow System (AROWS). The committee has received reports
indicating that these critical systems are extremely cumbersome
to navigate and operate, creating unnecessary administrative
burdens for reserve personnel who should be concentrating on
mission-critical training and readiness activities. The
committee is further troubled that these systems, due to
insufficient updates and modernization efforts, present
significant cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could compromise
personnel information.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a comprehensive briefing outlining a detailed,
one-year modernization plan for core Air Reserve component
business applications, including UTAPS and AROWS, not later
than June 30, 2026, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives. Such a plan should
include specific funding requirements, detailed contract
requirements and acquisition strategies, and a robust user
engagement and feedback component to ensure continuous
improvement and user satisfaction.
Multimodal generative artificial intelligence language translation
capabilities
The committee recognizes artificial intelligence's (AI)
ability to improve the Department of Defense's warfighting
posture, including by providing enhanced foreign language
translation capabilities. Several military units are currently
utilizing multimodal generative AI foreign language translation
capabilities that include text, audio, video, and image
integrated with automated human-in-the-loop review and
verification processes that allow for mission-specific, live
fine-tuning. This capability is being used to great effect,
augmenting linguists such that tasks that used to take a month
are now being completed in a few days. Such capabilities result
in a high return on investment for a wide range of mission
areas, including joint exercises, intelligence, information
operations, and counterintelligence investigations. The
committee notes that deployment of this technology is critical
to ensure the warfighter is fully equipped and that the
Department is efficiently utilizing resources to meet critical
mission needs.
The committee is concerned that using humans to manually
translate virtually all foreign language media is an
unsustainable and high-cost effort that will never fully
address the foreign language translation needs of our forces
without the assistance of modern technology. Therefore, the
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to invest in and
utilize multimodal generative AI foreign language translation
capabilities that include automated human-in-the-loop review
and verification processes and built-in mission-specific live
fine-tuning, at scale across all services, combatant commands,
and appropriate mission areas.
Munitions production decision support
The committee commends the Department of Defense for
working diligently to try to increase munitions production
goals to better position the Department to prepare for future
contingencies and support its partners and allies. The
committee is aware that efforts such as the Joint Production
Accelerator Cell and the Wartime Acquisition and Sustainment
Support Plan used by the Navy have increased analytical support
and attention to try to identify bottlenecks in the process.
However, the committee notes that, to date, the processes used
for capturing the outputs of such analyses, and continuously
updating and sharing such data, is startlingly antiquated and
manually intensive for a data-powered organization like the
Department of Defense.
Accordingly, the committee believes it is critical for the
Department's efforts to transition to an information
technology-based decision support system or dashboard to better
collect, analyze, visualize, and share information related to
munitions production, preferably linked with related processes
for developing the munitions requirements and operational
planning tools in order to improve the speed and scalability of
planning and execution.
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy
resourcing
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
(DOD) is not adequately investing in and providing the
resources necessary to build out the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy (OASD(CP)) to match the
statutory responsibilities outlined by the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117-81) and
the coordination needs for that office. The committee
recognizes that these resources are needed to ensure that there
is adequate technical, operational, and policy experience in
key areas that will build capabilities and a workforce that is
able to reestablish a credible cyber deterrent and hold our
adversaries at risk through the imposition of costs.
Furthermore, in order to meet its service-secretary-like
responsibilities to maintain civilian control over our cyber
forces, as well as to fully realize its intended benefits in
workforce development, cyber capabilities enhancement, and
strategic deterrence implementation, this office needs to be
sized to exert similar oversight as a major functional
combatant command.
The committee is aware of a comprehensive resourcing study
conducted prior to the formal establishment of the OASD(CP).
Accordingly, building upon that initial study and reviewing its
conclusions, the committee directs the OASD(CP) to conduct an
updated resourcing study for the office. Such study should
include: (1) A thorough assessment of needed technical and
operational experience requirements, both in terms of numbers
of individuals as well as types and diversity of skill
disciplines needed; (2) A detailed evaluation of limitations
within existing Cyber Excepted Service hiring authorities, as
well as other hiring authorities available to this office; (3)
Recommendations for integration of Highly Qualified Experts or
special Government employees to provide unique skillsets not
readily available within the Government; and (4) Identification
of various courses of action for future investments aligned
with the National Defense Strategy's priorities.
The committee further directs that the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Cyber Policy provide the report on the completed
study to the congressional defense committees, not later than
January 31, 2026, and deliver a comprehensive briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2026, on the study's findings, the courses of action presented
to the Secretary, and the Secretary's final decision.
Phishing-resistant authentication
The committee notes that the importance of protecting the
Department of Defense's (DOD) systems and networks is
underscored by investment in the principles of zero trust,
including managing identity and access using phishing-resistant
authentication. The committee further notes that while the DOD
has established a process for approval of new multifactor
authentication technologies, to date few approvals appear to
have made it through that process.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to develop a strategy to ensure that phishing-resistant
authentication, which includes hardware-based public key
infrastructure, is used by all personnel of the DOD and to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than May 1,
2026. The strategy shall include an action plan for the
deployment of phishing-resistant authentication across the DOD
and retirement of legacy authentication tools by the end of
fiscal year 2027. The strategy should also include exceptions
for applications in which the use of phishing-resistant
authentication is not feasible or practical and should require
a process for components seeking an exception to provide
documentation of an appropriate mitigation of the risk imposed
by not using phishing-resistant authentication.
Realignment of the Defense Cyber Crime Center
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense (DOD)
Cyber Crime Center (DC3) has a unique, multi-mission capability
supporting law enforcement, counterintelligence, cyber threat
analysis, digital forensics, and defense industrial base (DIB)
cybersecurity incident response. The committee further notes
that DC3 continues to serve as a national-level partner for
cyber incident coordination and forensic support.
At the same time, the committee acknowledges the expanded
responsibilities of the Department of Defense Cyber Defense
Command (DCDC), which is tasked with the protection and
operational defense of the DOD Information Network (DODIN). In
fulfilling this mission, DCDC increasingly requires access to
and awareness of threats and trends affecting both the DODIN
and interconnected systems across the DIB, as well as
mechanisms for enhanced engagement and collaboration with those
DIB partners on cybersecurity threats and vulnerabilities.
The committee notes there is substantial functional
alignment between DC3 and DCDC in the following mission areas:
(1) Cyber incident analysis and coordination; (2) Digital
forensics and malware analysis; (3) Assessment of threats to
DOD networks and critical infrastructure; (4) Support to
defensive cyberspace operations; and (5) Early warning and
situational awareness related to cyber intrusions and malicious
cyber campaigns.
Given these shared mission areas, the committee believes it
is essential for the Department to ensure DCDC maintains a
holistic operational picture of threats to the DODIN, including
those originating in the DIB or identified through digital
forensics analysis. The committee is concerned that failure to
integrate or align relevant elements of DC3 with DCDC could
result in mission duplication, fragmented awareness of emerging
threats, or the unnecessary development of parallel
capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense
to assess options to better align DC3 with DCDC, including
through formal coordination mechanisms, enhanced tasking
authorities, or revised organizational alignment. In doing so,
the DOD should ensure continued support for DC3's law
enforcement and counterintelligence authorities while enabling
DCDC to fully leverage DC3's existing capabilities in support
of its operational mission.
Strategy for identifying and addressing blockchain
The committee recognizes that emerging cyber technologies
like blockchain pose significant threats. The committee is
concerned that the Department of Defense (DOD) currently lacks
adequate capabilities to collect and analyze intelligence on
blockchain applications and transactions. The committee notes
this intelligence gap leaves the DOD unable to effectively
counter blockchain-enabled activities including illicit
trafficking of military dual-use technology, terrorism
financing, sanctions evasion, and ransomware operations that
fund hostile military activities.
The committee believes the DOD needs a comprehensive
blockchain strategy that addresses four key areas:
identification of blockchain capabilities, risk and
vulnerability analysis, threat mitigation, and capability
development. The committee expects this strategy to integrate
the Department's intelligence, cybersecurity, and analytical
capabilities to disrupt adversarial cyber operations, counter
illicit financial networks that threaten military security, and
guide strategic investments across the enterprise.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to develop a strategy for analyzing blockchain technology
applications--including identifying classes of vulnerabilities,
assessing risks, and proposing mitigations and opportunities--
and to brief the congressional defense committees on the
strategy, not later than July 1, 2026. Such strategy should
include: (1) Options for streamlining and formalizing
investment and leveraging commercial tools for blockchain
analysis and utilization; (2) Policy and budgetary changes
needed to facilitate broader adoption of commercial blockchain
intelligence technologies; (3) Recommendations to better enable
real-time blockchain intelligence sharing and integration
between the DOD and interagency and international partners; and
(4) Recommendations to enhance the traceability of foreign
military and state-sponsored cyber unit blockchain transactions
targeting U.S. defense and critical infrastructure.
Strategy for private cloud capabilities
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense has
developed multiple cloud offerings to meet the diverse mission
requirements of its components and military services. The
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has made significant
investments in both commercial cloud solutions under the Joint
Warfighting Cloud Capability (JWCC) contract and private cloud
infrastructure. These private cloud environments provide many
benefits similar to public cloud solutions' benefits, such as
flexibility, agility, scalability, and availability, while
ensuring secure and controlled deployments for sensitive
missions.
The committee is aware that the Department is currently
investing in enhancements to its private cloud capabilities,
namely the Stratus program, to provide improved options to
mission partners. However, the committee requires additional
information regarding how these investments will deliver unique
capabilities not already available through existing cloud
offerings.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief Information
Officer of the Department of Defense to provide a briefing to
the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 31,
2026, on the Department's comprehensive private cloud strategy.
This briefing should include: (1) Current status of existing
private cloud platform implementation; (2) Identification of
opportunities for expanded private cloud deployment; (3)
Assessment of how private cloud investments complement public
cloud capabilities; (4) Evaluation of security and operational
advantages of private cloud solutions; and (5) Analysis of how
the overall private cloud strategy advances data protection,
mission resilience, and cost and energy efficiencies within the
Department's modernization efforts.
Time-based objectives for Department of Defense data recovery
The committee remains concerned that the United States
faces an intensifying and sophisticated national security
threat, particularly in the cyber domain, from the People's
Republic of China. The committee is aware that malicious cyber
actors increasingly target backup systems and data repositories
as part of coordinated attacks against Department of Defense
(DOD) networks and systems. The committee notes that resilient
and rapidly deployable data recovery mechanisms are necessary
for DOD components to prevent catastrophic and extended loss of
mission-critical capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the DOD Chief
Information Officer, in coordination with the DOD Chief Digital
and Artificial Intelligence Officer, to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than April 30, 2026, on a
Department-wide evaluation of existing policies and
implementation guidance governing Recovery Time Objective
metrics for mission-essential data systems. Such briefing
should: (1) Examine current authoritative documentation
provided to the Department regarding maximum allowable
restoration timeframes following cyber compromise; (2) Identify
systems that currently satisfy established recovery time
objective requirements; (3) Document the modern data recovery
capabilities employed across the Department; and (4) Evaluate
systems presenting the highest vulnerability to cyber
compromise. The briefing should also include the development of
recommendations for appropriate recovery capabilities to
mitigate identified technical and policy gaps across the DOD
enterprise.
Transition strategy for formal methods in software and hardware
development
The committee is concerned about the advancing
sophistication, scale, and speed of cyber threats targeting
Department of Defense (DOD) systems. The committee notes that
formal methods and approaches for validation and verification,
which establish mathematical guarantees in software code, can
be used to prove the absence of exploitable vulnerabilities.
The committee also notes that such approaches can and have also
been used to secure hardware systems as well, demonstrating
even broader application of formal methods.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, acting
through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, the Director for Operational Test and Evaluation,
the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy,
and the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer, to
develop a comprehensive strategy for transitioning DARPA's
formal methods research investments into production
environments across the DOD.
The committee directs that the strategy include the
following elements: (1) Identification of high-priority
software and hardware-based platforms and systems for
consideration for initial integration of formal methods
approaches, with specific timelines and implementation phases;
(2) A description of integration pathways for transitioning
formal methods into both programs in sustainment and newly
acquired systems; (3) An assessment of necessary investments in
workforce training, tooling, and infrastructure to enable
successful adoption of formal methods at scale; (4) Metrics to
measure the effectiveness and return on investment of formal
methods implementation across different system types; and (5)
Development of incentives for industry to adopt such approaches
for programs they are developing.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on this transition
strategy, not later than March 31, 2026, including specific
resource requirements, policy recommendations, and
implementation milestones.
United States Cyber Command dual-hat leadership arrangement
The committee continues to assess the effectiveness of the
dual-hat leadership arrangement under which a single individual
serves as both the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) and
the Director, National Security Agency (NSA). Established in
2010, this structure was intended to improve operational
integration and alignment between the two organizations in
support of national security objectives.
The committee notes that in 2022, the Secretary of Defense
and the Director of National Intelligence sponsored an
interagency review of the dual-hat arrangement. The study
concluded that separating the leadership roles would increase
cost, reduce unity of effort, and result in less decisive
national security outcomes. The analysis further found that the
existing arrangement enhances coordination, accelerates
decision-making, and achieves greater efficiency in the
employment of cyber and signals intelligence capabilities.
The committee further notes that Congress increased its
oversight of the NSA/CYBERCOM relationship in section 1556 of
the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263), directing the Secretary
of Defense to provide annual briefings on the command
relationship and operational coordination between the two
organizations. This provision amended sec. 1642 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328), limiting the ability to terminate the dual-hat only
following the satisfaction of certain conditions that would
have to be jointly certified by the Secretary of Defense and
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that such a decision
would not pose risks to the military effectiveness of CYBERCOM
that are unacceptable to the national security interests of the
United States. To date, the Department of Defense has yet to
satisfy either provision.
The committee further notes that breaking up the dual-hat
relationship would have significant risk at the strategic,
operational, and tactical level. The committee further
acknowledges there would also be cost impacts incurred by
building the appropriate infrastructure for two separate
leadership organizations. The cost for doing so has not yet
been determined.
The committee believes that the dual-hat arrangement
continues to serve the best interests of U.S. national security
and resource stewardship and encourages the Department to
maintain and strengthen this structure.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
the infrastructure requirements and costs associated with
changing or potentially ending the dual-hat leadership
arrangement, not later than December 1, 2025.
Zero trust implementation
The committee appreciates recent updates on the progress
made by the Department of Defense (DOD) toward zero trust
implementation but remains concerned that the DOD faces
aggressive timelines to adhere to the 2027 zero trust mandates
directed by the DOD Zero Trust Strategy. The committee believes
that to achieve goals within DOD-specified timelines, military
departments, combatant commands, and other DOD components
should leverage scalable, security-certified, and managed
services solutions like the Defense Information Systems Agency
(DISA) program, Thunderdome, that went through an open vendor
selection process and comprehensive prototyping before
production. Where a managed solution does not effectively
satisfy requirements, the committee believes that components
should, to the greatest extent possible, leverage existing
blanket purchase agreements and similar DOD-wide procurement
vehicles that offer easy and efficient access to solutions at
the appropriate security level. The committee understands such
solutions allow components to adopt the full range of zero
trust capabilities including edge computing, internet-of-
things, remote user access, and other technologies in a manner
that best integrates with the component's existing security
architecture and requirements.
The committee directs the Chief Information Officer of the
DOD and the Director of DISA, not later than December 1, 2025,
to issue guidance to DOD components that identifies existing
procurement vehicles they can leverage to quickly and
efficiently acquire the technologies and solutions necessary to
achieve their zero trust implementation goals.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary and explanation of funding tables
Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military
construction projects of the Department of Defense (DOD). It
includes funding authorizations for the construction and
operation of military family housing as well as military
construction for the reserve components, the Defense Agencies
and Field Activities, and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program. It also provides
authorization for the base closure accounts that fund military
construction, environmental cleanup, and other activities
required to implement the decisions made in prior base
realignment and closure rounds.
The tables contained in this Act provide the project-level
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized
in division B of this Act and summarize that funding by
account.
The fiscal year 2026 budget request included $18.9 billion
for military construction and housing programs. Of this amount,
$15.2 billion was requested for military construction, $1.8
billion for the construction and operation of family housing,
$448.0 million for base closure activities, and $410.2 million
for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program.
The committee recommends the authorization of
appropriations for military construction, housing programs,
facilities sustainment, and base closure activities totaling
$40.7 billion. The total amount authorized for appropriations
reflects the committee's continued commitment to investing in
the recapitalization of DOD facilities and infrastructure.
Sec. 2001--Short title
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
division B of this Act as the ``Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026.''
Sec. 2002--Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
the expiration date for authorizations in this Act for military
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing
projects and facilities, and contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program as
October 1, 2028, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2029, whichever is later.
Sec. 2003--Effective date
The committee recommends a provision that would provide an
effective date for titles XXI through XXVII of October 1, 2025,
or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $2.2 billion for military construction and
$195.7 million for family housing for the Army for fiscal year
2026.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $8.5 billion for military construction for the Army and
$195.7 million for family housing for the Army for fiscal year
2026.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2101 and section 4601 of this Act.
Sec. 2101--Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Army military construction projects for fiscal year 2026. The
authorized amount is listed on an installation-by-installation
basis.
Sec. 2102--Family housing
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design for Army family housing
units for fiscal year 2026. This provision would also authorize
funds for facilities that support family housing, including
housing management offices, housing maintenance, and storage
facilities.
Sec. 2103--Authorization of appropriations, Army
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Army authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2026. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Army. The state list contained in this report
is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2104--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2021 project
at Fort Gillem, Georgia
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2101 in the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 of the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) until October 1,
2026, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is
later.
Sec. 2105--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in section 2101 in the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
(Public Law 117-81) until October 1, 2026, or the date of the
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2106--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2101 in the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 of the
James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) until October 1, 2026, or the
date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2107--Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2025 projects
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
various authorizations contained in the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $6.0 billion for military construction and
$68.2 million for family housing for the Navy for fiscal year
2026.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $12.8 billion for military construction for the Navy and
$68.2 million for family housing for the Navy for fiscal year
2026.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2201 and section 4601 of this Act.
Sec. 2201--Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Navy and Marine Corps military construction projects for fiscal
year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2202--Family housing
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design for Navy family housing
units for fiscal year 2026. This provision would also authorize
funds for facilities that support family housing, including
housing management offices, housing maintenance, and storage
facilities.
Sec. 2203--Authorization of appropriations, Navy
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Department of the Navy
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2026. This
provision would also provide an overall limit on the amount
authorized for military construction and family housing
projects for the active components of the Navy and the Marine
Corps. The state list contained in this report is the binding
list of the specific projects authorized at each location.
Sec. 2204--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in sections 2201 and 2202 in the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
(Public Law 117-81) until October 1, 2026, or the date of the
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2205--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2201 in the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 of the
James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) until October 1, 2026, or the
date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $3.7 billion for military construction and
$78.1 million for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal
year 2026.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $7.9 billion for military construction for the Air Force and
$78.1 million for family housing for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2026.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2301 and section 4601 of this Act.
Sec. 2301--Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2026.
The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Sec. 2302--Family housing
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
improvement to existing housing and planning and design for Air
Force family housing units for fiscal year 2026. This provision
would also authorize funds for facilities that support family
housing, including housing management offices, housing
maintenance, and storage facilities.
Sec. 2303--Authorization of appropriations, Air Force
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for military construction and family housing
projects of the Department of the Air Force authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2026. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Air Force and the Space Force. The state list
contained in this report is the binding list of the specific
projects authorized at each location.
Sec. 2304--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2017 project
at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization of a certain project contained in section 2902 in
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017 (Public Law 114-328) until October 1, 2026, or the date of
the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2305--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2019
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization of certain projects contained in section 2903 in
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2019 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) until October 1,
2026, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is
later.
Sec. 2306--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2020
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in sections 2301(a) and
2912(a) in the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 117-81) until October 1, 2026, or
the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2307--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in section 2301 in the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022
(Public Law 117-81) until October 1, 2026, or the date of the
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2308--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in section 2301 in the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 of
the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) until October 1, 2026, or
the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2309--Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2025
project at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming
The committee recommends a provision that would modify an
authorization contained in the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) to construct
3,219 kilometers of telephone duct facility.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $3.8 billion for military construction for
the Defense Agencies for fiscal year 2026.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $2.7 billion for military construction for the Defense
Agencies for fiscal year 2026.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2401, section 2402, and section 4601 of this Act.
Sec. 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land
acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Defense Agencies for
fiscal year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2402--Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment
Program projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out Energy Resilience and
Conservation Investment Program projects for fiscal year 2026.
The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Sec. 2403--Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the military construction and family housing
projects of the Defense Agencies authorized for construction
for fiscal year 2026. This provision would also provide an
overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the Defense
Agencies. The state list contained in this report is the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Sec. 2404--Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2019 project
at Iwakuni, Japan
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2401(b) in the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 of the John
S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2019 (Public Law 115-232) until October 1, 2026, or the date of
the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2405--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2402(b) in the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public
Law 117-81) until October 1, 2026, or the date of the enactment
of an Act authorizing funds for military construction for
fiscal year 2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2406--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in sections 2401(a) and
2402(a) in the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263)
until October 1, 2026, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2407--Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2024 projects
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
various authorizations in the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31).
Sec. 2408--Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2025 projects
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
various authorizations contained in the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 of the Servicemember
Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159).
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $481.8 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2026 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $531.8 million for military construction in fiscal year 2026
for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program.
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program
Sec. 2501--Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program in an
amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically authorized
in section 2502 of this title and the amount of recoupment due
to the United States for construction previously financed by
the United States.
Sec. 2502--Authorization of appropriations, NATO
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations of $481.8 million for the U.S. contribution to
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program for fiscal year 2026.
Subtitle B--Host Country in Kind Contributions
Sec. 2511--Republic of Korea funded construction projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept seven military construction
projects totaling $453.0 million from the Republic of Korea as
in-kind contributions.
Sec. 2512--Republic of Poland funded construction projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept eight military construction
projects totaling $504.2 million from the Republic of Poland as
in-kind contributions.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
Summary
The budget request included an authorization of
appropriations of $445.5 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2026 for facilities for the National Guard and
reserve components.
The committee recommends an authorization of appropriations
of $4.3 billion for military construction for the National
Guard and reserve components. The detailed funding
recommendations are contained in the state list table included
in this report.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in the
tables in this title and section 4601 of this Act.
Sec. 2601--Authorized Army National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army National Guard for
fiscal year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2602--Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army Reserve for fiscal
year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
construction and land acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine
Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2026. The authorized amounts are
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2604--Authorized Air National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air National Guard for
fiscal year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air Force Reserve for
fiscal year 2026. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Sec. 2606--Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and Reserve
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the reserve component military construction
projects authorized for construction for fiscal year 2026 in
this Act. This provision would also provide an overall limit on
the amount authorized for military construction projects for
each of the reserve components of the military departments. The
state list contained in this report is the binding list of the
specific projects authorized at each location.
Sec. 2607--Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023
projects
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorizations contained in sections 2601, 2602, 2603,
and 2604 in the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263)
until October 1, 2026, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2027, whichever is later.
Sec. 2608--Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2023
project at Tucson International Airport, Arizona
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) for
Tucson International Airport, Arizona.
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES
Summary and explanation of tables
The budget request included $410.2 million for the ongoing
cost of environmental remediation and other activities
necessary to continue implementation of the 1988, 1991, 1993,
1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds. The
committee recommends $410.2 million for these efforts. The
detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state
list table included in this report.
Sec. 2701--Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and
closure activities funded through Department of Defense Base
Closure Account
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2026 for ongoing activities that
are required to implement the decisions of the 1988, 1991,
1993, 1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program
Sec. 2801--Requirement for the military departments to develop and
annually update a 20-year infrastructure improvement plan
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each of the military departments to develop and annually update
a 20-year infrastructure improvement plan. The committee
intends for this provision to ensure that the departments'
senior leaders strategically and realistically budget for the
sustainment of their installations and facilities.
Sec. 2802--Increase of maximum amount for restoration or replacement of
damaged or destroyed facilities
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2854(c)(3) of title 10, United States Code, to increase
the cost cap to restore or replace a damaged or destroyed
facility from $100.0 million to $150.0 million.
The committee's intent is for this provision to help
address facilities reconstruction requirements on military
installations in the wake of costly natural disasters.
Sec. 2803--Reauthorization and modification of special design-build
authority for military construction projects
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3241(f) of title 10, United States Code, to modify an
existing but expired authority for accelerated design-build
procedures to increase the efficiency and execution of military
construction projects. The committee's intent for this
provision is to provide the agility of progressive design-build
mechanisms for military construction but operate within
contracting laws and title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 2804--Modification of pilot program on increased use of
sustainable building materials in military construction to
include sustainable building technologies identified by the
Comptroller General of the United States
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2861 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 118-81) to extend the pilot
program and include building materials identified by the
Government Accountability Office.
Sec. 2805--Implementation of Comptroller General recommendations
relating to information sharing to improve oversight of
military construction
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to implement the recommendations of the
Government Accountability Office report, published September
16, 2024, titled, ``Military Construction: Better Information
Sharing Would Improve DOD's Oversight'' (GAO-2024-106499), not
later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act,
or to report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives explaining why the Secretary
has not implemented those recommendations.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary to
provide a one-time briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 1, 2026, on the status of implementing these
recommendations.
Sec. 2806--Extension of requirement for contract for obligation and
execution of design funds for military construction projects
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2811(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act,
Division B of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public
Law 118-159), by striking ``150 days'' and inserting ``one
year.''
Sec. 2807--Extension of authorization of depot working capital funds
for unspecified minor military construction
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2208(u)(4) of title 10, United States Code, to extend
the authorization of depot working capital funds for
unspecified minor military construction projects from 2025 to
2027.
Sec. 2808--Extension of authority for temporary expanded land
acquisition for equine welfare
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2804(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) by striking ``February 1, 2026''
and inserting ``August 1, 2026.''
Sec. 2809--Prohibition on designation of military construction projects
as part of military intelligence program
The committee recommends a provision that would prevent the
Secretary of Defense from designating any military construction
project as being part of the military intelligence program.
Sec. 2810--Expansion of Defense Community Infrastructure Program to
include installations of the Coast Guard
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2391 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the
United States Coast Guard to compete for funding available
through the Defense Community Infrastructure Program.
Subtitle B--Military Housing
Sec. 2821--Improvements to annual reports of Department of Defense on
waivers of privacy and configuration standards for covered
military unaccompanied housing
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2856a of title 10, United States Code, by adding
elements to be included in future iterations of the barracks
waiver reports submitted by the Department of Defense (DOD).
The DOD and the military services have made progress toward
improving unaccompanied housing, but the committee remains
concerned that many servicemembers continue to be housed in
substandard conditions, as described by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) in a report published on September
19, 2023, titled ``Military Barracks: Poor Living Conditions
Undermine Quality of Life and Readiness'' (GAO-23-105797).
Additionally, in accordance with the requirements of
section 2833 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31), the GAO provided the
committee with a briefing on the first DOD report submitted
under section 2856a of title 10, United States Code, which
revealed certain limitations in the current report
requirements. The provision would improve and strengthen future
iterations of the report so that it provides information vital
to improvement in the long-term conditions of barracks across
the services.
Sec. 2822--Modification of Housing Requirements and Market Analysis to
account for impact of civilians and contractors
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2837(d) of title 10, United States Code, to account for
impacts of civilians and contractors of the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 2823--Authority for unaccompanied housing project under pilot
authority for use of other transactions for installation or
facility prototyping
The committee recommends a provision that would grant
permissive authority to the Secretary of Defense to conduct an
unaccompanied housing project under section 4022(i) of title
10, United States Code.
Sec. 2824--Elimination of indoor residential mold in housing of
Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, to conduct a comprehensive study on the
health effects of indoor residential mold growth in military
unaccompanied housing or other housing on military
installations.
Sec. 2825--Requirement for disclosure of information relating to
liability insurance and dispute resolutions relating to
privatized military housing
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2891c(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, by
requiring landlords of privatized military housing units to
disclose to the Secretary of Defense information relating to
insurance coverage and payments for dispute resolutions with
tenants.
Sec. 2826--Treatment of nondisclosure agreements with respect to
privatized military housing
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2890(f) of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit a
landlord from requesting that a tenant or prospective tenant of
a privatized housing unit sign a nondisclosure agreement.
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances
Sec. 2831--Authorization to acquire through exchange or lease certain
land used by the Armed Forces in Hawaii
The committee recommends a provision that would temporarily
authorize the Department of Defense to acquire mission critical
military training lands that are currently leased by the
military departments from the State of Hawaii. The committee's
intent for this provision would be to address the multiple
military training ranges across Hawaii that have expiring
leases in the near future.
Sec. 2832--Report on land withdrawals
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to submit a report on certain land
withdrawals.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Sec. 2841--Modifications to Defense Community Infrastructure Program
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2391(d)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, to
modify the priority list and definitions for Defense Community
Infrastructure Program projects.
Sec. 2842--Designation of Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range at
Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands
The committee recommends a provision that would redesignate
the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site as the
Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range to better reflect
the range's broader role in supporting the development and
operation of long-range missile systems, defenses, and space
capabilities.
Sec. 2843--Joint base facility management of Department of Defense
The committee recommends a provision that would improve the
Department of Defense's (DOD) facility management of joint
bases.
The committee notes that preliminary findings from an
ongoing Government Accountability Office (GAO) report show that
the DOD has faced challenges in ensuring that the 12 joint
bases are managing the sustainment, restoration, and
modernization of their facilities to support mission needs. The
GAO also notes that the DOD facilities are requiring more work
to maintain, due to facility age, accumulated deferred
maintenance, and older systems such as heating, ventilation,
and air conditioning. The committee notes that the DOD has not
provided consistent and clear guidance on facility maintenance
responsibilities and funding. In the absence of guidance
specific to joint base management, each joint base is
approaching issues such as facility management in a fragmented
manner, and this has led to issues such as lingering disputes
about how to fund critical infrastructure needs. The DOD also
has been unable to determine how funding for facility
maintenance is allocated among military components on joint
bases. This has prevented the DOD from completing a
determination of whether there is any funding discrepancy
between the joint base components and whether any such
discrepancy is negatively impacting mission readiness. Further,
the DOD has not regularly assessed whether they have the staff
that is needed to meet changing requirements and to keep DOD
facilities in good working order to support the mission and
provide servicemembers with good quality of life.
Sec. 2844--Limitation on use of amounts for travel based on compliance
with requirements related to minimum capital investment
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
both the service secretary and service chief of a military
department from using any funds to travel outside of the
continental United States should their respective military
department not be in compliance with section 2680 of title 10,
United States Code.
The committee notes the minimum facilities sustainment
funding set forth in section 2680 will be specifically used for
maintaining existing infrastructure as well as demolition
funding to dispose of excess inventory. The committee
encourages Department of Defense senior leadership to review
and utilize existing authorities to improve its facility
backlog.
Sec. 2845--Extension of prohibition on joint use of Homestead Air
Reserve Base with civil aviation
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2874 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023, Division B of the James M. Inhofe National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-
253), by striking ``September 30, 2028,'' and inserting
``September 30, 2034''.
Sec. 2846--Pilot program on procurement of utility services for
installations of the Department of Defense through areawide
contracts
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program for the
purposes of the military departments to procure utility
services from an areawide contract with a public utility
provider. The provision would also require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees within 90 days of the pilot program terminating on
any efficiencies, benefits, or cost-savings derived under the
pilot along with any proposed solutions for transition the
authority to a permanent status.
The committee notes that under this pilot program, the
Secretary of each military department must enter into at least
one areawide contract within 180 days of the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Sec. 2847--Authorization for monetary contributions to the conveyees of
utility systems for infrastructure improvements
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2688(k) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Department of Defense to pair utilities privatization with
the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program.
Sec. 2848--Prohibition on use of funds for development of Greenbury
Point Conservation Area at Naval Support Activity Annapolis,
Maryland
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of funds for development of Greenbury Point
Conservation Area at Naval Support Activity Annapolis,
Maryland.
Sec. 2849--Application of certain authorities and standards to historic
military housing and associated historic properties of the
Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air Force
The committee recommends a provision that would amend title
54, United States Code, to apply certain authorities and
standards to historic military housing and associated historic
properties of the Department of the Navy and the Department of
the Air Force.
Items of Special Interest
B-21 bomber shelter strategy
The committee notes that the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2025 (Public Law 118-159) required the Secretary of the
Air Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees on the suitability of open-sided environmental
protection shelters (EPSs) in comparison to traditional hangars
for B-21 bomber aircraft operating out of installations that
are at risk of severe weather events. The committee notes that
the briefing shows the potential of EPSs in terms of cost
savings and accelerating construction time. The committee notes
the Air Force stated that building traditional hangars instead
would cost an additional $3.0 billion in military construction
funding and $8.3 billion in life-cycle sustainment costs. The
committee understands that EPSs can also improve beddown times
by a number of years, which will increase operational
readiness. The committee finally notes that while there are
cases where a traditional hangar is preferred, such as in
extreme cold or blizzards, the Air Force noted that EPSs are
the preferred solution with a small mix of traditional hangars.
The committee believes the Air Force should continue to
focus on EPS as an alternative to traditional hangar
construction depending on the operational mission requirement.
Civilian housing at public naval shipyards
The committee is aware that the availability and
affordability of housing in communities surrounding the public
naval shipyards is relevant to the ability of the government to
recruit and retain skilled shipyard workers. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of the Navy and the Director of the Office
of Industrial Policy of the Department of Defense, and informed
by the operational commanders of shipyard workers and
commanders who manage shore infrastructure, to provide a report
to the congressional defense committees, not later than
September 30, 2027, on the feasibility, costs, and benefits of
providing apartment-style or dormitory housing units for
civilian workers at the four public naval shipyards, to
include:
(1) An assessment of the estimated costs of
constructing, maintaining, and leasing apartment-style
or dormitory housing units for civilian workers at
public naval shipyards;
(2) An assessment of the potential economic and
workforce effects of providing such housing units,
including on recruitment and retention rates;
(3) An assessment of the feasibility of providing
such housing units, including the timeline required for
implementation;
(4) An assessment of the operational effects of
providing such housing units, including on worker
availability, morale, and commuting burdens;
(5) An assessment of the effect of providing such
housing units on the housing market in surrounding
areas, including for non-shipyard workers;
(6) Options for deducting fair-market rent or below-
market housing fees directly from employee paychecks,
including administrative, legal, and contractual
implications;
(7) Comparisons with similar workforce housing models
used by the Department of Defense or other Federal
agencies; and
(8) Case studies of at least two covered naval
shipyards that include specific data on the potential
effectiveness of providing apartment-style or dormitory
housing units for civilian workers at such shipyards.
For the purposes of the report, the public naval shipyards
shall be considered to be:
(1) Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Virginia;
(2) Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate
Maintenance Facility, Hawaii;
(3) Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Maine; and
(4) Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate
Maintenance Facility, Washington.
Clarification of inclusion of certain energy production facilities in
authority for contracts for energy or fuel for military
installations
The committee's intent for section 2922a of title 10,
United States Code, is that the term ``energy production
facilities'' means any facilities that produce energy,
including but not limited to, electrical, chemical, thermal,
mechanical, and nuclear energy. Additionally, the only limiting
factor to the committee not specifically amending section 2922a
of title 10, United States Code, to this end is a direct
spending score by the Congressional Budget Office. Lastly, the
committee intends for the Department of Defense to interpret
this statute as such, especially as it relates to area-wide
contracts and other non-Department funded energy projects.
Comptroller General review of maintenance of general and flag officer
quarters
The committee is concerned with how the Department of
Defense (DOD) manages the maintenance of General and Flag
Officer Quarters (GFOQs), in particular the planning and costs
for maintenance of these units. Generally, the military
services' GFOQs are older and larger than typical military
family housing, and many of these properties are historic, with
some dating back to the early 19th century. These factors make
general and flag officer homes costly to maintain.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported on cost
increases in GFOQ renovation projects and raised questions
about the military services' management of these units over 20
years ago, in a report published on May 17, 2004, titled
``Issues Related to the Renovation of General and Flag Officer
Quarters'' (GAO-04-555). In that 2004 report, the GAO found
that requests for changes to housing units--typically from the
quarters' occupant or the installation's command officials--and
unforeseen repairs were the primary reasons for cost increases
to GFOQ renovation projects. Unplanned repairs, such as for
termite damage or unexpected historic preservation
requirements, had occurred because problems were not identified
during home inspections.
The committee remains concerned about unforeseen
maintenance of GFOQs. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess the
following: (1) The policies, process, and procedures for
maintaining GFOQs; (2) The extent to which the military
services effectively plan for major repairs and manage requests
for changes to these homes while balancing other maintenance
installation priorities; (3) The primary factors that have
contributed to cost increases for GFOQ maintenance and to what
extent the DOD has assessed the causes of the cost increases;
and (4) Any other matters the Comptroller General determines
appropriate related to this topic.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives on preliminary
findings from this assessment, by not later than March 1, 2026,
and determine a mutually agreed upon timeframe to communicate
the final results.
Coordination of advanced nuclear efforts
The committee supports ongoing efforts by the Department of
Defense (DOD) to invest in advanced nuclear capability and
encourages endeavors to bring those efforts into strategic
alignment. The committee notes that adversaries, namely the
People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation, have
recognized the criticality of civil nuclear energy. As a
result, they are investing vast state resources in developing
and deploying the next generation of nuclear reactors while
actively pursuing long-term global contracts for nuclear
energy. The committee believes it is critical that the DOD
leads in the development and deployment of nuclear reactors to
prevent our adversaries from monopolizing control of related
supply chains, both to prevent adversaries from achieving such
geopolitical leverage and to ensure that our own critical
infrastructure is not dependent on adversary technology. The
DOD faces unprecedented power needs and will need civil nuclear
technology to ensure agile, resilient, secure, and
uninterrupted power to critical missions and to military
installations and operations, in particular in austere and
unique environments. The DOD must act swiftly both to secure
its own military installations and to ensure the DOD leads in
the development and deployment of civil nuclear technology.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and
the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, not later than
November 1, 2026, to brief the congressional defense committees
on options for establishing and executing an advanced nuclear
energy technical project support program of record. At a
minimum, the briefing should include: (1) The likely use cases
for advanced nuclear energy, including micro-reactors, with
coordinated input from combatant commands to establish
operational and installation needs, including the support of
force electrification, base sustainment, elimination of fuel
supply vulnerabilities, addressing climate threats, enabling
multi-domain operations, and advanced weaponry, at the secret
level; (2) The process for establishing requirements for a
program of record; (3) The estimated minimum number of units
needed to establish a cost-effective program and minimize the
time to Initial Operational Capability; (4) The maximum number
of units with assumptions on which operational plans are in
effect; (5) The process for establishing a comprehensive
regulatory framework for DOD-managed advanced reactors and the
deployment of pilot nuclear reactors for installations; (6)
Estimates on fuel requirements to support deployment models;
and (7) The expected annual budget required to transition the
Project Pele demonstration, as well as programmatic budget
needs for the program of record through 2030 or through the
first 5 years in which advanced nuclear energy, including
micro-reactors, is deployed for operational and installation
energy, whichever is longer.
Feasibility study on potential land use of Pentagon Reservation
The committee notes that in May 2024 the National Capital
Planning Commission approved a Pentagon Reservation master plan
update, outlining proposed improvements to the Pentagon and
nearby Department of Defense (DOD) property. Among the elements
of this plan is the potential reuse of some DOD land adjacent
to Pentagon City, Virginia. The revised master plan, in element
3.5.4, identifies this land for future development under mixed-
use or supportive purposes, saying it should be, ``considered
for land use types that provide a more positive impact than
surface parking.'' It also notes that the ``economic
development dynamics of Pentagon City along with the potential
benefits to the Pentagon suggest strongly that further study of
this area should be conducted to identify the most appropriate
use for these sites.'' Given security and financial suitability
needs, the plan states that ``further study of this area should
be conducted to identify the most appropriate use for these
sites.''
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives a one-time briefing, not later
than March 1, 2026, on the potential use of DOD land adjacent
to the Pentagon Reservation fronting Army Navy Drive in
Arlington, Virginia, currently being used as parking lots. The
briefing should reflect the contents of element 3.5.4 of the
2024 Pentagon Reservation master plan update and balance the
needs of sound fiscal planning, security, sustainable land use,
and military families. Lastly, the briefing should identify
next steps and associated funding requirements.
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning replacement at Luke Air
Force Base
The committee understands that Luke Air Force Base (AFB)
requires upgraded heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems. The committee notes that, due to the Air
Force's inability to properly budget for facility sustainment
funding, HVAC systems across Luke AFB are aged and now need
replacement. The committee understands that temperatures in the
Phoenix, Arizona, area, also known as ``America's Hottest
City,'' can approach 120 degrees Fahrenheit. The committee
notes that operating older, less efficient HVAC systems in
areas experiencing extreme heat may result in higher operating
and maintenance costs. The committee is concerned that this
poses a safety and readiness issue--impacting airmen's ability
to work effectively in high heat--and a fiscal inefficiency.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of the Air
Force to include appropriate funds when planning the Air
Force's budget for fiscal year 2027.
