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.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

(3) Division C—Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and Other Authorizations.

(a) Procurement authority.—Beginning in fiscal year 2026, the Secretary of the Navy may enter into one or more contracts for the procurement of not more than five Columbia-class submarines.

(b) Condition for out-year contract payments.—A contract entered into under subsection (a) shall provide that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract for a fiscal year after fiscal year 2026 is subject to the availability of appropriations or funds for that purpose for such later fiscal year.

(c) Limitation on termination liability.—A contract for the construction of Columbia-class submarines entered into under subsection (a) shall include a clause that limits the liability of the United States to the contractor for any termination of the contract. The maximum liability of the United States under the clause shall be limited to the total amount of funding obligated to the contract at the time of termination.

(1) IN GENERAL.—During fiscal years 2026 and 2027, the Secretary of the Navy may enter into one or more contracts for the procurement of not more than 15 Medium Landing Ships.

(2) PROCUREMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH EXISTING CONTRACTS.—The ships authorized to be procured under paragraph (1) may be procured as additions to existing contracts covering the Medium Landing Ship program.

(b) Certification required.—A contract may not be entered into under subsection (a) unless the Secretary of the Navy certifies to the congressional defense committees, in writing, not later than 30 days before entry into the contract, each of the following, which shall be prepared by the milestone decision authority (as defined in section 4251(e) of title 10, United States Code) for the Medium Landing Ship program:

(1) The use of such a contract is consistent with the Department of the Navy’s projected force structure requirements for such ships.

(2) The use of such a contract will result in significant savings compared to the total anticipated costs of carrying out the program through annual contracts.

(3) There is a reasonable expectation that throughout the contemplated contract period the Secretary of the Navy will request funding for the contract at the level required to avoid contract cancellation.

(4) There is a stable design for the property to be acquired and the technical risks associated with such property are not excessive.

(5) The estimates of the cost of the contract and the anticipated cost avoidance through the use of the contract are realistic.

(A) sufficient funds will be available to perform the contract in such fiscal year; and

(B) the future-years defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, for such fiscal year will include the funding required to execute the program without cancellation.

(c) Authority for advance procurement.—The Secretary of the Navy may enter into one or more contracts for advance procurement associated with the ships for which authorization to enter into a contract is provided under subsection (a), and for systems and subsystems associated with such ships in economic order quantities when cost savings are achievable.

(d) Condition for out-year contract payments.—A contract entered into under subsection (a) shall provide that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract for a fiscal year is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose for such fiscal year.

SEC. 123. Recapitalization of Navy waterborne security barriers; modification of prohibition on availability of funds for legacy waterborne security barriers.

(a) In general.—Section 130 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 132 Stat. 1665), 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), is further amended—

(1) in the section heading, by inserting “; recapitalization” after “barriers”;

(A) by striking “subsections (b) and (c)” and inserting “subsection (b)”; and

(4) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections (b) and (c), respectively;

(5) in subsection (c), as so redesignated, by striking “subsection (c)(2)” and inserting “subsection (b)(2)”; and

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a recapitalization plan to replace legacy waterborne security barriers for Navy ports.

“(B) ELEMENTS.—The plan required by subparagraph (A) shall include the following:

“(i) A Navy requirements document that specifies key performance parameters and key system attributes for new waterborne security barriers for Navy ports.

“(ii) A certification that the level of capability specified under clause (i) will exceed that of legacy waterborne security barriers for Navy ports.

“(iii) The acquisition strategy for the recapitalization of waterborne security barriers for Navy ports, which shall meet or exceed the requirements specified under clause (i).

“(iv) A certification that any contract for new waterborne security barriers for a Navy port will be awarded in accordance with the requirements for full and open competition set forth in sections 3201 through 3205 of title 10, United States Code.

“(2) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of the Navy shall implement the plan required by paragraph (1) by not later than September 30, 2027.”.

(b) Clerical amendments.—The table of contents in section 2(b) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, and at the beginning of title I of division A of such Act, are each amended by striking the item relating to section 130 and inserting the following new item:

SEC. 124. Modification to limitations on Navy medium and large unmanned surface vessels.

(a) Repeal.—Section 122 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 134 Stat. 3425) is repealed.

(b) Requirement.—The Secretary of the Navy may not award a detail design or construction contract or other agreement, or obligate funds from a procurement account, for a covered program unless such contract or other agreement includes a requirement for an operational demonstration of not less than 720 continuous hours without preventative maintenance, corrective maintenance, emergent repair, or any other form of repair or maintenance, on any of the following:

(c) Certification.—The Secretary of the Navy may not accept delivery of articles constructed under a contract or other agreement for a covered program until the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees that the operational demonstration described in subsection (b) has been successfully completed.

(d) Limitation.—The Secretary of the Navy may not make contract financing payments for a contract or other agreement entered into for a covered program greater than 90 percent for small businesses and 80 percent for all other businesses until the certification described in subsection (c) is submitted.

(2) OPERATIONAL DEMONSTRATION.—The term “operational demonstration” means a land-based or sea-based test of the systems concerned in vessel-representative form, fit, and function.

(a) Limitation.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for the Navy may be obligated or expended for the scope of work, including priced or unpriced options, for the construction, advance procurement, or long-lead material of any ships in the TAGOS surveillance towed-array sensor system ship program unless the Secretary of the Navy submits the report described in subsection (b) to the Committee on Armed Service of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Report.—The Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Committee on Armed Service of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the following:

(1) Progress made on basic and functional design completion for TAGOS surveillance towed-array sensor system ships and how compliance with section 8669c of title 10, United States Code, will be maintained.

(2) The accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the Navy’s provisioning of contract baseline design, general arrangement drawings, and other government-furnished information to the prime contractor for such ships.

(3) The ability of the functional design of such ships to meet program requirements, including speed requirements.

(4) The adherence of the Navy to performance-based requirements and the ability of the prime contractor for such ships to make design choices to meet those requirements, commensurate with its responsibility for cost and schedule in the contract structure.

(5) Alternative solutions to meeting the general set of Navy requirements for anti-submarine warfare covered by such ships, including unmanned solutions.

SEC. 126. Limitation on availability of funds relating to amphibious warfare ship requirement.

(a) Plan required.—The Secretary of the Navy shall submit with the defense budget materials for fiscal year 2027 (as submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) a 30-year shipbuilding plan that meets the requirement under section 8062(b) of title 10, United States Code, to maintain 31 amphibious warfare ships.

(b) Certification required.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit with the defense budget materials for fiscal year 2027 (as submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) a certification as to whether such materials support the requirement under section 8062(b) of title 10, United States Code, to maintain 31 amphibious warfare ships.

(1) PLAN.—If the Secretary of the Navy does not submit the 30-year shipbuilding plan described in subsection (a) as required by such subsection, not more than 75 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for Administration and Service-Wide Activities, Operation and Maintenance, Navy, may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees such plan.

(2) CERTIFICATION.—If the Secretary of Defense does not submit the certification described in subsection (a) as required by such subsection, or certifies that the materials described in such subsection do not support the requirement described in such subsection, not more than 75 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for Office of the Secretary of Defense, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees defense budget materials that support the requirement under section 8062(b) of title 10, United States Code, to maintain 31 amphibious warfare ships.

(d) Amphibious warfare ship defined.—In this section, the term “amphibious warfare ship” has the meaning given that term in section 8062(h) of title 10, United States Code.

(a) Submittal of matrices.—Concurrent with the President’s annual budget request submitted to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 2027, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees and the Comptroller General of the United States—

(1) the matrices described in subsection (b) relating to the B–21 bomber aircraft program; and

(2) the estimate, as of the date of such submission, for the program's average procurement unit cost, acquisition unit cost, and life-cycle costs.

(b) Matrices described.—The matrices described in this subsection are the following:

(1) PROGRAM GOALS AND EXECUTION.—A matrix that identifies, in six-month increments, plans for and progress in achieving key milestones and events, and specific performance metric goals and actuals for the development, production, and sustainment of the B–21 bomber aircraft program, which shall be subdivided, at a minimum, according to the following:

(A) Technology readiness levels of major components, and associated risks and key demonstration events through maturity (technology readiness level 7) for baseline and modernization efforts.

(D) Manufacturing progress and related metrics for the prime contractor and key suppliers, including—

(E) System verification and key ground and flight test events for developmental and operational testing, including—

(F) Aircraft reliability, availability, and maintainability metrics, including—

(2) COST.—A matrix expressing, in six-month increments, the total cost for the Air Force service cost position for the engineering and manufacturing development phase and production lots of the B–21 bomber aircraft, and a matrix expressing the total cost for the prime contractor’s estimate for such phase and production lots, each of which shall be phased over the entire engineering and manufacturing development period and subdivided according to the costs of the following:

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Secretary of the Air Force submits the matrices required by subsection (a), concurrent with the submittal of each annual budget request to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, thereafter, and not later than 180 days after each such submittal, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees and the Comptroller General updates to the matrices described in subsection (b).

(2) ELEMENTS.—Each update submitted under paragraph (1) shall detail progress made toward the goals identified in the matrix described in subsection (b)(1) and provide updated cost estimates.

(d) Assessment by Comptroller General of the United States.—Not less frequently than annually, the Comptroller General shall—

(2) submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment of such matrix, including by identifying cost, schedule, or performance trends.

(e) Repeal.—Section 238 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 130 Stat. 2067) is repealed.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive roadmap detailing the planned force structure, basing, modernization, and transition strategy for the bomber aircraft fleet of the Air Force through fiscal year 2040.

(b) Elements.—The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A detailed schedule and rationale for the planned divestment of B–1 bomber aircraft, including location-specific retirements, infrastructure disposition, and mitigation of any resulting capability gaps.

(2) A transition plan for the operational fielding of B–21 bomber aircraft, including basing decisions, training and sustainment plans, operational concepts, and anticipated initial operational capability and full operational capability timelines.

(3) A strategy for integrating units of the Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve into B–21 bomber aircraft operations, including planned force structure, association, training, and mobilization models.

(A) modernization efforts for B–52 bomber aircraft, including engine replacement, radar upgrades, and digital integration efforts; and

(B) the expected service life and mission profile of B–52 bomber aircraft through the 2050s.

(5) A detailed timeline with key milestones for each of the elements described in paragraphs (1) through (4), including programmatic decision points, resourcing requirements, risk assessments, and coordination with other components of the Air Force Global Strike Command and the Air Combat Command.

(c) Objective.—The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall support a deliberate and balanced transition to a modernized, dual-capable bomber aircraft force that ensures long-range strike capacity, survivability, and deterrence in both nuclear and conventional mission sets, with a minimum of 100 B–21 bomber aircraft as directed by prior Acts of Congress.

(d) Form.—The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 133. Requirement for an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance roadmap for the Air Force.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive roadmap detailing the strategic plan for the development, acquisition, modernization, and integration of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities of the Air Force.

(b) Elements.—The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A strategic assessment of current (as of the date on which the roadmap is submitted) and projected intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance requirements for the Air Force across all domains, including air, space, and cyberspace.

(2) An inventory of current (as of the date on which the roadmap is submitted) intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms, sensors, and associated data-processing systems, including the mission capabilities, operational status, and expected service life for each.

(3) A plan for the modernization or divestment of legacy airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, with justification for each decision.

(4) A detailed outline of planned investments and capabilities in emerging intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance technologies, including—

(5) An assessment of the integration of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data into command and control networks, including interoperability with joint, interagency, and allied partners.

(6) A risk assessment identifying potential capability gaps, threats, and mitigation strategies.

(7) A description of the roles and responsibilities of the components of the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance effort of the Air Force in implementing the roadmap.

(8) A proposed timeline and milestones for the implementation of the roadmap over the next ten fiscal years.

(c) Form.—The roadmap required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but shall include a classified annex.

“(c) Annual reports.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, and not less frequently than once each year thereafter through December 31, 2032, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees an annual report on the implementation of the strategy.”.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop a plan to establish an open mission systems computing environment that is controlled by the Federal Government on the F–35 aircraft of the Department of Defense.

(1) Enable the portability of software applications between the F–35 aircraft, the F–22 aircraft, and the Next Generation Air Dominance initiative of the Air Force.

(2) Enable the integration of new open mission system software, or changes to existing open mission system software, with minimal integration work required by the prime contractor of the air vehicle.

(3) Eliminate or minimize aircraft airworthiness impacts due to software changes within the open mission systems computing environment.

(6) Ensure control by the Federal Government over the airworthiness and security processes, as well as ownership by the Federal Government of the open mission system technical documentation and data rights.

(7) Be capable of connection to all relevant aircraft apertures sufficient to meet current and future combat requirements, including cockpit connectivity via ethernet.

(8) Leverage modern commercial software languages and techniques necessary to support reliable, high-throughput, and low-latency use-cases.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than July 1, 2026, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the plan required under subsection (a).

(2) FORM.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified annex.

(a) In general.—Section 9062(l)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “September 30, 2029” and inserting “September 30, 2027”; and

(2) in subparagraph (A), by striking “68 F–15E aircraft” and inserting “34 F–15E aircraft”.

(b) Repeal.—Section 150 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 1812) is amended—

(2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections (a) and (b), respectively; and

(3) in the section heading, by striking “Prohibition on retirement of F–15E aircraft and”.