Impacts to energy and water utilities on military installations
The committee notes that Department of Defense (DOD)
installations need to be resilient against extreme weather
events and challenges. The committee further notes that
military installations need to ensure that basic functions
remain operational so the primary mission of the installation
is not under threat from interruption of energy and water
utilities. The DOD needs to be able to better understand in
detail the exposure their facilities have to extreme weather
events and how the impacts of such events may limit military
operations, pose risk to DOD utilities, and undermine
readiness.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command, to provide a one-time briefing to the committee, not
later than March 1, 2026, on the potential risk exposure of
water and energy utilities at military installations in the
Indo-Pacific as a result of extreme weather events. The
briefing should include: (1) A categorized list of incidents or
malfunctions that led to a major disruption of water or energy
services as a result of extreme weather and impeded the
utilities at installations from functioning properly; (2) An
assessment of military installations in the Indo-Pacific that
are at risk of energy and water utility disruptions due extreme
weather events and mitigating actions those installations took
to reduce this risk; (3) A list of DOD policies and statutes
that inhibit installation commanders' ability to better prepare
and develop military installation resilience strategies to
address the vulnerability of water and energy utilities to
extreme weather events; and (4) An assessment of how the design
of water and energy utility infrastructure on DOD installations
is being adjusted to account for extreme weather events.
Implementation of increased architecture and engineering design fee
limitation
The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) raised the
architecture and engineering (A&E) design fee limit from 6
percent to 10 percent of estimated construction costs for
Department of Defense projects. While Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement 48 Code of Federal
Regulations part 236 was amended on June 27, 2024,
implementation has been inconsistent, with some contracting
officers unaware of the update. This lack of awareness has led
to delays and hindered firms from fully benefiting from the
revised limitation. To ensure full implementation, the
Secretary of Defense should issue acquisition, program
objective memoranda, and budget guidance to all services to
ensure consistent application of the new fee limitation,
reflect the revised fee limit in future budgets, and train
contracting officers and acquisition personnel on compliance.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than December 1, 2025,
on the Department's efforts to ensure full implementation of
this change.
Infrastructure support for the 185th Air Refueling Wing
The committee remains concerned about infrastructure
limitations affecting the operational readiness of the 185th
Air Refueling Wing (ARW), a critical National Guard unit
supporting global aerial refueling missions. Located at a dual-
use facility not owned by the Department of Defense, the 185th
ARW relies on non-federal infrastructure for mission execution.
These limitations have restricted the Department's ability to
invest in necessary upgrades to sustain readiness and future
mission requirements.
The Department has historically faced challenges in using
military construction funds to support infrastructure it does
not directly own. However, the 185th ARW's reliance on such
facilities presents a unique case where readiness and strategic
capacity may be weakened without targeted investment and
coordination. Programs such as the Defense Community
Infrastructure Program (DCIP), cooperative agreements, or other
legal authorities may offer pathways for resolving these
infrastructure gaps.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
April 1, 2026, on the Department's plan to: (1) Preserve the
operational readiness of the 185th ARW, including support for
current and projected mission requirements; (2) Identify
infrastructure challenges associated with the unit's reliance
on non-federally owned facilities; (3) Assess available legal
authorities and potential legislative changes that would enable
the Department to contribute to infrastructure modernization
efforts, including the use of programs such as the DCIP; (4)
Describe any current or planned mitigation efforts, such as
partnerships with state or local governments; and (5) Provide
recommendations for congressional action.
Installation energy demands in Indo-Pacific
The committee notes the energy demands of operating in a
forward environment not only in peacetime but especially in a
contested environment. The committee notes that if the
Department of Defense (DOD) assessed potential opportunities to
partner with key allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to
develop geothermal energy, it could help meet its growing
energy demands and provide crucial information for future
infrastructure planning.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a one-time briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 1, 2026, with an assessment of
opportunities for the DOD to develop geothermal energy across
the Indo-Pacific that could increase deterrence, promote energy
and national security, and boost exports of U.S. technologies.
The briefing should include: (1) An assessment of countries and
regions in the Indo-Pacific in which the development or
expansion of geothermal energy is most beneficial to the DOD's
security interests, including in support of U.S. Indo-Pacific
strategy, and most feasible based on factors such as existing
geothermal production or exploration, subsurface data,
regulatory and economic conditions, energy demand, and
workforce quality; (2) An assessment of the benefits of
additional geothermal production on military installations that
could improve energy reliability, affordability, security, and
reduced reliance on adversaries; (3) An assessment of the
barriers to the development and expansion of geothermal energy
on military installations; (4) An assessment of the potential
for the DOD's competitive advantage in the development and
export of next-generation geothermal technologies; and (5) A
recommendation for whether to establish a pilot program for the
DOD to promote geothermal energy internationally and the
resources necessary for such a program.
Integrated project delivery
The committee is concerned that the military services have
not incorporated best practices from the private sector into
military construction (MILCON) projects. Section 2814 of the
James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263) required the Secretary of the
Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Air
Force to each enter into at least one integrated project
delivery project. The committee has not received any
information to indicate the military services complied with
this requirement.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Naval Facilities
Engineering Systems Command commissioned a study and report by
a third-party to determine the MILCON Cost Premium and
underlying cost drivers, which was published on April 28, 2025.
The study concluded that there is a significant cost premium
associated with military construction when compared to private
sector construction of similar facilities. The study included
several recommendations to reduce the MILCON cost premium,
among which was the adoption of best practices from the private
sector, including the use of integrated project delivery that
uses open-book pricing, enhanced collaboration, and the use of
an integrated project team. The committee agrees that
increasing collaboration and sharing of risk and rewards could
contribute to the on-time and on-budget delivery of MILCON
projects.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing
to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 1,
2026, on the feasibility and advisability of using integrated
project delivery for MILCON projects, to include:
(1) A comprehensive list of any legal or regulatory
barriers to the use of integrated project delivery,
including associated waiver authorities;
(2) A strategy for training the workforce for
awarding and managing construction employing integrated
project delivery;
(3) A detailed explanation of the challenges and
opportunities of using integrated project delivery; and
(4) An explanation for the Department of Defense's
failure to comply with section 2814 of the James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2023.
Intergovernmental service agreements for unaccompanied housing
The committee notes that the Department of Defense
continues to face challenges meeting unaccompanied housing
needs across the services, especially in regions with high
concentrations of servicemembers. The committee is aware of
proposals to use Intergovernmental Service Agreements (IGSAs)
to lease unaccompanied housing units. The committee believes
that this approach could provide additional unaccompanied
housing options, increasing supply faster than traditional
methods.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment, to provide
a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2026.
The briefing shall include but not be limited to:
(1) The viability of using IGSAs to lease
unaccompanied housing;
(2) Funding models, to include the use of basic
allowance for housing funds to fund the leases;
(3) A sample of military installations that could
benefit from this model; and
(4) Any scoring implications that would hinder
congressional action for a future pilot authority.
Mold kits
The committee believes that it is essential for the
Department of Defense to continue to examine and improve
quality-of-life initiatives for our servicemembers.
Specifically, as it relates to housing under the Military
Housing Privatization Initiative, the committee is concerned
regarding ongoing reports of mold inside housing owned and
operated by private contractors.
Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the Board of
Directors for each service exchange system to maintain ready
stock at all locations, where feasible and consistent with
operational capabilities, of at-home environmental testing
kits. These kits should enable military families to detect and
identify potential health hazards in housing environments. The
Secretary of Defense shall provide a written report to the
Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 1, 2026,
that includes, at a minimum:
(1) The percentage of military exchange locations
carrying at-home environmental testing kits by product
type;
(2) A list of military exchange locations selling
these kits;
(3) A plan to keep the kits readily available at
military exchanges; and
(4) Any challenges or costs associated with
maintaining at-home environmental testing kits.
Requirement for Camp Navajo entry bridge repairs
The committee notes that in the event of a conflict, it is
critical to have reliable access to munitions in storage and
the ability to expediently ship munitions. The committee
acknowledges that the transport of munitions often relies on
rail transportation to expeditiously move munitions from the
interior of the United States to munition ports to be shipped
outside the contiguous United States to the theater of
operations.
The committee acknowledges that properly maintaining the
infrastructure, such as bridges and overpasses, at military
installations operating munitions storage missions along the
Strategic Rail Corridor Network, including Camp Navajo in
Bellemont, Arizona, is important for our national security.
However, the condition and size of the current bridge limits
the portion of the strategic national rail line underneath the
overpass to one lane of travel, creating a limiting factor to
support contingencies, logistics, and resupply in the Indo-
Pacific area of responsibility.
Accordingly, the committee urges the U.S. Army and the U.S.
Army National Guard to prioritize military construction and
sustainment funding to replace and sustain the bridge network
contained within the Department of Defense's jurisdiction.
Study to enhance electrical grid resilience
The committee supports solutions that could protect
military installations from the effects of extreme weather
events. For example, hurricane force winds, uncontrollable
fires, and severe icing all threaten to destroy traditional
wood or concrete utility poles, leaving military installations
without power and unable to accomplish basic functions.
However, composite utility poles capable of withstanding the
effects of extreme weather could offer a more resilient and
cost-effective alternative over the long term.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to conduct an assessment and provide a one-time briefing
to the committee, not later than March 1, 2026, to identify
Department of Defense locations where modular composite utility
poles will improve grid resilience, reduce pole failures, and
decrease life-cycle costs compared to traditional wood utility
poles. The assessment and briefing should include the
identification of locations on military installations that have
experienced utility pole failures and electrical outages due to
excessive ice loading, hurricane-force winds, or wildfires.
Lastly, the assessment and briefing should include the
consideration of environmental moisture, such as from swamps
and wetlands, and wildlife interference and corruption as
additional factors in assessing electrical equipment failure.
Yuma Proving Ground
The committee is aware of the substandard conditions of
Pole Line Road, an interior test road running through Yuma
Proving Ground. The committee wishes to underscore the
importance of maintaining road safety, in particular on testing
grounds, where personnel often operate in small teams and
maneuver critical and expensive testing equipment.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to conduct an estimate cost analysis to repair the
existing Pole Line Road and an estimate cost analysis to
replace Pole Line Road. Cost estimates and analyses should
include impacts to the status quo and further road degradation
on mission success and personnel safety. The committee further
directs the U.S. Army to provide a one-time briefing to the
committee, not later than March 1, 2026, on the results of
these cost analyses.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations
Sec. 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the activities of the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
Sec. 3102--Defense environmental cleanup
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
defense environmental cleanup activities.
Sec. 3103--Other defense activities
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's other
defense activities.
Sec. 3104--Nuclear energy
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
nuclear energy activities.
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations
Sec. 3111--Organization and codification of provisions of law relating
to atomic energy defense activities
The committee recommends a provision that would improve
legislative and implementation efficiency by consolidating the
existing conglomeration of provisions that constitute the
Atomic Energy Defense Act as found under 50 United States Code
Chapter 42 (10 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) into a single new chapter
552 of title 10, United States Code, as a matter of positive
law.
Sec. 3112--Adjustment to plutonium pit production capacity
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4219 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2538a)
to adjust the by year and full rate production requirements for
the Department of Energy to produce war reserve plutonium pits
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Savannah River
Plutonium Processing Facility.
The committee recognizes that dramatic shifts in the
international security environment have compelled the
Department of Defense to reassess anticipated nuclear weapons
stockpile requirements, which are likely to levy additional
production needs on the nuclear security enterprise beyond the
original targets established in 2015. As such, the committee
acknowledges that the 80 pits per year production target is
likely insufficient to facilitate timely modernization of the
U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile in a manner that preserves
deterrence against growing threats from China, Russia, and
North Korea. In order to effectively establish realistic
targets within this legislative cycle, the Congress requires
updated assessments of projected annual production rate
requirements for plutonium pits. These assessments will inform
conference negotiations for the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2026.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, acting through the Chair of the Nuclear Weapons
Council, to brief the congressional defense committees on the
results of an updated annual, full-rate production target for
plutonium pits, encompassing both the Los Alamos National
Laboratory and the Savannah River Plutonium Processing
Facility, not later than August 1, 2025.
Sec. 3113--National Nuclear Security Administration Rapid Capabilities
Development Office
The committee recommends a provision that would restructure
the existing National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
Stockpile Responsiveness Program established by section 4220 of
the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2538b) into an Office
of Rapid Capabilities Development to improve the responsiveness
of the NNSA to rapidly evolving international security
conditions and Department of Defense requirements.
Sec. 3114--Review and assessment of the National Nuclear Security
Administration Enterprise Blueprint
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Chair of the Nuclear Weapons Council to lead a review of the
October 2024 National Nuclear Security Administration
Enterprise Blueprint and submit a one-time report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than June 1, 2026,
on the Council's assessment of the adequacy of the Enterprise
Blueprint to meet future Department of Defense requirements.
Sec. 3115--Notification of cost overruns for certain Department of
Energy projects
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4713 of subtitle A of title XLVII of the Atomic Energy
Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2753), ``Notification of cost overruns
for certain Department of Energy projects,'' with certain
technical and conforming amendments pertaining to reporting as
well as stockpile design processes.
Sec. 3116--Protection of certain nuclear facilities and assets from
unmanned aircraft
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4510 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2661),
``Protection of certain nuclear facilities and assets,'' to
include facilities operated by contractors of the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
Sec. 3117--Extension of authority for appointment of certain
scientific, engineering, and technical personnel
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 4601(c) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C.
2701) to extend the existing authority for the appointment of
certain personnel through September 30, 2036.
Sec. 3118--Appropriate scoping of artificial intelligence research
within the National Nuclear Security Administration
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subtitle B of title XLVIII of the Atomic Energy Defense Act
that funds be authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made
available to the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) for the purposes of artificial intelligence research may
only be used to support NNSA's nuclear security missions.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Sec. 3121--National security positions within the Department of Energy
The committee recommends a provision that would require
positions funded under Office of Management and Budget
functional subcategory 053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities,
to be considered necessary to meet national security
responsibilities.
Sec. 3122--Office of Environmental Management program-wide performance
metrics for reducing risk
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to develop and implement additional program
performance metrics to supplement the existing metrics of the
Office of Environmental Management's (EM) ``EM Program Plan
2022.'' This is in addition to revising the metrics identified
in ``EM Program Plan 2022'' to incorporate all metrics
developed under subsection (a) of this provision.
The provision would further direct the Secretary of Energy
to report to the congressional defense committees on its annual
progress--as measured against its performance metrics,
including all metrics developed under subsection (a) of this
provision and all other metrics described in the ``EM Program
Plan 2022,'' as revised as appropriate--1 year after the date
of the enactment of this Act and every 2 years thereafter. The
provision requires that, not later than 1 year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter
until 2036, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report describing the
outcomes achieved under the program performance metrics
described in subsection (a) of this provision for each fiscal
year.
Sec. 3123--Office of Environmental Management integrated radioactive
waste disposal planning and optimization
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to develop complex-wide analyses
identifying optimal disposal pathways and schedules for
radioactive waste managed by the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management. The provision would further
require the Secretary to submit to the congressional defense
committees the results of optimization analyses, the nationwide
disposal plan, while creating a forum of state regulators and
the required initial activities of the forum not later than 2
years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 3124--Report on future activities and resources for the delivery
of specialized infrastructure
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Administrator for Nuclear Security to submit an annual report
that assesses infrastructure investments necessary to meet the
demands of the National Nuclear Security Administration's
nuclear stockpile, global security, and naval nuclear
propulsion missions.
Items of Special Interest
Accelerating cleanup milestones at Los Alamos National Laboratory
The committee notes that Los Alamos National Laboratory has
long-standing sub-surface ground water contamination issues,
associated with chromium and explosives testing, that will take
decades to remediate.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy to
brief the congressional defense committees, not later than
March 31, 2026, on recommended actions that can be taken to
accelerate cleanup milestones with the State of New Mexico at
Los Alamos National Laboratory, including chromium plume
control interim measures to control migration of a hexavalent
chromium plume and progress on the groundwater remedies for the
Royal Demolition Explosive (RDX) plume in Canon de Valle.
Briefing on Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation program
The committee remains concerned about the proliferation of
nuclear and radiological materials.
Therefore, the committee directs the National Nuclear
Security Administration's Administrator for Nuclear Security,
not later than June 1, 2026, to provide a one-time briefing to
the congressional defense committees on developments in the
global security environment over the past 18 months regarding:
(1) Persistent threats of state and non-state actors seeking to
obtain nuclear and radiological materials; (2) State actors
potentially undermining nonproliferation regimes and arms
control agreements to which the United States is adherent; and
(3) Increased risks of the availability of nuclear and
radiological materials as a result of detected lapses in global
nuclear security mechanisms.
Briefing on feasibility of public-private partnerships to support
modernization of National Nuclear Security Administration high-
yield experimentation capabilities
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) high-yield experimentation
capabilities, like much of the NNSA's infrastructure, is in
need of modernization to meet the needs of the U.S. nuclear
weapons stockpile and ensure the NNSA retains a robust
scientific base across all disciplines relating to high-energy
physics. To alleviate continually increasing fiscal and
programmatic pressures on the NNSA and its workforce, the
committee believes that innovative approaches to developing and
resourcing future capabilities should be explored.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security to provide the congressional defense
committees with a one-time briefing, not later than November 1,
2025, on the feasibility of initiating a program to update
existing high-yield experimentation facilities or build
replacement facilities through the use of public-private
partnerships. The briefing should address, at a minimum: (1) An
assessment of the capability of potential private industry
partners to effectively contribute to the modernization of NNSA
high-yield experimentation capabilities; (2) A review of
existing statutory authorities for conducting a public-private
partnership for such purposes; (3) An evaluation of possible
siting options for the construction of new facilities, as
necessary; and (4) An initial cost and schedule projection for
recapitalizing existing facilities or constructing new
facilities.
Comptroller General review of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation legacy
nuclear security programs
The committee notes that following the collapse of the
Soviet Union, the Department of Energy initiated a range of
cooperative nuclear and radiological material security programs
with Russia and the other former Soviet states. Among other
things, these efforts included programs to improve the security
of facilities with weapon-usable nuclear materials and
radiological sources, to remove or consolidate materials to
fewer locations, and to detect and interdict smuggling of
materials across borders. Following the establishment of the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in 2000 and the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, these efforts were
expanded on a global scale. Significant progress was made over
the past two decades to reduce nuclear and radiological risks
worldwide.
Given this progress, the committee would like more
information about whether the significant amount of funding
that is still dedicated every year to these efforts under the
NNSA's Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) is
being expended commensurate with the remaining risks posed by
poorly secured fissile materials. Specifically, the committee
seeks to understand whether these ``legacy'' programs may now
be generally addressing lower-value materials or facilities and
working with countries that may pose less urgent or direct
nuclear security and proliferation risks to the United States.
Furthermore, the committee seeks to understand whether current
programs are flexible enough to address new risks as they
emerge.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess, for each DNN program identified,
including those within the DNN offices of Global Material
Security and Material Management and Minimization: (1) The
range of activities implemented by the program and the
countries in which the program operates or is planning to
operate; (2) Outcomes defined by the program, the national
security benefits of those outcomes, and how the program
measures progress toward the outcomes; (3) Funding levels for
the program, including carryover funds; (4) The scope of work
remaining in the program, and the projected timeline and cost
for completion of the work; and (5) The extent to which current
program design is sufficiently flexible to respond to emerging
global risks.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than February 1, 2026,
with final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format
and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security Administration
construction project cost drivers
The committee notes that in recent years, the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has experienced
significant cost growth in its portfolio of capital asset
acquisitions. The committee is seeking to understand the
drivers of cost across this portfolio, both in terms of
baseline costs as well as cost growth. For example, the
committee has learned of significant differences in the
construction cost per square foot of facilities built by NNSA
management and operating contractors as compared to the private
sector and would like to better understand what drives these
differences. Similarly, the committee has learned of quality
assurance problems on nuclear construction that have
contributed to costly rework.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the factors that contribute to the
significant costs of construction in the nuclear security
enterprise. The committee further directs the Comptroller
General to provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the
results of its assessment to the congressional defense
committees at a mutually agreed upon date, not later than May
1, 2026, with final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon
format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's artificial intelligence and machine learning
strategy
The committee notes that modeling and simulating the
complexity of nuclear weapons systems is essential to
maintaining confidence in the performance of the stockpile
without underground nuclear explosive testing. The committee
notes that artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML)
technologies have the potential to transform how the nuclear
enterprise uses computer models and simulation to evaluate,
design, certify, and qualify the stockpile and to dramatically
reduce the time to execute stockpile stewardship and
modernization. Applying AI/ML in the nuclear enterprise also
presents unique challenges, given the high-security and high-
consequence environment in which the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and nuclear security laboratories
operate. These challenges include limited or sparse data sets,
tight constraints on model correctness driven by the high
consequence of error, and the complexity of the computer codes
needed to simulate nuclear weapons.
The committee understands that in 2023, the NNSA's Advanced
Simulation and Computing program developed an AI/ML strategy,
called AI for Nuclear Deterrence (AI4ND), to develop and deploy
technologies and computing capabilities that can effectively
leverage AI for stockpile stewardship. The committee seeks to
enhance its understanding of this strategy.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The NNSA's efforts to address
data, modeling, and other challenges to adopting AI/ML to
stockpile stewardship and modernization; (2) The resources the
NNSA has identified as needed to achieve the goals of the AI4ND
strategy; and (3) The risks and opportunities of collaborating
through partnerships with industry, academia, and across the
Federal Government on AI/ML.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than March 31, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's federal program and project manager
responsibilities
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) effort to modernize the nuclear
security enterprise will cost billions of dollars over the next
two decades and involve multiple complex programs and
supporting projects that must be effectively integrated. For
example, the committee notes that NNSA's effort to establish a
modern pit production capability--one of the most complex and
potentially costly of NNSA's modernization efforts--encompasses
a broad range of program activities, six major capital asset
projects at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Savannah
River Site, and other activities. NNSA has struggled to
mitigate the risks of uncontrolled changes to scope, cost, and
schedule and to meet production program and project goals. The
committee is aware that NNSA program and project managers are
concerned that they may lack appropriate authority to direct
contractors' work, control budgetary resources, accept project
and program risk, and be supported by a sufficient and well-
trained federal team--all key features of effective program and
project management. The committee notes that recent NNSA
personnel reductions may complicate these efforts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The NNSA's federal program and
project manager responsibilities, including their authorities
and responsibilities in the NNSA and the ability of these
managers to effectively execute them; and (2) Federal staffing
for the production modernization programs and their associated
projects, which were previously assessed in a July 2024
Government Accountability Office report, titled ``National
Nuclear Security Administration: Actions Needed to Improve
Integration of Production Modernization Programs and Projects''
(GAO-24-106342).
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than April 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General review of National Nuclear Security
Administration's Office of Cost Estimating and Program
Evaluation
The committee notes that in 2013, the Office of Cost
Estimating and Program Evaluation (CEPE) was established by
statute within the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) to provide unbiased analysis in support of decision-
making on projects, programs, and portfolios. The committee
believes that this was a capability the NNSA lacked. CEPE's
responsibilities have grown over the years, and the NNSA is
undertaking a massive and challenging nuclear modernization
effort. The committee understands that this moment has been
described as the busiest the NNSA has been since the Cold War.
The committee would like to understand whether CEPE has the
capacity to fulfill its responsibilities and keep pace with
modernization efforts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The extent of CEPE's various
responsibilities and how they have changed over time; and (2)
Any challenges to CEPE's ability to fulfill its
responsibilities, the independence of its evaluations, or the
implementation of the results of its analyses.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than May 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General review of Office of Environmental Management
efforts to optimize cleanup activities
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for cleaning up
sites and facilities contaminated by decades of nuclear weapons
production and nuclear energy research. The committee
understands that EM's most costly responsibilities involve tank
waste management and the deactivation and decommissioning of
excess facilities. The agency regularly makes choices among
options for cleaning up and disposing of radioactive waste that
have different costs, limitations, and risks.
The committee notes that in a September 2024 report, the
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) developed a
hypothetical optimization model to serve as an example of how
EM could potentially optimize nuclear waste disposal decisions,
which could in turn achieve cleanup sooner, decrease costs, and
reduce risks (``Hanford Cleanup: Alternatives for Treating and
Disposing of High-Level Waste Could Save Billions of Dollars
and Reduce Certain Risks'' (GAO-24-106989)). However, GAO
reported in April 2025 that EM is not taking steps to optimize
the disposal sequencing of its nuclear waste (``Priority Open
Recommendations: Department of Energy'' (GAO-25-108093)). The
committee notes that it is unclear to what extent EM is
optimizing the sequencing of cleanup activities--including tank
waste cleanup activities and deactivation and decommissioning
efforts--within and across its sites.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess opportunities to optimize EM
nuclear waste cleanup and disposal and deactivation and
decommissioning efforts. The committee further directs the
Comptroller General to coordinate with the congressional
defense committees to determine which waste streams or cleanup
efforts to review and to provide a one-time, preliminary
briefing on the results of its assessment to the congressional
defense committees at a mutually agreed upon date, not later
than March 1, 2026, with final results to follow in a mutually
agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of Office of Environmental Management's
fraud risk management for contracts and subcontracts
The committee notes that, as one of the largest contracting
agencies in the federal government outside of the Department of
Defense, the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of
Environmental Management (EM) relies primarily on contractors
to carry out its diverse missions and operate its laboratories
and other facilities, spending approximately 90 percent of its
annual budget on contracts. In fiscal year 2025, $8.0 billion
of that annual budget will be spent on nuclear waste cleanup
activities across the country. The U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) and the DOE's Office of Inspector
General have identified multiple contracting fraud risks and
reported on incidents of fraudulent activity by the DOE's
contractors and subcontractors. The committee notes that GAO
first designated aspects of the DOE's contract management as
high-risk areas for the Government in 1990 because its record
of inadequate management and oversight of contractors left the
DOE vulnerable to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. As of
2025, EM's acquisition and program management remain on GAO's
High-Risk List.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess EM's fraud risk management efforts
with respect to contracts and subcontracts, including
assessments of possible: (1) Conflicts of interest; (2) Bid
rigging; (3) Small business fraud; and (4) Overpayments. The
committee further directs the Comptroller General to provide a
one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its assessment
to the congressional defense committees at a mutually agreed
upon date, not later than March 1, 2026, with final results to
follow in a mutually agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review of options for grouting low-activity waste
at the Hanford Site
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's (DOE)
Office of Environmental Management's (EM) most expensive
cleanup project is located at the Hanford Site in Washington
State and involves the treatment and immobilization of
radioactive and hazardous tank waste. The committee understands
that in 2024, EM announced plans to grout 2,000 gallons of low-
activity tank waste for off-site disposal as a part of EM's
Test Bed Initiative. Additionally, pursuant to a recently
finalized holistic agreement among the Department of Energy,
the Environmental Protection Agency, and the State of
Washington, EM now plans to complete retrieval of 22 tanks in
Hanford's southwest tank farms by 2040. The committee
understands that the low-activity portion of this waste would
be grouted and disposed of off-site. However, DOE has not yet
decided where this waste will be grouted, and some stakeholders
have raised concerns about EM's plans to transport this waste.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The status of EM's Test Bed
Initiative; (2) The on-site and off-site options EM has
considered for grouting Hanford's low-activity waste; and (3)
The benefits and drawbacks of on-site versus off-site treatment
prior to disposal.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than March 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General review of status of Idaho National Laboratory's
defense nuclear waste treatment
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management (EM) began operating the Integrated
Waste Treatment Unit (IWTU) at Idaho National Laboratory in
April 2023, after a nearly $1.0 billion cost overrun and 10-
year delay. The facility is designed to treat 772,000 gallons
of sodium-bearing waste, a liquid waste that EM currently
manages as high-level radioactive waste. Idaho National
Laboratory also stores approximately 4,400 cubic meters of
dried granular calcine waste, stored in six stainless steel bin
sets, but it does not yet have plans for how it will treat or
dispose of this waste. EM likewise currently manages the
calcine waste at Idaho National Lab as high-level radioactive
waste.
The committee notes that since beginning operations in
2023, the IWTU has faced ongoing issues, raising questions
about the reliability and operability of the facility. For
example, the facility was shut down in September 2023 so that
staff could replace media in its granular activated carbon
beds. The media removes mercury from the gas by-product of the
waste treatment process. EM officials estimated that the
facility would restart operations in January 2024. However,
when attempting to restart in March 2024, crews identified
abnormal conditions, causing EM to further suspend start-up
activities; the facility ultimately restarted in September
2024. The facility again shut down for 2 weeks in January 2025
to address a clogged feed line. In February 2025, Idaho
officials announced that the facility would shut down for an
additional 4 months to replace a carbon bed and perform other
maintenance.
The committee understands that, in addition, EM has not yet
determined how it will dispose of the immobilized waste treated
by the IWTU. EM has considered disposing it as transuranic
waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico but will
need to overcome legal and regulatory barriers before doing so.
Moreover, the waste reportedly may need further treatment with
vitrification if it cannot be disposed of as transuranic waste.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The steps EM is taking to
address technical issues it has encountered and the impacts of
the technical issues on its treatment efforts; (2) The extent
to which EM holds its contractors accountable for continued
issues facing the IWTU; and (3) EM's plans for treating and
disposing of the sodium-bearing and calcine waste at Idaho
National Laboratory.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than March 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Comptroller General review of the transportation of defense
radiological materials
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for cleaning up
sites and facilities contaminated by decades of nuclear weapons
production and nuclear energy research. Much of this waste is
disposed of at off-site disposal facilities. The committee
further notes that, in recent years, communities along
transportation paths have voiced concerns about radiological
materials being transported through or near these communities,
and, in some cases, municipalities have banned such transport.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The steps EM takes to ensure
the safe packaging and transportation of radiological and
hazardous materials; (2) How EM engages with stakeholders and
communities along transportation routes; and (3) The lessons EM
can learn from other entities that package and transport
radiological and hazardous materials.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees on the
status of its review at a mutually agreed upon date, not later
than March 1, 2026, with final results to follow in a mutually
agreed upon format and timeframe.
Comptroller General review to identify efficiency opportunities in
National Nuclear Security Administration capital asset
acquisitions
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) manages its large capital asset
acquisition projects in accordance with the Department of
Energy's (DOE) Order 413.3B. This order has evolved over the
past decade and a half to include more rigorous project
management requirements that reflect best practices. Despite
these more rigorous expectations, NNSA's project performance is
declining, and NNSA is increasingly seeking to obtain capital
assets through means other than projects executed under Order
413.3B or is seeking waivers to the order's requirements. The
committee recognizes that the way NNSA has elected to implement
Order 413.3B requirements may be onerous, and the committee
would like to better understand what opportunities for
improvement exist while still ensuring that projects are
managed consistent with best practices. Further, the committee
is seeking to better understand alternative means of acquiring
capital assets.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) The extent to which DOE Order
413.3B reflects best practices in project management and NNSA's
approach to implementing the order's requirements; (2) Any
opportunities that may exist to streamline or improve NNSA's
implementation approach, particularly with respect to improving
projects' schedule performance; and (3) Whether the alternative
means NNSA has pursued to acquiring capital assets have proved
beneficial with respect to schedule performance and risk
management.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than April 30, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
Rendija Canyon land study
The committee directs the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to conduct a study of portions of Tract A-14 (Rendija
Canyon) that may be suitable for conveyance for residential
use. Suitable land means subtracts that have been identified by
the National Nuclear Security Administration, in consultation
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, that meet the
requirements for conveyance under the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Act of
1998 (Public Law 105-119), that require minimal remediation,
and that will meet the requirements for conveyance of the
Department of Energy Order 458.1, ``Radiation Protection of the
Public and the Environment,'' and the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190). The committee further
directs the Administrator to brief the congressional defense
committees with the results of the study immediately upon its
completion, not later than March 31, 2026.
Report on advances in the nuclear weapons design process
The committee notes that over the past 30 years a number of
advances have been made at the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) Nevada National Nuclear Security Sites
Principal Underground Laboratory for Subcritical
Experimentation (PULSE). The committee understands that at
PULSE, formerly known as the U1a Complex, scientists conduct
subcritical and physics experiments to obtain technical
information about the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. In
particular, PULSE is undergoing a major construction project
that will enable it to conduct Enhanced Capabilities for
Subcritical Experiments (ECSE), which will host two of the most
capable weapons radiographic systems in the world, the ZEUS and
Scorpius test beds. Both are critical components in efforts to
assess pit design as the NNSA begins to produce pits at scale
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Savannah River
Site. Further, the committee understands that the NNSA is now
incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) in weapons design to
integrate the data from over 1,000 above- and below-ground
tests to interpolate and extend design parameters outside the
existing testing envelope and parameter database.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security, not later than March 1, 2026, to provide a
one-time briefing to the congressional defense committees on:
(1) How the combined initiatives of using AI in
weapons design, pit production, and ECSE could provide
greater certainty on warhead performance as compared to
current weapons design process; and
(2) The estimated costs and length of preparation
time required to conduct a full scale nuclear explosive
test should a determination be made that such a test is
required to ensure the safety, reliability,
performance, or military effectiveness of a weapon in
the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile.
Report on commercially available counter unmanned aerial systems
Continued advances in commercially available artificial
intelligence, computer vision, and sensor fusion capabilities
could help meet the growing threat that unmanned aerial systems
(UAS) pose to critical infrastructure and secure sites,
including Department of Energy installations. The committee
remains supportive of the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) efforts to leverage commercially
available software and hardware technology to detect ground and
aerial intrusions and advanced defeat capabilities to combat
the UAS threat. Following a review of its security
requirements, NNSA implemented a pilot program leveraging these
commercial technologies to combat the UAS threat.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Energy's
innovative approach, which provides for the rapid deployment of
leading commercial technology to improve security while
reducing overall costs. The committee also supports NNSA's
efforts to transition its successful pilot to a family of
systems program of record and expand deployment of this
technology to additional sites across the NNSA complex as part
of its future years nuclear security program.
The committee directs the Under Secretary for Nuclear
Security and Administrator, NNSA, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than December 13, 2025, regarding
the expansion of this program and transition to a family of
systems program of record, including associated resource
requirements and timelines to deploy these commercially
available capabilities across the national security enterprise.
Satellite facility long-term leasing
The committee recognizes that authorizing the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to purchase options for
future purchasing or leasing of real property provides benefits
to the NNSA in long-term infrastructure planning. The committee
believes this authority has been particularly helpful in cost-
effectively expediting the expansion and modernization of the
Kansas City National Security Campus to meet increasing
production demands for the nuclear security enterprise (NSE).
The committee understands that expanded use of such authorities
could benefit other locations within the NSE that require
significant infrastructure upgrades, particularly in such cases
where selected supporting facilities could be relocated outside
protected areas to reduce cost and unnecessary administrative
burdens. Such evolutions in long-term installation capability
planning will be key to efficiently and cost effectively
managing the operation of NNSA-supporting facilities over the
coming decades, and the committee strongly recommends that the
NNSA maximize the use of this authority in the development of
site strategies across the NSE.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security, in consultation with the Directors of Los
Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, and Sandia National Laboratories
and the Site Managers of the Y-12 National Security Complex,
the Savannah River Site, the Pantex Plant, the Nevada National
Security Site, and the Kansas City National Security Campus, to
provide a one-time briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than May 1, 2026, on site strategies
across the NSE. The briefing should include the identification
of opportunities for expanding the use of the authorities
provided by Section 3265 of the National Nuclear Security
Administration Act (section 2466 of title 50, United States
Code) and any recommendations for additional authorities that
might aid the NNSA in making greater use of satellite
facilities in areas neighboring laboratory and site
installations.
Unexploded ordnance from legacy tests near Sandia National Laboratories
The committee notes that Cold War-era nuclear weapons tests
have left unexploded ordnance (UXO) across the United States.
Although measures have been taken to remediate UXO, the
committee remains concerned that additional remediation efforts
may be needed in lands near the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) Sandia National Laboratories and the
adjoining Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess: (1) What UXO remediation efforts
NNSA has completed in the vicinity of Sandia National
Laboratories; and (2) The extent to which additional efforts
are needed to ensure that all affected nearby communities have
been cleared of legacy UXO.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a one-time, preliminary briefing on the results of its
assessment to the congressional defense committees at a
mutually agreed upon date, not later than April 1, 2026, with
final results to follow in a mutually agreed upon format and
timeframe.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
Sec. 3201--Authorization
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board.
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES
Sec. 4001--Authorization of amounts in funding tables
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
the allocation of funds among programs, projects, and
activities in accordance with the tables in division D of this
Act, subject to reprogramming in accordance with established
procedures.
Consistent with the previously expressed views of the
committee, the provision would also require that decisions by
an agency head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on
authorized, transparent, and statutory criteria or merit-based
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of
sections 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, and
other applicable provisions of law.
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
Sec. 4101--Procurement
Sec. 4102--Procurement for overseas contingency operations
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Sec. 4201--Research, development, test, and evaluation
Sec. 4202--Research, development, test, and evaluation for overseas
contingency operations
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Sec. 4301--Operation and maintenance
Sec. 4302--Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency
operations
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
Sec. 4401--Military personnel
Sec. 4402--Military personnel for overseas contingency operations
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
Sec. 4501--Other authorizations
Sec. 4502--Other authorizations for overseas contingency operations
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Sec. 4601--Military construction
Sec. 4602--Military construction for overseas contingency operations
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
Sec. 4701--Department of Energy national security programs
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
NATIONAL DEFENSE BASE BUDGET
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................ 3,045,199 15,000 3,060,199
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................. 6,948,889 1,779,720 8,728,609
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY............................ 2,886,534 19,000 2,905,534
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY....................... 3,734,235 250,000 3,984,235
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................... 9,605,566 477,700 10,083,266
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................ 17,028,101 -948,000 16,080,101
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................. 5,597,300 1,617,000 7,214,300
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC........................ 1,135,030 64,000 1,199,030
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY..................... 20,840,224 10,117,400 30,957,624
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................... 14,569,524 831,540 15,401,064
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS............................. 3,754,112 346,900 4,101,012
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................... 17,776,472 1,647,497 19,423,969
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE........................ 4,223,876 1,004,000 5,227,876
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE.................. 784,478 0 784,478
PROCUREMENT, SPACE FORCE.............................. 3,393,637 0 3,393,637
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.......................... 31,504,644 318,000 31,822,644
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE............................. 6,048,863 631,674 6,680,537
SUBTOTAL, TITLE I--PROCUREMENT........................ 152,876,684 18,171,431 171,048,115
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY.............. 14,549,223 780,865 15,330,088
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY.............. 25,708,049 1,377,767 27,085,816
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF................ 52,017,288 4,926,000 56,943,288
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, SF................ 15,486,466 369,000 15,855,466
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW................ 33,921,939 999,200 34,921,139
OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE...................... 318,143 0 318,143
SUBTOTAL, TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND 142,001,108 8,452,832 150,453,940
EVALUATION...........................................
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY....................... 58,975,065 -6,425,799 52,549,266
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES..................... 3,314,178 -515,144 2,799,034
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG......................... 8,673,981 -1,522,683 7,151,298
COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA TRAIN AND 357,516 0 357,516
EQUIP................................................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY....................... 74,080,120 -4,018,409 70,061,711
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS............... 11,004,201 -2,065,265 8,938,936
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES..................... 1,442,054 -77,976 1,364,078
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE................... 362,045 -60,786 301,259
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.................. 62,429,535 -1,790,020 60,639,515
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE................ 5,888,163 -775,252 5,112,911
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE................... 4,322,617 -413,693 3,908,924
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.......................... 7,332,599 -555,357 6,777,242
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE............... 55,935,718 269,060 56,204,778
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 45,346 0 45,346
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 8,885 0 8,885
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 100,793 0 100,793
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 148,070 0 148,070
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 342,149 0 342,149
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 235,156 0 235,156
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 282,830 0 282,830
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 21,243 0 21,243
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 357,949 0 357,949
SUBTOTAL, TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........ 295,660,213 -17,951,324 277,708,889
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL.................................... 181,803,437 -740,000 181,063,437
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS... 12,850,165 0 12,850,165
SUBTOTAL, TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................ 194,653,602 -740,000 193,913,602
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND.................................. 2,037,937 500,000 2,537,937
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION................... 213,282 0 213,282
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF.......... 904,301 185,000 1,089,301
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL....................... 502,599 19,171 521,770
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM................................ 40,502,123 340,000 40,842,123
SUBTOTAL, TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS............. 44,160,242 1,044,171 45,204,413
TOTAL, DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 829,351,849 8,977,110 838,328,959
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY.................................................. 2,173,959 6,303,713 8,477,672
NAVY.................................................. 6,012,677 8,504,838 14,517,515
AIR FORCE............................................. 3,721,473 4,184,959 7,906,432
DEFENSE-WIDE.......................................... 3,792,301 -1,089,573 2,702,728
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD................................... 151,880 1,608,705 1,760,585
ARMY RESERVE.......................................... 42,239 626,922 669,161
NAVY RESERVE & MARINE CORPS RESERVE................... 2,255 214,622 216,877
AIR NATIONAL GUARD.................................... 188,646 1,115,526 1,304,172
AIR FORCE RESERVE..................................... 60,458 248,802 309,260
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM...................... 481,832 50,000 531,832
INDOPACIFIC COMBATANT COMMAND......................... 0 150,000 150,000
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION....................... 16,627,720 21,918,514 38,546,234
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY.................................... 228,558 -100,000 128,558
O&M, ARMY............................................. 378,418 0 378,418
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS................... 177,597 0 177,597
O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS............................ 374,108 0 374,108
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE............................... 274,230 0 274,230
O&M, AIR FORCE........................................ 359,765 0 359,765
O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE..................................... 53,374 0 53,374
IMPROVEMENT FUND...................................... 8,315 0 8,315
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND................................ 497 0 497
SUBTOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING.............................. 1,854,862 -100,000 1,754,862
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY BRAC............................................. 171,870 0 171,870
NAVY BRAC............................................. 112,791 0 112,791
AIR FORCE BRAC........................................ 124,196 0 124,196
DEFENSE-WIDE BRAC..................................... 1,304 0 1,304
SUBTOTAL, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE................ 410,161 0 410,161
TOTAL, DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 18,892,743 21,818,514 40,711,257
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB- 848,244,592 30,795,624 879,040,216
FUNCTION 051)........................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)
DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS
ENERGY PROGRAMS
NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................ 160,000 0 160,000
SUBTOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS............................. 160,000 0 160,000
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES......................... 555,000 0 555,000
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.................................... 20,074,400 1,757,187 21,831,587
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION...................... 2,284,600 -45,947 2,238,653
NAVAL REACTORS........................................ 2,346,000 -99,000 2,247,000
SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.... 25,260,000 1,612,240 26,872,240
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP......................... 6,956,000 5,000 6,961,000
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.............................. 1,182,000 0 1,182,000
SUBTOTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.... 8,138,000 0 8,143,000
DEFENSE URANIUM ENRICHMENT D&D........................ 278,000 -278,000 0
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS......... 33,836,000 1,334,240 35,175,240
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............... 45,000 0 45,000
SUBTOTAL, INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION.... 45,000 0 45,000
TOTAL, DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL 33,881,000 1,334,240 35,220,240
SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 33,881,000 1,334,240 35,220,240
053).................................................