(a) Prohibition.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Defense may be obligated or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or otherwise divest A–10 aircraft to an inventory level below 103.

(b) Waiver authority.—The Secretary of the Air Force may waive the prohibition under subsection (a) with respect to a specific unit if—

(1) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a written certification that a detailed recapitalization plan has been developed for the affected unit, including follow on mission assignments, aircraft reallocation, personnel adjustments, and community impact mitigation; and

(1) A–10 AIRCRAFT.—The term “A–10 aircraft” means any aircraft of the Air Force designated A–10 Thunderbolt II.

(2) RETIRE.—The term “retire” includes the permanent removal of an aircraft from the operational inventory, reassignment to storage, or placement into backup aircraft inventory or excess status.

SEC. 138. Extension of limitations and minimum inventory requirement relating to RQ–4 aircraft.

(a) Primary mission aircraft inventory.—Notwithstanding any limit on primary mission aircraft inventory established before the date of the enactment of this Act, Secretary of the Air Force shall retain operational KC–135 Stratotankers as primary mission aircraft inventory as such aircraft are replaced by KC–46 aircraft in order to meet air refueling requirements of the Air Force and the United States Transportation Command.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall reassign KC–135 Stratotankers that are retained as primary mission aircraft inventory and replaced by KC–46 aircraft to Air Refueling Wings that have the capacity to expand their primary mission aircraft inventory fleet of KC–135 Stratotankers.

(2) CRITERIA.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall reassign KC–135 Stratotankers under paragraph (1) based on the ability of an Air Refueling Wing to—

(a) Extension of minimum inventory requirement.—Section 146(a)(3)(B) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2455), as most recently amended by section 145(a) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 1810 ), is further amended by striking “2025” and inserting “2028”.

(b) Extension of prohibition on reduction of C–130 aircraft assigned to National Guard.—Section 146(b)(1) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2455), as most recently amended by section 145(b) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 1810), is further amended by striking “2025” and inserting “2028”.

(c) Report requirement.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter through fiscal year 2028, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing the following:

(1) The total number and variant types of C–130 aircraft in the inventory of the Air Force.

(2) Any planned retirements, divestments, or reductions to the fleet of such aircraft.

(3) Modernization and recapitalization efforts, including block upgrades and procurement schedules.

(4) Planned basing actions for fielding C–130J aircraft to recapitalize C–130H aircraft.

SEC. 141. Information on future large and oversized air cargo transportation services.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall solicit from industry information on acquiring services of an airplane that—

(2) would be capable of carrying space launch vehicles and other Department of Defense articles not more than 300 feet long that cannot be or, as of June 2025, are not readily transported in an airplane due to cargo dimensions;

(4) could provide and supplement large and oversized fixed wing air cargo transportation services to support the readiness and logistical needs of the Department by December 31, 2035, and thereafter; and

(5) could provide to the Department at least 2,000 hours and not more than 7,500 hours of airplane time for at least two and not more than five years beginning when such airplane could enter service.

(b) Report.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the results of the solicitation required by subsection (a).

(a) In general.—For fiscal year 2026 and each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all funding opportunities executed in Program Element 0601228D8Z, or successor program element, shall include separate funding solicitations each focused toward—

(1) Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Tribal Colleges and Universities; and

(1) The term “Historically Black College or University” has the meaning given the term “part B institution” in section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061).

(2) The term “Minority-Serving Institution” means an eligible institution described in section 371(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1067q(a)).

(3) The term “Tribal College or University” has the meaning given the term in section 316(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)).

SEC. 212. Program for the enhancement of the research, development, test, and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense.

(a) Making permanent and improving pilot program for the enhancement of the research, development, test, and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense.—Chapter 305 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“§ 4145. Program for the enhancement of the research, development, test, and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments shall jointly carry out a program to demonstrate methods for the more effective development of technology and management of functions at eligible centers.

“(b) Eligible centers.—For purposes of the program, the eligible centers are—

“(1) the science and technology reinvention laboratories, as designated by section 4121(b) of this title;

“(2) the test and evaluation centers which are activities specified as part of the Major Range and Test Facility Base in Department of Defense Directive 3200.11;

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the head of each eligible center shall submit to the Assistant Secretary concerned a proposal on, and implement, alternative and innovative methods of effective management and operations of eligible centers, rapid project delivery, support, experimentation, prototyping, and partnership with universities and private sector entities—

“(A) to generate greater value and efficiencies in research and development activities;

“(B) to enable more efficient and effective operations of supporting activities, such as—

“(2) IMPLEMENTATION.— (A) The head of an eligible center described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) shall implement each method proposed under paragraph (1) of this subsection unless such method is disapproved in writing by the Assistant Secretary concerned within 60 days of receiving a proposal from an eligible center.

“(B) The Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense Innovation Unit, the Strategic Capabilities Office and the Office of Strategic Capital shall implement each method proposed under paragraph (1) unless such method is disapproved in writing by the Deputy Secretary of Defense within 60 days of receiving a proposal from the Director.

“(i) the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, with respect to matters concerning the Air Force;

“(ii) the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, with respect to matters concerning the Army; and

“(iii) the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition, with respect to matters concerning the Navy.

“(d) Waiver authority for demonstration and implementation.—The head of an eligible center may waive any regulation, restriction, requirement, guidance, policy, procedure, or departmental instruction that would affect the implementation of a method proposed under subsection (c)(1), unless such implementation would be prohibited by a provision of a Federal statute or common law.”.

(b) Conforming repeal.—Section 233 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 10 U.S.C. 4141 note prec.) is repealed.

SEC. 213. Extension of authority for assignment to Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency of private sector personnel with critical research and development expertise.

(1) the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees—

(A) the original baseline schedule of key capability deliverables and the current schedule as of the date of submission;

(B) the original cost estimate and the current cost estimate as of the date of submission, including the total funding received for the program;

(C) all reports of test and experimentation events, including a comparison of performance to alternative industry capabilities;

(D) the unaltered assessment of the Defense Innovation Unit on a market assessment of industry capabilities compared to the capabilities of the autonomy baseline manager and the common control system of the Navy; and

(E) an assessment that the program is delivering new capabilities at a pace and quality that meets or exceeds industry capabilities; and

(2) the Chief of Naval Operations validates to the congressional defense committees that the program meets operational user needs of the Navy.

SEC. 215. Limitation on availability of funds for Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

SEC. 216. Prohibition on contracts between certain foreign entities and institutions of higher education conducting Department of Defense-funded research.

(a) Prohibition.—Beginning on January 1, 2027, a covered institution may not enter into a contract with a covered nation or a foreign entity of concern.

(1) AUTHORITY.—Subject to the provisions of this subsection and subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense may, or their designee, pursuant to a request submitted under paragraph (2) of this subsection, issue a waiver of the prohibition set forth in subsection (a).

(i) IN GENERAL.—A covered institution that desires to enter into a contract with a foreign entity of concern or a covered nation may submit to the Secretary of Defense, not later than 120 days before the institution enters into such a contract, a request to waive the prohibition set forth in subsection (a) with respect to such contract.

(ii) CONTENTS OF WAIVER REQUEST.—A waiver request submitted by a covered institution under clause (i) shall include—

(I) the complete and unredacted text of the proposed contract for which the waiver is being requested, and if such original contract is not in English, a translated copy of the text into English (in a manner that complies with subsection (e)); and

(aa) is signed by the President or compliance officer of the institution designated in accordance with subsection (f); and

(bb) includes information that demonstrates that such contract is for the benefit of the institution’s mission and students and will promote the security, stability, and economic vitality of the United States.

(i) IN GENERAL.—A covered institution that has entered into a contract pursuant to a waiver issued under this section, the term of which is longer than the 1-year waiver period and the terms and conditions of which remain the same as the proposed contract submitted as part of the request for such waiver, may submit, not later than 120 days before the expiration of such waiver period, a request for a renewal of such waiver for the remainder of the contract term, but not to exceed a 4-year period (which shall include any information requested by the Secretary).

(ii) TERMINATION.—If a covered institution fails to submit a request under clause (i) or is not granted a renewal under such clause, such institution shall terminate such contract on the last day of the original 1-year waiver period.

(A) not later than 60 days before a covered institution enters into a contract pursuant to a waiver request under paragraph (2)(A), or before a contract described in paragraph (2)(B)(i) is renewed pursuant to a renewal request under such paragraph, shall notify the covered institution—

(ii) in a case in which the waiver or renewal will be issued, the date on which the 1-year waiver period starts;

(B) may only issue a waiver under this subsection to a covered institution if the Secretary of Defense determines that the contract for which the waiver is being requested will both—

(ii) promote the security, stability, and economic vitality of the United States; and

(C) shall, when making the determination described in subparagraph (B)(ii), base such determination on the following factors:

(i) The reasons for which the foreign entity of concern or covered nation has been so designated, and why those reasons do not apply to the contract for which waiver is being sought.

(ii) The foreign entity of concern or covered nation’s history of involvement with covered institutions.

(iii) The degree to which such a contract could provide access to information or technology which could materially benefit the national security of a covered nation or harm the national security of the United States.

(4) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 15 calendar days prior to issuing a waiver under this subsection, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives written notice of the intent of the Secretary to issue such waiver together with a justification for such waiver.

(5) APPLICATION OF WAIVERS.—A waiver issued under this subsection to a covered institution with respect to a contract shall only—

(A) waive the prohibition under subsection (a) for a 1-year period, or for the remainder of the term of the contract, but not to exceed 4 years; and

(B) apply to the terms and conditions of the proposed contract submitted as part of the request for such waiver.

(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a covered institution that entered into contract with a covered nation or foreign entity of concern prior to January 1, 2027, and which contract remains in effect on such date, the Secretary shall notify the congressional defense committees within 90 days of enactment of this Act.

(2) RENEWAL.—A covered institution that has entered into a contract described in paragraph (1), the term of which is longer than the waiver period described in subparagraph (B) of such paragraph and the terms and conditions of which remain the same as the contract submitted as part of the request required under subparagraph (A) of such paragraph, may submit a request for renewal of the waiver issued under such paragraph in accordance with subsection (c)(2)(B).

(d) Designation during contract term.—In the case of a covered institution that enters into a contract with a foreign source that is not a covered nation or a foreign entity of concern but which, during the term of such contract, is redesignated as a covered nation or foreign entity of concern, such institution shall terminate such contract not later than 120 days after the Secretary notifies the covered institution of such designation or immediately requests a waiver.

(e) Translation requirement.—Any information required to be disclosed under this section with respect to a contract that is not in English shall be translated, for purposes of such disclosure, by a person that is not an affiliated entity or agent of the covered nation or foreign entity of concern involved with such contract.

(f) Compliance officer.—Each covered institution applying for a waiver under subsection (c), shall identify a compliance officer, who shall—

(B) the truth and accuracy of any information contained in such a waiver request.

(g) Annual reports.—Section 1286(f) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232;10 U.S.C. 4001 note) is amended—

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking “and on the periodic reviews conducted pursuant to subsection (e)” and inserting “, on the periodic reviews conducted pursuant to subsection (e), and the waivers issued under section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026”; and

“(i) The terms and contents of any waivers issued under section 216 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 in the period covered by the report;

“(iii) the processes used by the Secretary to verify that covered institutions (as defined in such section) are in compliance with the requirements of such section.”.

(1) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term “contract” means—

(i) any agreement or memorandum of understanding for the acquisition, by purchase, lease, or barter, of property or services by or from a covered nation or foreign entity of concern; or

(ii) any affiliation, agreement, or similar transaction with a covered nation or foreign entity of concern that involves the use or exchange of the name, likeness, time, services, or resources of a covered institution.

(i) an agreement solely or primarily for the purposes of conducting a study-abroad program wherein students at covered institutions in the United States travel to a covered nation to study;

(ii) an arms-length agreement for the acquisition by purchase, lease, or barter of property or services for the covered institution from a foreign entity of concern; or

(iii) an agreement pertaining to a pre-existing campus or other satellite facility of a covered institution located in a covered nation or a joint facility of a covered institution and another entity located in a covered nation, unless that facility could provide access to information or technology which could materially benefit the national security of a covered nation or harm the national security of the United States.

(2) The term “covered institution” means an institution of higher education that conducts research funded by the Department of Defense.

(3) The term “covered nation” has the meaning given that term in section 4872(d) of title 10, United States Code.

(A) listed on the Department of Commerce's Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations), or successor list;

(B) included in the list of Chinese military companies operating in the United States most recently submitted under section 1260H(b)(1) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 115–283;10 U.S.C. 113 note); or

(C) identified on the list published under section 1286(c)(9)(A) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232;10 U.S.C. 4001 note).

(5) The term “institution of higher education” has the meaning given that term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002).

(a) Demonstration required.—The Secretary shall carry out a demonstration of a joint multi-domain kinetic and non-kinetic testing and training environment across military departments by interconnecting existing ranges and training sites in the western States to improve joint multi-domain training and further testing, research, and development.

(b) Use of existing ranges and capabilities.—The demonstration carried out pursuant to subsection (a) shall use existing ranges and range capability, unless capability gaps are identified in the process of planning specific demonstration activities.

(d) Timeline for completion of initial demonstration.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary shall seek to complete an initial demonstration, interconnecting two or more ranges or testing sites of two or more military departments in the western States, subject to availability of appropriations, not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(e) Briefing.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on—

(1) a phased implementation plan and design to connect ranges and testing sites in the western States, including the initial demonstration required by subsection (d);

(2) how the design architecture of the plan is in alignment with recommendations of the 2020 Department of Defense Electromagnetic Spectrum Superiority Strategy; and

(3) how the design architecture will support high-periodicity training, testing, research, and development.

(1) INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT.—The term “information environment” means the aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, and disseminate, or act on information.

SEC. 218. Modification of requirement for Department of Defense policies for management and certification of Link 16 military tactical data link network.

(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking “the Nevada Test and Training Range, Restricted Area 2508, Warning Area 151/470, Warning Area 386, and the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex” and inserting “military special use airspace including all prohibited areas, restricted areas, warning areas, and military operational areas”;

(2) in paragraph (2), in the matter before subparagraph (A), by striking “training, and large-scale exercises.” and inserting “regular training, and large-scale exercises. Under such processes, approval of Link 16 operations shall be presumed and denial of Link 16 operations shall be accompanied with substantiated evidence demonstrating compromise of safety due to electromagnetic interference.”; and

(a) Program required.—The Secretary of the Army shall carry out a program to support the maturation and expansion of robotic automation capabilities for munitions manufacturing at government-owned, contractor-operated production facilities.

(b) Objectives.—The objectives of the program under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) The design and integration of inherently safe, scalable robotic load, assemble, and pack (LAP) systems for munitions production.

(2) The demonstration of increased throughput and production capacity, while reducing manual handling of energetic materials.

(3) The development of cyber-hardened data infrastructure for secure integration of factory-floor operations with enterprise systems.

(4) Support for workforce upskilling and training in robotics, automation, and advanced manufacturing technologies.

(5) The evaluation of applicability across multiple munition types and organic industrial base sites.

(c) Coordination.—In carrying out the program under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Army shall coordinate with the Joint Program Executive Office Armaments and Ammunition and other relevant components of the Department of the Army.

(d) Briefing.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the program carried out under subsection (a). Such briefing shall cover—

(3) recommendations for the wider adoption of robotic automation technologies within the defense industrial base.

(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish one or more dual-use advanced manufacturing hubs that co-locate and share resources among public and private stakeholders from industry, academia, government, nongovernment agencies, and workforce and economic development resources. The hub or hubs should span the full spectrum of advanced manufacturing capabilities and cover the full development timeline between prototyping and fielding.

(1) utilize, to the maximum extent possible, the Department of Defense Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (MII) and encourage the MIIs to coordinate efforts in a joint manner;

(2) provide shared advanced manufacturing infrastructure and equipment, such as high-speed metal printers and material testing laboratories;

(3) establish a process to provide advanced manufacturing capability, including on shared classified space as needed;

(4) utilize, to the maximum extent possible, the Defense Logistics Agency’s Joint Additive Manufacturing Model Exchange (JAMMEX) as a central data repository for technical data packages for advanced manufacturing;

(5) build on the Defense Innovation Unit’s Blue Manufacturing Initiative and Blue Manufacturing Marketplace to match hardware and software manufacturers in defense technology with advanced manufacturing providers; and

(c) Recommendation.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Under Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a recommendation for the appropriate number of regional hubs to be established under subsection (a) for the Department of Defense to meet its sustainment needs and such requirements, specifications, and capabilities as the regional hubs may require.

(a) Department of Defense Advanced Manufacturing Program.—Not later than December 31, 2027, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall aim to qualify and approve for manufacturing and delivery not fewer than 1,000,000 parts or components of the Department of Defense that use advanced manufacturing techniques, with funding subject to the availability of appropriations or other funds. In doing so, the Secretary shall ensure that expedited processes for adoption of advanced manufacturing products are utilized across the components of the Department of Defense and lifecycle phases for new and existing systems.

(b) Program to additively manufacture certain types of unmanned aerial systems.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall carry out a program to certify new materials and processes to manufacture 25 to100 percent of the parts of one of each type of the following unmanned aerial system (UAS) categories using advanced or additive manufacturing techniques:

(2) Small unmanned aerial systems used for surveillance and reconnaissance missions.

(c) Program to certify additively manufactured parts for military systems with diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages.—

(1) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the Secretaries of the military departments, carry out a program to produce replacement parts for military systems with diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages using advanced or additive manufacturing techniques.

(2) TESTED PARTS.—In carrying out the program required by paragraph (1), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall select not less than five parts for test, evaluation, and certification under the program.

(A) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the program required by paragraph (1), the Under Secretary shall use additive manufacturing techniques to manufacture the parts selected pursuant to paragraph (2) and then test and evaluate the manufactured parts.

(B) EVALUATION.—Evaluation under subparagraph (A) shall be based on performance rather than specifications.

(4) SHARING OF RESULTS AND DATA.—In carrying out the program required by paragraph (1), the Under Secretary shall share test data across all military departments and establish mechanisms for data reciprocity for test and evaluation results for additively manufactured parts across all military departments.

(5) LIST OF OBSOLETE PARTS.—The Under Secretary shall, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, make a list of all parts for military systems with diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages.

(6) NEW LICENSING AGREEMENTS.—The Under Secretary shall, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, create new licensing agreements with owners of intellectual property for the platforms with parts included in the list required by paragraph (5) that allow additive manufacture of the parts.

(1) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall carry out a program across all military departments to additively manufacture three commonly used metal parts of each military department, such as titanium, stainless steel, and aluminum.

(2) ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Under Secretary shall—

(A) complete an assessment to determine how to additively manufacture 10 metal parts of each military department, with a preference for parts that require long lead times to manufacture or have sole-source suppliers; and

(B) submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Under Secretary with respect to the assessment completed under subparagraph (A).

(e) Program to additively manufacture parts for ground combat systems.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall, in coordination with the Secretary of the Army and the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency—

(1) identify sustainment vulnerabilities in the ground equipment supply chain of the Army, including at the manufacturing arsenals and maintenance depots of the Army that comprise the Organic Industrial Base, where additive manufacturing could be used to repair, upgrade, or modernize ground combat systems;

(2) choose not less than five parts that have long lead times for fabricating the greatest degree of customized specifications or have the most limited quantity in inventory and additively manufacture replacement parts for them;

(3) create a critical parts list identifying parts and components across ground combat systems with long lead times eligible to be additively manufactured; and

(4) develop plans, in coordination with Army Development Command, to integrate additive manufacturing techniques and technologies in the design, production, and sustainment of next-generation combat vehicles and their technologies. The developed technologies should prioritize interoperability across military platforms and integration with other military services.

(1) JOINT DEFENSE MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PANEL.—Section 4842(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “The Chair of” and all that follows through “programs.” and inserting the following: “The Panel shall be co-chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.”.

(2) JOINT ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING WORKING GROUP.—The Joint Additive Manufacturing Working Group shall be co-chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

(3) CONSORTIUM ON ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING FOR DEFENSE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT.—Section 223 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (10 U.S.C. 4841 note) is amended—

“(c) Co-chairs.—The Consortium shall be co-chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.”.

(1) GUIDANCE, DOD I UPDATE, AND MANUAL REQUIRED.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall—

(A) develop guidance to incorporate innovations in advanced manufacturing in such a way that the Department of Defense can better and faster deliver capabilities, sustain operations, and protect the warfighter with the latest technology while still ensuring quality, reliability, and compatibility;

(B) update Department of Defense Instruction 5000.93 (relating to use of additive manufacturing in the Department of Defense) dated June 10, 2021, to waive the requirement to maintain records of all additively produced end-items put into operational use where the additively produced part meets or exceeds performance of the traditionally manufactured end-item;

(C) create a manual in accordance with such instruction that gets at the technical standards required to qualify parts, components, or products that use advanced manufacturing technologies and techniques; and

(D) not later than March 1, 2026, provide the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on plans to update the guidance developed under subparagraph (A) and the updates made under subparagraph (B).

(2) CONSIDERATIONS.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering shall consider the 2016 Department of Defense Additive Manufacturing Roadmap, the 2021 Department of Defense Additive Manufacturing Strategy, the 2022 National Strategy for Advanced Manufacturing, and Department of Defense Instruction 5000.93.

(3) ALIGNMENT.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering shall ensure that the guidance on the use of advanced manufacturing required by paragraph (1)(A)—

(A) aligns with Department of Defense acquisition to prioritize flexibility, interoperability, and domestic sourcing; and

(B) requires the Department to prefer United States manufacturers and equipment and document a justification whenever the Department uses a foreign source; and

(C) requires the Department to partner with and direct funds to the Department’s Manufacturing Innovation Institutes whenever feasible.

(A) GUIDANCE.—The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) shall include guidance for all types of advanced manufacturing, including the following:

(B) MANUAL.— (i) The guidance required by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) shall utilize expedited qualification and testing procedures established in section 865 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 and result in a manual under subparagraph (C) of such paragraph to establish standardized processes to qualify parts and components produced by advanced manufacturing techniques and technologies based on performance, rather than specifications for testing and evaluation.

(ii) The process described in clause (i) shall include a methodology for standardizing technical production specifications, testing processes, and data reciprocity to share and accept test results of the same additively manufactured parts across all military departments.

(iii) The process described in clause (i) shall include test and evaluation results that facilitate data reciprocity across military departments, removing the need for each military department to independently validate the same parts another military department has already validated.

(iv) The manual shall include steps to allow for streamlined incremental qualification, rather than complete requalification, when the design and manufacturing process incorporates changes.

(v) The process described in clause (i) shall explore the option for third-party, external certification for companies that cannot afford or do not have the in-house expertise to do this on their own but have the technology that the Department needs.

(C) ADVANCED MATERIALS AND ADVANCED COMPOSITE MATERIALS RESEARCH.—The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) and the manual required by paragraph (1)(C)—

(i) shall cover requirements for development, test, and evaluation of the material properties of advanced materials and advanced composite materials used in advanced manufacturing, including metals, polymers, ceramics, composites, and hybrid metals;

(ii) should include how to incorporate integrated computational materials engineering to predict the material properties and the distribution of those properties in additively manufactured parts and scale-up additive manufacturing; and

(iii) shall include a list of recommendations for the types of amounts of critical metals to stockpile for the Department’s use in additive manufacturing, which should be accessible to users of the Defense Logistics Agency’s Joint Additive Manufacturing Model Exchange (JAMMEX).

(D) CYBERSECURITY.— (i) The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) and the manual required by paragraph (1)(C) shall include cybersecurity standards and guidelines for advanced manufacturing developed in consultation with the Chief Information Officer.

(ii) The guidance and manual should address the unique challenges that advanced manufacturing poses to Department information networks.

(iii) The guidance and manual shall include matters relating to cybersecurity compliance.

(iv) The guidance and manual shall call for periodic security and compliance reviews.

(E) MODELING AND SIMULATION.—The guidance and manual required by paragraph (1)—

(i) shall include software-driven, artificial intelligence-enabled modeling and simulation techniques for design, development, test, and evaluation to the maximum extent possible; and

(ii) should include integrating modeling and simulation at every level, from enterprise to individual operation, including utilizing digital engineering.

(F) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.— (i) The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) and the manual required by paragraph (1)(C) shall include processes and contracting mechanisms to protect and manage intellectual property.

(ii) The processes and contracting mechanisms described in clause (i) shall be designed to incentivize innovation while allowing the Department to additively manufacture parts and products for military systems at scale and on demand in case of contingency or crisis. This can include new licensing agreements with terms and conditions that allow for innovative intellectual property strategies.

(iii) The guidance and manual shall include considerations to incorporate the Defense Logistics Agency’s Joint Additive Manufacturing Model Exchange (JAMMEX).

(G) QUALITY ASSURANCE.— (i) The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) and the manual required by paragraph (1)(C) shall include processes, materials, and technologies to ensure continuous quality control throughout the entire manufacturing process and post-production.

(ii) The guidance and manual shall incorporate the process window qualification methodology, which is designed to be machine-agnostic, or independent of specific machine brands or software providers, as well as the following:

(I) Real-time process monitoring leveraging machine sensors and software analytics to detect and instantly mitigate deviations prevents defects and unauthorized parameter changes.

(II) Integration of machine learning algorithms that analyze production data in real-time allows the identification of anomalies indicative of potential quality or security threats, enabling proactive mitigation.

(III) Software-defined quality assurance protocols enforce standardized, repeatable verification processes, greatly improving reliability and simplifying security audits.

(H) PROLIFERATION OF ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING CAPABILITIES.—The guidance required by paragraph (1) shall include a plan that includes phasing and funding requirements to proliferate advanced manufacturing technologies and techniques across the entire Department, at the enterprise level to tactical operational units. This guidance shall—

(i) identify end-user access and operational needs for advanced manufacturing and associated resourcing, infrastructure, and basing requirements;

(ii) establish logistics models for production of additively manufactured parts in the continental United States and at forward operating locations;

(I) TRAINING.—The guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) shall include training program requirements, phasing, and sequencing to ensure each warfighter is equipped with the knowledge and skills to use advanced manufacturing techniques and technologies efficiently and safely. The guidance shall—

(i) outline which military occupational specialty career fields to train in advanced manufacturing equipment, techniques, and procedures with each military service and the degree of proficiency and training time required;

(ii) explore partnerships to establish apprenticeships and skilled technician training pipelines to support Department of Defense research and development programs and programs of record; and

(iii) consider creating new initiatives within existing transition assistance programs to create pathways for members of the Armed Forces to receive the training necessary to adapt their military skills to civilian jobs in advanced manufacturing.