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050)......... 882,125,592 32,129,864 914,260,456
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XIV--ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME (FUNCTION 600) 77,000 77,000
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADDS)
TITLE X--GENERAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY................... [10,000,000] [6,000,000]
NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY, BASE BUDGET (051)..... 848,244,592 30,795,624 879,040,216
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)................ 33,836,000 1,334,240 35,175,240
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)......................... 882,080,592 32,129,864 914,215,456
TRANSFER OF AUTHORIZED AMOUNTS TO NON-DEFENSE FUNCTIONS
TRANSFER FROM DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
CAPTAIN JAMES A. LOVELL FEDERAL HEALTH CARE CENTER.... -165,000 0 -165,000
BIEN HOA DIOXIN CLEANUP............................... -30,000 0 -30,000
SUBTOTAL, TRANSFER FROM DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY -195,000 0 -195,000
(051)................................................
OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS PROGRAMS OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE OR
ALREADY AUTHORIZED
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES...................... 236,923 0 236,923
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: DISPOSAL OF DOD REAL PROPERTY..... 7,000 0 7,000
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: LEASE OF DOD REAL PROPERTY........ 33,000 0 33,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)........ 276,923 0 276,923
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)
OTHER DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS.......................... 11,276,000 11,276,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)............ 11,276,000 0 11,276,000
TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS 11,276,000 0 11,276,000
(050)................................................
DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
NATIONAL DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY (051)................. 848,521,515 30,795,624 879,317,139
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)................ 33,836,000 1,334,240 35,175,240
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)...................... 11,276,000 0 11,276,000
TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION, 050 893,633,515 32,129,864 925,768,379
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
Line Item -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Cost Qty Cost Qty Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
FIXED WING
6 HADES PLATFORM, 0 26,850 0 26,850
PAYLOADS/PED, AND
INTEGRATION......
ROTARY
9 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 0 1,669 0 1,669
IIIA REMAN.......
13 UH-60 BLACKHAWK M 24 732,060 24 732,060
MODEL (MYP)......
17 CH-47 HELICOPTER.. 11 618,798 11 618,798
18 CH-47 HELICOPTER.. 0 61,421 0 61,421
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
27 AH-64 MODS........ 0 125,236 0 125,236
28 SCALABLE CONTROL 0 1,257 0 1,257
INTERFACE (SCI)..
29 CH-47 CARGO 0 17,709 0 17,709
HELICOPTER MODS
(MYP)............
34 UTILITY HELICOPTER 0 33,659 0 33,659
MODS.............
36 NETWORK AND 0 40,472 0 40,472
MISSION PLAN.....
37 COMMS, NAV 0 11,566 0 11,566
SURVEILLANCE.....
39 AVIATION ASSURED 0 49,475 0 49,475
PNT..............
40 GATM ROLLUP....... 0 4,651 0 4,651
GROUND SUPPORT
AVIONICS
45 AIRCRAFT 0 129,167 0 129,167
SURVIVABILITY
EQUIPMENT........
47 CMWS.............. 0 38,419 0 38,419
48 COMMON INFRARED 84 225,647 84 225,647
COUNTERMEASURES
(CIRCM)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
50 COMMON GROUND 0 29,489 0 29,489
EQUIPMENT........
52 AIRCREW INTEGRATED 0 14,986 0 14,986
SYSTEMS..........
53 AIR TRAFFIC 0 24,213 0 24,213
CONTROL..........
54 LAUNCHER, 2.75 0 1,611 0 1,611
ROCKET...........
AGILE PORTFOLIO
MANAGEMENT
57 SMALL UNMANNED 0 726,034 0 15,000 0 741,034
AERIAL SYSTEMS...
Flammable Solids [0] [15,000]
UAS Applications.
58 FUTURE UNMANNED 0 118,459 0 118,459
AERIAL SYSTEMS
(UAS) FAMILY.....
59 GRAY EAGLE 0 12,351 0 12,351
MODIFICATIONS....
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 119 3,045,199 0 15,000 119 3,060,199
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
SURFACE-TO-AIR
MISSILE SYSTEM
2 LOWER TIER AIR AND 0 637,473 4 613,000 4 1,250,473
MISSILE DEFENSE
(AMD) SEN........
Procure additional [4] [613,000]
4x LTAMDS--
misaligned budget
request..........
4 M-SHORAD-- 44 679,114 44 679,114
PROCUREMENT......
6 MSE MISSILE....... 233 945,905 0 539,620 233 1,485,525
PAC-3 MSE missile [0] [366,000]
recerts--misalign
ed budget request
Patriot Mods: [0] [173,620]
AMMPS/DEX........
9 PRECISION STRIKE 45 160,846 254 320,100 299 480,946
MISSILE (PRSM)...
Max PrSM Inc 1 [254] [320,100]
procurement (+254
missiles)--misali
gned budget
request..........
11 INDIRECT FIRE 0 830,579 0 188,000 0 1,018,579
PROTECTION
CAPABILITY INC 2-
I................
IFPC Inc 2 AIM 9X [0] [188,000]
missile
production to
432x AUR--
misaligned budget
request..........
12 MID-RANGE 0 82,407 0 97,000 0 179,407
CAPABILITY (MRC).
Hypersonics Rocket [0] [42,000]
Motor Cost
Reduction
Initiative.......
Maritime Strike [0] [55,000]
Tomahawk (MST)
(USA, USN).......
AIR-TO-SURFACE
MISSILE SYSTEM
15 JOINT AIR-TO- 178 84,667 178 84,667
GROUND MSLS
(JAGM)...........
17 LONG-RANGE 0 353,415 0 353,415
HYPERSONIC WEAPON
ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
MISSILE SYS
18 JAVELIN (AAWS-M) 649 329,205 649 329,205
SYSTEM SUMMARY...
19 TOW 2 SYSTEM 0 11,731 0 11,731
SUMMARY..........
20 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 0 1,125,071 0 1,125,071
(GMLRS)..........
21 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 0 43,156 0 43,156
(GMLRS)..........
22 MLRS REDUCED RANGE 4,002 32,339 4,002 32,339
PRACTICE ROCKETS
(RRPR)...........
23 HIGH MOBILITY 6 61,503 6 61,503
ARTILLERY ROCKET
SYSTEM (HIMARS...
MODIFICATIONS
29 PATRIOT MODS...... 0 757,800 0 757,800
32 STINGER MODS...... 0 428,935 0 22,000 0 450,935
Qualification of [0] [22,000]
Stinger
additional SRMs..
35 MLRS MODS......... 0 243,470 0 243,470
36 HIMARS 0 54,005 0 54,005
MODIFICATIONS....
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
38 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 6,651 0 6,651
PARTS............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
40 AIR DEFENSE 0 12,801 0 12,801
TARGETS..........
AGILE PORTFOLIO
MANAGEMENT
44 LAUNCHED EFFECTS 0 67,816 0 67,816
FAMILY...........
TOTAL MISSILE 5,157 6,948,889 258 1,779,720 5,415 8,728,609
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
PROCUREMENT OF
W&TCV, ARMY
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
2 ARMORED MULTI 86 554,678 86 554,678
PUPOSE VEHICLE
(AMPV)...........
4 ASSAULT BREACHER 0 4,079 0 4,079
VEHICLE (ABV)....
5 M10 BOOKER........ 0 64,919 0 64,919
MODIFICATION OF
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
8 STRYKER UPGRADE... 0 135,816 0 135,816
9 BRADLEY FIRE 0 4,684 0 4,684
SUPPORT TEAM
(BFIST) VEHICLE..
10 BRADLEY PROGRAM 0 157,183 0 157,183
(MOD)............
11 M109 FOV 0 82,537 0 82,537
MODIFICATIONS....
12 PALADIN INTEGRATED 10 250,238 10 250,238
MANAGEMENT (PIM).
13 IMPROVED RECOVERY 8 155,540 8 155,540
VEHICLE (M88
HERCULES)........
17 JOINT ASSAULT 21 132,637 21 132,637
BRIDGE...........
19 ABRAMS UPGRADE 30 740,528 30 740,528
PROGRAM..........
21 VEHICLE PROTECTION 0 107,833 0 107,833
SYSTEMS (VPS)....
WEAPONS & OTHER
COMBAT VEHICLES
24 PERSONAL DEFENSE 0 1,002 0 1,002
WEAPON (ROLL)....
25 M240 MEDIUM 0 5 0 5
MACHINE GUN
(7.62MM).........
27 MACHINE GUN, CAL 0 4 0 4
.50 M2 ROLL......
28 MORTAR SYSTEMS.... 0 5,807 0 5,807
29 LOCATION & AZIMUTH 0 9,477 0 9,477
DETERMINATION
SYSTEM (LADS.....
31 PRECISION SNIPER 0 1,853 0 1,853
RIFLE............
34 NEXT GENERATION 0 365,155 0 365,155
SQUAD WEAPON.....
36 HANDGUN........... 0 7 0 7
MOD OF WEAPONS AND
OTHER COMBAT VEH
38 M777 MODS......... 0 2,429 0 2,429
42 SNIPER RIFLES 0 19 0 19
MODIFICATIONS....
43 M119 MODIFICATIONS 0 4,642 0 4,642
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
46 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 469 0 19,000 0 19,469
$5.0M (WOCV-WTCV)
Procurement of six [0] [19,000]
additional
Robotic Combat
Vehicles (RCVs)..
47 PRODUCTION BASE 0 104,993 0 104,993
SUPPORT (WOCV-
WTCV)............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 155 2,886,534 0 19,000 155 2,905,534
OF W&TCV, ARMY...
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, ARMY
SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
AMMUNITION
1 CTG, 5.56MM, ALL 0 128,283 0 128,283
TYPES............
2 CTG, 7.62MM, ALL 0 62,157 0 62,157
TYPES............
3 NEXT GENERATION 0 426,177 0 426,177
SQUAD WEAPON
AMMUNITION.......
4 CTG, HANDGUN, ALL 0 7,750 0 7,750
TYPES............
5 CTG, .50 CAL, ALL 0 78,199 0 78,199
TYPES............
6 CTG, 20MM, ALL 0 25,773 0 25,773
TYPES............
7 CTG, 25MM, ALL 0 22,324 0 22,324
TYPES............
8 CTG, 30MM, ALL 0 100,392 0 100,392
TYPES............
9 CTG, 40MM, ALL 0 131,432 0 131,432
TYPES............
11 CTG, 50MM, ALL 0 42,131 0 42,131
TYPES............
MORTAR AMMUNITION
12 60MM MORTAR, ALL 0 38,114 0 38,114
TYPES............
13 81MM MORTAR, ALL 0 41,786 0 41,786
TYPES............
14 120MM MORTAR, ALL 0 123,144 0 123,144
TYPES............
TANK AMMUNITION
15 CARTRIDGES, TANK, 0 440,152 0 440,152
105MM AND 120MM,
ALL TYPES........
ARTILLERY
AMMUNITION
16 ARTILLERY 0 80,780 0 80,780
CARTRIDGES, 75MM
& 105MM, ALL
TYPES............
17 ARTILLERY 0 218,877 0 218,877
PROJECTILE,
155MM, ALL TYPES.
19 PRECISION 0 28,995 0 28,995
ARTILLERY
MUNITIONS........
20 ARTILLERY 0 168,737 0 168,737
PROPELLANTS,
FUZES AND
PRIMERS, ALL.....
MINES
21 MINES & CLEARING 0 42,748 0 42,748
CHARGERS, ALL
TYPES............
22 CLOSE TERRAIN 0 7,860 0 7,860
SHAPING OBSTACLE.
ROCKETS
24 SHOULDER LAUNCHED 0 46,089 0 46,089
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
25 ROCKET, HYDRA 70, 0 34,836 0 34,836
ALL TYPES........
OTHER AMMUNITION
26 CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES 0 12,543 0 12,543
27 DEMOLITION 0 21,409 0 21,409
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
28 GRENADES, ALL 0 56,530 0 56,530
TYPES............
29 SIGNALS, ALL TYPES 0 36,846 0 36,846
30 SIMULATORS, ALL 0 10,821 0 10,821
TYPES............
MISCELLANEOUS
32 AMMO COMPONENTS, 0 4,084 0 4,084
ALL TYPES........
34 ITEMS LESS THEN $5 0 16,799 0 16,799
MILLION (AMMO)...
35 AMMUNITION 0 16,219 0 16,219
PECULIAR
EQUIPMENT........
36 FIRST DESTINATION 0 18,600 0 18,600
TRANSPORTATION
(AMMO)...........
37 CLOSEOUT 0 102 0 102
LIABILITIES......
PRODUCTION BASE
SUPPORT
40 INDUSTRIAL 0 1,084,611 0 250,000 0 1,334,611
FACILITIES.......
Modernization of [0] [250,000]
organic
industrial base..
41 CONVENTIONAL 0 155,050 0 155,050
MUNITIONS
DEMILITARIZATION.
42 ARMS INITIATIVE... 0 3,885 0 3,885
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 0 3,734,235 0 250,000 0 3,984,235
OF AMMUNITION,
ARMY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
ARMY
TACTICAL VEHICLES
2 FAMILY OF 0 132,793 0 132,793
SEMITRAILERS.....
6 GROUND MOBILITY 0 308,620 0 308,620
VEHICLES (GMV)...
9 JOINT LIGHT 0 45,840 0 34,000 0 79,840
TACTICAL VEHICLE
FAMILY OF VEHICL.
Infantry Squad [0] [34,000]
Vehicle
Procurement......
10 TRUCK, DUMP, 20T 0 17,000 0 13,506 0 30,506
(CCE)............
Heavy Dump Trucks. [0] [13,506]
11 FAMILY OF MEDIUM 0 85,490 0 85,490
TACTICAL VEH
(FMTV)...........
12 FAMILY OF COLD 0 38,001 0 38,001
WEATHER ALL-
TERRAIN VEHICLE
(C...............
13 FIRETRUCKS & 0 39,761 0 39,761
ASSOCIATED
FIREFIGHTING
EQUIP............
14 FAMILY OF HEAVY 0 202,009 0 202,009
TACTICAL VEHICLES
(FHTV)...........
19 TACTICAL WHEELED 0 2,660 0 2,660
VEHICLE
PROTECTION KITS..
20 MODIFICATION OF IN 0 98,728 0 98,728
SVC EQUIP........
NON-TACTICAL
VEHICLES
23 NONTACTICAL 0 8,462 0 8,462
VEHICLES, OTHER..
COMM--JOINT
COMMUNICATIONS
29 TACTICAL NETWORK 0 866,347 0 866,347
COMMUNICATION....
31 JCSE EQUIPMENT 0 5,389 0 5,389
(USRDECOM).......
COMM--SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
32 SATELLITE 0 114,770 0 114,770
COMMUNICATIONS...
36 DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 0 65,591 0 65,591
WIDEBAND SATCOM
SYSTEMS..........
39 ASSURED 0 212,469 0 212,469
POSITIONING,
NAVIGATION AND
TIMING...........
COMM--C3 SYSTEM
COMM--COMBAT
COMMUNICATIONS
46 HANDHELD MANPACK 0 478,435 0 478,435
SMALL FORM FIT
(HMS)............
48 ARMY LINK 16 0 133,836 0 133,836
SYSTEMS..........
51 UNIFIED COMMAND 0 20,010 0 20,010
SUITE............
52 COTS 0 207,402 0 207,402
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIPMENT........
54 ARMY 0 110,678 0 110,678
COMMUNICATIONS &
ELECTRONICS......
COMM--INTELLIGENCE
COMM
56 CI AUTOMATION 0 15,290 0 15,290
ARCHITECTURE-
INTEL............
58 MULTI-DOMAIN 0 108,655 0 108,655
INTELLIGENCE.....
INFORMATION
SECURITY
60 INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 826 0 826
SECURITY PROGRAM-
ISSP.............
61 COMMUNICATIONS 0 125,970 0 125,970
SECURITY (COMSEC)
66 BIOMETRIC ENABLING 0 65 0 65
CAPABILITY (BEC).
COMM--BASE
COMMUNICATIONS
70 INFORMATION 0 209,378 0 209,378
SYSTEMS..........
72 BASE EMERGENCY 0 50,177 0 50,177
COMMUNICATION....
74 INSTALLATION INFO 0 439,373 0 439,373
INFRASTRUCTURE
MOD PROGRAM......
ELECT EQUIP--TACT
INT REL ACT
(TIARA)
78 TITAN............. 0 236,314 0 236,314
81 COLLECTION 0 2,935 0 2,935
CAPABILITY.......
83 DCGS-A-INTEL...... 0 1,087 0 1,087
85 TROJAN............ 0 37,968 0 20,600 0 58,568
AFRICOM: CRAM [0] [20,600]
capabilities.....
86 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 20,598 0 113,778 0 134,376
EQUIP (INTEL SPT)
AN/TPQ-53 [0] [113,778]
Counterfire
Target
Acquisition Radar
ELECT EQUIP--
ELECTRONIC
WARFARE (EW)
91 AIR VIGILANCE (AV) 0 9,731 0 9,731
93 FAMILY OF 0 15,382 0 100,000 0 115,382
PERSISTENT
SURVEILLANCE CAP.
CENTCOM: aerostat [0] [100,000]
sensors..........
94 COUNTERINTELLIGENC 0 8,283 0 8,283
E/SECURITY
COUNTERMEASURES..
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL SURV.
(TAC SURV)
96 SENTINEL MODS..... 0 462,010 0 462,010
97 NIGHT VISION 0 211,056 0 211,056
DEVICES..........
98 SMALL TACTICAL 0 2,111 0 2,111
OPTICAL RIFLE
MOUNTED MLRF.....
99 BASE EXPEDITIARY 0 1,801 0 1,801
TARGETING AND
SURV SYS.........
100 INDIRECT FIRE 0 27,881 0 27,881
PROTECTION FAMILY
OF SYSTEMS.......
101 FAMILY OF WEAPON 0 103,607 0 103,607
SIGHTS (FWS).....
102 ENHANCED PORTABLE 0 10,456 0 10,456
INDUCTIVE
ARTILLERY FUZE SE
104 FORWARD LOOKING 0 60,765 0 60,765
INFRARED (IFLIR).
106 JOINT BATTLE 0 165,395 0 165,395
COMMAND--PLATFORM
(JBC-P)..........
107 JOINT EFFECTS 0 48,715 0 48,715
TARGETING SYSTEM
(JETS)...........
109 COMPUTER 0 6,325 0 6,325
BALLISTICS: LHMBC
XM32.............
110 MORTAR FIRE 0 3,657 0 3,657
CONTROL SYSTEM...
111 MORTAR FIRE 0 3,262 0 3,262
CONTROL SYSTEMS
MODIFICATIONS....
112 COUNTERFIRE RADARS 0 40,526 0 40,526
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL C2
SYSTEMS
113 ARMY COMMAND POST 0 723,187 0 723,187
INTEGRATED
INFRASTRUCTURE (.
114 FIRE SUPPORT C2 0 3,389 0 3,389
FAMILY...........
115 AIR & MSL DEFENSE 0 33,103 0 33,103
PLANNING &
CONTROL SYS......
116 IAMD BATTLE 0 546,480 0 546,480
COMMAND SYSTEM...
117 AIAMD FAMILY OF 0 31,016 0 31,016
SYSTEMS (FOS)
COMPONENTS.......
118 LIFE CYCLE 0 5,175 0 5,175
SOFTWARE SUPPORT
(LCSS)...........
119 NETWORK MANAGEMENT 0 244,403 0 244,403
INITIALIZATION
AND SERVICE......
124 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 16,595 0 16,595
EQUIPMENT
(ENFIRE).........
ELECT EQUIP--
AUTOMATION
125 ARMY TRAINING 0 8,262 0 8,262
MODERNIZATION....
126 AUTOMATED DATA 0 93,804 0 93,804
PROCESSING EQUIP.
129 HIGH PERF 0 74,708 0 74,708
COMPUTING MOD PGM
(HPCMP)..........
130 CONTRACT WRITING 0 468 0 468
SYSTEM...........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 1,546 0 1,546
PROGRAMS.........
CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
EQUIPMENT
138 BASE DEFENSE 0 143 0 143
SYSTEMS (BDS)....
139 CBRN DEFENSE...... 0 69,739 0 69,739
BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
142 TACTICAL BRIDGE, 0 69,863 0 69,863
FLOAT-RIBBON.....
ENGINEER (NON-
CONSTRUCTION)
EQUIPMENT
150 ROBOTICS AND 0 509 0 509
APPLIQUE SYSTEMS.
151 RENDER SAFE SETS 0 14,184 0 14,184
KITS OUTFITS.....
COMBAT SERVICE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
153 HEATERS AND ECU'S. 0 14,288 0 14,288
156 GROUND SOLDIER 0 178,850 0 178,850
SYSTEM...........
157 MOBILE SOLDIER 0 15,729 0 15,729
POWER............
159 FIELD FEEDING 0 4,500 0 4,500
EQUIPMENT........
160 CARGO AERIAL DEL & 0 61,224 0 61,224
PERSONNEL
PARACHUTE SYSTEM.
161 FAMILY OF ENGR 0 0 0 37,615 0 37,615
COMBAT AND
CONSTRUCTION SETS
Hydraulic [0] [7,980]
Excavator (HYEX).
TRACTOR FULL [0] [29,635]
TRACKED, MED T-9
(Medium Dozer)...
PETROLEUM
EQUIPMENT
164 DISTRIBUTION 0 96,020 0 96,020
SYSTEMS,
PETROLEUM & WATER
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
165 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 99,567 0 99,567
MEDICAL..........
MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT
166 MOBILE MAINTENANCE 0 63,311 0 63,311
EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT
169 CONSTRUCTION 0 92,299 0 92,299
EQUIPMENT........
RAIL FLOAT
CONTAINERIZATION
EQUIPMENT
179 ARMY WATERCRAFT 0 57,342 0 57,342
ESP..............
180 MANEUVER SUPPORT 0 33,949 0 125,000 0 158,949
VESSEL (MSV).....
MSV-L 2x ships per [0] [125,000]
year.............
181 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 18,217 0 18,217
$5.0M (FLOAT/
RAIL)............
GENERATORS
182 GENERATORS AND 0 89,073 0 89,073
ASSOCIATED EQUIP.
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
184 FAMILY OF 0 12,576 0 33,201 0 45,777
FORKLIFTS........
Family of All [0] [15,000]
Terrain Cranes...
Type 1 Crane/ [0] [18,201]
Mobility.........
TRAINING EQUIPMENT
185 COMBAT TRAINING 0 49,025 0 49,025
CENTERS SUPPORT..
186 TRAINING DEVICES, 0 189,306 0 189,306
NONSYSTEM........
187 SYNTHETIC TRAINING 0 166,402 0 166,402
ENVIRONMENT (STE)
189 GAMING TECHNOLOGY 0 7,320 0 7,320
IN SUPPORT OF
ARMY TRAINING....
TEST MEASURE AND
DIG EQUIPMENT
(TMD)
191 INTEGRATED FAMILY 0 38,784 0 38,784
OF TEST EQUIPMENT
(IFTE)...........
193 TEST EQUIPMENT 0 51,119 0 51,119
MODERNIZATION
(TEMOD)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
195 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 136,315 0 136,315
SYSTEMS (OPA3)...
196 BASE LEVEL COMMON 0 19,452 0 19,452
EQUIPMENT........
197 MODIFICATION OF IN- 0 31,452 0 31,452
SVC EQUIPMENT
(OPA-3)..........
198 BUILDING, PRE-FAB, 0 10,490 0 10,490
RELOCATABLE......
200 SPECIAL EQUIPMENT 0 93,777 0 93,777
FOR TEST AND
EVALUATION.......
OPA2
205 INITIAL SPARES-- 0 7,254 0 7,254
C&E..............
AGILE PORTFOLIO
MANAGEMENT
207 COUNTER-SMALL 0 306,568 0 306,568
UNMANNED AERIAL
SYSTEM (C-SUAS)..
208 ELECTRONIC WARFARE 0 24,547 0 24,547
209 ELECTRONIC WARFARE 0 54,427 0 54,427
AGILE............
210 SOLDIER BORNE 0 21,919 0 21,919
SENSOR...........
TOTAL OTHER 0 9,605,566 0 477,700 0 10,083,266
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
2 F/A-18E/F 0 50,607 0 50,607
(FIGHTER) HORNET.
4 JOINT STRIKE 12 1,951,629 12 1,951,629
FIGHTER CV.......
5 JOINT STRIKE 0 401,596 0 401,596
FIGHTER CV.......
6 JSF STOVL......... 11 1,787,313 11 1,787,313
7 JSF STOVL......... 0 113,744 0 113,744
8 CH-53K (HEAVY 12 1,707,601 4 552,000 16 2,259,601
LIFT)............
USMC (+4) CH-53K.. [4] [552,000]
9 CH-53K (HEAVY 0 335,352 0 335,352
LIFT)............
10 V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT) 0 47,196 0 47,196
12 H-1 UPGRADES (UH- 0 8,305 0 8,305
1Y/AH-1Z)........
14 P-8A POSEIDON..... 0 13,631 0 13,631
15 E-2D ADV HAWKEYE.. 4 1,503,556 -4 -1,500,000 0 3,556
E-2D cancelation.. [-4] [-1,500,000]
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
OTHER AIRCRAFT
23 KC-130J........... 0 18,017 0 18,017
27 MQ-4 TRITON....... 0 133,139 0 133,139
31 MQ-25............. 3 407,046 3 407,046
32 MQ-25............. 0 52,191 0 52,191
34 MARINE GROUP 5 UAS 0 15,162 0 15,162
36 OTHER SUPPORT 1 19,812 1 19,812
AIRCRAFT.........
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
39 F-18 A-D UNIQUE... 0 53,809 0 53,809
40 F-18E/F AND EA-18G 0 576,229 0 576,229
MODERNIZATION AND
SUSTAINM.........
41 MARINE GROUP 5 UAS 0 143,695 0 143,695
SERIES...........
42 AEA SYSTEMS....... 0 25,848 0 25,848
44 INFRARED SEARCH 0 175,351 0 175,351
AND TRACK (IRST).
45 ADVERSARY......... 0 21,535 0 21,535
46 F-18 SERIES....... 0 756,967 0 756,967
47 H-53 SERIES....... 0 69,227 0 69,227
48 MH-60 SERIES...... 0 115,545 0 115,545
49 H-1 SERIES........ 0 149,405 0 149,405
51 E-2 SERIES........ 0 143,772 0 143,772
52 TRAINER A/C SERIES 0 12,151 0 12,151
54 C-130 SERIES...... 0 144,017 0 144,017
55 FEWSG............. 0 5 0 5
56 CARGO/TRANSPORT A/ 0 7,526 0 7,526
C SERIES.........
57 E-6 SERIES........ 0 163,737 0 163,737
58 EXECUTIVE 0 66,645 0 66,645
HELICOPTERS
SERIES...........
60 T-45 SERIES....... 0 173,433 0 173,433
61 POWER PLANT 0 18,707 0 18,707
CHANGES..........
62 JPATS SERIES...... 0 21,330 0 21,330
64 COMMON ECM 0 91,553 0 91,553
EQUIPMENT........
65 COMMON AVIONICS 0 161,376 0 161,376
CHANGES..........
66 COMMON DEFENSIVE 0 8,926 0 8,926
WEAPON SYSTEM....
67 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 3,011 0 3,011
68 P-8 SERIES........ 0 320,130 0 320,130
69 MAGTF EW FOR 0 22,356 0 22,356
AVIATION.........
71 V-22 (TILT/ROTOR 0 319,145 0 319,145
ACFT) OSPREY.....
72 NEXT GENERATION 0 439,493 0 439,493
JAMMER (NGJ).....
73 F-35 STOVL SERIES. 0 364,774 0 364,774
74 F-35 CV SERIES.... 0 180,533 0 180,533
75 QRC............... 0 24,893 0 24,893
76 MQ-4 SERIES....... 0 180,463 0 180,463
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
84 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 2,562,627 0 2,562,627
PARTS............
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIP &
FACILITIES
85 COMMON GROUND 0 584,561 0 584,561
EQUIPMENT........
86 AIRCRAFT 0 112,513 0 112,513
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES.......
87 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 45,153 0 45,153
88 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 70,770 0 70,770
CHARGES..........
89 SPECIAL SUPPORT 0 130,993 0 130,993
EQUIPMENT........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 43 17,028,101 0 -948,000 43 16,080,101
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
WEAPONS
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
2 TRIDENT II MODS... 0 2,582,029 0 2,582,029
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
STRATEGIC MISSILES
6 TOMAHAWK.......... 0 12,593 0 193,000 0 205,593
TLAM supplier base [0] [193,000]
stabilization--tu
rbofans..........
TACTICAL MISSILES
7 AMRAAM............ 51 69,913 0 694,000 51 763,913
AMRAAM: maximize [0] [694,000]
procurement......
8 SIDEWINDER........ 146 84,713 146 84,713
9 JOINT ADVANCE 0 301,858 0 301,858
TACTICAL MISSILE
(JATM)...........
10 STANDARD MISSILE.. 10 187,420 0 62,000 10 249,420
SM-6 procurement-- [11] [62,000]
misaligned budget
request (+11
AURs)............
12 SMALL DIAMETER 273 86,255 273 86,255
BOBOMBMB II......
13 RAM............... 123 122,372 123 122,372
15 JOINT AIR GROUND 277 74,152 277 74,152
MISSILE (JAGM)...
17 AERIAL TARGETS.... 0 182,704 0 182,704
19 OTHER MISSILE 0 3,490 0 3,490
SUPPORT..........
20 LRASM............. 56 243,217 20 158,000 76 401,217
LRASM supplier [0] [68,000]
base Navy
production to 160
per year.........
LRASM: procurement [20] [90,000]
+20 AURs to 120..
21 NAVAL STRIKE 16 32,238 16 32,238
MISSILE (NSM)....
22 NAVAL STRIKE 0 3,059 0 3,059
MISSILE (NSM)....
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
25 TOMAHAWK MODS..... 0 6,283 0 35,000 0 41,283
TLAM procurement [0] [35,000]
increase.........
26 ESSM.............. 305 503,381 305 503,381
28 AARGM-ER.......... 147 261,041 147 261,041
29 AARGM-ER.......... 0 24,284 0 24,284
31 STANDARD MISSILES 0 32,127 0 32,127
MODS.............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
32 WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL 0 127,222 0 400,000 0 527,222
FACILITIES.......
Navy munitions.... [0] [400,000]
ORDNANCE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
36 ORDNANCE SUPPORT 0 37,059 0 37,059
EQUIPMENT........
TORPEDOES AND
RELATED EQUIP
39 SSTD.............. 0 4,789 0 4,789
40 MK-48 TORPEDO..... 0 7,081 0 7,081
42 ASW TARGETS....... 0 38,386 0 38,386
MOD OF TORPEDOES
AND RELATED EQUIP
43 MK-54 TORPEDO MODS 0 1,692 0 1,692
44 MK-48 TORPEDO 0 31,479 0 31,479
ADCAP MODS.......
45 MARITIME MINES.... 0 0 0 75,000 0 75,000
Enhanced Joint [0] [75,000]
Direct Attack
Missile (JDAM)
(USN)............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
46 TORPEDO SUPPORT 0 161,218 0 161,218
EQUIPMENT........
47 ASW RANGE SUPPORT. 0 4,328 0 4,328
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION
48 FIRST DESTINATION 0 5,346 0 5,346
TRANSPORTATION...
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
51 SMALL ARMS AND 0 9,987 0 9,987
WEAPONS..........
MODIFICATION OF
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
52 CIWS MODS......... 0 8,122 0 8,122
53 COAST GUARD 0 44,455 0 44,455
WEAPONS..........
54 GUN MUNT MODS..... 0 83,969 0 83,969
55 LCS MODULE WEAPONS 10 2,200 10 2,200
56 AIRBORNE MINE 0 14,413 0 14,413
NEUTRALIZATION
SYSTEMS..........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
61 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 202,425 0 202,425
PARTS............
TOTAL WEAPONS 1,414 5,597,300 20 1,617,000 1,434 7,214,300
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMO, NAVY & MC
NAVY AMMUNITION
1 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 30,915 0 30,915
BOMBS............
2 JDAM.............. 798 61,119 798 61,119
3 AIRBORNE ROCKETS, 0 87,797 0 87,797
ALL TYPES........
4 MACHINE GUN 0 17,645 0 17,645
AMMUNITION.......
5 PRACTICE BOMBS.... 0 45,049 0 45,049
6 CARTRIDGES & CART 0 74,535 0 74,535
ACTUATED DEVICES.
7 AIR EXPENDABLE 0 98,437 0 98,437
COUNTERMEASURES..
8 JATOS............. 0 6,373 0 6,373
9 5 INCH/54 GUN 0 24,864 0 24,864
AMMUNITION.......
10 INTERMEDIATE 0 40,175 0 40,175
CALIBER GUN
AMMUNITION.......
11 OTHER SHIP GUN 0 43,763 0 43,763
AMMUNITION.......
12 SMALL ARMS & 0 49,493 0 49,493
LANDING PARTY
AMMO.............
13 PYROTECHNIC AND 0 9,644 0 9,644
DEMOLITION.......
15 AMMUNITION LESS 0 1,723 0 1,723
THAN $5 MILLION..
16 EXPEDITIONARY 0 0 0 64,000 0 64,000
LOITERING
MUNITIONS........
Expeditionary [0] [64,000]
Loitering
Munitions........
MARINE CORPS
AMMUNITION
18 MORTARS........... 0 141,135 0 141,135
19 DIRECT SUPPORT 0 26,729 0 26,729
MUNITIONS........
20 INFANTRY WEAPONS 0 180,867 0 180,867
AMMUNITION.......
21 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 12,936 0 12,936
MUNITIONS........
22 AMMO MODERNIZATION 0 18,467 0 18,467
23 ARTILLERY 0 147,473 0 147,473
MUNITIONS........
24 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 15,891 0 15,891
MILLION..........
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 798 1,135,030 0 64,000 798 1,199,030
OF AMMO, NAVY &
MC...............
SHIPBUILDING AND
CONVERSION, NAVY
FLEET BALLISTIC
MISSILE SHIPS
1 COLUMBIA CLASS 1 3,928,828 1 3,928,828
SUBMARINE........
2 COLUMBIA CLASS 0 5,065,766 0 5,065,766
SUBMARINE........
OTHER WARSHIPS
5 CARRIER 0 1,046,700 0 1,046,700
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM..........
6 CARRIER 0 612,038 0 612,038
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM..........
7 CVN-81............ 0 1,622,935 0 1,622,935
8 VIRGINIA CLASS 1 816,705 0 1,200,000 1 2,016,705
SUBMARINE........
Virginia class [0] [1,200,000]
submarine........
9 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 3,126,816 0 3,126,816
SUBMARINE........
10 CVN REFUELING 0 1,779,011 0 1,779,011
OVERHAULS........
12 DDG 1000.......... 0 52,358 0 52,358
13 DDG-51............ 0 10,773 2 6,324,400 2 6,335,173
DDG-51............ [2] [5,400,000]
Wage and quality [0] [924,400]
of life
enhancements for
conventional
surface
shipbuilding,
private ship
repair, and
public shipyards.
14 DDG-51............ 0 0 0 1,350,000 0 1,350,000
DDG-51 Advance [0] [900,000]
Procurement......
Large Surface [0] [450,000]
Combatant
Shipyard
Infrastructure
and Industrial
Base.............
AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
AUXILIARIES, CRAFT
AND PRIOR YR
PROGRAM COST
31 TAO FLEET OILER... 0 8,346 0 8,346
34 TAGOS SURTASS 1 612,205 1 612,205
SHIPS............
41 OUTFITTING........ 0 863,846 0 23,000 0 886,846
Outfitting........ [0] [23,000]
43 SERVICE CRAFT..... 0 34,602 0 140,000 0 174,602
YRBM procurement.. [0] [140,000]
48 AUXILIARY VESSELS 1 45,000 0 603,000 1 648,000
(USED SEALIFT)...
Auxiliary [0] [78,000]
Personnel Lighter
Used Sealift [0] [525,000]
Vessels for the
Ready Reserve
Force (RRF)......
49 COMPLETION OF PY 0 1,214,295 0 477,000 0 1,691,295
SHIPBUILDING
PROGRAMS.........
Completion of [0] [477,000]
prior year
shipbuilding--mis
aligned budget
request..........
TOTAL SHIPBUILDING 4 20,840,224 2 10,117,400 6 30,957,624
AND CONVERSION,
NAVY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
NAVY
SHIP PROPULSION
EQUIPMENT
1 SURFACE POWER 0 9,978 0 9,978
EQUIPMENT........
GENERATORS
2 SURFACE COMBATANT 0 62,004 0 9,000 0 71,004
HM&E.............
Mixed-Oxidant [0] [9,000]
Electrolytic
Disinfectant
Generator........
NAVIGATION
EQUIPMENT
3 OTHER NAVIGATION 0 96,945 0 96,945
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SHIPBOARD
EQUIPMENT
4 SUB PERISCOPE, 0 135,863 0 142,000 0 277,863
IMAGING AND SUPT
EQUIP PROG.......
Sub periscope, [0] [142,000]
imaging and supt
equip--misaligned
budget request...
5 DDG MOD........... 0 686,787 0 311,000 0 997,787
DDG Mod........... [0] [311,000]
6 FIREFIGHTING 0 36,488 0 36,488
EQUIPMENT........
7 COMMAND AND 0 2,417 0 2,417
CONTROL
SWITCHBOARD......
8 LHA/LHD MIDLIFE... 0 86,884 0 37,000 0 123,884
LHA/LHD Midlife... [0] [37,000]
9 LCC 19/20 EXTENDED 0 19,276 0 19,276
SERVICE LIFE
PROGRAM..........
10 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 22,477 0 22,477
EQUIPMENT........
11 SUBMARINE SUPPORT 0 383,062 0 383,062
EQUIPMENT........
12 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 52,039 0 52,039
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
13 LCS CLASS SUPPORT 0 2,551 0 2,551
EQUIPMENT........
14 SUBMARINE 0 28,169 0 28,169
BATTERIES........
15 LPD CLASS SUPPORT 0 101,042 0 25,000 0 126,042
EQUIPMENT........
LPD Class Support [0] [25,000]
Equipment........
16 DDG 1000 CLASS 0 115,267 0 115,267
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
17 STRATEGIC PLATFORM 0 38,039 0 38,039
SUPPORT EQUIP....
19 DSSP EQUIPMENT.... 0 5,849 0 5,849
22 UNDERWATER EOD 0 22,355 0 22,355
EQUIPMENT........
23 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 11,691 0 75,000 0 86,691
MILLION..........
Misaligned budget [0] [75,000]
request..........
24 CHEMICAL WARFARE 0 2,607 0 2,607
DETECTORS........
REACTOR PLANT
EQUIPMENT
26 SHIP MAINTENANCE, 0 2,392,620 0 2,392,620
REPAIR AND
MODERNIZATION....
28 REACTOR COMPONENTS 0 399,603 0 75,000 0 474,603
Navy budget [0] [75,000]
request errata to
restore funding
for reactor plant
components.......
OCEAN ENGINEERING
29 DIVING AND SALVAGE 0 7,842 0 7,842
EQUIPMENT........
SMALL BOATS
31 STANDARD BOATS.... 0 51,546 0 67,000 0 118,546
40-foot Patrol [0] [67,000]
Boat.............
PRODUCTION
FACILITIES
EQUIPMENT
32 OPERATING FORCES 0 208,998 0 208,998
IPE..............
OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
33 LCS COMMON MISSION 0 38,880 0 38,880
MODULES EQUIPMENT
34 LCS MCM MISSION 0 91,372 0 91,372
MODULE...........
36 LCS SUW MISSION 0 3,790 0 3,790
MODULES..........