(5) MANUAL REQUIRED.—The manual created under paragraph (1)(C) shall be a service-agnostic, vendor-agnostic manual on advanced manufacturing techniques and technologies for the Department of Defense—

(A) to standardize across the military departments the technical parameters for manufacturing parts and products using advanced manufacturing techniques;

(B) to outline the categories and levels of risk associated with such parts and products, including distinguishing between safety-critical and non-safety-critical parts and providing expedited approvals for low-risk parts through standardized material datasets and pre-qualified manufacturing protocols;

(D) to establish data reciprocity for test and evaluation data across all military departments with respect to qualifying such parts and products;

(E) to utilize the Defense Logistics Agency’s Joint Additive Manufacturing Model Exchange (JAMMEX) as the central data repository for technical data packages for advanced manufacturing; and

(F) to incorporate new proposed qualification approaches proposed by industry consortiums, Manufacturing Innovation Institutes, and Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.

(A) INITIAL.—The Secretary shall ensure that the guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) goes into effect in fiscal year 2026 by providing guidance with respect to the top three essential metals each military department needs to maintain its operational platforms.

(B) SUBSEQUENT.—The Secretary shall ensure that the guidance required by paragraph (1)(A) goes into effect not later than January 1, 2027, for all essential metals not covered by subparagraph (A).

(7) ADVANCED MANUFACTURING DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “advanced manufacturing” means a manufacturing process using the following:

(D) Other manufacturing capabilities similar to those listed in subparagraphs (A) through (C).

SEC. 220C. Limitation on availability of funds for fundamental research collaboration with certain academic institutions.

(a) Limitation.—Except as provided in subsection (b), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2026 may be obligated or expended to award a grant or contract to an institution of higher education for the specific purposes of conducting fundamental research in collaboration with a covered entity.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology may waive the limitation under subsection (a), on a case-by-case basis, with respect to an individual grant or contract for an institution of higher education if the Assistant Secretary determines that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(2) CONGRESSIONAL NOTICE.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which an award is made by the Department of Defense involving an institution of higher education with respect to which a waiver is made under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives notice of such waiver.

(1) IN GENERAL.—On an annual basis, as a classified or controlled unclassified information annex to the annual report required by section 1286(f) of the John S McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. 4001 note), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report annex on the compliance of the Department of Defense and institutions of higher education with the requirements of this section.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each report annex submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include, for each waiver issued under subsection (b) during the period covered by the report—

(B) a detailed description of the type and extent of any collaboration between an institution of higher education and a covered entity allowed pursuant to the waiver, including identification of the institution of higher education and the covered entities involved, the type of technology involved, the duration of the collaboration, and terms and conditions on intellectual property assignment, as applicable, under the collaboration agreement.

(1) The term “collaboration” means coordinated activity between an institution of higher education and a covered entity and includes—

(D) sponsorship or facilitation of research fellowships, visas, or residence permits;

(E) joint ventures, partnerships, or other formalized agreements for the purpose of conducting research or sharing resources, data, or technology;

(F) inclusion of researchers as consultants, advisors, or members of advisory or review boards; and

(A) means an academic institution that is included in the most recently updated list developed pursuant to 1286(c)(9) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. 4001 note); and

(3) The term “fundamental research” has the meaning given that term in National Security Decision Directive-189 (NSSD-189), National Policy on the Transfer of Scientific, Technical and Engineering Information, dated September 21, 1985, or any successor document.

(4) The term “institution of higher education” has the meaning given that term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002) and includes—

(A) any department, program, project, faculty, researcher, or other individual, entity, or activity of such institution; and

(a) Establishment.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary of the Army shall establish a soldier-inspired innovation program—

(1) that creates partnerships between operational units of the Army and leading national research universities to provide a unique platform for university-based researchers and small businesses to collaborate directly with soldiers on cutting-edge applied research and development; and

(2) to integrate soldiers into the early-stage problem identification process and include them in the solution development process to ensure technical solutions are meeting soldier needs and enhancing lethality.

(b) Designation.—The program established pursuant to subsection (a) shall be known as the “Catalyst Pathfinder Program” (in this section the “Program”).

(1) establish activities at all active-duty divisions of the Army to accelerate the incorporation of soldier insights into capability development;

(2) establish policies that streamline collaboration between soldiers, Army Futures Command, and academic institutions;

(3) establish a governance board that includes representatives from the research, development, test, and evaluation, acquisition, requirements, industry, and academic communities;

(5) implement an adaptive experimentation force capability to support technology experimentation activities throughout the solution development cycle

(d) Treatment of program.—The Program shall be treated as a research, development, test, and evaluation activity in the Army’s input to the Future Year Defense Program.

SEC. 222. Extension of period for annual reports on critical technology areas supportive of the National Defense Strategy.

SEC. 223. Evaluation of additional test corridors for hypersonic and long-range weapons.

(a) Evaluation required.—To assess impact effectiveness and increase the cadence of testing and training for long-range and hypersonic systems, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the Director of the Test Resource Management Center and in consultation with requirements owners of long-range and hypersonic systems of the Armed Forces, evaluate—

(1) the comparative advantages of episodic and permanent special activity airspace designated by the Federal Aviation Administration for use by the Department of Defense suitable for the test and training of long-range and hypersonic systems; and

(b) Briefing.—Not later than December 1, 2026, the Secretary shall provide to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a briefing on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the evaluation conducted pursuant to subsection (a), including an assessment of the completion date.

(2) The term “launch location” means the point from which a test is initiated.

(a) Requirement.—The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall include in the annual report required by section 139(h) of title 10, United States Code, an assessment of the operational and live fire test and evaluation activities for—

(b) Alternate pathway.—For any effort under subsection (a) assigned to the software acquisition pathway pursuant to section 3603 of title 10, United States Code, the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall assess the effort in accordance with the alternative test and evaluation pathway established in this Act.

SEC. 226. Prohibition on modification of indirect cost rates for institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations.

(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of Defense may not change or modify indirect cost rates (otherwise known as facilities and administration cost rates) for Department of Defense grants and contracts awarded to institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations (as those terms are defined in part 200 of title 2, Code of Federal Regulations) until the Secretary makes the certification described under subsection (b).

(b) Certification.—A certification under this subsection is a certification to the congressional defense committees that the Department of Defense—

(1) working with the extramural research community, including representatives from universities, university associations, independent research institutes, and private foundations, has developed an alternative indirect cost model that has—

(A) reduced the indirect cost rate for all applicable institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations (compared to indirect rates for fiscal year 2025); and

(B) optimized payment of legitimate and essential indirect costs involved in conducting Department of Defense research to ensure transparency and efficiency for Department of Defense-funded grants and contracts; and

(2) established an implementation plan with adequate transition time to change budgeting and accounting processes for affected institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations.

SEC. 227. Enhance international coordination for advanced manufacturing techniques, technologies, and adoption.

(a) Designation of senior official.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall designate a senior official, with relevant biotechnology experience, from a position within the Department of Defense that was in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act—

(2) to be the head the Biotechnology Management Office established under subsection (b); and

(b) Establishment of Biotechnology Management Office.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, with input from the senior official designated under subsection (a), charter and establish, under the authority, direction, and control of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, a Biotechnology Management Office to foster the development, acquisition and sustainment of broad-based biotechnology capabilities for the Department.

(1) Maintaining and executing the Defense Biotechnology Strategy required by section [BAG25949], including development and execution of a long-term research, development, acquisition, and sustainment roadmap.

(2) Updating policies and guidance within the Department relating to the acquisition, adoption, and transition of biotechnology-based products into Department use.

(3) Coordinating with activities across the Department, the Federal Government, industry, academia, and international partners relating to biotechnology.

(4) Proposing options for streamlining the regulatory or acquisition process of the Department.

(5) Conducting, as may be needed, global competition analyses, net assessment or forecasting to support decisionmakers on biotechnology advances.

(6) Supporting the development of public-private partnerships with academia, industry, and other State and local government partners, including through the development or fostering of regionally focused innovation ecosystems.

(7) Identifying biotechnology workforce and training gaps across the workforce of the Department.

(d) Sunset.—The office established pursuant to subsection (a) shall terminate on September 30, 2035.

(e) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the designation of the senior official pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the proposed scope of the charter for the office to be established pursuant to subsection (b), as well as implementation plans for preliminary activities the office will pursue during the proceeding one-year period.

(a) In general.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a strategy on the national security implications of emerging biotechnologies, including the future role that biotechnology will play in defense, and means to improve industry, interagency, and international relationships in this sector.

(b) Elements.—The strategy required pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) How the Department of Defense will develop and expand a network of commercial facilities for the biomanufacture of products that are critical for defense needs.

(2) Review and update of military specifications in order to better incorporate or substitute current products with biotechnology-based products.

(3) Updated plans and policies for the Department to enter into advance market commitments and offtake agreements for biotechnology products that have defense applications.

(4) A description of how the Department could better incorporate military-relevant applications of emerging biotechnology into wargaming exercises, tabletop exercises, or other net assessment analyses.

(5) The benefits and costs of issuing a research grand challenge, or a series of challenges, that focus on making biotechnology predictably engineerable and how the Department would implement such research grand challenge, or challenges.

(6) Development of a biotechnology regulation science and technology program within the Department, including development of digital infrastructure to support simplified regulation and the development of biometrology tools.

(7) Updated plans and policies for inter-governmental support that the Department could provide in encouraging member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to aggregate demand and pool purchasing power for biotechnology products.

(8) Review of plans and guidance on how the Department can work to develop, integrate, and disseminate biotechnology research initiatives across member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and how the Department might coordinate with international stakeholders to utilize the combined research capabilities of such member countries to drive a biotechnology development approach.

SEC. 233. Defining guidelines and policies on the use of biotechnology for the Armed Forces.

(a) Guidelines and policies required.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, after coordinating with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and external stakeholders, including representation from industry and academia, develop guidelines and policies on the ethical and responsible development and deployment of biotechnology within the Department of Defense and the Armed Forces.

(b) Elements.—The guidelines and policies developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) Definitions of ethical and responsible development and use of biotechnology.

(2) Guidelines relating to ethical and responsible development and use of biotechnology.

(3) Policies relating to informed consent of members of the Armed Forces participating in biotechnology development.

(4) Policies relating to reversibility and heritable treatment of potential biotechnology applications.

(5) Policies relating to biotechnologies and their potential effects on the environment.

(7) Policies relating to the compliance and obligations of the Department to the United Nations Biological Weapons Convention, and other international agreements pertaining to the laws of armed conflict.

(1) IN GENERAL.—No later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report outlining the guidelines and policies developed pursuant to subsection (a), including the methodologies through which the guidelines and policies were developed.

(2) FORM.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than once every two years thereafter until November 1, 2031, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the implementation of the guidelines and policies developed pursuant to subsection (a), including a discussion of any adjustments made to the policies and such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Secretary may have to ensure their successful implementation.

(2) FINAL BRIEFING.—The final briefing provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be provided during the 60-day period ending on November 1, 2031.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall 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 departments and agencies for building biodefense capabilities internationally in execution of national security and other policies of the Federal Government, with the Secretary focused on working with defense counterparts in countries that are allies of the United States.

(2) ELEMENTS OF MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING.—The memoranda of understanding entered into under paragraph (1) shall address how each relevant department or agency selects partner countries and the feasibility of coordinating efforts with each such country.

(b) Development of biodefense capabilities.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense programs, shall provide to the Director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency global authority to support development of biodefense capabilities and capacities in countries that are allies of the United States, subject to review and input on an as-needed basis by leadership of the Department of Defense and the relevant combatant commands.

SEC. 311. Department of Defense guidelines regarding implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

(a) In general.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall rescind all existing Department of Defense directives regarding the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (in this section referred to as “NEPA”) 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.

(b) Elements of new NEPA directive.—The new directive required under subsection (a) shall ensure that all components of the Department of Defense comply with the requirements under NEPA, including the updated guidelines established under title III of division C of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Public Law 118–5; 137 Stat. 38).

(c) Designation required.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall designate an appropriate official of the Department of Defense responsible for implementing the NEPA directive established under subsection (a) and ensuring the timely execution of all reviews required under NEPA without unnecessary regulatory delays.

(d) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to amend or override any provision of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense may use expeditionary solid waste disposal systems for the destruction of illicit contraband, including seized counterfeit materials, unauthorized military gear, and classified materials.

(2) AVAILABILITY OF SYSTEMS.—The expeditionary solid waste disposal systems units deployed under subsection (a) shall be—

(A) equipped to support operations related to border security and the elimination of contraband; and

(B) made available to military installations, forward operating bases, and partner security forces as needed to assist in countering infiltration and unauthorized use of military assets of the United States.

(b) Prohibition on use of open-air burn pits to dispose of certain material.—The Secretary of Defense may not use open-air burn pits for the disposal of illicit contraband, classified military equipment, or hazardous waste materials.

(B) by striking “additional operational energy” and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting “operational energy initiatives.”; and

“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall design operational energy initiatives under paragraph (1) to advance the objectives of the Department in the areas of energy resilience and fuel efficiency.

“(3) Operational energy initiatives carried out under paragraph (1) may directly contribute to enhanced mission and combat capabilities, fund operational environment training activities, or establish programs to incentivize demonstrable reductions in energy expenditures within the department, agency, or instrumentality credited with achieving the energy cost savings under subsection (a).”;

(2) in subsection (e)(1), by striking “The Secretary of Defense may transfer amounts described in subsection (a) that remain available for obligation” and inserting “Not later than 60 days after being notified of amounts described in subsection (a) that remain available for obligation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer such amounts”; and

“(f) Operational energy cost savings defined.—In this section, the term ‘operational energy cost savings’ means the monetary savings achieved through measures to reduce energy expenditures relative to the amount that would have been necessary to sustain an equivalent level of capability in the absence of such measures.”.

SEC. 315. Authority of Department of Defense to destroy or dispose of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may destroy or dispose of a perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance using innovative technologies that—

(2) are permitted or approved by a Federal or State agency that regulates the destruction or disposal of such a substance.

(b) Update of guidance.—The Secretary shall update the PFAS Destruction and Disposal Guidance of the Department of Defense, or any successor similar guidance, to reflect the requirements under subsection (a).

SEC. 316. Modification to restriction on procurement or purchasing of personal protective equipment for firefighters containing perfluoroalkyl substances or polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “if such equipment contains an intentionally added perfluoroalkyl substance or polyfluoroalkyl substance” and inserting “unless such equipment meets the specifications set forth in Standard 1970 of the National Fire Protection Association”; and

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “does not contain intentionally added perfluoroalkyl substances or polyfluoroalkyl substances” and inserting “meets the specifications set forth in Standard 1970 of the National Fire Protection Association”; and

(B) in paragraph (2), by striking “does not contain intentionally added perfluoroalkyl substances or polyfluoroalkyl substances” and inserting “meets the specifications set forth in Standard 1970 of 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.

(a) In general.—Subject to subsection (b), on and after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide bottled water to communities with private drinking water wells where contamination from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances resulting from activities of the Department of Defense has, at one point in time, exceeded the maximum contaminant level for such substances established by the Environmental Protection Agency if the Secretary, as of the day before the date of the enactment of this Act, provided bottled water to the community because of such contamination.

(b) Termination of requirement.—The Secretary is not required to provide bottled water to a community under subsection (a) if all impacted households in the community are connected to a municipal drinking water distribution system or the Secretary has successfully remediated the contamination from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances to meet or exceed both Federal and state drinking water standards for such substances.

SEC. 318. Repeal of prohibition on procurement by Department of Defense of certain items containing perfluorooctane sulfonate or perfluorooctanoic acid.

SEC. 319. Repeal of temporary moratorium on incineration by Department of Defense of perfluoroalkyl substances, polyfluoroalkyl substances, and aqueous film forming foam.

SEC. 320. Interim responses to address releases or threatened releases of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), shall take actions specified in subsection (b) to address any release or threatened release of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances at a covered facility.

(A) IN GENERAL.—If a preliminary assessment or site investigation for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances has not been conducted at a covered facility, the Secretary shall conduct expeditiously such assessment or investigation, as the case may be, to determine whether there has been a release or there is a threatened release of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances at the facility.

(B) PRESUMED RELEASE.—Each covered facility that has or has had a fire training pit or similar facility shall be presumed, for purposes of subparagraph (A), to have had a release of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(A) DETERMINATION OF POTENTIAL INTERIM RESPONSE ACTIONS.—A preliminary assessment or site investigation under paragraph (1)(A) shall include, along with any other matters required pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), a description and analysis of potential interim response actions that can be taken to reduce immediate public exposure to the release of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, including preventing an imminent and substantial endangerment.

(B) ACTIONS INCLUDED.—Interim response actions to be considered under subparagraph (A) shall include the following:

(ii) Connection to public water systems for members of the public using private wells.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall make the preliminary assessment or site investigation conducted under paragraph (1)(A) with respect to a covered facility available for review to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the relevant State environmental regulatory agencies, any Indian tribal government whose tribal lands may be affected by the release or threatened release of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, and members of the public.

(B) REVIEW PERIOD.—The period for review under subparagraph (A) shall be not less than 60 days and shall be extended if the Administrator requests additional review time.

(4) EXPEDITED IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense shall expedite the implementation of any interim response actions selected by the Secretary for implementation pursuant to the consideration conducted under paragraph (2) and the review under paragraph (3), with special priority provided to covered facilities located within a sole or principal drinking water source as designated by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300h–3(e)).

(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 270 days after 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 a report containing an identification of the following:

(A) Which covered facilities have had a preliminary assessment or site investigation completed pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A).

(B) Which covered facilities have had a preliminary assessment or site investigation initiated pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A) but not completed by the time the report is due to be submitted, and when such assessment or investigation is projected to be completed.

(C) Which covered facilities have not had a preliminary assessment or site investigation initiated pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A) but are required to have one pursuant to such subsection.

(D) Which covered facilities are not required to have a preliminary assessment or site investigation conducted pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A).

(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than one year after 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 a report on—

(A) which covered facilities have had interim response actions selected for implementation under subsection (b);

(E) an explanation as to why any interim response action considered in the preliminary assessment or site investigation conducted pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A) was not adopted.

(1) COVERED FACILITY.—The term “covered facility” means a facility subject to section 2701(c) of title 10, United States Code.

(2) RELEASE; RESPONSE.—The terms “release” and “response” have the meanings given those terms in section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.).

(a) In general.—In accordance with this section, the Secretary of the Navy shall implement processes to improve the materiel condition and combat readiness of Navy surface ships maintained and repaired at private shipyards by ensuring a stable and responsive industrial base capable of meeting operational and combat surge demands.

(A) DESIGNATION.—The Secretary of the Navy shall designate type commanders as the primary authorities for surface ship maintenance.

(B) RESPONSIBILITIES.—Type commanders designated under subparagraph (A) shall—

(iii) be responsible for setting priorities, approving contracts, and ensuring fleet readiness.

(C) REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTERS.—The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that regional maintenance centers act in a supporting role under the direction of type commanders.

(A) IN GENERAL.—For each ship undergoing maintenance at a private shipyard, the project manager, the port engineer, and the ship commanding officer—

(i) may jointly decide what work is done during the maintenance period, including the ability to adjust priorities within agreed budgets and schedules; and

(B) CONTRACTING OFFICERS.—Contracting officers shall support the decisions described in subparagraph (A)(i) by managing funds and contracts.

(3) STABLE WORKFORCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE.—The Secretary of the Navy shall provide a stable, predictable workload to private shipyards and other critical suppliers through a multi-year, multi-ship contract by ship class—

(A) to allow the shipyard and other critical suppliers to maintain a stable workforce;

(4) SHIP-SPECIFIC ASSIGNMENTS.—The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that specific shipyards shall have multi-year contracts for specified ships for repeated maintenance work to improve knowledge of ship condition and accelerate repairs, with excusable deviations such as homeport changes.

(5) COLLABORATIVE PLANNING.—The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that shipyards, alterations installation teams (when assigned), and Navy teams, including project managers and port engineers, work together in continuous maintenance activities to plan maintenance and ensure realistic schedules and priorities.

(6) ROLES FOR LARGE AND SMALL SHIPYARDS.—The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that—

(A) criteria for multi-year awards place heavy emphasis on strong teaming between large and small shipyard businesses;

(B) large and small shipyards establish multi-year teaming relationships and work in both the planning and execution phases of scheduled availabilities and emergency repairs; and

(7) PARTS AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Navy shall establish rotatable pools and procure spare parts ahead of time to create a pool of parts that can be quickly used for repairs.

(8) TRAINING.—The Secretary of the Navy shall train program managers and port engineers for specific ship classes prior to assigning such individuals to complex maintenance availabilities.

(9) FUNDING FOR WORKFORCE AND FACILITIES.—The Secretary of the Navy may allocate funds annually to private shipyards to sustain a minimum workforce and maintain repair facilities, in such amounts and under such conditions as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(10) SMALL BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary of the Navy shall issue guidance to address set-aside requirements for small businesses that enables the roles for large and small shipyards described in paragraph (6).

(1) determine specific methods, contract types, funding levels, and operational details consistent with the requirements and authorities under this section; and

(2) adapt existing processes or develop new approaches to carry out such requirements and authorities.

(d) Report required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing the following:

(1) How the Navy will implement the requirements of this section, including with respect to the roles of type commanders, regional maintenance centers, project managers, port engineers, ship commanding officers, and contracting officers.

(2) The planned funding approach for workforce stability, shipyard assignments, and spare parts procurement.

(3) A timeline for initial implementation, including any pilot programs, and full deployment across all regional maintenance centers.

(4) Metrics to measure success, such as on-time completion of maintenance, cost control, and readiness improvements.

(1) PORT ENGINEER.—The term “port engineer” means the technical expert on a ship’s condition who advises on repairs and standards.

(2) PROJECT MANAGER.—The term “project manager” means the individual responsible for overseeing a ship’s maintenance period.

(3) REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER.—The term “regional maintenance center” means an organization of the Navy that supports ship maintenance in a specific region, such as in Norfolk, Virginia, San Diego, California, Mayport, Florida, Everett, Washington, and Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

(4) SHIP COMMANDING OFFICER.—The term “ship commanding officer” means the commanding officer of a Navy surface ship undergoing maintenance.

(5) TYPE COMMANDER.—The term “type commander” means the flag officer in charge of a surface force, such as Commander, Naval Surface Force Atlantic, and Commander, Naval Surface Force, Pacific Fleet.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of the Navy shall investigate, and, as feasible, qualify, approve, integrate, and fully adopt into contract requirements advanced technologies and processes for Navy surface ship maintenance on an expedited timeline to enhance readiness, reduce costs, and address delays in maintenance and repair activities.

(b) Specified advanced technologies and processes.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary of the Navy shall prioritize qualification of the following:

(9) Predictive maintenance algorithms for artificial intelligence-driven failure prediction.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Navy shall establish a process for private entities to submit proposals for advanced technologies or processes not specified in subsection (b).

(2) EVALUATION.—The Secretary of the Navy shall evaluate any proposal submitted pursuant to the process established under paragraph (1) not later than 90 days after the date of such submission.

(3) PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.—A proposal submitted pursuant to the process established under paragraph (1) shall demonstrate potential to improve maintenance efficiency, safety, or cost-effectiveness.

(4) QUALIFICATION DECISION.—The Secretary of the Navy shall make a qualification decision with respect to a proposal submitted pursuant to the process established under paragraph (1) based on technical merit and the need of the Navy.

(1) IN GENERAL.—For any advanced technology or process included in a proposal submitted pursuant to the process established under subsection (c) and not selected for qualification or approval, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall enter into a contract with an independent third-party reviewer to assess the decision.

(2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—A contract entered into under paragraph (1) shall require the independent third-party reviewer to, not later than 90 days after the date of the decision concerned, submit to Congress an unaltered report that—

(e) Priority.—The Secretary of the Navy may prioritize advanced technologies and processes under this section based on operational needs, budget constraints, and compatibility with existing systems, if the Secretary includes justifications for such prioritization in the report required by subsection (g).

(f) Updates.—The Secretary of the Navy shall update policies, specifications, guidance, and contracts to integrate and fully adopt advanced technologies and processes as required by subsection (a).

(g) Report required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to Congress a report detailing timelines to qualify and approve each advanced technology or process specified in subsection (b) and any additional advanced technologies or processes identified pursuant to the process established under subsection (c), including estimated implementation dates or justifications for non-pursuit.

SEC. 323. Delegation to United States Transportation Command of mitigating vulnerabilities and risks associated with contested logistics for Department of Defense.

(a) In general.—On and after the date recommended under subsection (c)(2)(B)(v), the United States Transportation Command shall be responsible for—

(1) mitigating vulnerabilities and risks associated with contested logistics for the Department of Defense on a global basis; and

(2) planning and operations of the Joint Deployment and Distribution Enterprise (in this section referred to as the “JDDE”) relating to contested logistics across all domains, including the movement of forces and material from the source of supply to the designated point of need of the commander of the combatant command receiving support.

(b) Required coordination.—In carrying out the responsibilities under subsection (a), the Commander of the United States Transportation Command shall coordinate with the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the secretaries of the military departments, the commanders of the combatant commands, the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Secretary of Transportation.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commander of the United States Transportation Command, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of each military department, the commanders of the combatant commands, the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that provides an in-depth gap assessment on the ability of the JDDE to project, maneuver, and sustain the joint force in contested environments and provide recommendations to resolve or mitigate those gaps.