37 LCS IN-SERVICE 0 203,442 0 203,442
MODERNIZATION....
38 SMALL & MEDIUM UUV 0 54,854 0 54,854
LOGISTIC SUPPORT
40 LSD MIDLIFE & 0 4,079 0 4,079
MODERNIZATION....
SHIP SONARS
43 AN/SQQ-89 SURF ASW 0 144,425 0 144,425
COMBAT SYSTEM....
44 SSN ACOUSTIC 0 498,597 0 498,597
EQUIPMENT........
ASW ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
46 SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 0 56,482 0 56,482
WARFARE SYSTEM...
47 SSTD.............. 0 14,915 0 14,915
48 FIXED SURVEILLANCE 0 352,312 0 352,312
SYSTEM...........
49 SURTASS........... 0 31,169 0 31,169
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
EQUIPMENT
50 AN/SLQ-32......... 0 461,380 0 461,380
RECONNAISSANCE
EQUIPMENT
51 SHIPBOARD IW 0 379,908 0 379,908
EXPLOIT..........
52 MARITIME 0 13,008 0 13,008
BATTLESPACE
AWARENESS........
OTHER SHIP
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
53 COOPERATIVE 0 26,648 0 26,648
ENGAGEMENT
CAPABILITY.......
54 NAVAL TACTICAL 0 7,972 0 7,972
COMMAND SUPPORT
SYSTEM (NTCSS)...
55 ATDLS............. 0 58,739 0 58,739
56 NAVY COMMAND AND 0 3,489 0 3,489
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NCCS)...........
57 MINESWEEPING 0 16,426 0 6,000 0 22,426
SYSTEM
REPLACEMENT......
Dual-Modality [0] [6,000]
Vehicle Mine
Countermeasures..
59 NAVSTAR GPS 0 45,701 0 45,701
RECEIVERS (SPACE)
60 AMERICAN FORCES 0 304 0 304
RADIO AND TV
SERVICE..........
AVIATION
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
62 ASHORE ATC 0 97,262 0 97,262
EQUIPMENT........
63 AFLOAT ATC 0 72,104 0 72,104
EQUIPMENT........
64 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 52,171 0 52,171
65 JOINT PRECISION 0 5,105 0 5,105
APPROACH AND
LANDING SYSTEM (.
66 NAVAL MISSION 0 60,058 0 60,058
PLANNING SYSTEMS.
OTHER SHORE
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
68 TACTICAL/MOBILE 0 64,901 0 64,901
C4I SYSTEMS......
69 INTELLIGENCE 0 12,112 0 12,112
SURVEILLANCE AND
RECONAISSANCE
(ISR)............
70 CANES............. 0 534,324 0 534,324
71 RADIAC............ 0 31,289 0 31,289
72 CANES-INTELL...... 0 46,281 0 46,281
73 GPETE............. 0 33,395 0 33,395
74 MASF.............. 0 13,205 0 13,205
75 INTEG COMBAT 0 11,493 0 11,493
SYSTEM TEST
FACILITY.........
76 EMI CONTROL 0 3,687 0 3,687
INSTRUMENTATION..
78 IN-SERVICE RADARS 0 249,656 0 249,656
AND SENSORS......
SHIPBOARD
COMMUNICATIONS
79 BATTLE FORCE 0 106,583 0 106,583
TACTICAL NETWORK.
80 SHIPBOARD TACTICAL 0 20,900 0 20,900
COMMUNICATIONS...
81 SHIP 0 162,075 0 162,075
COMMUNICATIONS
AUTOMATION.......
82 COMMUNICATIONS 0 11,138 0 11,138
ITEMS UNDER $5M..
SUBMARINE
COMMUNICATIONS
83 SUBMARINE 0 113,115 0 113,115
BROADCAST SUPPORT
84 SUBMARINE 0 84,584 0 84,584
COMMUNICATION
EQUIPMENT........
SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
85 SATELLITE 0 62,943 0 62,943
COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEMS..........
86 NAVY MULTIBAND 0 63,433 0 63,433
TERMINAL (NMT)...
87 MOBILE ADVANCED 0 220,453 0 220,453
EHF TERMINAL
(MAT)............
SHORE
COMMUNICATIONS
88 JOINT 0 3,389 0 3,389
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
CRYPTOGRAPHIC
EQUIPMENT
89 INFO SYSTEMS 0 191,239 0 191,239
SECURITY PROGRAM
(ISSP)...........
90 MIO INTEL 0 1,122 0 1,122
EXPLOITATION TEAM
CRYPTOLOGIC
EQUIPMENT
91 CRYPTOLOGIC 0 7,841 0 7,841
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIP............
OTHER ELECTRONIC
SUPPORT
109 COAST GUARD 0 61,512 0 61,512
EQUIPMENT........
SONOBUOYS
112 SONOBUOYS--ALL 0 249,908 0 249,908
TYPES............
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
113 MINOTAUR.......... 0 5,191 0 5,191
114 WEAPONS RANGE 0 123,435 0 123,435
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
115 AIRCRAFT SUPPORT 0 91,284 0 91,284
EQUIPMENT........
116 ADVANCED ARRESTING 0 4,484 0 4,484
GEAR (AAG).......
117 ELECTROMAGNETIC 0 16,294 0 16,294
AIRCRAFT LAUNCH
SYSTEM (EMALS....
118 METEOROLOGICAL 0 13,806 0 13,806
EQUIPMENT........
119 AIRBORNE MCM...... 0 9,643 0 9,643
121 AVIATION SUPPORT 0 111,334 0 111,334
EQUIPMENT........
122 UMCS-UNMAN CARRIER 0 189,553 0 189,553
AVIATION(UCA)MISS
ION CNTRL........
SHIP GUN SYSTEM
EQUIPMENT
125 SHIP GUN SYSTEMS 0 7,358 0 7,358
EQUIPMENT........
SHIP MISSILE
SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
126 HARPOON SUPPORT 0 209 0 209
EQUIPMENT........
127 SHIP MISSILE 0 455,822 0 455,822
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
128 TOMAHAWK SUPPORT 0 107,709 0 107,709
EQUIPMENT........
FBM SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
129 CPS SUPPORT 0 67,264 0 67,264
EQUIPMENT........
130 STRATEGIC MISSILE 0 491,179 0 491,179
SYSTEMS EQUIP....
ASW SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
131 SSN COMBAT CONTROL 0 102,954 0 102,954
SYSTEM...........
132 ASW SUPPORT 0 25,721 0 25,721
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER ORDNANCE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
133 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 24,822 0 24,822
DISPOSAL EQUIP...
134 DIRECTED ENERGY 0 2,976 0 2,976
SYSTEMS..........
135 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 3,635 0 3,635
MILLION..........
OTHER EXPENDABLE
ORDNANCE
136 ANTI-SHIP MISSIL 0 19,129 0 70,000 0 89,129
DECOY SYSTEM.....
ASCM decoy [0] [70,000]
systems--misalign
ed budget request
137 SUBMARINE TRAINING 0 77,889 0 77,889
DEVICE MODS......
138 SURFACE TRAINING 0 186,085 0 186,085
EQUIPMENT........
CIVIL ENGINEERING
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
141 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 3,825 0 3,825
VEHICLES.........
142 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 5,489 0 5,489
TRUCKS...........
143 CONSTRUCTION & 0 102,592 0 102,592
MAINTENANCE EQUIP
144 FIRE FIGHTING 0 27,675 0 27,675
EQUIPMENT........
145 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 37,262 0 37,262
146 AMPHIBIOUS 0 38,073 0 38,073
EQUIPMENT........
147 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 4,009 0 4,009
EQUIPMENT........
148 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 127,086 0 127,086
MILLION..........
149 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 1,297 0 1,297
VEHICLES.........
SUPPLY SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
151 SUPPLY EQUIPMENT.. 0 38,838 0 38,838
152 FIRST DESTINATION 0 6,203 0 6,203
TRANSPORTATION...
153 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 643,618 0 643,618
SUPPLY SYSTEMS...
TRAINING DEVICES
155 TRAINING SUPPORT 0 3,480 0 3,480
EQUIPMENT........
156 TRAINING AND 0 75,048 0 75,048
EDUCATION
EQUIPMENT........
COMMAND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
157 COMMAND SUPPORT 0 34,249 0 34,249
EQUIPMENT........
158 MEDICAL SUPPORT 0 12,256 0 12,256
EQUIPMENT........
160 NAVAL MIP SUPPORT 0 8,810 0 8,810
EQUIPMENT........
161 OPERATING FORCES 0 16,567 0 16,567
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
162 C4ISR EQUIPMENT... 0 36,945 0 36,945
163 ENVIRONMENTAL 0 42,860 0 42,860
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
164 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 166,577 0 166,577
EQUIPMENT........
165 ENTERPRISE 0 42,363 0 42,363
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
OTHER
170 NEXT GENERATION 0 185,755 0 185,755
ENTERPRISE
SERVICE..........
171 CYBERSPACE 0 5,446 0 14,540 0 19,986
ACTIVITIES.......
Information [0] [14,540]
Security Cyber
Security Chain
Risk Management
Program..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 41,991 0 41,991
PROGRAMS.........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
176 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 585,865 0 585,865
PARTS............
TOTAL OTHER 0 14,569,524 0 831,540 0 15,401,064
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT,
MARINE CORPS
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
1 AAV7A1 PIP........ 0 21 0 21
2 AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT 91 790,789 91 790,789
VEHICLE FAMILY OF
VEHICLES.........
3 LAV PIP........... 0 764 0 764
ARTILLERY AND
OTHER WEAPONS
4 155MM LIGHTWEIGHT 0 3 0 3
TOWED HOWITZER...
5 ARTILLERY WEAPONS 0 221,897 0 221,897
SYSTEM...........
6 WEAPONS AND COMBAT 0 13,401 0 13,401
VEHICLES UNDER $5
MILLION..........
GUIDED MISSILES
11 NAVAL STRIKE 90 143,711 90 143,711
MISSILE (NSM)....
12 NAVAL STRIKE 0 20,930 0 20,930
MISSILE (NSM)....
13 GROUND BASED AIR 0 620,220 0 620,220
DEFENSE..........
14 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 56 32,576 56 32,576
JAVELIN..........
15 FAMILY ANTI-ARMOR 0 107 0 107
WEAPONS SYSTEMS
(FOAAWS).........
16 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 0 2,173 0 2,173
TOW..............
17 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 6 61,490 6 61,490
(GMLRS)..........
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEMS
21 COMMON AVIATION 0 68,589 0 68,589
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM (C
REPAIR AND TEST
EQUIPMENT
22 REPAIR AND TEST 0 61,264 0 61,264
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SUPPORT
(TEL)
23 MODIFICATION KITS. 0 1,108 0 1,108
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NON-TEL)
24 ITEMS UNDER $5 0 202,679 0 202,679
MILLION (COMM &
ELEC)............
25 AIR OPERATIONS C2 0 15,784 0 15,784
SYSTEMS..........
RADAR + EQUIPMENT
(NON-TEL)
27 GROUND/AIR TASK 0 79,542 2 111,200 2 190,742
ORIENTED RADAR (G/
ATOR)............
USMC (+2) G/ATOR [2] [111,200]
Radar Systems....
INTELL/COMM
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL)
29 ELECTRO MAGNETIC 0 35,396 0 35,396
SPECTRUM
OPERATIONS (EMSO)
30 GCSS-MC........... 0 3,303 0 3,303
31 FIRE SUPPORT 0 116,304 0 116,304
SYSTEM...........
32 INTELLIGENCE 0 67,690 0 17,700 0 85,390
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
Marine Littoral [0] [17,700]
Regiment Organic
Find, Fix, and
Track (F2T)......
34 UNMANNED AIR 0 14,991 0 14,991
SYSTEMS (INTEL)..
35 DCGS-MC........... 0 42,946 0 42,946
36 UAS PAYLOADS...... 0 12,232 0 12,232
OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
TEL)
40 MARINE CORPS 0 205,710 0 205,710
ENTERPRISE
NETWORK (MCEN)...
41 COMMON COMPUTER 0 21,064 0 21,064
RESOURCES........
42 COMMAND POST 0 50,549 0 50,549
SYSTEMS..........
43 RADIO SYSTEMS..... 0 209,444 0 209,444
44 COMM SWITCHING & 0 100,712 0 100,712
CONTROL SYSTEMS..
45 COMM & ELEC 0 16,163 0 16,163
INFRASTRUCTURE
SUPPORT..........
46 CYBERSPACE 0 14,541 0 14,541
ACTIVITIES.......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 2,145 0 2,145
PROGRAMS.........
ADMINISTRATIVE
VEHICLES
51 COMMERCIAL CARGO 0 24,699 0 24,699
VEHICLES.........
TACTICAL VEHICLES
52 MOTOR TRANSPORT 0 16,472 0 16,472
MODIFICATIONS....
53 JOINT LIGHT 138 81,893 224 168,000 362 249,893
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
USMC JLTV [224] [168,000]
procurement
(+224)...........
ENGINEER AND OTHER
EQUIPMENT
58 TACTICAL FUEL 0 33,611 0 33,611
SYSTEMS..........
59 POWER EQUIPMENT 0 24,558 0 24,558
ASSORTED.........
60 AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT 0 9,049 0 50,000 0 59,049
EQUIPMENT........
ALPV procurement.. [0] [50,000]
61 EOD SYSTEMS....... 0 21,069 0 21,069
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
62 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 52,394 0 52,394
EQUIPMENT........
GENERAL PROPERTY
63 FIELD MEDICAL 0 58,768 0 58,768
EQUIPMENT........
64 TRAINING DEVICES.. 0 63,133 0 63,133
65 FAMILY OF 0 33,644 0 33,644
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT........
66 ULTRA-LIGHT 0 7,836 0 7,836
TACTICAL VEHICLE
(ULTV)...........
OTHER SUPPORT
67 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 35,920 0 35,920
MILLION..........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
70 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 40,828 0 40,828
PARTS............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 381 3,754,112 226 346,900 607 4,101,012
MARINE CORPS.....
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
STRATEGIC
OFFENSIVE
1 B-21 RAIDER....... 0 2,590,116 0 2,590,116
2 B-21 RAIDER....... 0 862,000 0 862,000
TACTICAL FORCES
3 F-35.............. 24 3,555,503 10 989,497 34 4,545,000
Procure 10x F-35As [10] [989,497]
4 F-35.............. 0 531,241 0 531,241
8 LC-130............ 0 0 1 300,000 1 300,000
LC-130............ [1] [300,000]
9 JOINT SIMULATION 0 17,985 0 35,970
ENVIRONMENT......
TACTICAL AIRLIFT
12 KC-46A MDAP....... 15 2,799,633 15 2,799,633
OTHER AIRLIFT
UPT TRAINERS
17 ADVANCED PILOT 14 362,083 14 362,083
TRAINING T-7A....
HELICOPTERS
19 MH-139A........... 2 4,478 2 4,478
20 COMBAT RESCUE 0 107,500 0 107,500
HELICOPTER.......
MISSION SUPPORT
AIRCRAFT
24 CIVIL AIR PATROL A/ 0 3,131 0 3,131
C................
OTHER AIRCRAFT
26 TARGET DRONES..... 20 34,224 20 34,224
34 RQ-20B PUMA....... 6 11,437 6 11,437
STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
36 B-2A.............. 0 76,906 0 76,906
37 B-1B.............. 0 73,893 0 73,893
38 B-52.............. 0 223,827 0 223,827
39 LARGE AIRCRAFT 0 35,165 0 35,165
INFRARED
COUNTERMEASURES..
TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
41 COLLABORATIVE 0 15,048 0 15,048
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
MODS.............
42 E-11 BACN/HAG..... 0 28,797 0 28,797
43 F-15.............. 0 120,044 0 120,044
45 F-16 MODIFICATIONS 0 448,116 0 448,116
46 F-22A............. 0 977,526 0 977,526
47 F-35 MODIFICATIONS 0 380,337 0 380,337
48 F-15 EPAW......... 0 252,607 0 252,607
50 KC-46A MDAP....... 0 19,344 0 19,344
AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
51 C-5............... 0 34,939 0 34,939
52 C-17A............. 0 9,853 0 9,853
56 OSA-EA 0 87,515 0 87,515
MODIFICATIONS....
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
57 GLIDER MODS....... 0 159 0 159
58 T-6............... 0 247,814 0 247,814
59 T-1............... 0 137 0 152,000 0 152,137
Common ASE........ [0] [152,000]
60 T-38.............. 0 85,381 0 85,381
OTHER AIRCRAFT
68 C-130............. 0 144,041 0 144,041
70 C-135............. 0 124,368 0 124,368
73 CVR (CONNON ULF 0 79,859 0 79,859
RECEIVER) INC 2..
74 RC-135............ 0 231,001 0 231,001
75 E-3............... 0 17,291 0 17,291
76 E-4............... 0 45,232 0 45,232
80 H-1............... 0 17,899 0 17,899
81 MH-139A MOD....... 0 4,992 0 4,992
82 H-60.............. 0 1,749 0 1,749
83 HH60W 0 9,150 0 9,150
MODIFICATIONS....
85 HC/MC-130 0 365,086 0 365,086
MODIFICATIONS....
86 OTHER AIRCRAFT.... 0 263,902 0 263,902
88 MQ-9 MODS......... 0 100,923 0 100,923
90 SENIOR LEADER C3 0 24,414 0 24,414
SYSTEM--AIRCRAFT.
91 CV-22 MODS........ 0 78,713 0 78,713
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
94 INITIAL SPARES/ 0 973,535 0 973,535
REPAIR PARTS.....
COMMON SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
99 AIRCRAFT 0 156,776 0 156,776
REPLACEMENT
SUPPORT EQUIP....
POST PRODUCTION
SUPPORT
103 B-2B.............. 0 18,969 0 18,969
104 B-52.............. 0 111 0 111
106 C-17A............. 0 2,672 0 2,672
111 F-15.............. 0 5,112 0 5,112
114 F-16 POST 0 18,402 0 18,402
PRODUCTION
SUPPORT..........
116 HC/MC-130 POST 0 17,986 0 17,986
PROD.............
117 JOINT SIMULATION 0 28,524 0 57,048
ENVIRONMENT POST
PRODUCTION
SUPPORT..........
INDUSTRIAL
PREPAREDNESS
122 INDUSTRIAL 0 19,998 0 19,998
RESPONSIVENESS...
WAR CONSUMABLES
123 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 26,323 0 26,323
OTHER PRODUCTION
CHARGES
124 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 940,190 0 940,190
CHARGES..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 16,006 0 206,000 0 222,006
PROGRAMS.........
Acceleration of [0] [206,000]
Air Force program
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 81 17,776,472 11 1,647,497 92 19,423,969
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
MISSILE
REPLACEMENT
EQUIPMENT--BALLIS
TIC
1 MISSILE 0 35,116 0 35,116
REPLACEMENT EQ-
BALLISTIC........
2 MISSILE 0 2,166 0 2,166
REPLACEMENT EQ-
BALLISTIC........
BALLISTIC MISSILES
STRATEGIC
TACTICAL
5 LONG RANGE STAND- 0 192,409 0 192,409
OFF WEAPON.......
6 LONG RANGE STAND- 0 250,300 0 250,300
OFF WEAPON.......
7 REPLAC EQUIP & WAR 0 12,436 0 12,436
CONSUMABLES......
8 ADVANCED PRECISION 340 13,428 340 13,428
KILL WEAPON
SYSTEM (APKWS)
MISSILE..........
9 AGM-183A AIR- 0 387,055 0 282,000 669,055
LAUNCHED RAPID
RESPONSE WEAPON..
JSM procurement [0] [282,000]
total 112x--
misaligned budget
request..........
11 JOINT AIR-SURFACE 144 328,081 0 322,000 144 650,081
STANDOFF MISSILE.
Joint Air to [0] [322,000]
Surface Stand-Off
Missile (JASSM)
(USAF)...........
13 JOINT ADVANCED 0 368,593 0 368,593
TACTICAL MISSILE.
15 LRASM0............ 93 294,401 93 294,401
17 SIDEWINDER (AIM- 173 100,352 173 100,352
9X)..............
18 AMRAAM............ 226 365,125 226 365,125
21 SMALL DIAMETER 511 41,510 0 150,000 511 191,510
BOMB.............
GLSDB procurement. [0] [150,000]
22 SMALL DIAMETER 806 307,743 806 307,743
BOMB II..........
23 STAND-IN ATTACK 99 185,324 99 185,324
WEAPON (SIAW)....
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES
24 INDUSTRIAL 0 917 0 917
PREPAREDNESS/POL
PREVENTION.......
CLASS IV
25 ICBM FUZE MOD..... 0 119,376 0 119,376
27 MM III 0 14,604 0 14,604
MODIFICATIONS....
29 AIR LAUNCH CRUISE 0 41,393 0 41,393
MISSILE (ALCM)...
MISSILE SPARES AND
REPAIR PARTS
30 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 5,824 0 5,824
PARTS (INITAL)...
31 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 108,249 0 250,000 0 358,249
PARTS (REPLEN)...
Air Force [0] [250,000]
munitions--misali
gned budget
request..........
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
33 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 221,199 0 221,199
PROGRAMS.........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 828,275 0 828,275
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL MISSILE 2,392 4,223,876 0 1,004,000 2,392 5,227,876
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, AIR
FORCE
CARTRIDGES
3 CARTRIDGES........ 0 126,077 0 126,077
BOMBS
5 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 189,097 0 189,097
BOMBS............
6 MASSIVE ORDNANCE 0 6,813 0 6,813
PENETRATOR (MOP).
7 JOINT DIRECT 1,500 126,389 1,500 126,389
ATTACK MUNITION..
9 B61-12 TRAINER.... 0 7,668 0 7,668
OTHER ITEMS
10 CAD/PAD........... 0 58,454 0 58,454
11 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 7,297 0 7,297
DISPOSAL (EOD)...
12 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 636 0 636
PARTS............
14 FIRST DESTINATION 0 2,955 0 2,955
TRANSPORTATION...
15 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 5,571 0 5,571
$5,000,000.......
FLARES
17 EXPENDABLE 0 101,540 0 101,540
COUNTERMEASURES..
FUZES
18 FUZES............. 0 125,721 0 125,721
SMALL ARMS
19 SMALL ARMS........ 0 26,260 0 26,260
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 1,500 784,478 0 0 1,500 784,478
OF AMMUNITION,
AIR FORCE........
PROCUREMENT, SPACE
FORCE
SPACE PROCUREMENT,
SF
2 AF SATELLITE COMM 0 68,238 0 68,238
SYSTEM...........
4 COUNTERSPACE 0 2,027 0 2,027
SYSTEMS..........
6 EVOLVED STRATEGIC 0 64,996 0 64,996
SATCOM (ESS).....
7 FAMILY OF BEYOND 0 15,404 0 15,404
LINE-OF-SIGHT
TERMINALS........
10 GENERAL 0 1,835 0 1,835
INFORMATION TECH--
SPACE............
11 GPSIII FOLLOW ON.. 0 109,944 0 109,944
12 GPS III SPACE 0 29,274 0 29,274
SEGMENT..........
13 GLOBAL POSTIONING 0 870 0 870
(SPACE)..........
17 SPACEBORNE EQUIP 0 84,044 0 84,044
(COMSEC).........
18 MILSATCOM......... 0 36,447 0 36,447
20 SPECIAL SPACE 0 482,653 0 482,653
ACTIVITIES.......
21 MOBILE USER 0 48,977 0 48,977
OBJECTIVE SYSTEM.
22 NATIONAL SECURITY 4 1,466,963 4 1,466,963
SPACE LAUNCH.....
24 PTES HUB.......... 0 29,949 0 29,949
26 SPACE DEVELOPMENT 7 648,446 7 648,446
AGENCY LAUNCH....
27 SPACE DIGITAL 0 4,984 0 4,984
INTEGRATED
NETWORK (SDIN)...
29 SPACE MODS........ 0 115,498 0 115,498
30 SPACELIFT RANGE 0 64,321 0 64,321
SYSTEM SPACE.....
31 WIDEBAND SATCOM 0 92,380 0 92,380
OPERATIONAL
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS..........
SPARES
32 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 938 0 938
PARTS............
NON-TACTICAL
VEHICLES
33 USSF VEHICLES..... 0 5,000 0 5,000
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
35 POWER CONDITIONING 0 20,449 0 20,449
EQUIPMENT........
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 11 3,393,637 0 0 11 3,393,637
SPACE FORCE......
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE
PASSENGER CARRYING
VEHICLES
2 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 5,557 0 5,557
VEHICLES.........
CARGO AND UTILITY
VEHICLES
3 MEDIUM TACTICAL 0 3,938 0 3,938
VEHICLE..........
4 CAP VEHICLES...... 0 1,175 0 1,175
5 CARGO AND UTILITY 0 56,940 0 56,940
VEHICLES.........
SPECIAL PURPOSE
VEHICLES
6 JOINT LIGHT 0 62,202 0 62,202
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
7 SECURITY AND 0 129 0 129
TACTICAL VEHICLES
8 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 68,242 0 68,242
VEHICLES.........
FIRE FIGHTING
EQUIPMENT
9 FIRE FIGHTING/ 0 58,416 0 58,416
CRASH RESCUE
VEHICLES.........
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
10 MATERIALS HANDLING 0 18,552 0 18,552
VEHICLES.........
BASE MAINTENANCE
SUPPORT
11 RUNWAY SNOW REMOV 0 11,045 0 11,045
AND CLEANING EQU.
12 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 25,291 0 25,291
SUPPORT VEHICLES.
COMM SECURITY
EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
15 COMSEC EQUIPMENT.. 0 169,363 0 169,363
INTELLIGENCE
PROGRAMS
17 INTERNATIONAL 0 5,833 0 5,833
INTEL TECH &
ARCHITECTURES....
18 INTELLIGENCE 0 5,273 0 5,273
TRAINING
EQUIPMENT........
19 INTELLIGENCE COMM 0 42,257 0 42,257
EQUIPMENT........
ELECTRONICS
PROGRAMS
20 AIR TRAFFIC 0 26,390 0 26,390
CONTROL & LANDING
SYS..............
21 NATIONAL AIRSPACE 0 11,810 0 11,810
SYSTEM...........
22 BATTLE CONTROL 0 16,592 0 16,592
SYSTEM--FIXED....
23 THEATER AIR 0 27,650 0 27,650
CONTROL SYS
IMPROVEMEN.......
24 3D EXPEDITIONARY 0 103,226 0 103,226
LONG-RANGE RADAR.
25 WEATHER 0 31,516 0 31,516
OBSERVATION
FORECAST.........
26 STRATEGIC COMMAND 0 82,912 0 82,912
AND CONTROL......
27 CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN 0 22,021 0 22,021
COMPLEX..........
28 MISSION PLANNING 0 18,722 0 18,722
SYSTEMS..........
31 STRATEGIC MISSION 0 6,383 0 6,383
PLANNING &
EXECUTION SYSTEM.
SPCL COMM-
ELECTRONICS
PROJECTS
32 GENERAL 0 172,085 0 172,085
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
34 AF GLOBAL COMMAND 0 1,947 0 1,947
& CONTROL SYS....
36 MOBILITY COMMAND 0 11,648 0 11,648
AND CONTROL......
37 AIR FORCE PHYSICAL 0 294,747 0 294,747
SECURITY SYSTEM..
38 COMBAT TRAINING 0 231,987 0 231,987
RANGES...........
39 MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 0 94,995 0 94,995
EMERGENCY COMM N.
40 WIDE AREA 0 29,617 0 29,617
SURVEILLANCE
(WAS)............
41 C3 COUNTERMEASURES 0 116,410 0 116,410
44 DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 0 698 0 698
ACCOUNTING & MGT
SYS..............
46 THEATER BATTLE MGT 0 442 0 442
C2 SYSTEM........
47 AIR & SPACE 0 22,785 0 22,785
OPERATIONS CENTER
(AOC)............
AIR FORCE
COMMUNICATIONS
50 BASE INFORMATION 0 79,091 0 79,091
TRANSPT INFRAST
(BITI) WIRED.....
51 AFNET............. 0 282,907 0 282,907
52 JOINT 0 5,930 0 5,930
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
53 USCENTCOM......... 0 14,919 0 14,919
54 USSTRATCOM........ 0 4,788 0 4,788
55 USSPACECOM........ 0 32,633 0 32,633
ORGANIZATION AND
BASE
56 TACTICAL C-E 0 143,829 0 143,829
EQUIPMENT........
59 RADIO EQUIPMENT... 0 50,730 0 50,730
61 BASE COMM 0 67,015 0 67,015
INFRASTRUCTURE...
MODIFICATIONS
62 COMM ELECT MODS... 0 76,034 0 76,034
PERSONAL SAFETY &
RESCUE EQUIP
63 PERSONAL SAFETY 0 81,782 0 81,782
AND RESCUE
EQUIPMENT........
DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS
HANDLING EQ
64 POWER CONDITIONING 0 13,711 0 13,711
EQUIPMENT........
65 MECHANIZED 0 21,143 0 21,143
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIP............
BASE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
66 BASE PROCURED 0 90,654 0 90,654
EQUIPMENT........
67 ENGINEERING AND 0 253,799 0 100,000 0 353,799
EOD EQUIPMENT....
Regional Base [0] [100,000]
Cluster
Prepositioning
(RBCP)...........
68 MOBILITY EQUIPMENT 0 95,584 0 95,584
69 FUELS SUPPORT 0 34,794 0 34,794
EQUIPMENT (FSE)..
70 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 59,431 0 59,431
AND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT........
SPECIAL SUPPORT
PROJECTS
72 DARP RC135........ 0 30,136 0 30,136
73 DCGS-AF........... 0 87,044 0 87,044
77 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 1,178,397 0 1,178,397
PROGRAM..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 26,920,092 0 218,000 0 27,138,092
PROGRAMS.........
Acceleration of [0] [218,000]
Air Force program
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
80 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 1,075 0 1,075
PARTS (CYBER)....
81 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 20,330 0 20,330
PARTS............
TOTAL OTHER 0 31,504,644 0 318,000 0 31,822,644
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT,
DEFENSE-WIDE
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DCSA
38 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 2,230 0 2,230
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DHRA
59 PERSONNEL 0 3,797 0 3,797
ADMINISTRATION...
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DISA
16 INFORMATION 0 6,254 0 6,254
SYSTEMS SECURITY.
17 TELEPORT PROGRAM.. 0 112,517 0 112,517
19 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 23,673 0 23,673
MILLION..........
20 DEFENSE 0 252,370 0 25,000 0 277,370
INFORMATION
SYSTEM NETWORK...
Defense [0] [25,000]
Information
System Network
(DISN)--Service
Delivery Nodes...
21 WHITE HOUSE 0 125,292 0 125,292
COMMUNICATION
AGENCY...........
22 SENIOR LEADERSHIP 0 175,264 0 175,264
ENTERPRISE.......
23 JOINT REGIONAL 0 1,496 0 32,074 0 33,570
SECURITY STACKS
(JRSS)...........
Army [0] [32,074]
Modernization--JR
SS...............
24 JOINT SERVICE 0 54,186 0 54,186
PROVIDER.........
25 FOURTH ESTATE 0 75,386 0 75,386
NETWORK
OPTIMIZATION
(4ENO)...........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DLA
37 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 79,251 0 79,251
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DMACT
70 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 7,258 0 7,258
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DODEA
68 AUTOMATION/ 0 0 0 5,000 0 5,000
EDUCATIONAL
SUPPORT &
LOGISTICS........
Blast Overpressure [0] [5,000]
Analysis and
Mitigation.......
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DPAA
4 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 20 475 20 475
DPAA.............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE THREAT
REDUCTION AGENCY
62 VEHICLES.......... 0 911 0 911
63 OTHER MAJOR 0 12,023 0 12,023
EQUIPMENT........
65 DTRA CYBER 0 1,800 0 1,800
ACTIVITIES.......
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
MISSILE DEFENSE
AGENCY
44 THAAD............. 25 523,125 0 150,000 25 673,125
Maximize THAAD [0] [150,000]
Talon production
line (+12-16
AURs)--misaligned
budget request...
46 AEGIS BMD......... 0 0 0 400,000 0 400,000
Maximize SM-3 IB [0] [400,000]
production line..
48 BMDS AN/TPY-2 0 36,530 0 36,530
RADARS...........
49 SM-3 IIAS......... 12 444,835 12 444,835
50 ARROW 3 UPPER TIER 1 100,000 1 100,000
SYSTEMS..........
51 SHORT RANGE 1 40,000 1 40,000
BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE (SRBMD)..
52 DEFENSE OF GUAM 0 11,351 0 11,351
PROCUREMENT......
56 IRON DOME......... 1 60,000 1 60,000
58 AEGIS BMD HARDWARE 0 17,211 0 17,211
AND SOFTWARE.....
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
OSD
5 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 164,900 0 164,900
OSD..............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
TJS
42 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 33,090 0 33,090
TJS..............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
WHS
15 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 403 0 403
WHS..............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
USCYBERCOM
71 CYBERSPACE 0 73,358 0 73,358
OPERATIONS.......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 1,129,183 0 1,129,183
PROGRAMS.........
AVIATION PROGRAMS
91 ARMED OVERWATCH/ 6 156,606 6 156,606
TARGETING........
94 MH-60 BLACKHAWK... 0 0 0 0
95 ROTARY WING 0 189,059 0 189,059
UPGRADES AND
SUSTAINMENT......
96 UNMANNED ISR...... 0 6,858 0 6,858
97 NON-STANDARD 0 7,849 0 10,000 0 17,849
AVIATION.........
Non-Standard [0] [10,000]
Aviation--Sea
Planes...........
98 U-28.............. 0 2,031 0 2,031
99 MH-47 CHINOOK..... 0 156,934 0 156,934
100 CV-22 MODIFICATION 0 19,692 0 19,692
101 MQ-9 UNMANNED 0 12,890 0 12,890
AERIAL VEHICLE...
102 PRECISION STRIKE 0 61,595 0 61,595
PACKAGE..........
103 AC/MC-130J........ 0 236,312 0 236,312
SHIPBUILDING
AMMUNITION
PROGRAMS
106 ORDNANCE ITEMS 0 116,972 0 116,972
<$5M.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMS
107 INTELLIGENCE 0 227,073 0 227,073
SYSTEMS..........
108 DISTRIBUTED COMMON 0 2,824 0 2,824
GROUND/SURFACE
SYSTEMS..........
109 OTHER ITEMS <$5M.. 0 95,685 0 95,685
110 COMBATANT CRAFT 0 0 0 9,600 0 9,600
SYSTEMS..........
Combatant Craft [0] [9,600]
Assault..........
111 SPECIAL PROGRAMS.. 0 30,418 0 30,418
112 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 54,100 0 54,100
113 WARRIOR SYSTEMS 0 303,991 0 303,991
<$5M.............
114 COMBAT MISSION 0 4,985 0 4,985
REQUIREMENTS.....
116 OPERATIONAL 0 21,339 0 21,339
ENHANCEMENTS
INTELLIGENCE.....
117 OPERATIONAL 0 352,100 0 352,100
ENHANCEMENTS.....
CBDP
120 CHEMICAL 0 208,051 0 208,051
BIOLOGICAL
SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS........
121 CB PROTECTION & 0 213,330 0 213,330
HAZARD MITIGATION
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 66 6,048,863 0 631,674 66 6,680,537
DEFENSE-WIDE.....
TOTAL PROCUREMENT. 12,121 152,876,684 517 18,171,431 12,638 171,048,115
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND
EVALUATION
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Line Program Element Item FY 2026 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, ARMY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102A DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 237,678 237,678
2 0601103A UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 78,947 78,947
INITIATIVES.
3 0601104A UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY 69,391 69,391
RESEARCH CENTERS.
4 0601121A CYBER COLLABORATIVE 5,463 5,463
RESEARCH ALLIANCE.
5 0601275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE BASIC 88,053 88,053
RESEARCH.
6 0601601A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 7,012 7,012
AND MACHINE LEARNING
BASIC RESEARCH.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 486,544 0 486,544
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
7 0602002A ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND 9,455 9,455
DEVELOPMENT-APPLIED
RESEARCH.
8 0602134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 6,174 6,174
ADVANCED STUDIES.
9 0602135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED 12,618 12,618
AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS)
APPLIED RESEARCH.
10 0602141A LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY..... 97,157 10,000 107,157
..................... Advanced Materials and [10,000]
Manufacturing for
Hypersonics (AMMH).
12 0602143A SOLDIER LETHALITY 72,670 38,000 110,670
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Army Pathfinder Airborne. [5,000]
..................... Decrease Soldier load and [8,000]
power burden.
..................... Enhancing Energy [15,000]
Technologies in Cold
Regions.
..................... Pathfinder--Air Assault.. [10,000]
13 0602144A GROUND TECHNOLOGY........ 56,342 13,000 69,342
..................... Earth Sciences Polar [5,000]
Proving Ground &
Training Program.
..................... Engineered Roadway Repair [5,000]
Materials for Effective
Maneuver of Military
Assets.
..................... Geotechnical Intelligence [3,000]
and Terrain Analytics
Network for Arctic
Maneuverability.
14 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 71,547 19,000 90,547
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Platform anti-idle and [15,000]
mobility technology.
..................... Standardized Army Battery [4,000]
15 0602146A NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY... 56,529 56,529
16 0602147A LONG RANGE PRECISION 25,744 7,000 32,744
FIRES TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Novel Printed Armament [7,000]
Components for
Distributed Operations.
17 0602148A FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT 20,420 20,420
TECHNOLOGY.
18 0602150A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 25,992 5,000 30,992
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Counter-UAS Testing and [5,000]
Research Center (CTRC).
19 0602180A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 13,745 13,745
AND MACHINE LEARNING
TECHNOLOGIES.
21 0602182A C3I APPLIED RESEARCH..... 22,317 22,317
22 0602183A AIR PLATFORM APPLIED 53,305 10,000 63,305
RESEARCH.
..................... Shape-shifting Drones [10,000]
Powered by Mechanical
Intelligence.
23 0602184A SOLDIER APPLIED RESEARCH. 27,597 27,597
24 0602213A C3I APPLIED CYBER........ 4,716 4,716
25 0602275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 45,415 45,415
APPLIED RESEARCH.
26 0602276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER 17,102 17,102
APPLIED RESEARCH.
27 0602345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 18,408 18,408
LAUNCHED EFFECTS APPLIED
RESEARCH.
28 0602386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 8,209 8,209
MATERIALS--APPLIED
RESEARCH.
30 0602785A MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/ 17,191 17,191
TRAINING TECHNOLOGY.
31 0602787A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY....... 143,293 143,293
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 34,599 34,599
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 860,545 102,000 962,545
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
32 0603002A MEDICAL ADVANCED 1,860 1,860
TECHNOLOGY.
33 0603007A MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND 13,559 13,559
TRAINING ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
34 0603025A ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND 19,679 19,679
DEMONSTRATION.
35 0603040A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 20,487 12,000 32,487
AND MACHINE LEARNING
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Multi-Domain Kill Chain [12,000]
Automation.
36 0603041A ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE 10,560 10,560
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
37 0603042A C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.. 15,028 15,028
38 0603043A AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED 41,266 41,266
TECHNOLOGY.
39 0603044A SOLDIER ADVANCED 18,143 18,143
TECHNOLOGY.
40 0603116A LETHALITY ADVANCED 13,232 13,232
TECHNOLOGY.
42 0603118A SOLDIER LETHALITY 95,186 5,000 100,186
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Aerial Delivery of Fire [5,000]
Suppression.
43 0603119A GROUND ADVANCED 30,507 16,000 46,507
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Cold Regions Research and [5,000]
Engineering Laboratory.
..................... Fuel Cell Multi-Modular [5,000]
Use.
..................... Improvements in Mobility [6,000]
Modeling.
44 0603134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 15,692 15,692
SIMULATION.
45 0603135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED- 7,773 7,773
AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS)
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
46 0603275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 83,922 83,922
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
47 0603276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER 15,254 15,254
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
48 0603345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 13,898 13,898
LAUNCHED EFFECTS
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
49 0603386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 24,683 5,000 29,683
MATERIALS--ADVANCED
RESEARCH.
..................... NCSEB Recommendation--AI- [5,000]
Ready Biological Data.
50 0603457A C3I CYBER ADVANCED 3,329 3,329
DEVELOPMENT.
51 0603461A HIGH PERFORMANCE 241,855 50,000 291,855
COMPUTING MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM.
..................... High Performance [50,000]
Computing Modernization
Program.
52 0603462A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 141,301 7,000 148,301
VEHICLE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Acceleration of leap [7,000]
ahead systems for ground
vehicles.
53 0603463A NETWORK C3I ADVANCED 78,539 10,000 88,539
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Geophysical Littoral [5,000]
Autonomous Detection and
Exploitation II (GLADE
II).
..................... Network C3I Advanced [5,000]
Technology.
54 0603464A LONG RANGE PRECISION 162,236 162,236
FIRES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
55 0603465A FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 66,686 66,686
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
56 0603466A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 23,330 10,000 33,330
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Material Improvements for [10,000]
Electric Motors.
58 0603920A HUMANITARIAN DEMINING.... 9,349 9,349
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 72,837 72,837
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,240,191 115,000 1,355,191
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPES
60 0603305A ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE 8,141 8,141
SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.
61 0603308A ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS 83,080 83,080
INTEGRATION.
62 0603327A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 0
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
63 0603619A LANDMINE WARFARE AND 41,516 41,516
BARRIER--ADV DEV.
64 0603639A TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER 85,472 5,000 90,472
AMMUNITION.
..................... Large caliber automated [5,000]
ammunition resupply.
65 0603645A ARMORED SYSTEM 22,645 22,645
MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
66 0603747A SOLDIER SUPPORT AND 4,033 4,033
SURVIVABILITY.
67 0603766A TACTICAL ELECTRONIC 107,525 107,525
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
DEV.
68 0603774A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS 5,153 5,153
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
69 0603779A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 11,343 11,343
TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
70 0603790A NATO RESEARCH AND 5,031 5,031
DEVELOPMENT.
72 0603804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 15,435 15,435
EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
73 0603807A MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV. 1,000 1,000
74 0603827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED 41,856 41,856
DEVELOPMENT.
75 0604017A ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT..... 35,082 35,082
76 0604019A EXPANDED MISSION AREA 178,137 178,137
MISSILE (EMAM).
78 0604035A LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) 17,063 17,063
SATELLITE CAPABILITY.
79 0604036A MULTI-DOMAIN SENSING 239,813 239,813
SYSTEM (MDSS) ADV DEV.
80 0604037A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 3,092 3,092
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) ADV
DEV.
81 0604100A ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES. 9,865 9,865
85 0604114A LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE 196,448 196,448
DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
86 0604115A TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 267,619 10,000 277,619
INITIATIVES.
..................... Short Pulse Laser [10,000]
Directed Energy
Demonstration.
87 0604117A MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR 238,247 238,247
DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
89 0604120A ASSURED POSITIONING, 8,686 8,686
NAVIGATION AND TIMING
(PNT).
90 0604121A SYNTHETIC TRAINING 240,899 240,899
ENVIRONMENT REFINING &
PROTOTYPING.
91 0604134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 5,491 5,491
DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
92 0604135A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE FIRES 231,401 231,401
93 0604182A HYPERSONICS.............. 25,000 13,000 38,000
..................... Emerging Hypersonic [13,000]
Capabilities (USA, USN).
95 0604403A FUTURE INTERCEPTOR....... 8,019 8,019
97 0604531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 45,281 45,281
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
99 0604541A UNIFIED NETWORK TRANSPORT 29,191 29,191
100 0305251A CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 5,605 5,605
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 203,746 203,746
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 2,420,915 28,000 2,448,915
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION
101 0604201A AIRCRAFT AVIONICS........ 2,696 2,696
102 0604270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 9,153 9,153
DEVELOPMENT.
103 0604601A INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS. 56,553 56,553
104 0604604A MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES. 18,503 18,503
105 0604611A JAVELIN.................. 9,810 9,810
106 0604622A FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL 47,064 47,064
VEHICLES.
110 0604645A ARMORED SYSTEMS 16,593 16,593
MODERNIZATION (ASM)--ENG
DEV.
111 0604710A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG 351,274 351,274
DEV.
112 0604713A COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, 5,654 5,654
AND EQUIPMENT.
113 0604715A NON-SYSTEM TRAINING 19,063 19,063
DEVICES--ENG DEV.
114 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, 13,892 13,892
CONTROL AND
INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
115 0604742A CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION 7,790 7,790
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
116 0604746A AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT 9,512 9,512
DEVELOPMENT.
117 0604760A DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE 7,724 7,724
SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG
DEV.
118 0604798A BRIGADE ANALYSIS, 24,318 24,318
INTEGRATION AND
EVALUATION.
119 0604802A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS-- 150,344 150,344
ENG DEV.
120 0604804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 50,194 50,194
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
121 0604805A COMMAND, CONTROL, 63,725 63,725
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
122 0604807A MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL 6,252 6,252
BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
123 0604808A LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER-- 9,862 9,862
ENG DEV.
124 0604818A ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & 430,895 430,895
CONTROL HARDWARE &
SOFTWARE.
125 0604820A RADAR DEVELOPMENT........ 53,226 53,226
127 0604827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR 4,137 4,137
DEM/VAL.
128 0604852A SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY 76,903 76,903
ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
129 0604854A ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD... 80,862 80,862
130 0605013A INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 125,701 125,701
DEVELOPMENT.
131 0605018A INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND 164,600 164,600
PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
132 0605030A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 20,954 20,954
CENTER (JTNC).
133 0605031A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 41,696 41,696
(JTN).
134 0605035A COMMON INFRARED 10,789 10,789
COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
135 0605036A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 13,322 13,322
DESTRUCTION (CWMD).
136 0605037A EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND 4,619 4,619
DETAINEE PROCESSING.
137 0605038A NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL 13,459 13,459
CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE
VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR
SUITE.
138 0605041A DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL 3,611 3,611
DEVELOPMENT.
139 0605042A TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO 3,222 3,222
SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
140 0605047A CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM.. 8,101 8,101
142 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 44,182 8,000 52,182
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Advances in surface-to- [8,000]
air missile technologies.
143 0605052A INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION 248,659 248,659
CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK
1.
144 0605053A GROUND ROBOTICS.......... 227,038 227,038
145 0605054A EMERGING TECHNOLOGY 57,546 38,000 95,546
INITIATIVES.
..................... Operationalize anti-idle [38,000]
ground vehicles.
146 0605144A NEXT GENERATION LOAD 24,492 24,492
DEVICE--MEDIUM.
147 0605148A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 44,273 44,273
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) EMD.
152 0605224A MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE 34,844 5,000 39,844
..................... DeepFake and AI- [5,000]
synthesized Image
Detection.
154 0605232A HYPERSONICS EMD.......... 513,027 513,027
155 0605233A ACCESSIONS INFORMATION 32,710 32,710
ENVIRONMENT (AIE).
156 0605235A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE 186,304 2,090 188,394
CAPABILITY.
..................... Maritime Strike Tomahawk [2,090]
(MST) (USA, USN).
157 0605236A INTEGRATED TACTICAL 22,732 22,732
COMMUNICATIONS.
158 0605241A FUTURE LONG RANGE ASSAULT 1,248,544 1,248,544
AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENT.
160 0605244A JOINT REDUCED RANGE 28,893 28,893
ROCKET (JR3).
163 0605457A ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND 146,056 146,056
MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
164 0605531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 55,196 55,196
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS SYS DEV
& DEMONSTRATION.
166 0605625A MANNED GROUND VEHICLE.... 386,393 386,393
167 0605766A NATIONAL CAPABILITIES 16,913 16,913
INTEGRATION (MIP).
168 0605812A JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,664 2,664
VEHICLE (JLTV)
ENGINEERING AND
MANUFACTURING
DEVELOPMENT PHASE (EMD).
169 0605830A AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT 930 930
EQUIPMENT.
170 0303032A TROJAN--RH12............. 3,920 3,920
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 117,428 117,428
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 5,378,817 53,090 5,431,907
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
173 0604256A THREAT SIMULATOR 74,767 74,767
DEVELOPMENT.
174 0604258A TARGET SYSTEMS 16,004 16,004
DEVELOPMENT.
175 0604759A MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 101,027 101,027
176 0605103A RAND ARROYO CENTER....... 10,892 10,892
177 0605301A ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL..... 379,283 452,775 832,058
..................... Cost to Complete, Family [14,000]
Housing Replacement
Construction, Kwajalein
Atoll.
..................... Facilities Sustainment [8,775]
for Kwajalein
Operational Facilities.
..................... Kwajalein Catchments / [20,000]
Solar.
..................... Kwajalein Deferred [100,000]
Maintenance Backlog
Reduction.
..................... Kwajalein Palm Barracks [16,000]
Repair.
..................... Kwajalein Redundant [15,000]
Cooling for Power Plants.
..................... Kwajalein Repair Roi DAAF [176,000]
Aprons & Taxiways.
..................... Kwajalein Repair Roi [7,000]
Dining Facility.
..................... Kwajalein Repair Rotary [40,000]
and Fixed Wing Hangars.
..................... Kwajalein Roi Water [9,000]
Distribution System
Repair.
..................... Kwajalein Sewer Lift [6,000]
Station Power Loop.
..................... Kwajalein Vehicle [22,000]
Maintenance Facility
Repair.
..................... Kwajalein Water [19,000]
Distribution System
Repair.
178 0605326A CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION 58,606 58,606
PROGRAM.
180 0605601A ARMY TEST RANGES AND 425,108 425,108
FACILITIES.
181 0605602A ARMY TECHNICAL TEST 69,328 69,328
INSTRUMENTATION AND
TARGETS.
182 0605604A SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY 31,306 31,306
ANALYSIS.
183 0605606A AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION... 1,887 1,887
184 0605706A MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS 19,100 19,100
185 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN 6,277 6,277
ITEMS.
186 0605712A SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL 63,637 63,637
TESTING.
187 0605716A ARMY EVALUATION CENTER... 62,343 62,343
188 0605718A ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD 11,825 11,825
COLLABORATION & INTEG.
189 0605801A PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES... 54,172 54,172
190 0605803A TECHNICAL INFORMATION 26,592 26,592
ACTIVITIES.
191 0605805A MUNITIONS 44,465 44,465
STANDARDIZATION,
EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
192 0605857A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 2,857 2,857
TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
193 0605898A ARMY DIRECT REPORT 53,436 53,436
HEADQUARTERS--R&D - MHA.
194 0606002A RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC 72,302 8,000 80,302
MISSILE DEFENSE TEST
SITE.
..................... Multi-level security [8,000]
modernization.
195 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN 5,660 5,660
INTEL MODERNIZATION.
196 0606118A AIAMD SOFTWARE 358,854 358,854
DEVELOPMENT &
INTEGRATION.
197 0606942A ASSESSMENTS AND 6,354 6,354
EVALUATIONS CYBER
VULNERABILITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,956,082 460,775 2,416,857
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
199 0603778A MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 14,639 20,000 34,639
PROGRAM.
..................... GLSDB HIMARS integration [20,000]
work.
200 0605024A ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 6,449 6,449
SUPPORT.
201 0607101A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 115 115
DESTRUCTION (CWMD)
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT.
202 0607131A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS 13,687 13,687
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS.
203 0607136A BLACKHAWK PRODUCT 23,998 23,998
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
204 0607137A CHINOOK PRODUCT 10,859 10,859
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
208 0607145A APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 44,371 44,371
209 0607148A AN/TPQ-53 COUNTERFIRE 43,054 43,054
TARGET ACQUISITION RADAR
SYSTEM.
210 0607150A INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT.. 13,129 13,129
215 0607665A FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS..... 1,594 1,594
216 0607865A PATRIOT PRODUCT 183,763 183,763
IMPROVEMENT.
217 0203728A JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP 8,424 8,424
OPERATION COORDINATION
SYSTEM (JADOCS).
218 0203735A COMBAT VEHICLE 744,085 744,085
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
219 0203743A 155MM SELF-PROPELLED 107,826 107,826
HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS.
220 0203752A AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 237 237
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
221 0203758A DIGITIZATION............. 1,013 1,013
222 0203801A MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE 1,338 1,338
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM.
225 0205778A GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH 33,307 33,307
ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
230 0303140A INFORMATION SYSTEMS 15,040 15,040
SECURITY PROGRAM.
232 0303142A SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT 35,720 35,720
(SPACE).
235 0305179A INTEGRATED BROADCAST 6,653 6,653
SERVICE (IBS).
236 0305219A MQ-1 GRAY EAGLE UAV...... 3,444 3,444
237 0708045A END ITEM INDUSTRIAL 67,002 67,002
PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 46,872 46,872
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 1,426,619 20,000 1,446,619
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
238 0608041A DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE 89,238 2,000 91,238
PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Army Cyber/NETCOM - AI [2,000]
Enabled Network
Visibility and Security
Controls.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 89,238 2,000 91,238
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... AGILE RDTE PORTFOLIO
MANAGEMENT
239 0609135A COUNTER UNMANNED AERIAL 143,618 143,618
SYSTEMS (UAS) AGILE
DEVELOPMENT.
240 0609277A ELECTRONIC WARFARE AGILE 127,081 127,081
DEVELOPMENT.
241 0609278A ELECTRONIC WARFARE AGILE 59,202 59,202
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
242 0609345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 187,473 187,473
LAUNCHED EFFECTS AGILE
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
243 0609346A UAS LAUNCHED EFFECTS 172,898 172,898
AGILE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL AGILE RDTE 690,272 0 690,272
PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 14,549,223 780,865 15,330,088
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, ARMY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, NAVY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601103N UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 67,306 5,000 72,306
INITIATIVES.
..................... Artificial Intelligence [5,000]
Maritime Maneuvering
(AIMM) 2.0.
2 0601153N DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 511,163 15,100 526,263
..................... NCSEB Recommendation--AI- [5,000]
Ready Biological Data.
..................... Precision interferometer [10,100]
at Lowell Observatory.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 578,469 20,100 598,569
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
3 0602114N POWER PROJECTION APPLIED 30,635 30,635
RESEARCH.
4 0602123N FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED 125,699 24,000 149,699
RESEARCH.
..................... Advanced Circuit Breaker. [12,000]
..................... Battery vulnerability.... [2,000]
..................... Multi-Material Flexible [5,000]
Automated Manufacturing.
..................... Sea-Launched Aerial [5,000]
Drones.
5 0602131M MARINE CORPS LANDING 45,697 7,000 52,697
FORCE TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Unmanned Logistics [7,000]
Solutions.
6 0602235N COMMON PICTURE APPLIED 55,246 55,246
RESEARCH.
7 0602236N WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT 74,264 5,000 79,264
APPLIED RESEARCH.
..................... On-Demand IV Fluids for [5,000]
Expeditionary Medicine.
8 0602271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 79,929 5,000 84,929
APPLIED RESEARCH.
..................... Future Radio Frequency [5,000]
Digital Array Technology
Development and
Demonstration.
9 0602435N OCEAN WARFIGHTING 81,270 81,270
ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
RESEARCH.
10 0602651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 7,300 7,300
APPLIED RESEARCH.
11 0602747N UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED 64,335 64,335
RESEARCH.
12 0602750N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 279,815 279,815
APPLIED RESEARCH.
13 0602782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 29,081 29,081
WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
15 0602861N SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 81,423 81,423
MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
ACTIVITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 954,694 41,000 995,694
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
16 0603123N FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED 43,527 43,527
TECHNOLOGY.
17 0603271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 8,644 8,644
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
18 0603273N SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR 121,618 121,618
NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS.
19 0603640M USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 309,711 13,000 322,711
DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
..................... Autonomous Amphibious [8,000]
Robotic Vehicle
Development and
Integration.
..................... Low-Cost Tactical [5,000]
Hypersonic Long-Range
Precision Fires.
20 0603651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 6,561 6,561
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
21 0603673N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 455,851 455,851
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
22 0603680N MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 63,903 63,903
PROGRAM.
23 0603729N WARFIGHTER PROTECTION 7,653 7,653
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
24 0603758N NAVY WARFIGHTING 81,923 81,923
EXPERIMENTS AND
DEMONSTRATIONS.
25 0603782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 2,075 2,075
WARFARE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,101,466 13,000 1,114,466
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPES
27 0603128N UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM... 28,388 28,388
29 0603207N AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL 35,870 35,870
APPLICATIONS.
30 0603216N AVIATION SURVIVABILITY... 24,064 24,064
31 0603239N NAVAL CONSTRUCTION FORCES 8,603 8,603
32 0603254N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.. 18,904 18,904
33 0603261N TACTICAL AIRBORNE 2,241 2,241
RECONNAISSANCE.
34 0603382N ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS 2,083 -2,083
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Excess to need........... [-2,083]
35 0603502N SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER 32,359 32,359
MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
36 0603506N SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO 11,832 11,832
DEFENSE.
37 0603512N CARRIER SYSTEMS 8,361 8,361
DEVELOPMENT.
38 0603525N PILOT FISH............... 1,218,486 1,218,486
40 0603536N RETRACT JUNIPER.......... 206,429 206,429
41 0603542N RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL..... 730 730
43 0603561N ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM 162,651 162,651
DEVELOPMENT.
45 0603563N SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED 59,218 59,218
DESIGN.
46 0603564N SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & 96,022 96,022
FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
47 0603570N ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER 383,831 66,000 449,831
SYSTEMS.
..................... Advanced Nuclear Power [66,000]
Systems.
48 0603573N ADVANCED SURFACE 101,136 101,136
MACHINERY SYSTEMS.
49 0603576N CHALK EAGLE.............. 156,686 156,686
50 0603581N LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP 10,203 -10,000 203
(LCS).
..................... Excess to Need........... [-10,000]
51 0603582N COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION 19,643 19,643
52 0603595N OHIO REPLACEMENT......... 273,265 10,000 283,265
..................... Rapid Realization of [10,000]
Composites for Wet
Submarine Application.
53 0603596N LCS MISSION MODULES...... 39,258 -10,000 29,258
..................... Mine Countermeasure (MCM) [-10,000]
Mission Package.
54 0603597N AUTOMATED TEST AND RE- 9,862 9,862
TEST (ATRT).
55 0603598N ATRT ENTERPRISE RAPID 20,000 20,000
CAPABILITY.
56 0603599N FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT...... 84,199 84,199
57 0603609N CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 10,877 10,877
58 0603635M MARINE CORPS GROUND 278,261 278,261
COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM.
59 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 43,657 43,657
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
60 0603713N OCEAN ENGINEERING 9,647 9,647
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
61 0603721N ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. 22,829 22,829
62 0603724N NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM...... 46,577 23,000 69,577
..................... LOCNESS: derisking DEW/ [11,000]
advanced sensors on DDGx.
..................... Safety certification and [12,000]
USMC support for soldier/
ground vehicle
auxilliary power.
63 0603725N FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT... 10,925 10,925
64 0603734N CHALK CORAL.............. 414,282 414,282
65 0603739N NAVY LOGISTIC 1,016 1,016
PRODUCTIVITY.
66 0603746N RETRACT MAPLE............ 647,914 84,550 732,464
..................... Joint Warfighting [84,550]
Critical Munitions.
67 0603748N LINK PLUMERIA............ 376,672 500,000 876,672
..................... F/A-XX................... [500,000]
68 0603751N RETRACT ELM.............. 106,810 106,810
69 0603764M LINK EVERGREEN........... 529,550 529,550
70 0603790N NATO RESEARCH AND 5,234 5,234
DEVELOPMENT.
71 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY... 1,056 1,056
72 0603851M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 9,832 9,832
TESTING.
73 0603860N JOINT PRECISION APPROACH 41,978 41,978
AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
VAL.
76 0604025M RAPID DEFENSE 99 99
EXPERIMENTATION RESERVE
(RDER).
77 0604027N DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE... 151,271 151,271
78 0604028N SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED 4,855 4,855
UNDERSEA VEHICLES.
79 0604029N UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE 47,106 47,106
CORE TECHNOLOGIES.
82 0604112N GERALD R. FORD CLASS 112,704 112,704
NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
(CVN 78--80).
83 0604127N SURFACE MINE 18,504 18,504
COUNTERMEASURES.
84 0604272N TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL 14,387 14,387
INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
(TADIRCM).
85 0604286N NAVY ADVANCED 10,585 10,585
MANUFACTURING.
86 0604289M NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS 2,722 2,722
87 0604292N FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 7,125 7,125
(MARITIME STRIKE).
88 0604295M MARINE AVIATION 38,873 38,873
DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION.
89 0604320M RAPID TECHNOLOGY 16,316 16,316
CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE.
90 0604454N LX (R)................... 26,709 26,709
91 0604536N ADVANCED UNDERSEA 143,943 143,943
PROTOTYPING.
92 0604636N COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 16,689 16,689
SYSTEMS (C-UAS).
93 0604659N PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS 110,072 125,000 235,072
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
..................... Emerging Hypersonic [25,000]
Capabilities (USA, USN).
..................... Navy MACE................ [100,000]
94 0604707N SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 6,866 6,866
WARFARE (SEW)
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
SUPPORT.
95 0604786N OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE 225,773 60,000 285,773
WARFARE WEAPON
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... LRASM MADCAP C-3 [60,000]
development acceleration.
97 0605513N UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE 3,712 3,712
ENABLING CAPABILITIES.
98 0605514M GROUND BASED ANTI-SHIP 29,004 29,004
MISSILE.
100 0605518N CONVENTIONAL PROMPT 798,337 798,337
STRIKE (CPS).
101 0105519N NUCLEAR-ARMED SEA- 0 320,000 320,000
LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE
(SLCM-N) SUPPORT.
..................... Restoration of full [320,000]
funding for Nuclear-
Armed Sea-Launched
Cruise Missile.
102 0207147M COLLABORATIVE COMBAT 58,000 58,000
AIRCRAFT.
103 0303260N DEFENSE MILITARY 1,980 1,980
DECEPTION INITIATIVE.
104 0303354N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT-- 3,864 3,864
MIP.
105 0304240M ADVANCED TACTICAL 2,822 2,822
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
106 0304270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 1,278 1,278
DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
107 0304797N UNDERSEA ARTIFICIAL 29,308 29,308
INTELLIGENCE / MACHINE
LEARNING (AI/ML).
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 7,454,345 1,166,467 8,620,812
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION
108 0603208N TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT. 15,101 15,101
109 0604038N MARITIME TARGETING CELL.. 147,802 147,802
111 0604212N OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT... 987 987
113 0604215N STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT.... 4,540 4,540
114 0604216N MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER 64,838 64,838
UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
116 0604230N WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM... 15,778 15,778
117 0604231N COMMAND AND CONTROL 64,547 64,547
SYSTEMS.
118 0604234N ADVANCED HAWKEYE......... 350,324 350,324
119 0604245M H-1 UPGRADES............. 62,240 62,240
120 0604261N ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS.. 52,549 52,549
121 0604262N V-22..................... 124,958 124,958
122 0604264N AIR CREW SYSTEMS 44,297 44,297
DEVELOPMENT.
123 0604269N EA-18.................... 184,921 184,921
124 0604270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 185,606 185,606
DEVELOPMENT.
125 0604273M EXECUTIVE HELO 74,980 74,980
DEVELOPMENT.
126 0604274N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 64,167 64,167
(NGJ).
127 0604280N JOINT TACTICAL RADIO 289,345 289,345
SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
128 0604282N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 228,256 228,256
(NGJ) INCREMENT II.
129 0604307N SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT 432,981 432,981
SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
130 0604329N SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB) 23,836 23,836
131 0604366N STANDARD MISSILE 412,964 412,964
IMPROVEMENTS.
132 0604373N AIRBORNE MCM............. 8,372 8,372
133 0604378N NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE 39,878 39,878
CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
135 0604501N ADVANCED ABOVE WATER 67,881 67,881
SENSORS.
136 0604503N SUBMARINE SWFTS 204,158 204,158
MODERNIZATION.
137 0604504N AIR CONTROL.............. 23,930 23,930
138 0604512N SHIPBOARD AVIATION 33,704 33,704
SYSTEMS.
139 0604516N SHIP SURVIVABILITY....... 4,364 4,364
141 0604522N AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 74,937 74,937
RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
142 0604530N ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR 32,037 32,037
(AAG).
143 0604558N NEW DESIGN SSN........... 247,293 247,293
145 0604567N SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ 28,400 28,400
LIVE FIRE T&E.
146 0604574N NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER 3,552 3,552
RESOURCES.
147 0604601N MINE DEVELOPMENT......... 130 79,300 79,430
..................... Enhanced Joint Direct [50,000]
Attack Missile (JDAM)
(USN).
..................... Quickstrike Extended [29,300]
Range (QS-ER) (USN).
148 0604610N LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO 12,565 12,565
DEVELOPMENT.
149 0604654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 8,740 8,740
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
150 0604657M USMC GROUND COMBAT/ 17,377 17,377
SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
151 0604703N PERSONNEL, TRAINING, 6,703 6,703
SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
FACTORS.
152 0604727N JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON 895 895
SYSTEMS.
153 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT 167,711 167,711
& CONTROL).
154 0604756N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 145,007 145,007
(ENGAGE: HARD KILL).
155 0604757N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 232,368 232,368
(ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW).
156 0604761N INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING. 7,023 7,023
157 0604771N MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT...... 7,629 7,629
158 0604777N NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM..... 3,724 3,724
159 0604850N SSN(X)................... 365,987 365,987
160 0605013M INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 16,000 16,000
DEVELOPMENT.
161 0605013N INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 192,784 192,784
DEVELOPMENT.
162 0605024N ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 3,428 3,428
SUPPORT.
163 0605180N TACAMO MODERNIZATION..... 1,243,978 1,243,978
164 0605212M CH-53K RDTE.............. 135,432 135,432
165 0605215N MISSION PLANNING......... 120,255 120,255
166 0605217N COMMON AVIONICS.......... 67,944 67,944
167 0605220N SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR 7,267 7,267
(SSC).
168 0605285N NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER.. 74,320 74,320
170 0605414N UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION 305,487 305,487
(UCA).
171 0605450M JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND 59,077 59,077
MISSILE (JAGM).
172 0605500N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 41,129 41,129
AIRCRAFT (MMA).
173 0605504N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 103,397 103,397
(MMA) INCREMENT III.
174 0605516N LONG RANGE FIRES......... 138,443 138,443
175 0605611M MARINE CORPS ASSAULT 44,644 44,644
VEHICLES SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
176 0605813M JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 6,984 6,984
VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
177 0204202N DESTROYERS GUIDED MISSILE 58,817 58,817
(DDG-1000).
178 0301377N COUNTERING ADVANCED 16,906 16,906
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
(CACW).
179 0302315N NON-KINETIC 23,818 23,818
COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT.
183 0304785N ISR & INFO OPERATIONS.... 170,567 170,567
185 0306250M CYBER OPERATIONS 11,936 11,936
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 7,431,995 79,300 7,511,295
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
186 0604256N THREAT SIMULATOR 25,133 25,133
DEVELOPMENT.
187 0604258N TARGET SYSTEMS 14,191 10,000 24,191
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Secure power: high value [10,000]
target protection.
188 0604759N MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 61,946 61,946
189 0605152N STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 3,596 3,596
SUPPORT--NAVY.
190 0605154N CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES 31,695 31,695
193 0605853N MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 133,538 133,538
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
194 0605856N STRATEGIC TECHNICAL 3,709 3,709
SUPPORT.
195 0605863N RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT 151,479 151,479
SUPPORT.
196 0605864N TEST AND EVALUATION 463,725 463,725
SUPPORT.
197 0605865N OPERATIONAL TEST AND 30,880 30,880
EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
198 0605866N NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 22,563 22,563
WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
199 0605867N SEW SURVEILLANCE/ 7,325 7,325
RECONAISSANCE SUPPORT.
200 0605873M MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE 28,816 28,816
SUPPORT.
201 0605898N MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 42,751 42,751
202 0606295M MARINE AVIATION 4,732 4,732
DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGEMENT
AND SUPPORT.
203 0606355N WARFARE INNOVATION 37,551 37,551
MANAGEMENT.
204 0305327N INSIDER THREAT........... 2,653 2,653
205 0902498N MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS 2,041 2,041
(DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES).
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,068,324 10,000 1,078,324
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
208 0604840M F-35 C2D2................ 494,034 494,034
209 0604840N F-35 C2D2................ 475,710 475,710
210 0605520M MARINE CORPS AIR DEFENSE 56,140 56,140
WEAPONS SYSTEMS.
211 0607658N COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT 136,436 136,436
CAPABILITY (CEC).
212 0101221N STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS 807,099 807,099
SYSTEM SUPPORT.
213 0101224N SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY 63,252 5,000 68,252
PROGRAM.
..................... Strategic Weapon System [5,000]
shipboard navigation
system modernization.
214 0101226N SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 56,401 56,401
WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.
215 0101402N NAVY STRATEGIC 52,404 52,404
COMMUNICATIONS.
216 0204136N F/A-18 SQUADRONS......... 369,863 369,863
218 0204229N TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK 151,177 151,177
MISSION PLANNING CENTER
(TMPC).
219 0204311N INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE 71,800 71,800
SYSTEM.
220 0204313N SHIP-TOWED ARRAY 1,990 1,990
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS.
221 0204413N AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL 0
SUPPORT UNITS
(DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
222 0204460M GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED 32,045 32,045
RADAR (G/ATOR).
223 0204571N CONSOLIDATED TRAINING 199,067 199,067
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
224 0204575N ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) 115,834 115,834
READINESS SUPPORT.
225 0205601N ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE 33,659 33,659
IMPROVEMENT.
227 0205632N MK-48 ADCAP.............. 84,338 84,338
228 0205633N AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS.... 127,421 9,900 137,321
..................... Autonomous airfield FOD [9,900]
sweeping systems.
229 0205675N OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER 209,200 209,200
SYSTEMS.
230 0206313M MARINE CORPS 125,488 9,000 134,488
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
..................... Hydrogen Fuel Cell for [5,000]
small-UAS.
..................... Integrated Contested [4,000]
Logistics Communications.
231 0206335M COMMON AVIATION COMMAND 17,813 17,813
AND CONTROL SYSTEM
(CAC2S).
232 0206623M MARINE CORPS GROUND 70,139 70,139
COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
SYSTEMS.
233 0206624M MARINE CORPS COMBAT 20,419 20,419
SERVICES SUPPORT.
234 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ 34,289 34,289
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
SYSTEMS.
236 0207161N TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 34,650 34,650
237 0207163N ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 26,286 26,286
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
238 0208043N PLANNING AND DECISION AID 3,572 3,572
SYSTEM (PDAS).
242 0303138N AFLOAT NETWORKS.......... 70,742 70,742
243 0303140N INFORMATION SYSTEMS 64,147 64,147
SECURITY PROGRAM.
244 0305192N MILITARY INTELLIGENCE 3,311 3,311
PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
247 0305208M DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 61,238 61,238
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
248 0305220N MQ-4C TRITON............. 14,421 14,421
250 0305232M RQ-11 UAV................ 1,063 1,063
252 0305241N MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR 41,414 41,414
DEVELOPMENT.
253 0305242M UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 9,157 9,157
(UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
255 0305421N MQ-4C TRITON 361,943 361,943
MODERNIZATION.
256 0307577N INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 803 803
(IMD).
257 0308601N MODELING AND SIMULATION 12,389 12,389
SUPPORT.
258 0702207N DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON- 23,372 23,372
IF).
259 0708730N MARITIME TECHNOLOGY 3,600 3,600
(MARITECH).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 2,554,769 24,000 2,578,769
..................... Acceleration of Navy [24,000]
program.
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 7,092,895 47,900 7,140,795
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
260 0608013N RISK MANAGEMENT 13,341 13,341
INFORMATION--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
261 0608231N MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND 12,520 12,520
AND CONTROL (MTC2)--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 25,861 0 25,861
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 25,708,049 1,377,767 27,085,816
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, NAVY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, AF
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102F DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 302,716 302,716
2 0601103F UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 94,121 94,121
INITIATIVES.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 396,837 0 396,837
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
3 0602020F FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES 78,214 78,214
APPLIED RESEARCH.
4 0602022F UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED 6,294 6,294
RESEARCH CENTER (UARC)--
TACTICAL AUTONOMY.
5 0602102F MATERIALS................ 147,422 20,000 167,422
..................... Advanced materials [10,000]
science for
manufacturing research.
..................... Metals Affordability [5,000]
Iniatitive.
..................... NCSEB Recommendation--AI- [5,000]
Ready Biological Data.
7 0602202F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 133,928 133,928
APPLIED RESEARCH.
8 0602203F AEROSPACE SYSTEMS 321,059 321,059
TECHNOLOGIES.
9 0602204F AEROSPACE SENSORS........ 199,120 199,120
11 0602298F SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 10,813 10,813
MANAGEMENT-- MAJOR
HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
12 0602336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS 4,969 4,969
TECH EXPLORATION.
13 0602602F CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 125,102 125,102
14 0602605F DIRECTED ENERGY 92,331 92,331
TECHNOLOGY.
15 0602788F DOMINANT INFORMATION 187,036 30,000 217,036
SCIENCES AND METHODS.
..................... Agile, Assured, and [5,000]
Autonomous Battle
Management Network and
Readiness Accelerator
(3A-BMN).
..................... Dependable AI for [15,000]
National Security.
..................... Distributed Quantum [10,000]
Networking Testbed and
Quantum Cloud Computing
Environment.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 1,306,288 50,000 1,356,288
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
16 0603032F FUTURE AF INTEGRATED 268,754 268,754
TECHNOLOGY DEMOS.
17 0603112F ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR 31,021 31,021
WEAPON SYSTEMS.
18 0603199F SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND 12,915 12,915
TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
19 0603203F ADVANCED AEROSPACE 69,652 69,652
SENSORS.
20 0603211F AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/ 102,125 102,125
DEMO.
23 0603273F SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR 128,407 20,000 148,407
NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS.
..................... S&T for Nuclear Reentry [20,000]
Systems--Resonating
Fiber Optic Gyroscopes.
25 0603456F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 19,790 19,790
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
26 0603601F CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS 99,263 99,263
TECHNOLOGY.
27 0603605F ADVANCED WAEPONS 4,434 4,434
TECHNOLOGY.
28 0603680F MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 38,891 4,000 42,891
PROGRAM.
..................... Additive Manufacturing [4,000]
for Engineer Components.
29 0603788F BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE 30,812 30,812
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
30 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 28,316 28,316
ENTERPRISE R&D.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 834,380 24,000 858,380
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPES
32 0603260F INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED 3,901 3,901
DEVELOPMENT.
33 0603742F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION 25,172 25,172
TECHNOLOGY.
34 0603790F NATO RESEARCH AND 4,595 4,595
DEVELOPMENT.
35 0603851F INTERCONTINENTAL 90,096 90,096
BALLISTIC MISSILE--DEM/
VAL.
36 0604001F NC3 ADVANCED CONCEPTS.... 15,910 15,910
37 0604003F ADVANCED BATTLE 1,040,475 1,040,475
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ABMS).
39 0604005F NC3 COMMERCIAL 67,081 67,081
DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
40 0604007F E-7...................... 199,676 700,000 899,676
..................... E-7 continued development [700,000]
and procurement.
41 0604009F AFWERX................... 18,499 18,499
42 0604010F NEXT GENERATION ADAPTIVE 330,270 330,270
PROPULSION.
43 0604015F LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER 2,347,225 2,347,225
47 0604183F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING-- 802,810 802,810
HYPERSONIC ATTACK CRUISE
MISSILE (HACM).
49 0604257F ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND 40,779 40,779
SENSORS AND SENSORS.
52 0604317F TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER...... 3,558 3,558
53 0604327F HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED 144,143 144,143
TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
(HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
54 0604336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS 56,926 56,926
PROTOTYPING.
55 0604414F CYBER RESILIENCY OF 46,148 46,148
WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS.
56 0604609F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS & 22,754 22,754
CONCEPT MATURATION.
57 0604668F JOINT TRANSPORTATION 129,626 129,626
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JTMS).
58 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 4,996 4,996
ENTERPRISE R&D.
59 0604858F TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM.. 134,833 21,000 155,833
..................... Blended Wing Body--Next [21,000]
Generation Aircraft.
60 0604860F OPERATIONAL ENERGY AND 49,460 66,000 115,460
INSTALLATION RESILIENCE.
..................... Operational energy [56,000]
program increase.
..................... XR (AR/VR) plus mission [10,000]
execution tools.
61 0605057F NEXT GENERATION AIR- 12,960 12,960
REFUELING SYSTEM.
63 0606004F NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE 1,097 5,000 6,097
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Wing-level additive [5,000]
manufacturing.
64 0606005F DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION 15,997 15,000 30,997
OFFICE.
..................... Adaptive Threat Modeling [15,000]
Lab.
65 0207110F F-47..................... 0 500,000 500,000
..................... F-47--misaligned budget [500,000]
request.
66 0207147F COLLABORATIVE COMBAT 111,365 678,000 789,365
AIRCRAFT.
..................... CCA--misaligned budget [678,000]
request.
67 0207179F AUTONOMOUS COLLABORATIVE 62,019 62,019
PLATFORMS.
68 0207420F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION.... 1,713 1,713
71 0207455F THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG- 17,344 17,344
RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
72 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE 15,785 15,785
SYSTEMS (ABADS).
73 0207606F JOINT SIMULATION 260,667 260,667
ENVIRONMENT (JSE).
74 0208030F WAR RESERVE MATERIEL-- 9,865 9,865
AMMUNITION.
75 0303010F AF ISR DIGITAL 24,817 24,817
INFRASTRUCTURE.
76 0305236F COMMON DATA LINK 32,511 32,511
EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA).
77 0305601F MISSION PARTNER 14,956 14,956
ENVIRONMENTS.
78 0701200F ENTERPRISE SELECT CLASS 1,000 1,000
II.
79 0708051F RAPID SUSTAINMENT 32,666 69,000 101,666
MODERNIZATION (RSM).
..................... B-21 Additive [40,000]
Manufacturing.
..................... Engine wash, data [29,000]
analysis, mission
execution excellence
program.
80 0808736F SPECIAL VICTIM 1,997 1,997
ACCOUNTABILITY AND
INVESTIGATION.
81 0808737F INTEGRATED PRIMARY 5,167 5,167
PREVENTION.
82 0901410F CONTRACTING INFORMATION 29,277 29,277
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
83 1206415F U.S. SPACE COMMAND 36,913 36,913
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
SUPPORT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 6,267,049 2,054,000 8,321,049
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION
84 0604200F FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON 36,125 36,125
ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
85 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 125,663 125,663
IMPROVEMENTS.
86 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT.. 79,312 79,312
87 0604270F ELECTRONIC WARFARE 17,013 17,013
DEVELOPMENT.
88 0604281F TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS 77,170 77,170
ENTERPRISE.
89 0604287F PHYSICAL SECURITY 10,589 10,589
EQUIPMENT.
90 0604288F SURVIVABLE AIRBORNE 1,826,328 1,826,328
OPERATIONS CENTER (SAOC).
91 0604602F ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE 7,253 7,253
DEVELOPMENT.
92 0604604F SUBMUNITIONS............. 3,502 3,502
93 0604617F AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT..... 23,474 23,474
94 0604706F LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS..... 20,542 20,542
95 0604735F COMBAT TRAINING RANGES... 139,499 139,499
96 0604932F LONG RANGE STANDOFF 606,955 149,000 755,955
WEAPON.
..................... Conventional Variant [8,000]
Advance Planning.
..................... Long Range Standoff [141,000]
Weapon Acceleration.
97 0604933F ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION.. 3,252 3,252
100 0605056F OPEN ARCHITECTURE 44,150 44,150
MANAGEMENT.
101 0605223F ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING.. 172,378 172,378
103 0605238F GROUND BASED STRATEGIC 2,647,563 2,000,000 4,647,563
DETERRENT EMD.
..................... Restoration of full [2,000,000]
funding for Sentinel
ICBM program EMD.
104 0605296F MICROELECTRONICS SECURE 104,990 104,990
ENCLAVE.
106 0207039F COGNITIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC 44,267 44,267
WARFARE.
107 0207110F F-47..................... 2,579,362 2,579,362
109 0207279F ISOLATED PERSONNEL 99,248 99,248
SURVIVABILITY AND
RECOVERY.
110 0207328F STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON... 255,336 255,336
111 0207407F ELECTROMAGNETIC BATTLE 20,439 20,439
MANAGEMENT (EMBM).
112 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 12,898 12,898
TRAINING.
114 0303008F SATURN................... 4,985 4,985
117 0305155F THEATER NUCLEAR WEAPON 19,875 19,875
STORAGE & SECURITY
SYSTEM.
120 0401221F KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS.. 145,434 145,434
121 0401319F VC-25B................... 602,318 602,318
122 0701212F AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS... 30,341 30,341
123 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS.... 5,067 5,067
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 9,765,328 2,149,000 11,914,328
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
125 0604256F THREAT SIMULATOR 41,125 41,125
DEVELOPMENT.
126 0604759F MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 156,915 156,915
127 0605101F RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE... 32,405 32,405
129 0605712F INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST 13,872 13,872
& EVALUATION.
130 0605807F TEST AND EVALUATION 1,098,871 1,098,871
SUPPORT.
133 0605829F ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER, 435,918 435,918
NETWORK, & BUS SYS.
134 0605831F ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY 1,153,165 1,153,165
INTEGRATION.
136 0605833F ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR 368,881 368,881
SYSTEMS.
137 0605898F MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 5,960 5,960
138 0605976F FACILITIES RESTORATION 217,761 217,761
AND MODERNIZATION--TEST
AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.
139 0605978F FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT-- 91,969 91,969
TEST AND EVALUATION
SUPPORT.
140 0606017F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND 28,157 28,157
MATURATION.
141 0606398F MANAGEMENT HQ--T&E....... 7,417 7,417
142 0208201F OFFENSIVE SMALL UNMANNED 4,985 4,985
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (SUAS).
143 0303255F COMMAND, CONTROL, 15,662 50,000 65,662
COMMUNICATION, AND
COMPUTERS (C4)--STRATCOM.
..................... C4 STRATCOM.............. [20,000]
..................... NC3 network sensor [15,000]
demonstration.
..................... NC3 REACH................ [15,000]
144 0308602F ENTEPRISE INFORMATION 101,779 101,779
SERVICES (EIS).