(ii) improving the ability of the JDDE to operate in contested environments; and

(iii) establishing the Commander of United States Transportation Command to be the element responsible for global contested logistics; and

(i) a description of the organizational responsibilities of elements of the JDDE as of the date of the report and the ability of the JDDE to project, maneuver, and sustain the joint force;

(ii) a description of the intent and capability of adversaries to the United States to disrupt the ability of the JDDE to project, maneuver, and sustain the joint force;

(iii) a description of the responsibilities to protect the operations of the JDDE, to include physical protection and protection of command and control systems of the JDDE from cyber threats;

(iv) recommendations for changes in statutes, authorities, resources, responsibilities, and processes within the JDDE to establish the Commander of United States Transportation Command to be the element responsible for global contested logistics; and

(v) a recommended date, not later than one year after the date on which the report is submitted to the congressional defense committees, for the United States Transportation Command to assume responsibility for contested logistics from the source of supply to the designated point of need of the commander of the combatant command receiving support.

(3) FORM.—The report required under paragraph (1) may be submitted in classified form, but if so, shall include an unclassified executive summary.

(1) INTERIM BRIEFING.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commander of the United States Transportation Command shall provide to the congressional defense committees an interim briefing on the development of the report required under subsection (c).

(2) FINAL BRIEFING.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commander of the United States Transportation Command shall provide to the congressional defense committees a final briefing on the report required under subsection (c).

(e) Rule of construction.—Except to the extent that, before January 1, 2026, a responsibility specified in subsection (a) was a specific function of one of agencies or components specified in subsection (b), nothing under this section shall be construed as—

(2) requiring the transfer of any function, personnel, or asset from those agencies or components to the United States Transportation Command.

(f) Contested logistics defined.—In this section, the term “contested logistics” means logistics that occur under conditions in which an adversary or competitor deliberately seeks or has sought to deny, disrupt, destroy, or defeat friendly force logistics operations, facilities, and activities across any of the multiple domains.

SEC. 324. Requirements for Department of Defense aircraft operations near commercial airports.

(a) Risk mitigation.—The Secretary of Defense shall require all aircraft of the Department of Defense that operate near commercial airports to be equipped with position broadcast technology and shall direct the development of standard operating procedures that maximize the use of such technology.

(b) Coordination with Federal Aviation Administration.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop a program for sharing aviation safety data for aircraft of the Department of Defense, to include near misses and mishaps, with the Federal Aviation Administration.

(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the number of near misses that aircraft of the Department have had with commercial aircraft during the 10-year period preceding such date of enactment.

(2) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter through 2030, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the number of near misses that aircraft of the Department have had with commercial aircraft during the previous fiscal year.

(3) ELEMENTS.—Each report under this subsection shall include, with respect to each near miss covered under the report, the following:

(C) Any changes to protocols, standard operating procedures, or policy, as appropriate, that were made based on the near miss.

(4) FORM OF REPORT.—Each report under this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 325. Extension and modification of semiannual briefings on operational status of amphibious warship fleet.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “September 30, 2026” and inserting “September 30, 2028”; and

“(6) Details regarding the maintenance and service life extension plan for the amphibious warship that retains an operationally available amphibious warship until the end of the Obligation and Work Limiting Date for the construction contract for a replacement amphibious warship, as necessary to meet the requirements under section 8062 of title 10, United States Code.”.

(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of Defense shall not take any action to close, mothball, divest, deactivate, or otherwise render inoperable any facility that is part of the organic industrial base of the Army, including any depot, arsenal, ammunition plant, manufacturing center, or facility of a center of industrial and technical excellence, unless—

(b) Scope.—The prohibition in subsection (a) applies to all facilities operated or maintained as part of the organic industrial base of the Army, whether Government-owned and Government-operated or Government-owned and contractor-operated.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense may suspend operations or limit access to a facility covered by this section if such action is necessary to address an imminent threat to the health and safety of personnel or to mitigate substantial environmental hazards.

(2) REPORT REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that describes any action taken under paragraph (1) not later than 15 days after the date on which such suspension of operations or limitation of access is initiated.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition under subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that such a waiver is necessary to address a critical national security interest of the United States.

(2) NOTIFICATION REQUIRED.—Not later than 30 days prior to exercising the waiver under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees—

(B) a detailed justification for the waiver, including an assessment of the national security interest at stake;

(C) an evaluation of potential impacts to the readiness, industrial base capacity, and surge requirements of the Army; and

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for five 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.

(A) a list of all facilities in the organic industrial base of the Army and the operational status of each facility;

(B) any planned changes in mission, workload, or operating status of each facility;

(D) a description of any action by the Secretary of Defense taken pursuant to subsection (c) or (d) during the one-year period preceding submission of the report.

(1) MOTHBALL.—The term “mothball” means placing a facility in inactive status while maintaining it in a condition such that it could be reactivated at some future time.

(2) ORGANIC INDUSTRIAL BASE OF THE ARMY.— The term “organic industrial base of the Army” means the network of Government-owned facilities that provide manufacturing, maintenance, storage, and readiness support for Army materiel and munitions, including the facilities listed in the Army Organic Industrial Base Modernization Implementation Plan, dated April 12, 2022.

SEC. 327. Establishment of Defense Personal Property Management Office under Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act—

(1) the Defense Personal Property Management Office of the Department of Defense shall be established within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; and

(2) the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall assume responsibility for all functions, personnel, and other matters of the Defense Personal Property Management Office.

(b) Regulations.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to implement subsection (a).

(c) Briefing.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the plan and timeline for the implementation of subsection (a).

SEC. 328. Integration of commercially available artificial intelligence capabilities into logistics operations.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall facilitate the integration of currently available and suitable commercial artificial intelligence capabilities specifically designed to assist with logistics tracking, planning, operations, and analytics into two relevant and suitable exercises of the Department of Defense to be conducted during fiscal year 2026.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the commander of the combatant command or commands overseeing the exercise selected under subsection (a), shall identify for such exercise a commercially available artificial intelligence product that is specifically designed to address logistics needs of the Department of Defense and meets the critical data security protocols outlined in subsection (c).

(2) CAPABILITY OF PARTNER.—In selecting a commercial product under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense and the commander of the combatant command or commands concerned shall—

(A) ensure that the commercial product acquired for such demonstration includes provision of capability to respond to potential software changes in an agile and rapid manner to ensure seamless integration and adaptability during the exercise; and

(B) prioritize the consideration of a product provided by a small or nontraditional software focused firm.

(c) Data security.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all necessary approvals are expedited to facilitate the secure use of data of the Department of Defense by commercial artificial intelligence providers during the exercises selected under subsection (a), including—

(1) compliance with applicable cybersecurity policies and regulations of the Department; and

(d) Interim briefing.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall provide an interim briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that includes—

(1) identification of the specific exercises selected for demonstration, including the combatant commanders participating in this demonstration and identification of a point of contact within the combatant command responsible;

(2) identification of the specific commercial artificial intelligence tool or tools to be demonstrated, including the contractual mean or other agreement used to facilitate the use of the commercial artificial intelligence tool;

(4) metrics to be used to assess the efficacy of such tools used in each demonstration.

(e) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the conclusion of the exercises selected under subsection (a), the commander of the combatant command overseeing the exercise shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing that includes the following:

(1) An overview of the integration and use of commercial artificial intelligence capabilities during the exercise.

(2) An assessment of the impact of such technologies on unit readiness and operational success.

(3) Recommendations for further integration or development of artificial intelligence capabilities in future exercises and operations of the Department of Defense.

(a) Establishment of pilot program.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program to be known as the “Arsenal Workload Sustainment Pilot Program” (in this section referred to as the “pilot program”).

(b) Duration.—The pilot program shall be conducted for a period of five years.

(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the pilot program, the Secretary of Defense shall give a preference to any procurement action or solicitation by a non-public partner who will enter into a public-private partnership with the Secretary in the source selection process if such non-public partner will use an arsenal of the Department of the Army that is owned and operated by the United States Government as a partner in any type of contractual agreement with the United States Government.

(2) FURTHER PREFERENCE.—In selecting non-public partners under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall give a preference to non-public partners that ensure an equitable workshare is performed under the partnership by employees of the Department of Defense to protect critical skills in the organic industrial base.

(d) Regulations.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations governing how a non-public partner shall be given a preference required under subsection (c).

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the activities carried out under the pilot program, including a description of any operational challenges identified.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) A breakout, by relevant budget accounts, of workload at an arsenal of the Department of the Army that is owned and operated by the United States Government that was achieved in the prior fiscal year, whether directly or through public-private partnerships under the pilot program.

(B) An assessment of relevant budget accounts where such an arsenal can be utilized to meet future procurement needs of the Department of Defense, irrespective of cost.

(C) An outlook of expected workload at each such arsenal during the period covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code.

(D) The capital investments required to be made at each such arsenal to ensure compliance and operational capacity.

(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

(2) NON-PUBLIC PARTNER.—The term “non-public partner” means a corporation, individual, university, or nonprofit organization that is not part of the United States Government.

SEC. 331. Modification of report on improved oversight for implementation of Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program of the Navy.

SEC. 332. Modification of readiness report to include summary count of certain mishaps.

SEC. 333. Annual report on funding and status of interim remedial actions of Department of Defense relating to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 160 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the funding and status of interim remedial actions of the Department of Defense relating to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (in this section referred to as ‘PFAS’).

“(b) Elements.—Each report required by subsection (a) shall include information regarding the following:

“(1) The total amounts budgeted and obligated, for the current fiscal year and for any prior fiscal year, per site at each installation of the Department of Defense, for interim remedial actions of the Department relating to PFAS.

“(2) In the case of each report after the initial report, the total amounts budgeted, obligated, and expended, per site at each installation, on such actions since the previous report.

“(3) The general and operating status of interim remedial actions related to PFAS per site at each installation, including—

“(A) a list of all announced or selected interim remedial actions, and for each such action, the function and role of the action with respect to addressing PFAS at the installation;

“(B) for each action listed, a phase-specific status update, including whether—

“(iii) construction or execution has begun, is in progress, is completed, or is delayed;

“(iv) the action is currently operating, including an assessment of the duration of such action and any performance metrics available;

“(C) identification of actions that are one-time in nature (such as soil removal and disposal), and the status of each action;

“(D) timelines for completion of each phase, including original projected timelines and any updates;

“(E) for any phase delayed by more than one year beyond the original projection, a site-specific explanation for the delay; and

“(F) identification of any administrative, regulatory, funding, or other barriers contributing to delays or budgetary effects, along with the plan of the Secretary to address each such barrier.”.

(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 2716 the following:

(b) Required remediation acceleration strategy.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances remediation acceleration strategy, which shall include—

(1) criteria for prioritizing military installations based on risk to human health, environmental impact, and proximity to affected communities;

(2) timelines for completing each phase of the cleanup process under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.);

(3) a plan for deploying additional resources, technologies, or personnel to reduce delays, including an identification of—

(A) the number of laboratories that are accredited by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program of the Department of Defense to test for PFAS; and

(B) the number of laboratories that are in the process of being so accredited; and

(4) benchmarks for evaluating performance of each military department or defense agency on response efforts relating to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(1) DASHBOARD.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall make publicly available an accessible online dashboard that includes the actions of the Department of Defense relating to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The dashboard required under paragraph (1) shall include a summary of—

(A) site-by-site funding levels and expenditures at each installation of the Department;

(3) UPDATE.—The Secretary shall update the dashboard required under paragraph (1) not less frequently than semiannually.

SEC. 341. Provision of sports foods and third-party certified dietary supplements to members of the United States Special Operations Command.

(a) Use of amounts.—The Secretary of Defense may use amounts 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 members of the United States Special Operations Command (in this section referred to as the “USSOCOM”).

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall authorize the USSOCOM to acquire sports foods and third-party certified dietary supplements and to distribute such foods and supplements to members of the USSOCOM, subject to the requirements under subsection (c).

(B) augment or replace the budget or services of dining facilities of the Department.

(c) Criteria.—The Secretary shall ensure the Commander of the USSOCOM establishes requirements for the procurement and distribution of sports foods and third-party certified dietary supplements under this section and shall require compliance with Department of Defense Instruction 6130.06 (relating to the use of use of dietary supplements in the Department of Defense) and the Prohibited Dietary Supplement Ingredients List of the Department of Defense, or successor similar instruction or list, to ensure that—

(1) dietary supplements procured under this section are certified by a non-Department third-party certifying organization that has been vetted by the Operation Supplement Safety program of the Department for end-product quality assurance, confirming no contaminants, ingredients, substances, or their synonyms prohibited by the Department;

(2) sports foods procured under this section are free of ingredients, substances, and their synonyms prohibited by the Department; and

(3) under the program guidance and oversight of a primary care sports medicine physician, sports foods and third-party certified dietary supplements are acquired by units of the USSOCOM and distributed by credentialed and privileged registered (performance) dietitians or medical clinicians with prescribing authority (such as a medical doctor, doctor of osteopathic medicine, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner) assigned to or supporting the USSOCOM at the operational unit level.

(d) Report.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that assesses the feasibility and advisability of expanding the authority under this section for the procurement and distribution of sports foods and third-party certified dietary supplements to include the military departments.

(1) DIETARY SUPPLEMENT.—The term “dietary supplement” has the meaning given that term in section 201(ff) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321(ff)) and requires nutrition labeling in the form of a “Supplement Facts Panel”.