145 0702806F ACQUISITION AND 22,670 22,670
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
146 0804776F ADVANCED DISTRIBUTED 1,698 1,698
LEARNING.
148 1001004F INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES. 4,430 4,430
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 3,803,640 50,000 3,853,640
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
149 0604233F SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE 66,200 66,200
FLIGHT TRAINING.
150 0604283F BATTLE MGMT COM & CTRL 17,353 17,353
SENSOR DEVELOPMENT.
153 0604840F F-35 C2D2................ 1,182,094 1,182,094
154 0605018F AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL 64,050 64,050
AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
155 0605024F ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 62,965 62,965
EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
157 0605229F HH-60W................... 43,579 43,579
158 0605278F HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E.... 50,845 50,845
159 0606018F NC3 INTEGRATION.......... 40,066 40,066
160 0101113F B-52 SQUADRONS........... 931,164 931,164
161 0101122F AIR-LAUNHCED CRUISE 555 555
MISSILE (ALCM).
162 0101126F B-1B SQUADRONS........... 116,589 116,589
163 0101127F B-2 SQUADRONS............ 12,519 12,519
164 0101213F MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS...... 106,032 106,032
165 0101316F WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC 24,081 24,081
COMMUNICATION.
166 0101318F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 6,928 6,928
STRATCOM--GLOBAL STRIKE.
167 0101328F ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES.... 259,605 259,605
169 0102110F MH-139A.................. 5,982 5,982
170 0102326F REGION/SECTOR OPERATION 726 726
CONROL CENTER
MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
171 0102417F OVER-THE-HORIZON 132,097 132,097
BACKSCATTER RADAR.
172 0202834F VEHICLES AND SUPPORT 744 744
EQUIPMENT--GENERAL.
173 0205219F MQ-9 UAV................. 26,689 26,689
174 0205671F JOINT COUNTER RCIED 3,424 3,424
ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
176 0207133F F-16 SQUADRONS........... 216,638 150,000 366,638
..................... F-16 Open Systems [75,000]
Environment/BLOS Systems.
..................... IVEWS development for F- [75,000]
16.
177 0207134F F-15E SQUADRONS.......... 233,018 180,000 413,018
..................... F-15 Global Lighting/ [180,000]
Eagle Tether.
178 0207136F MANNED DESTRUCTIVE 17,680 17,680
SUPPRESSION.
179 0207138F F-22A SQUADRONS.......... 852,332 852,332
180 0207142F F-35 SQUADRONS........... 48,446 48,446
181 0207146F F-15EX................... 78,345 78,345
182 0207161F TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 86,549 86,549
183 0207163F ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 51,242 51,242
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
184 0207172F JOINT ADVANCED TACTICAL 425,029 425,029
MISSILE (JATM).
186 0207238F E-11A.................... 15,244 15,244
188 0207247F AF TENCAP................ 52,492 52,492
189 0207249F PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS 13,613 13,613
PROCUREMENT.
191 0207268F AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 52,734 52,734
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
192 0207325F JOINT-TO-SURFACE STANDOFF 232,252 5,000 237,252
MISSILE (JASSM).
..................... Joint Air to Surface [5,000]
Stand-Off Missile
(JASSM) (USAF).
193 0207327F SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB) 24,810 24,810
194 0207410F AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS 113,086 113,086
CENTER (AOC).
195 0207412F CONTROL AND REPORTING 17,569 17,569
CENTER (CRC).
198 0207431F COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE 33,601 33,601
SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
199 0207438F THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT 6,787 6,787
(TBM) C4I.
200 0207439F ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE 60,072 60,072
INT REPROG (EWIR).
202 0207452F DCAPES................... 8,507 8,507
203 0207457F AIR FORCE SPECIAL WARFARE 27,526 27,526
(SPECWAR).
204 0207521F AIR FORCE CALIBRATION 2,273 2,273
PROGRAMS.
206 0207590F SEEK EAGLE............... 33,707 33,707
208 0207611F READINESS DECISION 8,880 8,880
SUPPORT ENTERPRISE.
209 0207697F DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND 4,399 4,399
EXERCISES.
210 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 8,096 8,096
TRAINING.
211 0208006F MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS. 138,745 138,745
212 0208007F TACTICAL DECEPTION....... 13,711 13,711
213 0208087F DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE 31,197 31,197
OPERATIONS.
214 0208088F AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE 95,034 95,034
OPERATIONS.
218 0208288F INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS.. 1,012 1,012
219 0301025F GEOBASE.................. 999 999
220 0301113F CYBER SECURITY 14,749 14,749
INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT.
226 0301377F COUNTERING ADVANCED 1,117 1,117
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
(CACW).
228 0301401F AF MULTI-DOMAIN NON- 2,987 2,987
TRADITIONAL ISR
BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
229 0302015F E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE 54,457 54,457
OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
230 0302315F NON-KINETIC 7,006 7,006
COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT.
232 0303089F CYBERSPACE AND DODIN 10,080 10,080
OPERATIONS.
233 0303131F MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 99,599 99,599
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
234 0303133F HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO 19,955 19,955
SYSTEMS.
235 0303140F INFORMATION SYSTEMS 98,414 98,414
SECURITY PROGRAM.
236 0303248F ALL DOMAIN COMMON 76,642 76,642
PLATFORM.
237 0303260F JOINT MILITARY DECEPTION 356 356
INITIATIVE.
238 0304100F STRATEGIC MISSION 75,164 75,164
PLANNING & EXECUTION
SYSTEM (SMPES).
239 0304109F THRESHER................. 105 105
242 0304260F AIRBORNE SIGINT 90,650 90,650
ENTERPRISE.
243 0304310F COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC 4,127 4,127
ANALYSIS.
247 0305020F CCMD INTELLIGENCE 1,547 1,547
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
248 0305022F ISR MODERNIZATION & 22,237 22,237
AUTOMATION DVMT (IMAD).
249 0305099F GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC 4,257 4,257
MANAGEMENT (GATM).
250 0305103F CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 310 310
251 0305111F WEATHER SERVICE.......... 30,509 30,509
252 0305114F AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, 17,259 17,259
APPROACH, AND LANDING
SYSTEM (ATCALS).
253 0305116F AERIAL TARGETS........... 5,081 5,081
256 0305128F SECURITY AND 8,964 8,964
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
257 0305146F DEFENSE JOINT 6,524 6,524
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
258 0305158F TACTICAL TERMINAL........ 1,099 1,099
259 0305179F INTEGRATED BROADCAST 19,085 19,085
SERVICE (IBS).
261 0305206F AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 25,432 25,432
SYSTEMS.
262 0305207F MANNED RECONNAISSANCE 16,643 16,643
SYSTEMS.
263 0305208F DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 79,033 79,033
SURFACE SYSTEM.
265 0305221F NETWORK-CENTRIC 12,019 12,019
COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
266 0305238F NATO AGS................. 816 816
267 0305240F ISR TRANSPORT AND 32,578 32,578
PROCESSING.
268 0305249F AF JWICS ENTERPRISE...... 21,097 21,097
269 0305600F INTERNATIONAL 18,946 18,946
INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY
AND ARCHITECTURES.
270 0305836F C2IMERA.................. 13,867 13,867
272 0305903F MOBILE COMMAND AND 3,988 3,988
CONTROL CENTERS (MCCCS).
273 0305984F PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,891 2,891
COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2).
274 0307577F INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 3,000 3,000
(IMD).
276 0401119F C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS 33,713 33,713
(IF).
277 0401130F C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF)....... 76,514 25,000 101,514
..................... C-17 blade coatings...... [17,000]
..................... C-17 winglet procurement. [8,000]
278 0401132F C-130J PROGRAM........... 31,354 70,000 101,354
..................... LC-130 Non-recurring [70,000]
engineering.
279 0401134F LARGE AIRCRAFT IR 52,928 52,928
COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
280 0401218F KC-135S.................. 0 35,000 35,000
0401218F KC-135 drag reduction.... [35,000]
281 0401318F CV-22.................... 653 653
283 0708610F LOGISTICS INFORMATION 18,581 18,581
TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
284 0801380F AF LVC OPERATIONAL 33,898 33,898
TRAINING (LVC-OT).
285 0804743F OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING.... 2,371 2,371
286 0901202F JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,080 2,080
AGENCY.
287 0901218F CIVILIAN COMPENSATION 4,355 4,355
PROGRAM.
288 0901220F PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION. 2,766 2,766
289 0901226F AIR FORCE STUDIES AND 14,761 14,761
ANALYSIS AGENCY.
290 0901538F FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 3,982 3,982
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
291 0901554F DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACNTNG 38,942 38,942
MGT SYS (DEAMS).
292 1201921F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 335 335
STRATCOM--SPACE
ACTIVITIES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 22,264,031 134,000 22,398,031
..................... Acceleration of Air Force [121,000]
program.
..................... Advanced Sensors [13,000]
Application Program.
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 29,643,766 599,000 30,242,766
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 52,017,288 4,926,000 56,943,288
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, AF.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, SF
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102SF DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 22,270 22,270
2 0601103SF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 14,569 14,569
INITIATIVES.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 36,839 0 36,839
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
4 1206601SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY......... 245,497 8,000 253,497
..................... Space Modeling, [8,000]
Simulation, & Analysis
Hub.
5 1206616SF SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 2,591 1,000 3,591
DEVELOPMENT/DEMO.
..................... Service Support to [1,000]
SPACECOM Activities.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 248,088 9,000 257,088
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
6 1206310SF SPACE SCIENCE AND 459,989 459,989
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
7 1206616SF SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 128,588 1,000 129,588
DEVELOPMENT/DEMO.
..................... Rocket Cargo program..... [-7,000]
..................... Space Advanced Technology [8,000]
Development/Demo.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 588,577 1,000 589,577
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPES
8 0604002SF SPACE FORCE WEATHER 857 857
SERVICES RESEARCH.
9 1203010SF SPACE FORCE IT, DATA 88,606 88,606
ANALYTICS, DIGITAL
SOLUTIONS.
10 1203164SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL 175,304 175,304
POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER
EQUIPMENT) (SPACE).
11 1203622SF SPACE WARFIGHTING 125,982 125,982
ANALYSIS.
12 1203710SF EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS.... 77,135 77,135
13 1203955SF SPACE ACCESS, MOBILITY & 14,478 14,478
LOGISTICS (SAML).
14 1206410SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY 1,307,970 277,000 1,584,970
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPING.
..................... SDA Tranche 3 Transport [277,000]
Layer.
15 1206427SF SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 67,246 67,246
TRANSITIONS (SSPT).
16 1206438SF SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. 60,106 60,106
17 1206458SF TECH TRANSITION (SPACE).. 326,144 326,144
18 1206730SF SPACE SECURITY AND 45,200 45,200
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
19 1206760SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 114,430 114,430
ENTERPRISE SERVICE
(PTES).
20 1206761SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 571,921 571,921
SERVICE (PTS).
21 1206855SF EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM 1,229,929 1,229,929
(ESS).
22 1206857SF SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES 9,664 9,664
OFFICE.
23 1206862SF TACTICALLY RESPONSIVE 33,282 60,000 93,282
SPACE.
..................... Tactically Responsive [60,000]
Space.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 4,248,254 337,000 4,585,254
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION
25 1203269SF GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS 179,249 179,249
IIIF).
26 1206421SF COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS..... 31,298 31,298
27 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON. 38,501 38,501
28 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 992 992
SYSTEM.
29 1206431SF ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM 13,825 13,825
(SPACE).
31 1206433SF WIDEBAND GLOBAL SATCOM 29,609 29,609
(SPACE).
32 1206440SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GROUND.... 358,330 358,330
33 1206442SF NEXT GENERATION OPIR..... 189,621 189,621
34 1206443SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GEO....... 432,073 432,073
36 1206445SF COMMERCIAL SATCOM 132,060 132,060
(COMSATCOM) INTEGRATION.
37 1206446SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING 1,757,354 1,757,354
MISSILE TRACKING--LOW
EARTH ORBIT (LEO.
38 1206447SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING 686,348 686,348
MISSILE TRACKING--MEDUM
EARTH ORBIT (MEO.
39 1206771SF COMMERCIAL SERVICES...... 36,628 36,628
40 1206853SF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE 6,595 6,595
LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)--
EMD.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 3,892,483 0 3,892,483
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
44 1206392SF ACQ WORKFORCE--SPACE & 269,162 269,162
MISSILE SYSTEMS.
45 1206398SF SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS 15,356 15,356
CENTER--MHA.
46 1206399SF SSC ENTERPRISE 110,598 110,598
ENGINEERING &
INTEGRATION.
47 1206759SF MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT-- 189,083 189,083
SPACE.
48 1206860SF ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH 19,857 19,857
PROGRAM (SPACE).
49 1206864SF SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP). 28,787 28,787
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 632,843 0 632,843
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
51 1201212SF SERVICE-WIDE SUPPORT (NOT 18,451 18,451
OTHERWISE ACCOUNTED FOR).
52 1203001SF FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS 303 303
TERMINALS (FAB-T).
53 1203040SF DCO-SPACE................ 102,439 102,439
54 1203109SF NARROWBAND SATELLITE 421,847 421,847
COMMUNICATIONS.
55 1203110SF SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK 93,780 93,780
(SPACE).
56 1203154SF LONG RANGE KILL CHAINS... 1,916 1,916
57 1203155SF GROUND MOVING TARGET 1,063,384 1,063,384
INDICATOR (GMTI).
58 1203173SF SPACE AND MISSILE TEST 22,128 22,128
AND EVALUATION CENTER.
59 1203174SF SPACE INNOVATION, 82,399 82,399
INTEGRATION AND RAPID
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
60 1203182SF SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM 54,996 54,996
(SPACE).
61 1203330SF SPACE SUPERIORITY ISR.... 24,411 24,411
62 1203609SF PLEO SATCOM (MILNET)..... 277,407 277,407
63 1203873SF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 0 22,000 22,000
RADARS.
..................... PARCS radar upgrades..... [22,000]
64 1203906SF NCMC--ITW/AA SYSTEM...... 25,839 25,839
66 1203913SF NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM 96,836 96,836
(SPACE).
67 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 182,377 182,377
OPERATIONS.
68 1206423SF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM 190,484 190,484
III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
SEGMENT.
73 1206772SF RAPID RESILIENT COMMAND 106,220 106,220
AND CONTROL (R2C2).
75 1208053SF JOINT TACTICAL GROUND 6,698 6,698
SYSTEM.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 2,866,499 2,866,499
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 5,638,414 22,000 5,660,414
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
76 1208248SF SPACE DOMAIN AWARENESS/ 200,968 200,968
PLANNING/TASKING SW.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 200,968 0 200,968
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 15,486,466 369,000 15,855,466
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, SF.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, DW
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601000BR DTRA BASIC RESEARCH...... 15,643 15,643
3 0601108D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 16,817 16,817
RESEARCH INITIATIVES.
4 0601110D8Z BASIC RESEARCH 82,264 30,000 112,264
INITIATIVES.
..................... Defense Established [30,000]
Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research.
6 0601120D8Z NATIONAL DEFENSE 146,010 146,010
EDUCATION PROGRAM.
7 0601122E EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES... 360,456 360,456
8 0601228D8Z HISTORICALLY BLACK 99,610 10,000 109,610
COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
INSTITUTIONS.
..................... Efficient AI Linguistics [10,000]
Algorithmic Development
to Support National
Security.
9 0601384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 36,582 36,582
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 757,382 40,000 797,382
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
10 0602000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS 19,734 19,734
TECHNOLOGY.
11 0602023E ACCESS AND AWARENESS..... 100,791 100,791
12 0602024E WARFIGHTING PERFORMANCE.. 278,121 278,121
13 0602025E MAKING, MAINTAINING, 1,347,049 1,347,049
SUPPLY CHAIN AND
LOGISTICS.
14 0602026E EFFECTS.................. 20,275 20,275
16 0602128D8Z PROMOTION AND PROTECTION 3,166 3,166
STRATEGIES.
17 0602230D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 46,261 46,261
INNOVATION.
18 0602234D8Z LINCOLN LABORATORY 11,479 30,000 41,479
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
..................... Lincoln Laboratory [30,000]
Research Program.
19 0602251D8Z APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE 53,983 53,983
ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
PRIORITIES.
21 0602384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 230,751 230,751
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
22 0602668D8Z CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH.. 17,988 33,000 50,988
..................... University Consortium for [20,000]
Cybersecurity.
..................... Pacific Intelligence and [13,000]
Innovation Initiative
(P3I).
28 0602718BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 161,495 161,495
DESTRUCTION APPLIED
RESEARCH.
29 0602751D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 8,883 8,883
INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
30 0602890D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 48,738 48,738
RESEARCH.
31 0602891D8Z FSRM MODELLING........... 994 994
32 1160401BB SOF TECHNOLOGY 50,026 11,200 61,226
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Comprehensive Protective [11,200]
Cold Weather Layering
System.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 2,399,734 74,200 2,473,934
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
33 0603000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED 50,663 50,663
TECHNOLOGY.
35 0603055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 168,253 15,000 183,253
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
..................... Power generation......... [15,000]
37 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM 81,513 15,000 96,513
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
..................... U.S.-Israel Joint R&D on [15,000]
emerging technologies.
38 0603133D8Z FOREIGN COMPARATIVE 27,958 10,000 37,958
TESTING.
..................... Foreign Comparative [10,000]
Testing program.
39 0603142D8Z MISSION ENGINEERING & 99,534 99,534
INTEGRATION (ME&I).
40 0603160BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 393,469 393,469
DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
42 0603176C ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND 21,625 17,000 38,625
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
..................... Directed energy [17,000]
technology maturation.
43 0603180C ADVANCED RESEARCH........ 42,093 42,093
44 0603183D8Z JOINT HYPERSONIC 50,998 50,998
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
&TRANSITION.
45 0603225D8Z JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS 35,505 35,505
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
48 0603288D8Z ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS..... 41,010 41,010
49 0603289D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 57,457 57,457
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
50 0603330D8Z QUANTUM APPLICATION...... 59,521 59,521
51 0603342D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 0 5,000 5,000
(DIU).
..................... DIU OnRamp Hub........... [5,000]
52 0603375D8Z TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION.... 19,654 10,000 29,654
..................... Auxilliary equipment..... [10,000]
53 0603379D8Z ADVANCED TECHNICAL 19,991 19,991
INTEGRATION.
54 0603384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 247,043 247,043
DEFENSE PROGRAM--
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
55 0603467E DARPA ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 1,643,465 1,643,465
DEVELOPMENT.
56 0603468E ADVANCED COMPLEX SYSTEMS. 350,695 350,695
57 0603469E ADVANCED ENABLING 335,647 335,647
TECHNOLOGIES.
59 0603618D8Z JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED 20,575 20,575
TECHNOLOGY.
60 0603662D8Z NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS 19,937 19,937
CAPABILITIES.
62 0603680D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE 409,493 175,000 584,493
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
..................... Critical Minerals RDT&E [15,000]
Increase.
..................... Advanced manufacturing... [150,000]
..................... Biotechnology [5,000]
Manufacturing.
..................... Robotics Enhancements for [5,000]
Armaments Manufacturing.
63 0603680S MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 50,610 5,000 55,610
PROGRAM.
..................... DLA Critical Materials... [5,000]
64 0603712S GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D 19,640 19,640
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATIONS.
65 0603716D8Z STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL 58,092 58,092
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
66 0603720S MICROELECTRONICS 135,016 135,016
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
AND SUPPORT.
67 0603727D8Z JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM 945 945
70 0603766E NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE 0 14,000 14,000
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Air Combat Evolution [14,000]
(ACE)--autonomous air-to-
air cruise missile and
drone defense.
72 0603781D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 12,972 12,972
INSTITUTE.
73 0603838D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION 211,027 211,027
ACCELERATION (DIA).
74 0603924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 114,577 10,000 124,577
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM.
..................... Ultra-Short Pulsed Laser [10,000]
(USPL) Weapons Lethality.
75 0603941D8Z TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE 1,095,772 10,000 1,105,772
& TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Reusable Hypersonic Test [10,000]
Bed Integration &
Testing.
76 0603945D8Z INTERNATIONAL INNOVATION 173,048 5,000 178,048
INITIATIVES.
..................... Critical Minerals for [5,000]
Energy Storage Solutions.
78 0604055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 0 17,000 17,000
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
..................... Micro-Reactor Program [5,000]
Advancement.
..................... TRISO fuel development... [12,000]
80 1160402BB SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 152,282 152,282
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 6,220,080 308,000 6,528,080
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPES
81 0603161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 55,465 48,000 103,465
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
..................... Nuclear Advanced Concept [48,000]
Development & Prototypes.
82 0603600D8Z WALKOFF.................. 152,449 152,449
83 0603851D8Z ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY 123,981 123,981
TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
PROGRAM.
84 0603881C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 508,898 508,898
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
85 0603882C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 825,919 825,919
MIDCOURSE DEFENSE
SEGMENT.
86 0603884BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 272,940 272,940
DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
87 0603884C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 197,641 197,641
SENSORS.
88 0603890C BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS.... 646,039 646,039
89 0603891C SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA.... 498,630 64,000 562,630
..................... AMD/LTRI................. [55,000]
..................... C2BMC-G.................. [9,000]
90 0603892C AEGIS BMD................ 588,440 588,440
91 0603896C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 634,183 2,000 636,183
COMMAND AND CONTROL,
BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
COMMUNICATIONS (C2BMC).
..................... Fiber Festoon Cable [2,000]
sustainment.
92 0603898C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 45,758 2,000 47,758
JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
..................... DEEP SENTRY.............. [2,000]
93 0603904C MISSILE DEFENSE 55,097 55,097
INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS
CENTER (MDIOC).
94 0603906C REGARDING TRENCH......... 29,608 29,608
95 0603907C SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR 166,813 166,813
(SBX).
96 0603913C ISRAELI COOPERATIVE 300,000 300,000
PROGRAMS.
97 0603914C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 463,079 463,079
TEST.
98 0603915C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 514,904 45,000 559,904
TARGETS.
..................... Advanced reactive target [5,000]
simulation development.
..................... Affordable air-breathing [10,000]
hypersonic flight
vehicle.
..................... High Mach Airbreathing [20,000]
Targets.
..................... Sea-based launch for [10,000]
missile defense targets.
99 0603923D8Z COALITION WARFARE........ 10,090 10,090
100 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION 41,815 41,815
INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY (5G).
101 0604016D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 2,545 6,000 8,545
CORROSION PROGRAM.
..................... Corrosion Control [6,000]
Research.
102 0604102C GUAM DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT. 128,485 116,000 244,485
..................... AGS integration of AN/TPY- [116,000]
6 TAUs.
105 0604125D8Z ADVANCED MANUFACTURING 45,513 45,513
COMPONENTS AND
PROTOTYPES.
106 0604181C HYPERSONIC DEFENSE....... 200,627 200,627
107 0604250D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 749,452 19,000 768,452
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... EUCOM: Defense of [9,000]
undersea infrastructure.
..................... Project Pele............. [10,000]
108 0604294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 512,151 512,151
MICROELECTRONICS.
109 0604331D8Z RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM 235,292 235,292
112 0604400D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 2,142 2,142
(DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM
COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
113 0604551BR CATAPULT INFORMATION 4,161 4,161
SYSTEM.
114 0604555D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 55,005 55,005
PROTOTYPING--NON S&T.
117 0604682D8Z SUPPORT FOR STRATEGIC 2,776 2,776
ANALYSIS.
119 0604791D8Z MULTI-DOMAIN JOINT 20,343 20,343
OPERATIONS (MDJO).
120 0604797D8Z JOINT ENERGETIC 3,000 3,000
TRANSITION OFFICE.
121 0604826J JOINT C5 CAPABILITY 25,889 25,889
DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
AND INTEROPERABILITY
ASSESSMENTS.
122 0604873C LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION 60,443 60,443
RADAR (LRDR).
123 0604874C IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE 1,582,414 1,582,414
INTERCEPTORS.
124 0604876C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 37,784 37,784
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
TEST.
125 0604878C AEGIS BMD TEST........... 153,618 153,618
126 0604879C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 68,699 16,000 84,699
SENSOR TEST.
..................... Sensor Ground Testing.... [16,000]
127 0604880C LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3).. 24,555 18,000 42,555
..................... Evaluation of CONUS, [8,000]
Hawaii, Alaska
emplacements.
..................... Guam SM-3 software [10,000]
integration.
128 0604887C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 38,325 38,325
MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
129 0604924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 5,589 5,589
ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPE.
130 0202057C SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1,806 1,806
131 0208059JCY CYBERCOM ACTIVITIES...... 30,212 30,212
133 0208086JCY CYBER TRAINING 124,971 124,971
ENVIRONMENT (CTE).
135 0305103C CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 2,131 2,131
136 0305245D8Z INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES 43,596 5,000 48,596
AND INNOVATION
INVESTMENTS.
..................... Geospatial Workforce [5,000]
Development Program.
139 1206895C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 97,061 97,061
SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 10,390,334 341,000 10,731,334
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION
141 0604123D8Z CHIEF DIGITAL AND 9,196 9,196
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
OFFICER (CDAO)--DEM/VAL
ACTIVITIES.
142 0604133D8Z ALPHA-1 DEVELOPMENT 441,821 441,821
ACTIVITIES.
143 0604161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 12,874 12,874
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
144 0604384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 255,630 255,630
DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
145 0604771D8Z JOINT TACTICAL 10,527 10,527
INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM (JTIDS).
146 0605000BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 14,931 14,931
DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
147 0605013BL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1,283 1,283
DEVELOPMENT.
148 0605021SE HOMELAND PERSONNEL 9,137 9,137
SECURITY INITIATIVE.
149 0605022D8Z DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY 6,780 6,780
PROGRAM.
150 0605027D8Z OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT 9,765 9,765
INITIATIVES.
151 0605080S DEFENSE AGENCY 31,714 31,714
INITIATIVES (DAI)--
FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
152 0605141BR MISSION ASSURANCE RISK 9,573 9,573
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
(MARMS).
153 0605210D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC 9,366 9,366
PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
154 0605294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 143,475 143,475
MICROELECTRONICS.
155 0605649D8Z ACQUISITION INTEGRATION 13,556 13,556
AND INTEROPERABILITY
(AI2).
156 0605755D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR 3,307 3,307
DEFENSE MODERNIZATION
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
157 0605772D8Z NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, 3,158 3,158
& COMMUNICATIONS.
159 0305282K JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN) 10,000 10,000
160 0305304D8Z REAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 6,473 6,473
MANAGEMENT.
161 0305310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION 12,107 12,107
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 1,014,673 0 1,014,673
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
163 0603829J JOINT CAPABILITY 13,822 13,822
EXPERIMENTATION.
164 0604122D8Z JADC2 DEVELOPMENT AND 297,801 297,801
EXPERIMENTATION
ACTIVITIES.
165 0604774D8Z DEFENSE READINESS 8,552 8,552
REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS).
166 0604875D8Z JOINT SYSTEMS 8,627 8,627
ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT.
167 0604940D8Z CENTRAL TEST AND 542,773 542,773
EVALUATION INVESTMENT
DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP).
168 0604942D8Z ASSESSMENTS AND 1,275 1,275
EVALUATIONS.
170 0605001E MISSION SUPPORT.......... 115,673 115,673
171 0605100D8Z JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT 210,878 210,878
TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
172 0605126J JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND 78,057 78,057
MISSILE DEFENSE
ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
174 0605142D8Z SYSTEMS ENGINEERING...... 23,405 23,405
175 0605151D8Z STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 5,301 5,301
SUPPORT--OSD.
176 0605161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL 12,549 10,000 22,549
SECURITY.
..................... Nuclear Matters [10,000]
Management Support.
177 0605170D8Z SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND 15,597 15,597
INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
178 0605200D8Z GENERAL SUPPORT TO 3,468 3,468
OUSD(INTELLIGENCE AND
SECURITY).
179 0605384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 67,263 67,263
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
186 0605711D8Z CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY 11,781 11,781
ANALYSIS.
187 0605790D8Z SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION 5,411 5,411
RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER (STTR)
ADMINISTRATION.
188 0605797D8Z MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY 29,675 5,000 34,675
ADVANTAGE.
..................... NSCEB recommendation-- [5,000]
AIxBio Sandbox.
189 0605798D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 45,134 45,134
ANALYSIS.
190 0605801KA DEFENSE TECHNICAL 60,209 60,209
INFORMATION CENTER
(DTIC).
191 0605803SE R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD 30,778 30,778
ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
EVALUATION.
192 0605804D8Z DEVELOPMENT TEST AND 37,381 37,381
EVALUATION.
193 0605898E MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 13,623 13,623
194 0605998KA MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE 3,466 3,466
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
CENTER (DTIC).
195 0606005D8Z SPECIAL ACTIVITIES....... 18,594 18,594
196 0606100D8Z BUDGET AND PROGRAM 13,084 13,084
ASSESSMENTS.
197 0606114D8Z ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP 5,229 5,229
(AWG) SUPPORT.
199 0606225D8Z ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND 3,461 3,461
RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
200 0606300D8Z DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD.... 6,563 6,563
201 0606301D8Z AVIATION SAFETY 1,702 1,702
TECHNOLOGIES.
202 0606771D8Z CYBER RESILIENCY AND 14,220 14,220
CYBERSECURITY POLICY.
203 0606774D8Z DEFENSE CIVILIAN TRAINING 8,752 8,752
CORPS.
204 0606775D8Z JOINT PRODUCTION 5,493 5,493
ACCELERATOR CELL (JPAC).
205 0606829D8Z SUSTAINMENT TRANSITION 30,000 30,000
CAPABILITIES.
206 0606853BR MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 14,841 10,000 24,841
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
..................... Critical Infrastructure [10,000]
Defense Analysis Center
(CIDAC).
207 0203345D8Z DEFENSE OPERATIONS 2,493 2,493
SECURITY INITIATIVE
(DOSI).
208 0204571J JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL 8,070 8,070
SUPPORT.
209 0208045K C4I INTEROPERABILITY..... 70,893 70,893
210 0303169D8Z INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 4,355 4,355
RAPID ACQUISITION.
211 0305172K COMBINED ADVANCED 5,447 5,447
APPLICATIONS.
213 0305208K DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 2,887 2,887
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
214 0305248J JOINT STAFF OFFICE OF THE 14,500 14,500
CHIEF DATA OFFICER
(OCDO) ACTIVITIES.
215 0804768J COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT 91,952 91,952
AND TRAINING
TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
NON-MHA.
216 0808709SE DEFENSE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 388 388
MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
(DEOMI).
217 0808737SE INTEGRATED PRIMARY 5,744 5,744
PREVENTION.
218 0901598C MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA....... 28,719 28,719
219 0903235K JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER 1,283 1,283
(JSP).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 31,148 31,148
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 2,032,317 25,000 2,057,317
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
220 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION 22,439 22,439
INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY (5G).
223 0607162D8Z CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 2,360 2,360
WEAPONS ELIMINATION
TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENT.
224 0607210D8Z INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS 273,379 21,000 294,379
AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
..................... Corrosion Resistant [17,000]
Magnesium Coating for
Aircraft.
..................... Rare Earth Magnet [4,000]
Manufacturing.
225 0607310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION 12,704 12,704
MODERNIZATION.
226 0607327T GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY 6,173 6,173
COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
TSCMIS).
227 0607384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 79,118 79,118
DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
228 0607757D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR 2,945 2,945
DEFENSE MODERNIZATION
OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT.
229 0208085JCY ROBUST INFRASTRUCTURE AND 88,522 88,522
ACCESS.
230 0208097JCY CYBER COMMAND AND CONTROL 85,833 85,833
(CYBER C2).
231 0208099JCY DATA AND UNIFIED PLATFORM 83,039 83,039
(D&UP).
235 0302019K DEFENSE INFO 16,162 16,162
INFRASTRUCTURE
ENGINEERING AND
INTEGRATION.
236 0302609V COUNTERING THREATS 5,030 5,030
AUTOMATED PLATFORM.
237 0303126K LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS-- 40,293 40,293
DCS.
238 0303131K MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 5,113 5,113
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
240 0303140D8Z INFORMATION SYSTEMS 25,347 15,000 40,347
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... National Narrative [15,000]
Intelligence Research
Center.
242 0303140K INFORMATION SYSTEMS 23,224 23,224
SECURITY PROGRAM.
243 0303153K DEFENSE SPECTRUM 20,174 20,174
ORGANIZATION.
244 0303171K JOINT PLANNING AND 6,242 6,242
EXECUTION SERVICES.
246 0303430V FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE 22,700 22,700
SERVICES INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
252 0305104D8Z DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE 10,840 10,840
(DIB) CYBER SECURITY
INITIATIVE.
257 0305146V DEFENSE JOINT 1,800 1,800
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
258 0305172D8Z COMBINED ADVANCED 22,548 22,548
APPLICATIONS.
260 0305186D8Z POLICY R&D PROGRAMS...... 6,043 6,043
262 0305199D8Z NET CENTRICITY........... 17,114 17,114
264 0305208BB DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 5,656 5,656
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
270 0305387D8Z HOMELAND DEFENSE 1,771 1,771
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PROGRAM.
279 0306250JCY CYBER OPERATIONS 473,399 473,399
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
280 0307609V NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL 34,710 34,710
SECURITY SYSTEMS (NISS).
283 0708012K LOGISTICS SUPPORT 2,876 2,876
ACTIVITIES.
284 0708012S PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS. 2,000 2,000 4,000
..................... Pacific Disaster Centers. [2,000]
285 0708047S DEFENSE PROPERTY 3,020 3,020
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
289 1160403BB AVIATION SYSTEMS......... 119,699 15,000 134,699
..................... Vertical Take Off and [15,000]
Landing Optionally
Piloted Vehicle (VTOL-
OPV).
290 1160405BB INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS 102,732 3,000 105,732
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Ultra-lightweight Group 1 [3,000]
Small UAS.
291 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS. 234,653 234,653
292 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS.......... 279,639 5,000 284,639
..................... Blast Overpressure [5,000]
Analysis and Mitigation.
293 1160432BB SPECIAL PRGRAMS.......... 550 550
294 1160434BB UNMANNED ISR............. 2,281 2,281
295 1160480BB SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES.... 9,213 9,213
296 1160483BB MARITIME SYSTEMS......... 120,475 120,475
297 1160490BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS 21,752 21,752
INTELLIGENCE.
298 1203610K TELEPORT PROGRAM......... 24,319 24,319
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 8,276,313 8,276,313
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 10,594,200 61,000 10,655,200
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
299 0608140D8Z ENTERPRISE PLATFORMS AND 402,783 402,783
CAPABILITIES--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
300 0608648D8Z ACQUISITION VISIBILITY-- 17,549 17,549
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
301 0608776D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 48,413 150,000 198,413
FIELDING.
..................... Attritable autonomous [150,000]
systems.
302 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND 44,474 44,474
CONTROL SYSTEM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 513,219 150,000 663,219
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 33,921,939 999,200 34,921,139
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, DW.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
DEFENSE
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
1 0605118OTE OPERATIONAL TEST AND 133,542 133,542
EVALUATION.
2 0605131OTE LIVE FIRE TEST AND 108,109 108,109
EVALUATION.
3 0605814OTE OPERATIONAL TEST 76,492 76,492
ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 318,143 0 318,143
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST & 318,143 318,143
EVAL, DEFENSE.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RDT&E.............. 142,001,108 8,452,832 150,453,940
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 4,671,407 4,671,407
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 221,578 221,578
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 927,219 927,219
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 2,220,746 100,000 2,320,746
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [100,000]
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 1,333,769 1,333,769
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,829,054 1,829,054
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 7,497,735 102,000 7,599,735
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [102,000]
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 583,196 583,196
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 152,404 152,404
100 MEDICAL READINESS................................... 844,140 844,140
110 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 10,694,915 10,694,915
120 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 6,159,744 -6,159,744 0
Transferred to Division B........................... [-6,159,744]
130 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 263,147 263,147
140 ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES............................... 392,457 392,457
150 RESET............................................... 111,688 111,688
160 US AFRICA COMMAND................................... 413,046 1,000 414,046
AFRICOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees...... [1,000]
170 US EUROPEAN COMMAND................................. 385,744 201,000 586,744
EUCOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees........ [1,000]
Experimentation for EUCOM Eastern Flank Defense Line [150,000]
Unmanned systems for EUCOM.......................... [50,000]
180 US SOUTHERN COMMAND................................. 224,971 1,000 225,971
SOUTHCOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees..... [1,000]
190 US FORCES KOREA..................................... 77,049 77,049
200 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS......... 331,467 331,467
210 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 550,089 3,000 553,089
Human-Artificial Intelligence teaming............... [3,000]
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 39,885,565 -5,751,744 34,133,821
MOBILIZATION
220 STRATEGIC MOBILITY.................................. 134,892 134,892
230 ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS........................... 330,812 31,400 362,212
Army Prepositioned Stocks........................... [31,400]
240 INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS............................. 3,162 3,162
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 468,866 31,400 500,266
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
250 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 172,424 172,424
260 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 78,929 78,929
270 ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING........................... 88,033 88,033
280 SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.............. 508,982 508,982
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 988,901 988,901
300 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 1,398,974 1,398,974
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 202,738 202,738
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 596,528 596,528
330 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 747,712 747,712
340 EXAMINING........................................... 177,666 177,666
350 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 181,211 181,211
360 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 227,476 227,476
370 JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS............... 190,668 22,000 212,668
Fully fund Army JROTC............................... [22,000]
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 5,560,242 22,000 5,582,242
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
390 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 1,306,690 1,306,690
400 CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES........................... 740,581 740,581
410 LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES......................... 588,151 588,151
420 AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT............................... 344,948 344,948
430 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 408,825 408,825
440 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 2,171,607 84,880 2,256,487
Army Data Platform 1.0 (VANTAGE)/Army Data Platform [74,880]
2.0................................................
Army Data Platform 2.0.............................. [10,000]
450 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 313,323 313,323
460 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 853,139 853,139
470 OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT............................... 2,078,411 2,078,411
480 ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES.............................. 223,611 223,611
490 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 294,705 294,705
500 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS............ 618,471 618,471
510 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT....... 36,510 36,510
520 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS................. 664,510 664,510
530 MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS...................... 31,387 31,387
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 2,385,523 2,385,523
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 13,060,392 84,880 13,145,272
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -812,335 -812,335
Unobligated balances................................ [-812,335]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -812,335 -812,335
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY............... 58,975,065 -6,425,799 52,549,266
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 14,651 14,651
020 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 703,286 703,286
030 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 146,794 146,794
040 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 685,541 685,541
050 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 55,155 55,155
060 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 438,508 438,508
070 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 23,783 23,783
080 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 40,426 40,426
090 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 557,465 557,465
100 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 504,922 -504,922 0
Transferred to Division B........................... [-504,922]
110 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 20,531 20,531
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 2,174 2,174
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 19,041 19,041
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 3,212,277 -504,922 2,707,355
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
140 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 14,629 14,629
150 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 16,798 16,798
160 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 6,432 6,432
170 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 7,186 7,186
180 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 56,856 56,856
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 101,901 0 101,901
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -10,222 -10,222
Unobligated balances................................ [-10,222]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -10,222 -10,222
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES............. 3,314,178 -515,144 2,799,034
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 911,525 911,525
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 210,737 210,737
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 879,111 879,111
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 88,001 88,001
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 350,261 350,261
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,128,195 1,128,195
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 810,263 810,263
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 34,354 34,354
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 179,622 179,622
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 1,246,273 1,246,273
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 1,275,984 -1,275,984 0
Transferred to Division B........................... [-1,275,984]
120 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 1,203,158 1,203,158
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 5,136 5,136
140 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 24,096 24,096
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 8,346,716 -1,275,984 7,070,732
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
150 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 6,460 6,460
160 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 45,919 45,919
170 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 9,373 9,373
190 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 261,622 261,622
200 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 3,891 3,891
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 327,265 0 327,265
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -246,699 -246,699
Unobligated balances................................ [-246,699]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -246,699 -246,699
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG................. 8,673,981 -1,522,683 7,151,298
COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA TRAIN AND
EQUIP
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
010 IRAQ................................................ 212,516 212,516
020 SYRIA............................................... 130,000 130,000
030 LEBANON............................................. 15,000 15,000
SUBTOTAL COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)... 357,516 0 357,516
TOTAL COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA TRAIN 357,516 0 357,516
AND EQUIP..........................................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 7,720,210 7,720,210
020 FLEET AIR TRAINING.................................. 2,925,791 2,925,791
050 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT................................. 1,447,480 1,447,480
060 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 1,661,933 1,661,933
080 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 2,147,907 2,147,907
090 MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS................... 5,350,073 5,350,073
100 SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING.................. 1,719,580 1,719,580
110 SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE.............................. 13,803,188 13,803,188
120 SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT....................... 2,760,878 2,760,878
130 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........ 1,830,993 1,830,993
140 MEDICAL READINESS................................... 604,287 604,287
150 SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE...................... 453,847 453,847
160 WARFARE TACTICS..................................... 1,000,516 1,000,516
170 OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............ 454,803 454,803
180 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 2,291,340 151,230 2,442,570
AFRICOM: Safeguarding U.S. Operations in Somalia.... [53,500]
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [97,730]
190 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.. 62,495 62,495
200 COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS................ 105,914 21,720 127,634
Critical Joint Manpower............................. [16,720]
INDOPACOM's Community Engagement Initiative......... [5,000]
210 COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT......... 386,657 260,500 647,157
AI-Enabled Planning & Wargaming (Thunderforge)...... [18,000]
Critical Joint Manpower............................. [29,390]
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [30,780]
INDOPACOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees.... [1,000]
Joint Sustainment Decision Tool (JSDT).............. [42,000]
Prepositioned Material in Support of SOF............ [43,000]
Resilient TS-SCI Warfighting Architecture........... [58,300]
Robust, Resilient Mission Platform (R2MP)........... [10,100]
SOF Air and Maritime Low-Vis Infrastructure......... [27,930]
220 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 634,746 634,746
230 FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE............................. 1,837,670 1,837,670
240 WEAPONS MAINTENANCE................................. 1,601,768 1,601,768
250 OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................ 839,619 839,619
260 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 2,185,422 2,185,422
270 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 3,991,438 -3,991,438
Transferred to Division B........................... [-3,991,438]
280 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 6,166,266 44,000 6,210,266
Barber's Point--sec. 2856 of FY24 NDAA.............. [9,000]
Red Hill long-term monitoring, research, and [35,000]
remediation........................................
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 63,984,821 -3,513,988 60,470,833
MOBILIZATION
290 SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE....................... 388,627 388,627
300 READY RESERVE FORCE................................. 785,052 785,052
310 SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS...................... 583,296 583,296
330 COAST GUARD SUPPORT................................. 22,192 22,192
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 1,779,167 0 1,779,167
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
340 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 202,397 202,397
350 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 16,945 16,945
360 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..................... 164,348 164,348
370 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 1,026,076 1,026,076
380 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 272,964 272,964
390 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 463,572 463,572
400 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 303,177 303,177
410 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 914 914
420 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 65,819 65,819
430 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 25,334 36,000 61,334
Fully fund Navy JROTC............................... [36,000]
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 2,541,546 36,000 2,577,546
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
440 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,357,428 1,357,428
450 CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 239,918 239,918
460 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 690,712 690,712
490 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT....... 61,046 61,046
500 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 289,748 289,748
520 PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM SUPPORT.......... 543,911 543,911
530 ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT............... 853,340 853,340
540 INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES................. 1,007,078 1,007,078
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 731,405 731,405
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 5,774,586 0 5,774,586
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -540,421 -540,421
Unobligated balances................................ [-540,421]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -540,421 -540,421
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY............... 74,080,120 -4,018,409 70,061,711
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATIONAL FORCES.................................. 1,950,784 103,900 2,054,684
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [103,900]
020 FIELD LOGISTICS..................................... 1,981,840 1,981,840
030 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 236 236
040 MARITIME PREPOSITIONING............................. 175,091 175,091
050 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 349,082 349,082
060 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION............ 2,079,890 -2,079,890
Transferred to Division B........................... [-2,079,890]
070 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 2,834,721 2,834,721
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 9,371,644 -1,975,990 7,395,654
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
080 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 26,350 26,350
090 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 1,282 1,282
100 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 119,526 119,526
110 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 58,696 58,696
120 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 538,812 538,812
130 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 237,004 237,004
140 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 27,500 27,500
150 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 30,808 30,808
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 1,039,978 0 1,039,978
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
180 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 87,509 87,509
190 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 431,282 431,282
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 73,788 73,788
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 592,579 0 592,579
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -89,275 -89,275
Unobligated balances................................ [-89,275]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -89,275 -89,275
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS....... 11,004,201 -2,065,265 8,938,936
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 759,843 759,843
030 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT................................. 9,972 9,972
040 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 204,603 204,603
060 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 24,469 24,469
070 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS............................... 19,698 19,698
080 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 186,946 186,946
090 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 294 294
100 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 33,414 33,414
110 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 58,213 -58,213
Transferred to Division B........................... [-58,213]
120 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 118,361 118,361
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 1,415,813 -58,213 1,357,600
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
130 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 2,539 2,539
140 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 22,185 22,185
150 ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.................. 1,517 1,517
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 26,241 0 26,241
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -19,763 -19,763
Unobligated balances................................ [-19,763]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -19,763 -19,763
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES............. 1,442,054 -77,976 1,364,078
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATING FORCES.................................... 117,987 117,987
020 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 22,686 22,686
030 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 48,519 -48,519
Transferred to Division B........................... [-48,519]
040 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 123,079 123,079
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 312,271 -48,519 263,752
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
050 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 49,774 49,774
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 49,774 0 49,774
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -12,267 -12,267
Unobligated balances................................ [-12,267]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -12,267 -12,267
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE........... 362,045 -60,786 301,259
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 1,425,125 286,000 1,711,125
DAF campaigning and exercises....................... [150,000]
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [136,000]
020 COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES........................... 2,753,789 20,000 2,773,789
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [20,000]
030 AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)...... 1,701,493 5,000 1,706,493
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [5,000]
040 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 4,676,962 4,676,962
050 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 3,093,331 -3,093,331
Transferred to Division B........................... [-3,093,331]
060 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 245,874 245,874
070 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 9,283,958 21,500 9,305,458
FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning.......................... [21,500]
080 FLYING HOUR PROGRAM................................. 6,772,468 903,000 7,675,468
FY26 F-15 retirement prohibition.................... [400,000]
FY26 F-22 retirement prohibition.................... [200,000]
FY26 reversal of accelerated A-10 divestment plan... [303,000]
090 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 11,328,614 11,328,614
100 GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................ 1,239,641 1,239,641
110 OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS....................... 1,896,441 1,896,441
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 858,321 858,321
140 MEDICAL READINESS................................... 554,180 554,180
150 US NORTHCOM/NORAD................................... 266,248 266,248
160 US STRATCOM......................................... 593,503 593,503
170 US CENTCOM.......................................... 350,566 1,001,000 1,351,566
CENTCOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees...... [1,000]
CENTCOM: replenishment of munitions and readiness [1,000,000]
for Operations ROUGH RIDER and MIDNIGHT HAMMER.....
180 US SOCOM............................................ 28,018 28,018
190 US TRANSCOM......................................... 703 703
200 CENTCOM CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT...................... 928 1,000 1,928
Cooperation with the Kingdom of Jordan.............. [1,000]
210 USSPACECOM.......................................... 369,658 369,658
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,805,672 1,805,672
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 49,245,493 -855,831 48,389,662
MOBILIZATION
220 AIRLIFT OPERATIONS.................................. 3,391,672 3,391,672
230 MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS........................... 279,205 279,205
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 3,670,877 0 3,670,877
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
240 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 250,380 250,380
250 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 29,335 29,335
260 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC).............. 131,342 131,342
270 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 522,068 6,000 528,068
Local cyber training supplementals.................. [6,000]
280 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 1,065,465 1,065,465
290 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 284,442 284,442
300 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 181,966 181,966
310 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 256,687 256,687
320 EXAMINING........................................... 6,990 6,990
330 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 224,340 224,340
340 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 360,260 360,260
350 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 0 80,000 80,000
Fully fund AF JROTC................................. [80,000]
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 3,313,275 86,000 3,399,275
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
360 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................ 1,155,659 1,155,659
370 TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................ 158,965 158,965
380 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,221,364 1,221,364
390 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 45,228 45,228
410 OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................ 1,712,600 1,712,600
420 CIVIL AIR PATROL.................................... 32,394 32,394
430 DEF ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT....... 48,741 48,741
450 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............................... 89,341 89,341
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,735,598 1,735,598
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 6,199,890 0 6,199,890
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -1,020,189 -1,020,189
Unobligated balances................................ [-1,020,189]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -1,020,189 -1,020,189
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.......... 62,429,535 -1,790,020 60,639,515
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 GLOBAL C3I & EARLY WARNING.......................... 846,856 846,856
020 SPACE LAUNCH OPERATIONS............................. 397,822 397,822
030 SPACE OPERATIONS.................................... 983,784 983,784
040 EDUCATION & TRAINING................................ 302,939 302,939
060 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 67,126 67,126
070 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 557,175 -557,175
Transferred to Division B........................... [-557,175]
080 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS AND SYSTEM SUPPORT............. 1,495,242 1,495,242
090 SPACE OPERATIONS -BOS............................... 233,546 233,546
100 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 141,512 141,512
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 641,519 641,519
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 5,667,521 -557,175 5,110,346
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
110 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................ 35,889 35,889
120 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 184,753 184,753
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 220,642 0 220,642
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -218,077 -218,077
Unobligated balances................................ [-218,077]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -218,077 -218,077
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE........ 5,888,163 -775,252 5,112,911
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 2,010,793 2,010,793
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 214,701 214,701
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 702,575 702,575
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 188,802 -188,802
Transferred to Division B........................... [-188,802]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 493,324 493,324
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 585,430 585,430
070 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 2,484 2,484
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 4,198,109 -188,802 4,009,307
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
080 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 98,418 98,418
090 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 10,618 10,618
100 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC).............. 14,951 14,951
120 AUDIOVISUAL......................................... 521 521
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 124,508 0 124,508
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -224,891 -224,891
Unobligated balances................................ [-224,891]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -224,891 -224,891
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE........... 4,322,617 -413,693 3,908,924
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
OPERATING FORCES
010 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS................................. 2,501,226 2,501,226
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 627,680 627,680
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 1,024,171 1,024,171
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 549,496 -549,496
Transferred to Division B........................... [-549,496]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 1,258,081 1,258,081
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 1,110,875 1,110,875
070 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 16,134 16,134
080 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 112,205 112,205
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 7,199,868 -549,496 6,650,372
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
090 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 82,280 82,280
100 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 50,451 50,451
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 132,731 0 132,731
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -5,861 -5,861
Unobligated balances................................ [-5,861]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -5,861 -5,861
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.................. 7,332,599 -555,357 6,777,242
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
OPERATING FORCES
010 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 414,097 414,097
020 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--JTEEP........................ 1,026,502 55,960 1,082,462
Program increase.................................... [55,960]
030 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CYBER........................ 9,086 9,086
040 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE--MISO............ 209,442 41,800 251,242
AFRICOM: MISO....................................... [14,000]
INDOPACOM Information Operations (MISO)............. [27,800]
050 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT DEVELOPMENT 2,136,165 2,136,165
ACTIVITIES.........................................
060 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MAINTENANCE.............. 1,273,409 1,273,409
070 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONAL 181,122 181,122
HEADQUARTERS.......................................
080 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER FORCES........... 3,409,285 70,000 3,479,285
Blast Overpressure Analysis and Mitigation.......... [5,000]
Prepositioned Material in Support of SOF............ [65,000]
090 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES.... 77,241 77,241
100 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND INTELLIGENCE............. 1,187,600 1,187,600
110 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT...... 1,579,137 1,579,137
120 CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS............................... 1,300,384 10,000 1,310,384
IOM capabilities.................................... [10,000]
130 USCYBERCOM HEADQUARTERS............................. 314,284 314,284
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 13,117,754 177,760 13,295,514
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
140 DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY...................... 173,265 173,265
150 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 124,869 124,869
160 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 28,697 28,697
EDUCATION..........................................
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 326,831 0 326,831
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
170 CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS............................. 126,637 126,637
180 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY--CYBER................ 3,844 3,844
190 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY....................... 632,959 632,959
200 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY.................. 1,441,456 1,441,456
210 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANEGEMENT AGENCY--CYBER........... 43,434 43,434
220 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY..... 1,168,366 1,168,366
240 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY-- 11,120 11,120
CYBER..............................................
250 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY--CYBER............. 46,621 46,621
260 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY.................... 932,144 35,000 967,144
DLNSEO Restoration.................................. [20,000]
Flagship Language Program for Chinese & Arabic...... [15,000]
290 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.................. 3,042,559 5,000 3,047,559
Defense Information System Network (DISN)--Service [5,000]
Delivery Nodes.....................................
300 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY--CYBER........... 559,426 559,426
310 DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY....................... 164,770 164,770
320 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY............................ 401,513 401,513
330 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY.............................. 226,665 226,665
340 DEFENSE POW/MIA OFFICE.............................. 171,339 19,000 190,339
Reverse cuts to Defense POW/MIA office (DPAA)....... [19,000]
350 DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY................. 2,864,252 706,000 3,570,252
Irregular Warfare Center of Excellence.............. [6,000]
ISCP--EUCOM......................................... [200,000]
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.............. [500,000]
360 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.......... 40,052 40,052
370 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY..................... 708,214 708,214
390 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY--CYBER.............. 71,925 71,925
400 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............ 3,600,175 80,000 3,680,175
Impact Aid.......................................... [50,000]
Impact Aid for children with severe disabilities.... [30,000]
410 MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY.............................. 720,365 720,365
420 OFFICE OF THE LOCAL DEFENSE COMMUNITY COOPERATION... 159,534 159,534
460 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE--CYBER........... 98,034 36,900 134,934
Cyber Service Academy Scholarship Program........... [22,900]
Cybersecurity of the DIB............................ [6,000]
Small business cybersecurity certification increase. [8,000]
470 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.................. 2,093,717 144,400 2,238,117
2026 NDS Commission funding......................... [5,000]
Afghanistan War Commission.......................... [11,400]
Anomalous Health Incidents Cross-Functional Team.... [13,000]
Bien Hoa dioxin remediation......................... [30,000]
Defense Community Infrastructure Program............ [50,000]
Defense Operational Resilience International [15,000]
Cooperation........................................
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration [20,000]
(REPI).............................................
530 WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES.................... 411,182 411,182
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 22,750,830 22,750,830
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 42,491,133 1,026,300 43,517,433
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -935,000 -935,000
Unobligated balances................................ [-935,000]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -935,000 -935,000
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE....... 55,935,718 269,060 56,204,778
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
010 US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE... 21,243 21,243
SUBTOTAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 21,243 0 21,243
ARMED FORCES.......................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 21,243 0 21,243
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID
010 OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID....... 100,793 100,793
SUBTOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC 100,793 0 100,793
AID................................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 100,793 0 100,793
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT
010 COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION........................ 282,830 282,830
SUBTOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT....... 282,830 0 282,830
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 282,830 0 282,830
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
010 ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD................................ 45,346 45,346
SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.......... 45,346 0 45,346
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 45,346 0 45,346
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
050 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY..................... 148,070 148,070
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY............ 148,070 0 148,070
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 148,070 0 148,070
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
080 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE.................. 8,885 8,885
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE......... 8,885 0 8,885
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 8,885 0 8,885
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
070 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE................ 342,149 342,149
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE......... 342,149 0 342,149
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 342,149 0 342,149
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
060 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY..................... 357,949 357,949
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE......... 357,949 0 357,949
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 357,949 0 357,949
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE
SITES
090 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES....... 235,156 235,156
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED 235,156 0 235,156
DEFENSE SITES......................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 235,156 0 235,156
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE....................... 295,660,213 -17,951,324 277,708,889
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2026 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS................... 181,803,437 -740,000 181,063,437
Unobligated balances................................ [-740,000]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS.......... 181,803,437 -740,000 181,063,437
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND
CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND 12,850,165 12,850,165
CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND 12,850,165 0 12,850,165
CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................ 194,653,602 -740,000 193,913,602
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
010 INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS........................... 20,589 500,000 520,589
Spares and readiness............................ [500,000]
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY............. 20,589 500,000 520,589
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY
010 NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTERS................... 381,600 381,600
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY............. 381,600 0 381,600
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
020 SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.......................... 90,262 90,262
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........ 90,262 0 90,262
NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION FUND
010 DEFENSE STOCKPILE............................... 5,700 5,700
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION 5,700 0 5,700
FUND...........................................
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
020 ENERGY MANAGEMENT--DEF.......................... 1,272 1,272
030 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT--DEFENSE................ 10,697 10,697
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE..... 11,969 0 11,969
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
010 WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA...................... 1,527,817 1,527,817
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA............. 1,527,817 0 1,527,817
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND...................... 2,037,937 500,000 2,537,937
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
1 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--O&M...................... 3,243 3,243
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 3,243 0 3,243
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
3 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION -RDT&E.................... 210,039 210,039
SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND 210,039 0 210,039
EVALUATION.....................................
TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION....... 213,282 0 213,282
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
DRUG INTRDCTN
010 COUNTER-NARCOTICS SUPPORT....................... 398,424 398,424
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............................. 254,460 254,460
SUBTOTAL DRUG INTRDCTN.......................... 652,884 0 652,884
DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
020 DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM................... 134,938 134,938
SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM.......... 134,938 0 134,938
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
030 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM............. 110,125 185,000 295,125
National Guard Counter-Drug Program............. [185,000]
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM.... 110,125 185,000 295,125
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS
040 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS............. 6,354 6,354
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS.... 6,354 0 6,354
TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 904,301 185,000 1,089,301
DEF............................................
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
010 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE....................... 494,865 19,171 514,036
Office of the Inspector General................. [19,171]
020 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE....................... 2,030 2,030
030 RDT&E........................................... 4,625 4,625
040 PROCUREMENT..................................... 1,079 1,079
TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........... 502,599 19,171 521,770
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
010 IN-HOUSE CARE................................... 10,731,135 290,000 11,021,135
Fully fund military medical treatment facilities [290,000]
020 PRIVATE SECTOR CARE............................. 21,023,765 21,023,765
030 CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT..................... 2,116,278 2,116,278
040 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.......................... 2,271,798 50,000 2,321,798
Fully fund Defense Health Agency information [50,000]
management systems.............................
050 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES........................... 303,898 303,898
060 EDUCATION AND TRAINING.......................... 371,426 371,426
070 BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS.................. 2,356,290 2,356,290
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 39,174,590 340,000 39,514,590
RDT&E
080 R&D RESEARCH.................................... 41,660 41,660
090 R&D EXPLORATRY DEVELOPMENT...................... 183,398 183,398
100 R&D ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT........................ 333,072 333,072
110 R&D DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION.................... 178,983 178,983
120 R&D ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT..................... 117,190 117,190
130 R&D MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT...................... 99,338 99,338
140 R&D CAPABILITIES ENHANCEMENT.................... 19,071 19,071
SUBTOTAL RDT&E.................................. 972,712 0 972,712
PROCUREMENT
150 PROC INITIAL OUTFITTING......................... 24,597 24,597
160 PROC REPLACEMENT & MODERNIZATION................ 222,445 222,445
170 PROC JOINT OPERATIONAL MEDICINE INFORMATION 30,732 30,732
SYSTEM.........................................
180 PROC MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM--DESKTOP TO 77,047 77,047
DATACENTER.....................................
SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................ 354,821 0 354,821
TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................... 40,502,123 340,000 40,842,123
TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 44,160,242 1,044,171 45,204,413
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2026 Senate
Account State/ Country Installation Project Title Request Senate Change Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
Army Alabama Redstone Arsenal COST TO COMPLETE--PROPULSION SYSTEMS 55,000 0 55,000
BUILDING
Army Alaska Fort Wainwright BARRACKS 208,000 -145,000 63,000
Army Alaska Fort Wainwright DINING FACILITY (DESIGN) 0 8,000 8,000
Army Arizona Fort Huachuca FLIGHT CONTROL TOWER (DESIGN) 0 2,000 2,000
Army Arizona Yuma Proving Ground POLE LINE ROAD (DESIGN) 0 990 990
Army Florida Eglin Air Force BARRACKS 91,000 -41,000 50,000
Base
Army Florida Naval Air Station COMMAND & CONTROL FACILITY (INC) 50,000 0 50,000
Key West
Army Georgia Fort Benning CAMP MERRILL BARRACKS (DESIGN) 0 3,800 3,800
Army Georgia Fort Gillem EVIDENCE STORAGE BUILDING 166,000 -121,000 45,000
Army Georgia Fort Gordon CYBER FACULTY OPERATIONS AND 0 6,100 6,100
AUDITORIUM FACILITY (DESIGN)
Army Germany U.S. Army Garrison VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP 92,000 0 92,000
Ansbach
Army Germany U.S. Army Garrison KNOWN DISTANCE RANGE 9,800 0 9,800
Rheinland-Pfalz
Army Germany U.S. Army Garrison LIVE FIRE EXERCISE SHOOTHOUSE 13,200 0 13,200
Rheinland-Pfalz
Army Germany U.S. Army Garrison VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP 39,000 0 39,000
Rheinland-Pfalz
Army Guam Joint Region PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, EIAMD, 33,000 0 33,000
Marianas PHASE 2 (INC)
Army Hawaii Pohakuloa Training AIRFIELD OPERATIONS BUILDING 0 20,000 20,000
Area
Army Hawaii Schofield Barracks MCA WILDLAND FIRE STATION (DESIGN) 0 2,100 2,100
Army Illinois Rock Island Arsenal CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 50,000 50,000
Army Illinois Rock Island Arsenal FORGING EQUIPMENT ANNEX (DESIGN) 0 5,000 5,000
Army Indiana Crane Army PYROTECHNIC PRODUCTION FACILITY 161,000 -89,000 72,000
Ammunition Plant
Army Kansas Fort Riley AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER 0 26,000 26,000
Army Kansas Fort Riley AUTOMATED INFANTRY PLATOON BATTLE 13,200 0 13,200
COURSE
Army Kansas Fort Riley BARRACKS (DESIGN) 0 16,000 16,000
Army Kentucky Fort Campbell AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER 0 45,000 45,000
Army Kentucky Fort Campbell BARRACKS 112,000 -72,000 40,000
Army Kentucky Fort Campbell FLIGHT CONTROL TOWER 0 55,000 55,000
Army Maryland Aberdeen Proving APPLIED SCIENCE CENTER, ABERDEEN 0 8,000 8,000
Ground PROVING GROUND (DESIGN)
Army New York Fort Drum AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION 0 9,824 9,824
DESIGN)
Army New York Fort Drum ORTC TRANSIENT TRAINING BARRACKS 0 8,655 8,655
(DEISGN)
Army New York Fort Drum RANGE 41C, AUTOMATED RECORD FIRE 0 2,500 2,500
PLUS RANGE (DESIGN)
Army New York Fort Hamilton CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 31,000 0 31,000
Army New York Watervliet Arsenal ELECTRICAL SWITCHING STATION 29,000 0 29,000
Army North Carolina Fort Bragg AUTOMATED INFANTRY PLATOON BATTLE 19,000 0 19,000
COURSE
Army North Carolina Fort Bragg COST TO COMPLETE AIRCRAFT 24,000 0 24,000
MAINTENANCE HANGAR
Army Oklahoma McAlester Army COST TO COMPLETE--AMMUNITION 55,000 0 55,000
Ammunition Plant DEMOLITION SHOP
Army Pennsylvania Letterkenny Army DEFENSE ACCESS ROADS 7,500 0 7,500
Depot
Army Pennsylvania Letterkenny Army GUIDED MISSILE MAINTENANCE BUILDING 84,000 0 84,000
Depot
Army Pennsylvania Tobyhanna Army RADAR TEST RANGE EXPANSION 68,000 0 68,000
Depot
Army Republic of the U.S. Army Garrison AIRFIELD APRON & TAXIWAY REPAIR 0 161,000 161,000
Marshall Islands Kwajalein
Army South Carolina Fort Jackson CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 51,000 0 51,000
Army Texas Corpus Christi Army COST TO COMPLETE--POWERTRAIN 60,000 0 60,000
Depot FACILITY (ENGINE ASSEMBLY)
Army Texas Red River Army COST TO COMPLETE--COMPONENT REBUILD 93,000 -45,000 48,000
Depot SHOP
Army Washington Joint Base Lewis- COMMAND & CONTROL FACILITY 128,000 -73,000 55,000
McChord
Army Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 287,557 0 287,557
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 6,459,744 6,459,744
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION ($6,159,744
Locations TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Army Worldwide Unspecified HOST NATION SUPPORT 46,031 0 46,031
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified PDI: INDOPACOM MINOR CONSTRUCTION 68,453 0 68,453
Unspecified Worldwide PILOT
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 79,218 0 79,218
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Army 2,173,959 6,303,713 8,477,672
................... ................... ....................................
NAVY & MARINE CORPS
Navy & Marine Corps Arizona Marine Corps Air UDP TRANSIENT BARRACKS (DESIGN) 0 6,700 6,700
Station Yuma
Navy & Marine Corps Arizona Marine Corps Air WATER TREATMENT PLANT (DESIGN) 0 26,100 26,100
Station Yuma
Navy & Marine Corps Australia Royal Australian PDI: AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON (INC) 190,630 0 190,630
Air Force Base
Darwin
Navy & Marine Corps Bahrain Naval Support COST TO COMPLETE--FLEET MAINTENANCE 42,000 0 42,000
Activity Bahrain FACILITY & TOC
Navy & Marine Corps California Marine Corps Base COMMUNICATION CENTER (AREA 52) 18,480 0 18,480
Camp Pendleton
Navy & Marine Corps California Marine Corps Base FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONSE STATION 0 43,800 43,800
Camp Pendleton
Navy & Marine Corps California Marine Corps Base MESS HALL & ARMORY (AREA 43) 108,740 -86,000 22,740
Camp Pendleton
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Air Station STRIKE FIGHTER CENTER OF EXCELLENCE 55,542 0 55,542
Lemoore PACIFIC (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base Coronado FORD CLASS CVN INFRASTRUCTURE 103,000 -79,000 24,000
UPGRADES, PIER LIMA
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base Coronado UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING 0 199,000 199,000
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base San CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 86,820 0 86,820
Diego
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base San RECONNGURABLE CYBER LABORATORY 0 68,000 68,000
Diego
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base Ventura COMMUNITY & AIRFIELD AREA FLOOD 0 104,000 104,000
County PROTECTION
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Base Ventura COST TO COMPLETE--MQ-25 AIRCRAFT 71,200 0 71,200
County Point Mugu MAINTENANCE HANGAR
Navy & Marine Corps California Naval Support NAVAL INNOVATION CENTER (INC) 30,000 0 30,000
Activity Monterey
Navy & Marine Corps Connecticut Naval Submarine WEAPONS MAGAZINE & ORDNANCE 30,000 0 30,000
Base New London OPERATIONS FACILITY
Navy & Marine Corps Connecticut Naval Submarine SUBMARINE PIER 8 REPLACEMENT 0 225,000 225,000
Base New London
Navy & Marine Corps District of Marine Barracks BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS & SUPPORT 65,900 0 65,900
Columbia Washington (8th FACILITY (INC)
Street & I)
Navy & Marine Corps District of Naval Research BIOMOLECULAR SCIENCE & SYNTHETIC 0 157,000 157,000
Columbia Laboratory BIOLOGY LABORATORY
Navy & Marine Corps Djibouti Camp Lemmonier ELECTRICAL POWER PLANT (INC) 51,600 0 51,600
Navy & Marine Corps Florida Cape Canaveral COST TO COMPLETE--ENGINEERING TEST 15,600 0 15,600
Space Force FACILITY
Station
Navy & Marine Corps Florida Naval Air Station CONSOLIDATED "A" SCHOOL DORMITORY 0 164,000 164,000
Pensacola
Navy & Marine Corps Florida Naval Air Station ADVANCED HELICOPTER TRAINING SYSTEM 98,505 0 98,505
Whiting Field HANGAR (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Florida Naval Air Station CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (DESIGN) 0 3,000 3,000
Whiting Field
Navy & Marine Corps Georgia Naval Submarine TRIDENT REFIT FACILITY EXPANSION-- 119,030 0 119,030
Base Kings Bay COLUMBIA (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region BLK V VA CLASS OPERATIONAL STORAGE 0 103,000 103,000
Marianas FACILITY
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region NEX COLD STORAGE WAREHOUSE 0 62,000 62,000
Marianas
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Andersen Air Force PDI: JOINT CONSOLIDATED 181,124 -60,000 121,124
Base COMMUNICATIONS CENTER (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Andersen Air Force PDI: WATER WELLS 70,070 0 70,070
Base
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region PDI: COST TO COMPLETE--X-RAY WHARF 31,000 0 31,000
Marianas BERTH
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region PDI: JOINT COMMUNICATION UPGRADE 158,600 -75,000 83,600
Marianas (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region PDI: MISSILE INTEGRATION TEST 87,270 0 87,270
Marianas FACILITY (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Naval Base Guam PDI: INNER APRA HARBOR RESILIENCY 105,950 0 105,950
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Naval Base Guam PDI: ARTILLERY BATTERY FACILITIES 64,774 0 64,774
North Finegayan (INC)
Telecommunications
Site
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Naval Base Guam PDI: RECYCLE CENTER 61,010 0 61,010
North Finegayan
Telecommunications
Site
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region POLARIS POINT ECP UPGRADE 0 35,000 35,000
Marianas
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region POLARIS POINT ECP UPGRADE 0 587,020 587,020
Marianas
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region SATELLITE FIRE STATION 0 23,000 23,000
Marianas
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region SUBMARINE MAINTENANCE FACILITY 0 537,100 537,100
Marianas PHASES 1-3
Navy & Marine Corps Guam Joint Region UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE & ACCESS ROAD 0 32,000 32,000
Marianas
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Joint Base Pearl DDG-1000 SHIP SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE 83,000 0 83,000
Harbor-Hickam UPGRADES
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Joint Base Pearl DRY DOCK 3 REPLACEMENT (INC) 553,720 -61,000 492,720
Harbor-Hickam
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Joint Base Pearl WATER TREATMENT PLANT (INC) 141,650 0 141,650
Harbor-Hickam
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Marine Corps Base ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION 0 94,250 94,250
Kaneohe Bay MODERNIZATION
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Marine Corps Base MAIN GATE ENTRY REPLACEMENT 0 49,260 49,260
Kaneohe Bay
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Marine Corps Base WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY 108,350 -71,000 37,350
Kaneohe Bay COMPLIANCE UPGRADE (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Hawaii Pacific Missile PDI: AIRFIELD PAVEMENT UPGRADES 235,730 -170,000 65,730
Range Facility
Barking Sands
Navy & Marine Corps Japan Marine Corps Base PDI: SCHOOL AGE CARE CENTERS 58,000 0 58,000
Camp Smedley D.
Butler
Navy & Marine Corps Maine Portsmouth Naval MULTI-MISSION DRYDOCK #1 EXTENSION 220,793 0 220,793
Shipyard (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Maine Portsmouth Naval POWER RELIABILITY & WATER RESILIENCE 227,769 0 227,769
Shipyard UPGRADES (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Maryland National Maritime FOREIGN MATERIALS EXPLOITATION LAB 114,000 -41,000 73,000
Intelligence
Center
Navy & Marine Corps Maryland Naval Support CONT AINED BURN FACILITY 0 65,000 65,000
Facility Indian
Head
Navy & Marine Corps Maryland US Naval Academy STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 0 86,000 86,000
Annapolis
Navy & Marine Corps Nevada Naval Air Station RANGE TRAINING COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS 47,000 0 47,000
Fallon
Navy & Marine Corps North Carolina Marine Corps Air F-35 AIRCRAFT SUSTAINMENT CTR (INC) 200,000 -160,000 40,000
Station Cherry
Point
Navy & Marine Corps North Carolina Marine Corps Air FLIGHTLINE UTILITIES MODERNIZATION, 0 15,000 15,000
Station Cherry PHASE 2 (DESIGN)
Point
Navy & Marine Corps North Carolina Marine Corps Base AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT VEHICLE SHELTERS 0 48,280 48,280
Camp Lejeune
Navy & Marine Corps Pennsylvania Naval Support MACHINERY CONTROL DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 88,000 88,000
Activity
Mechanicsburg
Navy & Marine Corps Rhode Island Naval Station CONSOLIDATED RDT&E SYSTEMS FACILITY 0 40,000 40,000
Newport
Navy & Marine Corps Rhode Island Naval Station NEXT GENERATION SECURE SUBMARINE 0 73,000 73,000
Newport PLATFORM FACILITY
Navy & Marine Corps Rhode Island Naval Station NEXT GENERATION TORPEDO INTEGRATION 0 37,000 37,000
Newport LAB
Navy & Marine Corps Rhode Island Naval Station SUBMARINE PAYLOAD INTEGRATION 0 40,000 40,000
Newport LABORATORY
Navy & Marine Corps South Carolina Joint Base NUCLEAR POWER TRAINING FACILITY 65,400 0 65,400
Charleston SIMULATION EXPANSION (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Joint Expeditionary COST TO COMPLETE--CHILD DEVELOPMENT 12,360 0 12,360
Base Little Creek- CENTER
Fort Story
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Marine Corps Base WATER TREATMENT PLANT 63,560 0 63,560
Quantico
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Naval Station COST TO COMPLETE--CHILD DEVELOPMENT 11,700 0 11,700
Norfolk CENTER
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Naval Station ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 93,307 0 93,307
Norfolk UPGRADES (INC)
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Naval Station MQ-25 AIRCRAFT LAYDOWN FACILITIES 20,430 0 20,430
Norfolk
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Naval Station PPV UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING INVESTMENT 380,000 0 380,000
Norfolk
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Naval Weapons WEAPONS MAGAZINES (INC) 71,758 0 71,758
Station Yorktown
Navy & Marine Corps Virginia Norfolk Naval DRY DOCK 3 MODERNIZATION (INC) 188,576 0 188,576
Shipyard
Navy & Marine Corps Washington Naval Air Station EA-18G GROWLER MAINTENANCE FACILITY 0 75,000 75,000
Whidbey Island
Navy & Marine Corps Washington Naval Base Kitsap- TRIDENT REFIT FACILITY WAREHOUSE 245,700 -150,000 95,700
Bangor
Navy & Marine Corps Washington Puget Sound Naval COST TO COMPLETE--CVN 78 AIRCRAFT 48,800 0 48,800
Shipyard CARRIER ELECTRICAL UPGRADES
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified DATA PROCESSING FACILITY 57,190 0 57,190
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 562,423 0 562,423
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 4,191,438 4,191,438
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (NAVY) ($3,991,438
Locations TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 2,179,890 2,179,890
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (MARINE CORPS)
Locations ($2,079,890 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 162,855 0 162,855
Unspecified Worldwide PILOT PROGRAM
Locations
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified JOINT MARITIME FACILITY 72,430 0 72,430
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Navy & Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 119,331 0 119,331
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Navy & Marine Corps 6,012,677 8,504,838 14,517,515
................... ................... ....................................
AIR FORCE
Air Force Alaska Eielson Air Force COAL THAW SHED ADDITION (DESIGN) 0 1,750 1,750
Base
Air Force Alaska Eielson Air Force CONSOLIDATED MUNITIONS COMPLEX 0 13,200 13,200
Base (DESIGN)
Air Force Alaska Eielson Air Force JOINT PACIFIC ALASKA RANGE COMPLEX 0 8,040 8,040
Base OPERATIONS FACILITY (DESIGN)
Air Force Alaska Joint Base JOINT INTEGRATED TEST & TRAINING 152,000 -70,000 82,000
Elmendorf- CENTER (INC)
Richardson
Air Force Arizona Davis-Monthan Air COMMUNICATIONS HEADQUARTERS FACILITY 49,000 0 49,000
Force Base
Air Force Arizona Davis-Monthan Air MC-130J HANGAR/AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 125,000 -75,000 50,000
Force Base UNIT
Air Force Arizona Luke Air Force Base CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 45,000 45,000
Air Force California Travis Air Force CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 60,000 0 60,000
Base
Air Force Diego Garcia Naval Support OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITY 29,000 0 29,000
Facility Diego
Garcia
Air Force Florida Cape Canaveral INSTALL WASTE WATER "FORCE" MAIN, 11,400 0 11,400
Space Force ICBM ROAD
Station
Air Force Florida Cape Canaveral INSTALL WATER MAIN, ICBM ROAD 10,400 0 10,400
Space Force
Station
Air Force Florida Cape Canaveral PHILLIPS PARKWAY HAUL ROUTE 28,000 0 28,000
Space Force
Station
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force 350TH SPECTRUM WARFARE WING (DESIGN) 0 3,300 3,300
Base
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER WITH LAND 41,000 0 41,000
Base ACQUISITION
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force F-35A ADAL SQUADRON OPERATIONS 23,000 0 23,000
Base
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force F-35A DEVELOPMENTAL TEST 2-BAY MX 52,000 0 52,000
Base HANGAR
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force F-35A DEVELOPMENTAL TEST 2-BAY TEST 50,000 0 50,000
Base HANGAR
Air Force Florida Hurlburt Field 361 ISRG MISSION OPERATIONS FACILITY 0 66,000 66,000
Air Force Florida MacDill Air Force KC-46A ADAL AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 30,000 0 30,000
Base HANGAR 2
Air Force Florida MacDill Air Force KC-46A ADAL AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 33,000 0 33,000
Base HANGAR 3
Air Force Florida MacDill Air Force KC-46A GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE 11,000 0 11,000
Base
Air Force Florida Tyndall Air Force FIRE/CRASH RESCUE STATION 0 48,000 48,000
Base
Air Force Georgia Moody Air Force 23RD SECURITY FORCES SQUADRON OPS 0 35,000 35,000
Base FACILITY
Air Force Georgia Moody Air Force MILITARY WORKING DOG KENNEL 0 14,500 14,500
Base
Air Force Georgia Robins Air Force AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER 28,000 0 28,000
Base
Air Force Germany Ramstein Air Base 35 POINT INDOOR FIRING RANGE 44,000 0 44,000
Air Force Germany Ramstein Air Base AEROMEDICAL EVACUATION COMPOUND 29,000 -29,000 0
Air Force Greenland Pituffik Space Base RUNWAY APPROACH LANDING SYSTEM 32,000 0 32,000
Air Force Hawaii Joint Base Pearl COMBINED OPERATIONS CENTER (DESIGN) 0 5,000 5,000
Harbor-Hickam
Air Force Japan Kadena Air Base PDI: THEATER A/C CORROSION CONTROL 66,350 0 66,350
CENTER (INC)
Air Force Louisiana Barksdale Air Force CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (DESIGN) 0 2,200 2,200
Base
Air Force Louisiana Barksdale Air Force WEAPONS GENERATION FACILITIES 116,000 -98,000 18,000
Base DORMITORY
Air Force Maryland Joint Base LARGE VEHICLE INSPECTION STATION 0 50,000 50,000
Anacostia-Bolling
Air Force Massachusetts Hanscom Air Force FIRE STATION 55,000 0 55,000
Base
Air Force Mississippi Columbus Air Force WATER TANK STORAGE 0 14,200 14,200
Base
Air Force Missouri Whiteman Air Force B-21 ADAL WEAPONS RELEASE SYSTEM 13,600 0 13,600
Base STORAGE
Air Force Missouri Whiteman Air Force B-21 RADIO FREQUENCY HANGAR 114,000 -94,000 20,000
Base
Air Force Montana Malmstrom Air Force WEAPONS STORAGE & MAINTENANCE 60,000 0 60,000
Base FACILITY (INC)
Air Force Nebraska Offutt Air Force SAOC BEDDOWN--1-BAY HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 1,900 1,900
Base
Air Force Nebraska Offutt Air Force SAOC BEDDOWN--2-BAY HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 16,000 16,000
Base
Air Force Nebraska Offutt Air Force SAOC BEDDOWN--SUPPLY STORAGE 0 7,350 7,350
Base FACILITY (DESIGN)
Air Force New Hampshire Pease Air Force JOINT USE CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 3,613 3,613
Base (DESIGN)
Air Force New Jersey Joint Base McGuire- WELL NO. 5 0 11,500 11,500
Dix-Lakehurst
Air Force New Jersey Joint Base McGuire- WELL NO. 6 0 11,500 11,500
Dix-Lakehurst
Air Force New Mexico Cannon Air Force 192 BED DORMITORY (DESIGN) 0 9,000 9,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Cannon Air Force DEPLOYMENT PROCESSING CENTER 0 79,000 79,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Cannon Air Force DORMITORY 90,000 -80,000 10,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force 58 SOW/PJ/CRO PIPELINE DORM 0 91,000 91,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER SIMULATOR 0 33,000 33,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force EXPLOSIVE OPERATIONS BUILDING 0 26,000 26,000
Base
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force JOINT NAVIGATION WARFARE CENTER 0 6,200 6,200
Base HEADQUARTERS (DESIGN)
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE 83,000 0 83,000
Base HEADQUARTERS
Air Force North Carolina Seymour Johnson Air CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 54,000 54,000
Force Base
Air Force North Carolina Seymour Johnson Air COMBAT ARMS TRAINING AND MAINTENANCE 0 41,000 41,000
Force Base COMPLEX
Air Force Norway Royal Norwegian Air QUICK REACTION AIRCRAFT HANGAR 72,000 0 72,000
Force Base Rygge
Air Force Ohio Wright-Patterson AI SUPERCOMPUTING CENTER (DESIGN) 0 2,800 2,800
Air Force Base
Air Force Ohio Wright-Patterson HUMAN PERFORMANCE CENTER LAB 0 45,000 45,000
Air Force Base
Air Force Ohio Wright-Patterson RUNWAY (DESIGN) 0 15,000 15,000
Air Force Base
Air Force Oklahoma Tinker Air Force BOMBER AGILE COMMON HANGAR (INC) 127,000 -112,000 15,000
Base
Air Force Oklahoma Tinker Air Force CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 54,000 0 54,000
Base
Air Force Oklahoma Tinker Air Force E-7 SQUAD OPERATIONS CENTER 0 108,000 108,000
Base
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 ADD FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2 63,000 0 63,000
Base
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 ALERT FACILITY 71,000 0 71,000
Base
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 75,000 0 75,000
Base SHELTERS
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 88,000 0 88,000
Base SHELTERS
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 W. ALERT APRON & ENVIRONMENTAL 81,000 0 81,000
Base PROTECTION SHELTERS
Air Force Tennessee Arnold Air Force INSTALLATION ACP GATE 2 UPGRADE 0 17,500 17,500
Base
Air Force Texas Dyess Air Force B-21 LOW OBSERVABLE CORROSION HANGAR 0 24,700 24,700
Base AND THE MISSION PLANNING FACILITY
(DESIGN)
Air Force Texas Dyess Air Force B-21 MISSION PLANNING FACILITY 78,000 0 78,000
Base
Air Force Texas Dyess Air Force B-21 UTILITIES & SITE IMPROVEMENTS 12,800 0 12,800
Base
Air Force Texas Dyess Air Force GATE REPAIRS (DESIGN) 0 4,500 4,500
Base
Air Force Texas Goodfellow Air PIPELINE STUDENT DORMITORY 112,000 -89,000 23,000
Force Base
Air Force Texas Joint Base San BMT CLASSROOMS/DINING FACILITY 4 79,000 -50,000 29,000
Antonio-Lackland (INC)
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force RADR STORAGE FACILITY 20,000 0 20,000
Feltwell
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force SURETY: COMMAND POST 104,000 -94,000 10,000
Lakenheath
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force SURETY: DEFENDER OPERATIONS COMPOUND 149,000 -139,000 10,000
Lakenheath
Air Force Utah Hill Air Force Base F-35 MAINTENANCE FACILITY, PHASE 1 22,000 0 22,000
(INC)
Air Force Utah Hill Air Force Base T-7A DEPOT MAINTENANCE COMPLEX (INC) 178,000 -55,000 123,000
Air Force Virginia Joint Base Langley- FUEL SYSTEM MAINTENANCE DOCK 0 49,000 49,000
Eustis
Air Force Virginia Langley Air Force 192ND WING HEADQUARTERS (DESIGN) 0 3,200 3,200
Base
Air Force Washington Fairchild Air Force ALTERATION AIRCRAFT PARTS WAREHOUSE 0 2,500 2,500
Base (DESIGN)
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 573,223 0 573,223
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 3,643,331 3,643,331
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (AIR FORCE)
Locations ($3,093,331 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 557,175 557,175
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (SPACE FORCE)
Locations (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 123,800 0 123,800
Unspecified Worldwide PILOT PROGRAM
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 72,900 0 72,900
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Air Force Wyoming F.E. Warren Air GBSD UTILITY CORRIDOR (INC) 130,000 0 130,000
Force Base
Subtotal Military Construction, Air Force 3,721,473 4,184,959 7,906,432
................... ................... ....................................