(A) intended to deliver essential energy (calories) and nutrients at the right time to members of the USSOCOM to ensure critical combat and medical readiness; and

SEC. 342. Limitation on use of funds to establish or expand Space Force Special Operations Component Command.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for Major Force Program 11 for the United States Special Operations Command shall be obligated or expended 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 of the United States Special Operations Command, in consultation with the Chief of Space Operations, jointly submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives the report required by subsection (b).

(b) Report.—The report required under this subsection shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(1) An articulation of the requirement for a Space Force Special Operations Component Command.

(2) A funding profile, across the future-years defense program submitted under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, for the establishment of a Space Force Special Operations Component Command, including a delineation of funds required under Major Force Program 2 and Major Force Program 11.

(3) A timeline and conditions for achieving initial and full operational capability for a Space Force Special Operations Component Command.

(4) An identification of the military, civilian, and contractor personnel required for a Space Force Special Operations Component Command at initial and full operational capability.

(5) An identification of the facilities requirements for a Space Force Special Operations Component Command at initial and full operational capability.

(6) An explanation of how and when the Secretary of Defense and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict have documented approval for the establishment of a Space Force Special Operations Component Command.

(7) An explanation of the administrative and command relationships between a Space Force Special Operations Component Command and the United States Special Operations Command, United States Space Command, and the Space Force.

(8) Any other matters determined relevant by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command.

SEC. 343. Requirements for contracts relating to permanent change of station moving process.

(a) In general.—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 Secretary of Defense shall require that the following oversight mechanisms are included in the final contract agreement:

(1) The prime contractor shall submit to the Secretary a summary document outlining the key terms and conditions of each subcontract agreement related to capacity, performance, and compliance with the contract requirements, which shall include the following:

(A) The guaranteed capacity of each subcontractor (including location, volume, and peak season commitment).

(B) Performance metrics and service level agreements applicable to each subcontractor.

(2) Each subcontractor shall provide to the prime contractor, upon request, certifications and copies of training completion relating to compliance with requirements under the contract.

(3) The prime contractor shall submit to the Secretary regular performance reports on its subcontractors, including metrics related to on-time pickup, on-time delivery, damage claim rates, customer satisfaction, and compliance with contract requirements.

(4) The prime contractor shall submit to the Secretary a subcontractor management plan outlining its processes for selecting, monitoring, and managing subcontractors, including a description of how the prime contractor ensures subcontractor compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and contract requirements.

(5) The prime contractor shall maintain a robust risk management plan that addresses potential disruptions to the subcontractor network, such as financial instability, natural disasters, or labor disputes.

(6) Not less frequently than monthly, the prime contractor shall submit to the Secretary the subcontractor rating system used by the prime contractor, with current scoring results under such system.

(7) The prime contractor shall submit to the Secretary the subcontractor rates for each move under the contract.

(8) The prime contractor shall establish clear escalation procedures for addressing subcontractor performance issues, including steps for resolving disputes, implementing corrective actions, and terminating non-performing subcontractors.

(9) The Federal Government shall be permitted to audit subcontractor records with reasonable notice to the prime contractor.

(10) The contract shall incorporate a fixed-price contract line item number for monthly overhead, separating it from the rates associated with the costs of moves.

(11) The prime contractor shall establish a database that the Secretary can access on a real-time basis to ensure compliance with this section.

(b) Considerations for successor contracts.—For any successor contract to the Global Household Goods Contract entered into after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall consider, during development of an acquisition strategy and execution strategy, in addition to the requirements under subsection (a), the following:

(1) The incorporation of a fixed-price contract line item number for monthly overhead, separating it from the rates associated with the costs of moves.

(2) Contracts under the Federal Acquisition Regulation for lanes that account for more than one percent of total permanent change of station move volume and tender of service contracts for the remaining lanes.

(4) The establishment of a database that the Secretary can access on a real-time basis to ensure compliance with this section.

(c) Incorporation of proposals.—The Secretary may incorporate any proposal of the prime contractor into a final contract negotiated or renegotiated under this section that ensures advertised performance capabilities are met.

SEC. 344. Limitation on transformation by the Army of primary helicopter training program at Fort Rucker, Alabama.

(1) the completion of the Part 141 Helicopter Flight School Training Pilot proof of concept plan conducted by the Department of the Army and the Federal Aviation Administration, including—

(A) all three phases of Initial Entry Rotary Wing Training Phases 1 & 2 and Phase 3 Warfighter Tactical Training Phase; and

(B) the evaluation of the effectiveness of the training pilot, which shall include the results of six classes of eight students each (48 students total) and is scheduled to be completed in May 2026;

(2) the Secretary of the Army (in this section referred to as the “Secretary”) has fully assessed and validated the outcomes of such training pilot, including cost, operational effectiveness, safety, and training efficacy;

(3) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a report detailing the results of such training pilot and the rationale for any proposed changes to training systems or platforms resulting from such training pilot;

(4) an independent assessment of the business case analysis and implementation plan for such transformation has been conducted by the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which shall include—

(A) an analysis of the cost to produce an aviator qualified under Initial Entry Rotary Wing Training Phases 1 & 2 utilizing the current training model and aircraft as well as the cost to produce such an aviator utilizing the helicopter flight school training proof of concept model and aircraft;

(B) an assessment of the risks and benefits of outsourcing Initial Entry Rotary Wing training requirements;

(D) an identification of measures taken to mitigate costs and enhance training within the existing training ecosystem;

(5) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a report containing the results of such assessment and a detailed justification of how the findings from such assessment support proceeding with any such transformation; and

(B) an assessment of the cost-effectiveness and operational and training readiness resulting from the training pilot;

(C) any recommendations for future procurement or contracting activity related to training initiatives similar to the training pilot; and

(D) the course of action proposed by the Secretary relating to any such transformation.

SEC. 345. Conveyance of certain aircraft from Air Force to Arizona Aviation Historical Group, Phoenix, Arizona.

(a) Authority.—The Secretary of the Air Force (in this section referred to as the “Secretary”) may convey to the Arizona Aviation Historical Group, Phoenix, Arizona (in this section referred to as the “Group”), all right, title, and interest of the United States in five T–37B trainer aircraft and any available spare parts for such aircraft that the Secretary has determined are surplus to need.

(b) Conveyance at no cost to the United States.—The conveyance of an aircraft under subsection (a) shall be made at no cost to the United States. Any costs associated with such conveyance, costs of determining compliance with terms of the conveyance, and costs of operation and maintenance of the aircraft conveyed shall be borne by the Group.

SEC. 346. Limitation on use of funds by the Army until submittal of plan to integrate Joint Munitions Command and Army Sustainment Command.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Army for fiscal year 2026 may be used to restructure the commands of the Army until the Secretary submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report regarding the proposed plan of the Secretary to integrate the Joint Munitions Command and the Army Sustainment Command.

(b) Elements.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A detailed comparison of the old organizational structures of the commands of the Army compared with the proposed new integration construct for such organizational structures, including any changes to reporting chains, leadership roles, and workforce.

(3) Any plans for changing the numbers, duty locations, or responsibilities of personnel under the Joint Munitions Command and the Army Sustainment Command.

(5) An assessment of the short-term and long-term impacts of the proposed integration on the readiness of the Army and the Department of Defense to conduct the missions of the Joint Munitions Command and the Army Sustainment Command and the plan of the Army for mitigating those impacts.

SEC. 347. Limitation on use of certain funds of the Air Force until acquisition strategy submitted to maintain Airborne Command Post capability.

(1) options to expand production of the C–130J–30 Super Hercules to provide additional airframes to preserve the Airborne Command Post capability; and

(2) an outline of the future relationship of the Airborne Command Post capability with the Secondary Launch Platform–Airborne effort.

SEC. 348. Pilot program for contracted amphibious air resources for the area of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, may establish and maintain a pilot program for the contracted operation of a fleet of commercial amphibious aviation resources to be made available to the commanders of the combatant commands and the commanders of other components of the Department of Defense for mission tasking within the area of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command.

(b) Fielding and adjudicating mission requests.—The Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command shall establish a process to field and adjudicate mission requests pursuant to the pilot program under subsection (a) in a timely manner.

(c) Sunset.—The authority to carry out the pilot program under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date that is three years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 349. Naming of certain assets of the Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

(a) In general.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall implement the naming recommendations for assets of the Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia that were adopted by the Commission.

(b) Prohibition relating to overriding recommendations.—The Secretary of Defense may not change the name of an asset of the Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia that was adopted by the Commission to any name other than the name that was adopted.

(c) Commission defined.—In this section, the term “Commission” means the commission established under section 370(b) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).

(a) In general.—The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as of September 30, 2026, as follows:

(b) End strength reductions.—The end strengths prescribed by subsection (a) for the Selected Reserve of any reserve component shall be proportionately reduced by—

(1) the total authorized strength of units organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component which are on active duty (other than for training) at the end of the fiscal year; and

(2) the total number of individual members not in units organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component who are on active duty (other than for training or for unsatisfactory participation in training) without their consent at the end of the fiscal year.

(c) End strength increases.—Whenever units or individual members of the Selected Reserve for any reserve component are released from active duty during any fiscal year, the end strength prescribed for such fiscal year for the Selected Reserve of such reserve component shall be increased proportionately by the total authorized strengths of such units and by the total number of such individual members.

(a) In general.—The minimum number of military technicians (dual status) as of the last day of fiscal year 2026 for the reserve components of the Army and the Air Force (notwithstanding section 129 of title 10, United States Code) shall be the following:

(b) Limitation on number of temporary military technicians (dual status).—The number of temporary military technicians (dual status) employed under the authority of subsection (a) may not exceed 25 percent of the total authorized number specified in such subsection.

(c) Limitation.—Under no circumstances may a military technician (dual status) employed under the authority of this section be coerced 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 component. If a military technician (dual status) declines to participate in such realignment or conversion, no further action will 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.

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 for the use of the Armed Forces and other activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for expenses, not otherwise provided for, for military personnel, as specified in the funding table in section 4401.

(b) Construction of authorization.—The authorization of appropriations in the subsection (a) supersedes any other authorization of appropriations (definite or indefinite) for such purpose for fiscal year 2026.

SEC. 501. Statutory adjustment to reflect transfer of certain general officer billets from the Air Force to the Space Force.

(a) Army.—Section 7037 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(f) If the Judge Advocate General is removed from office before the end of the term of the Judge Advocate General as specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall, not later than five days before the removal takes effect, submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives notice that the Judge Advocate General is being removed and a statement of the reason for the removal.”.

(b) Navy.—Section 8088 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(f) If the Judge Advocate General is removed from office before the end of the term of the Judge Advocate General as specified in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall, not later than five days before the removal takes effect, submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives notice that the Judge Advocate General is being removed and a statement of the reason for the removal.”.

(c) Air force.—Section 9037 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(g) If the Judge Advocate General is removed from office before the end of the term of the Judge Advocate General as specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall, not later than five days before the removal takes effect, submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives notice that the Judge Advocate General is being removed and a statement of the reason for the removal.”.

(a) In general.—Section 806 of title 10, United States Code (article 6 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is amended—

(1) by redesignating subsections (a) through (d) as subsections (b) through (e), respectively;

(2) by inserting before subsection (b), as redesignated by paragraph (1), the following new subsection:

“(A) admitted to the practice of law before the highest court of a State, Territory, Commonwealth, or the District of Columbia, and maintain an active license to practice before such court;

“(C) in compliance with such other requirements as the cognizant authority has set to remain eligible to practice law.

“(2) The Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard and the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps may suspend the authority of judge advocates in their respective services to perform legal duties if such officers become noncompliant with the requirements in paragraph (1). Judge advocates and legal officers suspended or disbarred from the practice of law within a jurisdiction shall not perform legal duties.”.

(A) TRIAL COUNSEL AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.—Section 827(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 27(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is amended by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:

“(1) must be a judge advocate who is qualified under section 806(a)(1) of this title (article 6(a)(1)); and”.

(B) SPECIAL TRIAL COUNSEL.—Section 824a(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code (article 24a(b)(1) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is amended by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:

“(A) is a judge advocate who is qualified under section 806(a)(1) of this title (article 6(a)(1)); and”.

SEC. 504. Modification of waiver authority related to joint qualified officer requirement prior to promotion to general or flag grade.

(2) redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively.

SEC. 505. Notification of removal of officers from selection board reports and promotion lists.

(1) SELECTION BOARD REPORTS.—Section 618(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(3) The Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense committees of the removal of the name of an officer from the report of a selection board by the President or the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Defense under paragraph (1) or paragraph (2), respectively, for any reason other than misconduct—

“(B) prior to submission to the Senate of a promotion list with respect to such report pursuant to section 624(c) of this title.”.

(2) PROMOTION LISTS.—Section 629(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: “The President shall notify the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after removing the name of an officer from such list for any reason other than misconduct.”.

(b) Reserve components.—Section 14111(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(B) prior to submission to the Senate of a promotion list with respect to such report pursuant to section 12203 of this title.”.