DEFENSE-WIDE
Defense-Wide Alabama DLA Distribution GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE 32,000 0 32,000
Center Anniston
Defense-Wide California Armed Forces POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 20,600 20,600
Reserve Center
Mountain View
Defense-Wide California Naval Base Coronado SOF SEAL TEAM SEVENTEEN OPERATIONS 0 75,900 75,900
FACILITY
Defense-Wide California Travis Air Force MEDICAL WAREHOUSE ADDITION 49,980 0 49,980
Base
Defense-Wide California Travis Air Force POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 25,120 25,120
Base
Defense-Wide Cuba Naval Station HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT (INC 3) 35,794 0 35,794
Guantanamo Bay
Defense-Wide Florida Homestead Air SOF CLIMATE CONTROLLED TACTICAL 0 33,000 33,000
Reserve Base STORAGE WAREHOUSE
Defense-Wide Florida Marine Corps POWER GENERATION & ELECTRICAL 0 30,500 30,500
Support Facility INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE
Blount Island
Defense-Wide Georgia Fort Benning DEXTER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 127,375 -105,000 22,375
Defense-Wide Germany Rhine Ordnance MEDICAL CENTER REPLACEMENT (INC 12) 99,167 0 99,167
Barracks
Defense-Wide Germany U.S. Army Garrison POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 73,000 73,000
Ansbach
Defense-Wide Germany U.S. Army Garrison SOF HUMAN PERFORMANCE TRAINING 16,700 0 16,700
Rheinland-Pfalz CENTER
Defense-Wide Guam Joint Region PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, COMMAND 183,900 -95,000 88,900
Marianas CENTER (INC)
Defense-Wide Guam Joint Region PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, EIAMD, 61,903 0 61,903
Marianas PHASE 1 (INC)
Defense-Wide Guam Joint Region POWER RESILIENCY UPGRADES 0 53,000 53,000
Marianas
Defense-Wide Guam Naval Base Guam POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 63,010 63,010
Defense-Wide Japan Marine Corps Air POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 10,000 10,000
Station Iwakuni
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW EAST CAMPUS BUILDING #5 (INC 2) 455,000 -60,000 395,000
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW VENONA WIDENING 26,600 0 26,600
Defense-Wide Maryland Walter Reed MEDCEN ADDITION/ALTERATION (INC 9) 70,000 0 70,000
National Military
Medical Center
Defense-Wide Massachusetts Cape Cod Space POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 10,000 10,000
Force Station
Defense-Wide New Mexico White Sands Missile POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 38,500 38,500
Range
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 80,000 80,000
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF MISSION COMMAND CENTER 130,000 -98,000 32,000
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF OPERATIONAL AMMUNITION 0 65,000 65,000
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg SOF OPERATIONAL AMMUNITION SUPPLY 80,000 0 80,000
POINT
Defense-Wide North Carolina Marine Corps Base SOF COMBAT SERIVCE SUPPORT/MOTOR 0 34,000 34,000
Camp Lejeune TRANSPORT EXPANSION
Defense-Wide North Carolina Marine Corps Base SOF MARINE RAIDER BATTALION OPS 90,000 0 90,000
Camp Lejeune FACILITY (INC)
Defense-Wide Pennsylvania DLA Distribution GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE 90,000 0 90,000
Center Susquehanna
Defense-Wide Pennsylvania Harrisburg Air SOF SIMULATOR FACILITY (MC-130J) 13,400 0 13,400
National Guard
Base
Defense-Wide Puerto Rico Punta Borinquen RAMEY UNIT SCHOOL REPLACEMENT 155,000 -114,000 41,000
Defense-Wide Texas Camp Swift SMART WATER GRID 0 19,800 19,800
Defense-Wide Texas Fort Hood CENTRAL ENERGY PLANT 0 34,500 34,500
Defense-Wide Texas NSA Texas NSA/CSS TEXAS CRYPTOLOGIC CENTER 500,000 -352,673 147,327
(INC)
Defense-Wide United Kingdom Royal Air Force HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT, PHASE 2 (INC) 322,200 -275,000 47,200
Lakenheath
Defense-Wide United Kingdom Royal Air Force SOF MRSP & PARTS STORAGE 45,000 0 45,000
Mildenhall
Defense-Wide Utah Camp Williams POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID 0 28,500 28,500
Defense-Wide Virginia Pentagon OPERATIONS FACILITY 34,000 0 34,000
Defense-Wide Washington Fairchild Air Force HYDRANT SYSTEM AREA C 85,000 0 85,000
Base
Defense-Wide Washington Manchester Tank BULK STORAGE TANKS, PHASE 3 71,000 0 71,000
Farm
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (DEFENSE-WIDE) 26,571 0 26,571
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (DHA) 29,077 0 29,077
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (DLA) 30,900 0 30,900
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (ERCIP) 38,669 0 38,669
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (MDA) 21,360 0 21,360
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (NSA) 14,842 0 14,842
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (SOCOM) 32,731 0 32,731
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (TJS) 2,000 0 2,000
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (WHS) 14,851 0 14,851
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified ENERGY RESILIENCE & CONSERVATION 684,330 -684,330 0
Unspecified Worldwide INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified EXERCISE RELATED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 4,727 0 4,727
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 77,000 0 77,000
Unspecified Worldwide PILOT PROGRAM
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 3,000 0 3,000
Unspecified Worldwide (DEFENSE-WIDE)
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (DLA) 3,084 0 3,084
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (MDA) 4,140 0 4,140
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (NSA) 6,000 0 6,000
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 25,000 0 25,000
Unspecified Worldwide (SOCOM)
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Defense-Wide 3,792,301 -1,089,573 2,702,728
................... ................... ....................................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Army National Guard Arizona Camp Navajo BRIDGE (DESIGN) 0 4,000 4,000
Army National Guard Guam Joint Forces READINESS CENTER ADDITION 55,000 0 55,000
Headquarters--Guam
Army National Guard Illinois General Richard L. READINESS CENTER ALTERATION (DESIGN) 0 5,000 5,000
Jones National
Guard Readiness
Center
Army National Guard Illinois Marseilles Training RANGE CONTROL (DESIGN) 0 3,050 3,050
Center
Army National Guard Illinois Peoria Armory READINESS CENTER (DESIGN) 0 8,000 8,000
Army National Guard Indiana Shelbyville Armory AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION/ 0 55,000 55,000
ALTERATION
Army National Guard Iowa Waterloo Armory VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP 13,800 0 13,800
Army National Guard Kentucky Jackson Field VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP (DESIGN) 0 1,850 1,850
Army National Guard Michigan Camp Grayling ALL-DOMAIN WARFIGHTING TRAINING 0 4,400 4,400
COMPLEX (DESIGN)
Army National Guard Mississippi Camp Shelby ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITY AND 0 11,600 11,600
READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)
Army National Guard Mississippi Meridian Readiness ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITY 0 2,200 2,200
Center and Army (DESIGN)
Aviation Support
Facility
Army National Guard Nevada Henderson Armory ARMORY EXPANSION (DESIGN) 0 2,371 2,371
Army National Guard New Hampshire Plymouth Training READINESS CENTER 26,000 0 26,000
Center
Army National Guard New Mexico Santa Fe Training SOLDIER PERFORMANCE READINESS CENTER 0 4,250 4,250
Center (DESIGN)
Army National Guard New York Albany READINESS CENTER 0 90,000 90,000
Army National Guard North Carolina Salisbury Training AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION/ 0 69,000 69,000
Center ALTERATION
Army National Guard North Dakota Jamestown Armory ARMORY (DESIGN) 0 5,200 5,200
Army National Guard Oregon Naval Weapons AUTOMATED MULTIPURPOSE MACHINE GUN 0 16,000 16,000
Systems Training (MPMG) RANGE
Facility Boardman
Army National Guard South Dakota Watertown Training VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP 28,000 0 28,000
Center
Army National Guard Tennessee Smyrna Training AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 4,000 4,000
Site
Army National Guard Vermont Swanton Armory READINESS CENTER (DESIGN) 0 4,000 4,000
Army National Guard Virginia Army Aviation COST TO COMPLETE--AIRCRAFT 15,500 0 15,500
Support Facility MAINTENANCE HANGAR
Sandston
Army National Guard Washington Fairchild Air Force DINING FACILITY (DESIGN) 0 1,800 1,800
Base
Army National Guard Wisconsin Black River Falls READINESS CENTER (DESIGN) 0 2,000 2,000
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 13,580 0 13,580
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 1,275,984 1,275,984
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM
Locations O&M)
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 0 39,000 39,000
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Army National Guard 151,880 1,608,705 1,760,585
................... ................... ....................................
ARMY RESERVE
Army Reserve Alabama Maxwell Gunter AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY 0 28,000 28,000
Army Reserve Alaska Joint Base MAINTENANCE FACILITY 0 46,000 46,000
Elmendorf-
Richardson
Army Reserve Illinois Fort Sheridan AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY 0 36,000 36,000
Army Reserve Pennsylvania New Castle Army AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY/ 30,000 0 30,000
Reserve Center VMS/LAND
Army Reserve Texas Conroe Army Reserve ROTARY-WING LANDING PAD & TAXIWAY 0 12,000 12,000
Center
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 6,013 0 6,013
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 504,922 504,922
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM
Locations O&M)
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 6,226 0 6,226
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Army Reserve 42,239 626,922 669,161
................... ................... ....................................
NAVY RESERVE & MARINE CORPS RESERVE
Navy Reserve & Marine Maine Portsmouth Naval PARKING CONSOLIDATION (DESIGN) 0 1,020 1,020
Corps Reserve Shipyard
Navy Reserve & Marine Texas Naval Air Station AIRCRAFT HANGAR MODERNIZATION 0 106,870 106,870
Corps Reserve Joint Reserve Base
Fort Worth
Navy Reserve & Marine Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 2,255 0 2,255
Corps Reserve Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Navy Reserve & Marine Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 48,519 48,519
Corps Reserve Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (MARINE CORPS
Locations RESERVE) (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Navy Reserve & Marine Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 58,213 58,213
Corps Reserve Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (NAVY RESERVE)
Locations (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)
Subtotal Military Construction, Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve 2,255 214,622 216,877
................... ................... ....................................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD
Air National Guard Alaska Eielson Air Force BCE PAVEMENTS & GROUNDS FACILITY 0 16,000 16,000
Base
Air National Guard Alaska Joint Base BASE SUPPLY COMPLEX 46,000 0 46,000
Elmendorf-
Richardson
Air National Guard Georgia Savannah Combat C130J CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY 0 1,130 1,130
Readiness Training (DESIGN)
Center
Air National Guard Georgia Savannah Combat TROOP CAMP (DESIGN) 0 3,800 3,800
Readiness Training
Center
Air National Guard Georgia Savannah Hilton C-130J CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY 0 11,400 11,400
Head International
Airport
Air National Guard Georgia Savannah/Hilton DINING HALL & SERVICES TRAIN 27,000 0 27,000
Head International FACILITY
Airport
Air National Guard Illinois Scott Air Force AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 6,000 6,000
Base
Air National Guard Indiana Fort Wayne F16 MISSION TRAINING FACILITY 0 18,000 18,000
International (DESIGN)
Airport
Air National Guard Iowa Sioux Gateway ADAL AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON 0 45,000 45,000
Airport
Air National Guard Iowa Sioux Gateway EXTEND RUNWAY 13-31 0 47,000 47,000
Airport
Air National Guard Iowa Sioux Gateway REPAIR RUNWAY 13-31 0 45,000 45,000
Airport
Air National Guard Iowa Sioux Gateway WARM-UP / HOLDING PAD 0 11,000 11,000
Airport
Air National Guard Maine Bangor Air National MENG 101ST ARW AMXS/AGE FACILITY 0 2,500 2,500
Guard Base (DESIGN)
Air National Guard Maryland Warfield Air ENGINE SOUND SUPPRESSOR EQUIPMENT 0 1,000 1,000
National Guard (DESIGN)
Base
Air National Guard Massachusetts Otis Air National DINING FACILITY / EMEDS 31,000 0 31,000
Guard Base
Air National Guard Michigan Selfridge Air BRAVO RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT (DESIGN) 0 2,400 2,400
National Guard
Base
Air National Guard Michigan Selfridge Air RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (DESIGN) 0 9,000 9,000
National Guard
Base
Air National Guard Michigan Selfridge Air TAXIWAY ALPHA RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT 0 2,800 2,800
National Guard (DESIGN)
Base
Air National Guard Mississippi Key Field Air BASE SUPPLY WAREHOUSE 19,000 0 19,000
National Guard
Base
Air National Guard Mississippi Key Field Air CORROSION CONTROL HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 6,700 6,700
National Guard
Base
Air National Guard Nevada Reno-Tahoe ENGINE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT 0 3,200 3,200
International EQUIPMENT FACILITY (DESIGN)
Airport
Air National Guard Nevada Reno-Tahoe FUEL CELL HANGAR (DESIGN) 0 5,400 5,400
International
Airport
Air National Guard New Hampshire Pease Air National SMALL ARMS RANGE 0 16,000 16,000
Guard Base
Air National Guard New Jersey Atlantic City MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION PHASE 1 0 68,000 68,000
International
Airport
Air National Guard Oregon Kingsley Field Air ACADEMIC TRAINING CENTER (DESIGN) 0 8,000 8,000
National Guard
Base
Air National Guard Oregon Klamath Falls F-35 FTU ACADEMIC TRAINING CENTER 0 80,000 80,000
Airport
Air National Guard Oregon Portland ADAL COMMUNICATIONS ANNEX 16,500 0 16,500
International
Airport
Air National Guard Utah Salt Lake City FUEL CELL CORROSION CONTROL HANGAR 0 73,000 73,000
International
Airport
Air National Guard Utah Salt Lake City MAINT HANGAR & SHOPS 0 72,000 72,000
International
Airport
Air National Guard West Virginia McLaughlin Air SQUADRON OPERATIONS FACILITY 0 3,300 3,300
National Guard (DESIGN)
Base
Air National Guard Wisconsin Volk Air National ADAL ACS COMPLEX 0 8,400 8,400
Guard Base
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 24,146 0 24,146
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 549,496 549,496
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM
Locations O&M)
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 25,000 0 25,000
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Air National Guard 188,646 1,115,526 1,304,172
................... ................... ....................................
AIR FORCE RESERVE
Air Force Reserve Delaware Dover Air Force 512TH OPERATIONS GROUP FACILITY 42,000 -42,000 0
Base
Air Force Reserve New York Niagara Falls Air COMBINED OPERATIONS FACILITY 0 54,000 54,000
Reserve Station
Air Force Reserve South Carolina Joint Base MEDICAL FACILITY ADDITION 307BW 0 33,000 33,000
Charleston Air
Reserve Base
Air Force Reserve Texas Joint Base San C5M AGE MAINTENANCE FACILITY 18,000 0 18,000
Antonio-Lackland
Air Force Reserve Virginia Joint Base Langley- TARGETING ISR CRITICAL 0 15,000 15,000
Eustis COMMUNICATIONS DATA FACILITY
(DESIGN)
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 270 0 270
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION 0 188,802 188,802
Unspecified Worldwide & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM
Locations O&M)
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION 188 0 188
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Military Construction, Air Force Reserve 60,458 248,802 309,260
................... ................... ....................................
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
NATO Worldwide NATO Security NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM 481,832 50,000 531,832
Unspecified Investment Program
Subtotal NATO Security Investment Program 481,832 50,000 531,832
................... ................... ....................................
INDOPACIFIC COMBATANT COMMAND
MILCON, INDOPACOM Worldwide Unspecified INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 0 150,000 150,000
Unspecified Worldwide PILOT PROGRAM
Locations
Subtotal INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM 0 150,000 150,000
................... ................... ....................................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 16,627,720 21,918,514 38,546,234
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
Fam Hsg Con, Army Belgium Chievres Air Base FAMILY HOUSING NEW CONSTRUCTION (100 145,042 -100,000 45,042
UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Army Germany U.S. Army Garrison FAMILY HOUSING REPLACEMENT 50,692 0 50,692
Bavaria CONSTRUCTION (27 UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Army Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 32,824 0 32,824
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Army 228,558 -100,000 128,558
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING O&M, ARMY
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified FURNISHINGS 16,254 0 16,254
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT 41,089 0 41,089
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified LEASED HOUSING 116,275 0 116,275
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified MAINTENANCE 110,941 0 110,941
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified MANAGEMENT 41,450 0 41,450
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified MISCELLANEOUS 319 0 319
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified SERVICES 8,096 0 8,096
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified UTILITIES 43,994 0 43,994
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Army 378,418 0 378,418
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, NAVY & MARINE CORPS
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Guam Joint Region COST TO COMPLETE--REPLACE ANDERSEN 19,384 0 19,384
Marine Corps Marianas HOUSING, PHASE 4 (68 UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Guam Joint Region COST TO COMPLETE--REPLACE ANDERSEN 18,000 0 18,000
Marine Corps Marianas HOUSING, PHASE 7 (46 UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Guam Joint Region REPLACE ANDERSEN HOUSING, PHASE 9 65,378 0 65,378
Marine Corps Marianas (136 UNITS) (INC)
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Japan Marine Corps Air REPAIR WHOLE HOUSE BUILDING 1255 (6 11,230 0 11,230
Marine Corps Station Iwakuni UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 3,806 0 3,806
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN (DPRI/GUAM) 2,799 0 2,799
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified NAVY SOUTHEAST MHPI (2ND 57,000 0 57,000
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide RESTRUCTURE) (100 UNITS)
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Navy & Marine Corps 177,597 0 177,597
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING O&M, NAVY & MARINE CORPS
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified FURNISHINGS 16,820 0 16,820
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT 57,061 0 57,061
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified LEASING 68,426 0 68,426
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified MAINTENANCE 112,019 0 112,019
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified MANAGEMENT 56,956 0 56,956
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified MISCELLANEOUS 435 0 435
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified SERVICES 17,424 0 17,424
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Worldwide Unspecified UTILITIES 44,967 0 44,967
Marine Corps Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Operation & Maintenance, Navy & Marine Corps 374,108 0 374,108
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force Colorado Buckley Air Force MHPI RESTRUCTURE (351 UNITS) 12,000 0 12,000
Base
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force Hawaii Joint Base Pearl MHPI RESTRUCTURE (460 UNITS) 147,555 0 147,555
Harbor-Hickam
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force Japan Kadena Air Base FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENTS, KADENA 34,100 0 34,100
TOWER 4511 (68 UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force Japan Yokota Air Base FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENTS, PAIP 9, 44,000 0 44,000
PHASE 3 (34 UNITS)
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified DESIGN 36,575 0 36,575
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Air Force 274,230 0 274,230
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING O&M, AIR FORCE
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified FURNISHINGS 31,275 0 31,275
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT 38,987 0 38,987
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified LEASING 5,436 0 5,436
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified MAINTENANCE 142,572 0 142,572
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified MANAGEMENT 54,581 0 54,581
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified MISCELLANEOUS 1,475 0 1,475
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified SERVICES 12,701 0 12,701
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified UTILITIES 72,738 0 72,738
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Air Force 359,765 0 359,765
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified FURNISHINGS (DIA) 553 0 553
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified FURNISHINGS (NSA) 93 0 93
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified LEASING (DIA) 33,911 0 33,911
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified LEASING (NSA) 14,320 0 14,320
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified MAINTENANCE (NSA) 37 0 37
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified UTILITIES (DIA) 4,445 0 4,445
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense- Worldwide Unspecified UTILITIES (NSA) 15 0 15
Wide Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Defense-Wide 53,374 0 53,374
................... ................... ....................................
FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND
Family Housing Worldwide Unspecified ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES--FHIF 8,315 0 8,315
Improvement Fund Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Family Housing Improvement Fund 8,315 0 8,315
................... ................... ....................................
UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND
Unaccompanied Housing Worldwide Unspecified ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES--UHIF 497 0 497
Improvement Fund Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund 497 0 497
................... ................... ....................................
TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING 1,854,862 -100,000 1,754,862
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, ARMY
BRAC, Army Worldwide Unspecified BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE 171,870 0 171,870
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure--Army 171,870 0 171,870
................... ................... ....................................
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, NAVY
BRAC, Navy Worldwide Unspecified BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE 112,791 0 112,791
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure--Navy 112,791 0 112,791
................... ................... ....................................
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, AIR FORCE
BRAC, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE 124,196 0 124,196
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure--Air Force 124,196 0 124,196
................... ................... ....................................
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, DEFENSE-WIDE
BRAC, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE 1,304 0 1,304
Unspecified Worldwide
Locations
Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure--Defense-Wide 1,304 0 1,304
................... ................... ....................................
TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE 410,161 0 410,161
................... ................... ....................................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC 18,892,743 21,818,514 40,711,257
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL
SECURITY PROGRAMS
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Program FY 2026 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary by Appropriation
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriation Summary:
Energy Programs
Nuclear Energy...................................... 160,000 0 160,000
Atomic Energy Defense Activities
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Weapons Activities................................ 20,074,400 1,757,187 21,831,587
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.................. 2,284,600 -45,947 2,238,653
Naval Reactors.................................... 2,346,000 -99,000 2,247,000
Federal Salaries and Expenses..................... 555,000 0 555,000
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration..... 25,260,000 1,612,240 26,872,240
Defense Environmental Cleanup....................... 6,956,000 5,000 6,961,000
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D...................... 278,000 -278,000 0
Other Defense Activities............................ 1,182,000 0 1,182,000
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities............... 33,676,000 1,339,250 35,015,250
Total, Discretionary Funding.............................. 33,836,000 1,339,250 35,175,250
Nuclear Energy
Safeguards and security................................. 160,000 0 160,000
Total, Nuclear Energy..................................... 160,000 0 160,000
National Nuclear Security Administration
Weapons Activities
Stockpile management
Stockpile major modernization
B61-12 Life Extension Program....................... 16,000 0 16,000
W80-4 Life extension program........................ 1,259,048 0 1,259,048
SLCM-N Warhead...................................... 0 186,000 186,000
Restoration of full funding for Nuclear- (186,000)
Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile Warhead..
W87-1 Modification Program.......................... 649,096 121,187 770,283
Restoration of management reserve for (121,187)
program stabilization......................
W93................................................. 806,797 -25,000 781,797
Program decrease........................... (-25,000)
B61-13.............................................. 49,357 0 49,357
Subtotal, Stockpile major modernization............... 2,780,298 282,187 3,062,485
Stockpile sustainment..................................... 1,720,200 -100,000 1,620,200
Program decrease................................. (-100,000)
Weapons dismantlement and disposition..................... 82,367 5,000 87,367
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation (-20,000)
funds............................................
Harvesting dismantlement for stockpile modernization.... (25,000)
Production operations..................................... 1,020,243 0 1,020,243
Nuclear enterprise assurance.............................. 117,193 -19,000 98,193
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation (-19,000)
funds............................................
Total, Stockpile management............................. 5,720,301 168,187 5,888,488
Production Modernization
Primary Capability Modernization
Plutonium Modernization
Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization
Los Alamos Pit Production....................... 982,263 0 982,263
21-D-512 Plutonium Pit Production Project, LANL. 509,316 0 509,316
15-D-302 TA-55 Reinvestments Project, Phase 3, 7,942 0 7,942
LANL...........................................
07-D-220-04 Transuranic Liquid Waste Facility, 5,865 0 5,865
LANL...........................................
Subtotal, Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization...... 1,505,386 0 1,505,386
Savannah River Plutonium Modernization
Savannah River Pit Production................... 75,486 0 75,486
21-D-511 Savannah River Plutonium Processing 1,130,000 0 1,130,000
Facility, SRS..................................
Subtotal, Savannah River Plutonium Modernization.. 1,205,486 0 1,205,486
Enterprise Plutonium Support.......................... 122,094 0 122,094
Total, Plutonium Modernization.......................... 2,832,966 0 2,832,966
High Explosives & Energetics
High Explosives & Energetics.................... 132,023 24,000 156,023
Realignment of improperly applied (24,000)
reconciliation funds...................
21-D-510 HE Synthesis, Formulation, and 0 125,000 125,000
Production, PX.................................
Project Continuation................... (125,000)
PFAS Binder Mitigation and Future Alternatives.. (60,000)
Subtotal, High Explosives & Energetics............ 132,023 209,000 341,023
Total, Primary Capability Modernization................... 2,964,989 209,000 3,173,989
Secondary Capability Modernization
Secondary Capability Modernization...................... 770,186 282,000 1,052,186
Depleted uranium risk reduction.............. (145,000)
Realignment of improperly applied (137,000)
reconciliation funds.........................
18-D-690 Lithium Processing Facility, Y-12.............. 0 150,000 150,000
Project Continuation......................... (150,000)
06-D-141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12.............. 0 830,000 830,000
Realignment of improperly applied (830,000)
reconciliation funds...........................
Total, Secondary Capability Modernization................. 770,186 1,262,000 2,032,186
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program....................... 568,384 0 568,384
18-D-650 Tritium Finishing Facility, SRS................ 0 35,000 35,000
Program increase............................... (35,000)
Total, Tritium and Domestic Uranium Enrichment............ 568,384 35,000 603,384
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization............. 221,588 -31,000 190,588
Program decrease............................... (-31,000)
26-D-511 MESA Photolithography Capability (MPC), 40,000 0 40,000
SNL..............................................
26-D-510 Product Realization Infrastructure for 15,000 0 15,000
Stockpile Modernization (PRISM), LLNL............
Total, Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization............... 276,588 -31,000 245,588
Capability Based Investments.............................. 177,996 -24,000 153,996
Program decrease................................. (-24,000)
Warhead Assembly Modernization............................ 34,336 0 34,336
Total, Production Modernization......................... 4,792,479 1,451,000 6,243,479
Stockpile research, technology, and engineering
Assessment Science
Assessment Science.................................. 980,959 12,000 992,959
Realignment of improperly applied (-97,000)
reconciliation funds.......................
Plutonium aging and mitigation; high (109,000)
explosives evaluation and alternate
pathways development.......................
26-D-512 LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP), LANL.. 20,000 0 20,000
Total, Assessment Science............................. 1,000,959 12,000 1,012,959
Engineering and integrated assessments
Engineering and Integrated Assessments.............. 399,777 74,000 473,777
Establishment of Rapid Capabilities (12,000)
Development Office.........................
Phase 1 study support...................... (36,000)
Realignment of improperly applied (26,000)
reconciliation funds.......................
26-D-513 Combined Radiation Environments for 52,248 0 52,248
Survivability Testing, SNL.........................
Total, Engineering and Integrated Assessments......... 452,025 74,000 526,025
Inertial Confinement Fusion
Inertial Confinement Fusion......................... 699,206 (25,000) 724,206
Enhanced facility sustainment.............. (25,000)
26-D-514 NIF Enhanced Fusion Yield Capability, LLNL. 26,000 26,000
Total, Inertial Confinement Fusion.................... 725,206 25,000 750,206
Advanced simulation and computing..................... 865,995 0 865,995
Weapons technology and manufacturing maturation....... 276,279 0 276,279
Total, Stockpile research, technology, and engineering.. 3,320,464 111,000 3,431,464
Academic Programs......................................... 94,000 0 94,000
Infrastructure and operations
Operating
Operations of facilities............................ 1,722,000 -80,000 1,642,000
Program decrease........................... (-80,000)
Safety and Environmental Operations................. 194,360 0 194,360
Maintenance and Repair of Facilities................ 920,000 141,000 1,061,000
Program decrease........................... (-50,000)
Deferred maintenance buy-down.............. (191,000)
Recapitalization.................................... 741,179 193,821 935,000
Program decrease........................... (-31,179)
Deferred maintenance buy-down.............. (225,000)
Total, Operating...................................... 3,577,539 254,821 3,832,360
Total, Infrastructure and operations.................... 3,577,539 254,821 3,832,360
Secure transportation asset
Operations and equipment.............................. 299,541 -30,000 269,541
Program decrease............................. (-30,000)
Program direction..................................... 149,244 0 149,244
Total, Secure transportation asset...................... 448,785 (-30,000) 418,785
Defense nuclear security
Operations and maintenance............................ 1,245,418 -45,000 1,200,418
Program decrease............................. (-45,000)
Construction:
Total, Defense nuclear security......................... 1,245,418 -45,000 1,200,418
Information Technology and Cybersecurity................ 811,208 -152,821 658,387
Program decrease...................................... (-152,821)
Legacy Contractor Pensions and Settlement Payments...... 64,206 0 64,206
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 20,074,400 1,757,187 21,831,587
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 20,074,400 1,757,187 21,831,587
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
Material Management and Minimization
Reactor conversion and uranium supply................. 63,383 0 63,383
Nuclear material removal and elimination.............. 61,000 -23,000 38,000
Program decrease............................. (-23,000)
Plutonium disposition................................. 150,686 0 150,686
Total, Material Management and Minimization............. 275,069 -23,000 252,069
Global Material Security
International nuclear security........................ 62,865 0 62,865
Radiological security................................. 186,406 0 186,406
Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence............ 140,601 0 140,601
Total, Global Material Security......................... 389,872 0 389,872
Nonproliferation and Arms Control....................... 221,008 0 221,008
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D
Proliferation detection............................... 269,376 0 269,376
Nonproliferation stewardship program.................. 149,383 -25,000 124,383
Program decrease............................. (-25,000)
Nuclear detonation detection.......................... 307,435 2,053 309,488
Restoral of orbital sensors.................. 0 (2,053)
Forensics R&D......................................... 20,460 0 20,460
Nonproliferation fuels development.................... 0 0 0
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D............. 746,654 -22,947 723,707
Nonproliferation Construction:
U.S. Construction
18-D-150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition 50,000 0 50,000
Project, SRS.................................
Total, Nonproliferation Construction.................... 50,000 0 50,000
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 20,993 0 20,993
Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program
Emergency Management............................. 33,122 0 33,122
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation........ 596,878 0 596,878
Total, Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response 630,000 0 630,000
Program..................................................
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................ 2,333,596 -45,947 2,287,649
Adjustments
Use of prior year balances............................ -39,574 0 -39,574
Cancellation of Prior Year Balances................... -9,422 0 -9,422
Total, Adjustments...................................... -48,996 0 -48,996
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................... 2,284,600 -45,947 2,238,653
Naval Reactors
Naval reactors development.............................. 884,579 0 884,579
Columbia-Class reactor systems development.............. 35,300 0 35,300
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............ 703,581 0 703,581
Program direction....................................... 61,540 0 61,540
Construction:
14-D-901 Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project, 526,000 -99,000 427,000
NRF..................................................
Program decrease............................. (-99,000)
25-D-530 Naval Examination Acquisition Project........ 60,000 0 60,000
26-D-530 East Side Office Building.................... 75,000 0 75,000
Total, Naval Reactors Construction...................... 661,000 -99,000 562,000
Total, Naval Reactors..................................... 2,346,000 -99,000 2,247,000
Federal Salaries and Expenses
Program direction....................................... 555,000 0 555,000
Total, Federal Salaries and Expenses...................... 555,000 0 555,000
TOTAL, National Nuclear Security Administration........... 25,260,000 1,612,240 26,872,240
Defense Environmental Cleanup
Closure sites administration.......................... 500 0 500
Richland
River corridor and other cleanup operations........... 68,562 0 68,562
Central plateau remediation........................... 754,259 0 754,259
Richland community and regulatory support............. 10,700 0 10,700
22-D-402 L-897 200 Area Water Treatment Facility...... 4,000 0 4,000
Total, Richland......................................... 837,521 0 837,521
Office of River Protection:
Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning.... 390,415 0 390,415
Tank Farm Activities.................................. 923,212 0 923,212
Construction:
23-D-403 Hanford 200 West Area Tank Farms Risk 108,200 0 108,200
Management Project...............................
15-D-409 Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System... 78,600 0 78,600
01-D-416: Waste Treatment and Immobilization 600,000 0 600,000
Plant, RL........................................
Subtotal, Construction................................ 786,800 0 786,800
Total, Office of River Protection....................... 2,100,427 0 2,100,427
Idaho National Laboratory:
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition................... 452,242 0 452,242
Idaho community and regulatory support................ 3,779 0 3,779
Construction:
22-D-403 Idaho Spent Nuclear Fuel Staging Facility 2,000 0 2,000
22-D-402 Calcine Construction..................... 2,000 0 2,000
Subtotal, Construction................................ 4,000 0 4,000
Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................ 460,021 0 460,021
NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................ 1,955 0 1,955
Separations Processing Research Unit.................. 950 0 950
Nevada................................................ 64,835 0 64,835
Sandia National Laboratory............................ 1,030 0 1,030
Los Alamos National Laboratory........................ 278,288 0 278,288
Los Alamos Excess Facilities D&D...................... 1,693 0 1,693
Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.................. 348,751 0 348,751
Oak Ridge Reservation:
OR Nuclear Facility D&D............................... 346,562 0 346,562
U233 Disposition Program.............................. 63,000 0 63,000
OR cleanup and waste disposition...................... 75,000 0 75,000
Construction:
14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility... 34,885 0 34,885
17-D-401 On-site Waste Disposal Facility.......... 15,050 0 15,050
Subtotal, Construction................................ 49,935 0 49,935
OR reservation community & regulatory support......... 5,900 0 5,900
OR technology development and deployment.............. 3,300 0 3,300
Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................ 543,697 0 543,697
Savannah River Site:
Savannah River risk management operations............. 396,394 0 396,394
Savannah River community and regulatory support....... 5,317 5,000 10,317
Payment in lieu of taxes..................... (5,000)
Savannah River National Laboratory O&M................ 90,719 0 90,719
Construction:
20-D-401 Saltstone Disposal Unit #10, 11, 12...... 52,500 0 52,500
19-D-701: SR Security Systems Replacement......... 708 0 708
Subtotal, Construction................................ 53,208 0 53,208
Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and 1,066,000 0 1,066,000
disposition..........................................
Total, Savannah River Site.............................. 1,611,638 5,000 1,616,638
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant........................... 413,424 0 413,414
Construction:
21-D-401: Hoisting Capability Project............. 2,000 0 2,000
Total, Construction................................... 2,000 0 2,000
Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...................... 415,424 0 415,424
Program direction....................................... 312,818 0 312,818
Program support......................................... 20,320 0 20,320
Safeguards and Security--Defense Environmental Cleanup.. 288,871 0 288,871
Technology development and deployment................... 16,012 0 16,012
Subtotal, Defense Environmental Cleanup................... 6,956,000 5,000 6,961,000
TOTAL, Defense Environmental Cleanup...................... 6,956,000 5,000 6,961,000
Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D............................ 278,000 -278,000 0
Program Reduction................................ (-278,000)
Other Defense Activities
Environment, health, safety and security
Environment, health, safety and security mission 141,908 0 141,908
support..............................................
Program direction..................................... 90,555 0 90,555
Total, Environment, health, safety and security......... 232,463 0 232,463
Office of Enterprise Assessments
Enterprise assessments................................ 30,022 0 30,022
Program direction..................................... 59,132 0 59,132
Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments................. 89,154 0 89,154
Specialized security activities......................... 441,000 0 441,000
Legacy Management
Legacy Management Activities--Defense................. 177,716 0 177,716
Program Direction..................................... 22,542 0 22,542
Total, Legacy Management................................ 200,258 0 200,258
Defense-Related Administrative Support.................. 214,626 0 214,626
Office of Hearings and Appeals.......................... 4,499 0 4,499
Subtotal, Other Defense Activities...................... 1,182,000 0 1,182,000
Total, Other Defense Activities........................... 1,182,000 0 1,182,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Committee Action
Senate Armed Services Committee
ROLL CALL VOTES DURING FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
In compliance with Rule XXVI 7(3)(b) of the Standing Rules
of the Senate, listed below is a tabulation of the roll call
votes.
1. MOTION: To include a provision that would repeal the
prohibition on procurement by the Department of Defense of
certain items containing perfluorooctane sulfonate or
perfluorooctanoic acid.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
2. MOTION: To include a provision that would repeal the
temporary moratorium on incineration by the Department of
Defense of perfluoroalkyl substances, polyfluoroalkyl
substances, and aqueous film forming foam.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
3. MOTION: To include a provision to require military
service academies to accept the Classical Learning Test.
VOTE:
Failed by roll call vote 10-17
In favor: Senators Wicker, Cotton, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt, and Banks
Opposed: Senators Fischer, Rounds, Ernst, Sheehy, Reed,
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren,
Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
4. MOTION: To include a provision to require for a civilian
harm mitigation and response officer in each regional combatant
command.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
5. MOTION: To include a provision that would provide for a
limitation on Department of Defense support for migrant
operations at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
6. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the
certification requirement regarding contracting for military
recruiting.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
7. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the
implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
8. MOTION: To include a provision to prohibit the
performance by the Department of Defense of sex change
surgeries.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
9. MOTION: To include a provision to provide for term
appointments for civilian faculty at the United States Military
Academy, the United States Naval Academy, and the United States
Air Force Academy.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 11-16
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Sullivan,
Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt, and Banks
Opposed: Senators Rounds, Ernst, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen,
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters,
Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
10. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the
consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin,
or religion in services academy admissions decisions.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
11. MOTION: To include a provision to eliminate statutory
provisions relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the
Department of Defense.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
Opposed: Senator Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
12. MOTION: To include a provision that would establish a
Women's Initiative Team, in each branch of the Armed Forces.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
and Slotkin
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, and Sheehy
13. MOTION: To include a provision that would protect the
rights of conscience related to healthcare for Department of
Defense and Armed Forces personnel.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 11-16
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Sullivan,
Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt, and Banks
Opposed: Senators Rounds, Ernst, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen,
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters,
Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
14. MOTION: To include a provision to provide for an annual
limitation on the use of Department of Defense funds to provide
assistance to secure the southern border.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 11-16
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters Duckworth, and Rosen
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, Sheehy, Kelly, and Slotkin
15. MOTION: To include a provision relating to oversight of
the United States military posture in Europe.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 3-24
In favor: Senators Tuberville, Schmitt, and Banks
Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Mullin, Budd, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen,
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters,
Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
16. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the
prohibition on participation of the People's Republic of China
in Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercises.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 9-18
In favor: Senators Cotton, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Tuberville, Budd, Schmitt, Banks, and King
Opposed: Senator Wicker, Fischer, Rounds, Ernst, Mullin,
Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine,
Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
17. MOTION: To favorably report to the Senate the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 26-1
In favor: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, Schmitt,
Banks, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono,
Kaine, King, Peters Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, and Slotkin
Opposed: Senator Warren
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during the Senate floor debate on the
legislation.
Regulatory Impact
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2026.
Changes in Existing Law
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.
[all]