(a) Distribution of commissioned officers on active service in general officer grades.—Section 525 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting “or the Space Force officer list” after “officer on the active duty list”; and

(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking “officers in the grade of general” and inserting “officers on sustained duty orders in the grade of general”;

(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking “officers in a grade above” and inserting “officers on sustained duty orders in a grade above”; and

(iii) in subparagraph (C), by striking “officers in the grade” and inserting “officers on sustained duty orders in the grade”; and

“(3) The limitations of this section do not apply to a Space Force general officer serving in a Space Force active status but not on sustained duty orders, and who is on active service for a period in excess of 365 days but not to exceed three years. Unless authorized by the Secretary of Defense, the number of Space Force general officers covered by this subsection and not serving in a joint duty assignment for purposes of chapter 38 of this title may not exceed two. Not later than 30 days after authorizing more than two Space Force general officers covered by this subsection, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the notification required in accordance with paragraph (2).”.

(b) Authorized strength of Space Force general officers on active service.—Section 526 of such title is amended—

(A) in the subsection heading, by inserting “and of the Space Force” after “components”;

(B) in paragraph (1), by inserting “or of the Space Force” after “a reserve component”;

“(D) The Secretary of the Air Force may authorize not more than two of the general officers authorized to serve in the Space Force under section 20110 of this title to serve on active service for a period of at least 180 days and not longer than 365 days.”; and

(D) in paragraph (3)(A), by inserting “, or a Space Force general officer in a Space Force active status not on sustained duty,” after “a reserve component”; and

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “officer; or” and inserting “officer;”;

(B) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

“(3) a Space Force officer in the grade of brigadier general or above who is pending transition off of sustained duty orders, but only during the 60-day period preceding the end date of such orders.”.

(c) Strength in grade: Space Force general officers in a Space Force active status not on sustained duty.—Chapter 2003 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“§ 20110. Strength in grade: Space Force general officers in a Space Force active status, not on sustained duty

“(a) Authorized strength.—The authorized strength of general officers in the Space Force serving in a Space Force active status but not on sustained duty is five.

“(b) Exclusions.—The following Space Force general officers shall not be counted for purposes of this section:

“(2) Those serving in a joint duty assignment for purposes of chapter 38 of this title, except that the number of officers who may be excluded under this paragraph may not exceed two.

“(c) Permanent grade.—A Space Force general officer may not be reduced in permanent grade because of a reduction in the number authorized under subsection (a).

“(d) Temporary exclusion.—The limitations of subsection (a) do not apply to an officer released from a joint duty assignment or other non-joint active service assignment, but only during the 60-day period beginning on the date the officer departs the joint duty or other active service assignment. The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to extend the 60-day period by an additional 120 days, except that not more than three Space Force officers may be covered by an extension under this subsection at the same time.”.

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.

SEC. 511. Expansion of authority to waive limitations on release of reserves from active duty within two years of retirement eligibility.

(2) transfer all Navy reserve administrative readiness functions to the responsibility and cognizance of Navy reserve unit commanding officers or Navy reserve community directors, as appropriate; and

(3) reassign each member of an active or reserve component of the Navy assigned to the Navy Reserve Center system as of the date of the enactment of this Act within the active or reserve component of the member or transfer the member to the inactive reserve, as applicable.

(a) Army National Guard.—Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army—

(1) an officer of the Army National Guard who fills a vacancy in a federally recognized unit of the Army National Guard may be transferred from the active Army National Guard to the inactive Army National Guard;

(2) an officer of the Army National Guard transferred to the inactive Army National Guard pursuant to paragraph (1) may be transferred from the inactive Army National Guard to the active Army National Guard to fill a vacancy in a federally recognized unit;

(3) a warrant officer of the Army National Guard who fills a vacancy in a federally recognized unit of the Army National Guard may be transferred from the active Army National Guard to the inactive Army National Guard; and

(4) a warrant officer of the Army National Guard transferred to the inactive Army National Guard pursuant to paragraph (1) may be transferred from the inactive Army National Guard to the active Army National Guard to fill a vacancy in a federally recognized unit.

(b) Air National Guard.—Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force—

(1) an officer of the Air National Guard who fills a vacancy in a federally recognized unit of the Air National Guard may be transferred from the active Air National Guard to the inactive Air National Guard; and

(2) an officer of the Air National Guard transferred to the inactive Air National Guard pursuant to paragraph (1) may be transferred from the inactive Air National Guard to the active Air National Guard to fill a vacancy in a federally recognized unit.

“(c) The Chief of Naval Personnel shall be responsible for overall management, oversight, and administration of Navy military and civilian employees.”.

SEC. 522. Enhanced efficiency and service discretion for Disability Evaluation System reviews.

(a) Secretarial discretion and statements of contention for appeals to physical evaluation board determinations of fitness for duty.—Section 524 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. 1071 note) is amended—

(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary” and inserting “The Secretary”;

(2) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following: “The Secretary concerned may require submission of a statement of contention as part of the appeal submission.”; and

“(2) If the member submits a formal appeal, the Secretary concerned shall conduct a fitness for duty determination consisting of either a records review or an impartial appellate hearing, as determined by the Secretary.”.

(b) Statements of contention for physical evaluation boards.—Section 1214 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “if he demands it.” and inserting “if the member demands it. The Secretary concerned may require submission of a statement of contention as part of the demand.”.

SEC. 523. Technical correction related to convalescent leave for academy cadets and midshipmen.

(1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively;

“(c) Convalescent leave.—An academy cadet or midshipman diagnosed with a medical condition is allowed convalescent leave under section 701(m) of this title.”; and

(3) in subsection (d), as redesignated by paragraph (1), by striking “Sections 701” and inserting “Except as provided under subsection (c), sections 701”.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretaries of the military departments, in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall establish a status identifier or equivalent recognition to denote the combat participation of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) crew members who conduct operations in direct support of combat missions. The identifier shall be designed to enable appropriate consideration by the Department of Veterans Affairs in the administration of benefits and services that account for combat-related service, consistent with how traditional combat designators are treated.

(b) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the Department of Defense to categorize service described in subsection (a) as equivalent to service involving physical presence in a combat zone.

(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish and implement a policy to ensure that registered sex offenders that reside or work on military installations are identified to the respective military community, including, as necessary, through agreements with State and local law enforcement agencies.

(b) Report on designation of Department of Defense as jurisdiction under SORNA.—Not later than one year after 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 a report assessing the advisability and desirability of designating the Department of Defense as a jurisdiction for purposes of notification requirements under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (title I of Public Law 109–248; 42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.).

(a) Quarterly reports required.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the activities, progress, and performance metrics of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO) for the preceding quarter.

(b) Elements.—Each report submitted under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) Updates on the implementation status of ongoing and new SAPRO initiatives, including any reforms mandated by statute, executive order, or internal Department of Defense directive.

(2) Metrics on reported sexual assault cases, broken down by military service and component, including status of case processing and outcomes.

(3) Updates on the staffing, resourcing, and activities of the Office of Special Trial Counsel.

(4) Performance metrics and outcome-based evaluations of prevention programs and training effectiveness.

(5) Progress towards meeting the Department’s goals related to survivor care, victim advocacy, and commander accountability.

(6) Interagency coordination and alignment with civilian best practices or recommendations from external advisory bodies.

(7) Any challenges, shortfalls, or recommendations for legislative or policy changes to improve effectiveness.

(a) United States Military Academy.—Section 7442(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “9 ranked or unranked alternates” and inserting “up to 14 ranked or unranked alternates”.

(b) United States Naval Academy.—Section 8454 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in the section heading, by striking “number” and inserting “appointment; numbers, territorial distribution”; and

(2) in subsection (a), by striking “9 ranked or unranked alternates” and inserting “up to 14 ranked or unranked alternates”.

(c) United States Air Force Academy.—Section 9442(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “9 ranked or unranked alternates” and inserting “up to 14 ranked or unranked alternates”.

SEC. 542. Asynchronous instruction in distance education option for professional military education.

“(a) In general.—There is an Army University. The Army University shall integrate all of the professional military education institutions within the Army into a single educational structure to provide economic policy, governance, and innovation to such institutions.

“(b) Component centers and schools.—Component centers and schools of the Army University include the following:

“(6) Any additional colleges, centers of excellence, and schools that the Secretary of the Army determines appropriate.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing the Department of Defense’s plan to obtain Military Education Level One (MEL–1) credit for the Strategic Thinkers Program (STP).

(A) a detailed assessment of how the STP enhances strategic thought and decision-making among military and civilian leaders;

(C) a plan to identify specific positions in the Department that will best utilize the skills and abilities of future program graduates;

(D) a description of the measures to obtain MEL–1 credit for completing STP, including recommendations on current authorities that could be utilized to grant MEL–1 credit to program graduates;

(E) recommendations for expanding participation among military officers and civilian officials; and

(b) Implementation and oversight.—The Secretary of Defense shall designate an appropriate office within the Department to manage the STP and implement MEL–1 credit for STP completion. The designated office shall provide an annual briefing to the congressional defense committees on the status of awarding MEL–1 credit, program effectiveness, and any legislative or funding adjustments necessary to support continued program success.

SEC. 545. Improvements to information-sharing to support individuals retiring or separating from the Armed Forces.

(a) Opt-out sharing.—Section 570F of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92; 10 U.S.C. 1142 note) is amended—

(A) by striking “out the form to indicate an email address” and inserting the following: “out the form to indicate—

(B) in paragraph (1), as designated by subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”;

“(2) if the individual would like to opt-out of the transmittal of the individual’s information to and through a State veterans agency as described in subsection (a).”; and

“(d) Opt-out of information sharing.—Information on an individual shall be transmitted to and through a State veterans agency as described in subsection (a) unless the individual indicates pursuant to subsection (c)(2) that the individual would like to opt out of such transmittal.”.

(b) Storage and transfer of information.—Such section is further amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into memoranda of understanding or other agreements with the State veterans agencies described in subsection (a) to create or modify a Department system to store and transfer information under this section to information systems of such State veterans agencies.

“(2) COMPLIANCE.—The Secretary shall ensure that any agreement entered into under paragraph (1) is in compliance with—

“(A) applicable provisions of law relating to privacy and personally identifiable information; and

“(B) applicable policies relating to cybersecurity of Department information systems and State information systems.”.

“(f) Limitation on use of information.—Information transferred under this section may only be used by a State for the purpose of providing or connecting veterans to benefits or services as described in subsection (a).”.

(a) Annual training on government ethics and standards of conduct.—The Secretaries of the military departments shall ensure that all members of the Armed Forces in their respective departments are trained annually in government ethics and standards of conduct.

(b) Training on the law of armed conflict and rules of engagement.—The Secretaries of the military departments shall ensure that all members of the Armed Forces in their respective departments are trained on the following topics, including within 90 days of a mobilization or deployment, as applicable:

SEC. 547. Prohibition on consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in service academy admissions decisions.

(a) In general.—The Service Academies may not consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in admissions decisions.

(b) Service Academy defined.—In this section, the term “Service Academy” has the meaning given the term in section 347 of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 548. Prohibition on participation of males in athletic programs or activities at the military service academies that are designated for women or girls.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, and the United States Air Force Academy do not permit a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for women or girls.

(b) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a recipient from permitting males to train or practice with an athletic program or activity that is designated for women or girls so long as no female is deprived of a roster spot on a team or sport, opportunity to participate in a practice or competition, scholarship, admission to an educational institution, or any other benefit that accompanies participating in the athletic program or activity.

(1) the term “athletic programs and activities” includes all programs or activities that are provided conditional upon participation with any athletic team; and

(2) the term “sex” means a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.

(a) Repeal of certain restrictions.—Section 553 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2592), and the amendments made by such section, are repealed.

(1) UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY.—Section 7448(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) in paragraph (2), by inserting “, except as provided under paragraph (5),” after “That”; and

“(5) That, upon graduation, a cadet may seek employment as a professional athlete or Olympic athlete if the cadet is drafted or signs a free agent contract with a professional sports entity, in which case the cadet will incur a five-year service obligation upon employment as a professional or Olympic athlete and will, if no longer employed as a professional or Olympic athlete, return as a regular officer in the active component for a five-year service obligation. If the cadet is ineligible to return to active service, the cadet shall repay the government for the cost of his or her education.”.

(2) UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY.—Section 8459(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) in paragraph (2), by inserting “, except as provided under paragraph (5),” after “That”; and

“(5) That, upon graduation, a midshipman may seek employment as a professional athlete or Olympic athlete if the midshipman is drafted or signs a free agent contract with a professional sports entity, in which case the midshipman will incur a five-year service obligation upon employment as a professional or Olympic athlete and will, if no longer employed as a professional or Olympic athlete, return as a regular officer in the active component for a five-year service obligation. If the midshipman is ineligible to return to active service, the midshipman shall repay the government for the cost of his or her education.”.

(3) UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY.—Section 9448(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) in paragraph (2), by inserting “, except as provided under paragraph (5),” after “That”; and

SEC. 551. Certain assistance to local educational agencies that benefit dependents of military and civilian personnel.

(a) Continuation of authority to assist local educational agencies that benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian employees.—

(1) ASSISTANCE TO SCHOOLS WITH SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF MILITARY DEPENDENT STUDENTS.—Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 by section 301 and available for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities as specified in the funding table in section 4301, $50,000,000 shall be available only for the purpose of providing assistance to local educational agencies under subsection (a) of section 572 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 20 U.S.C. 7703b).

(2) LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “local educational agency” has the meaning given that term in section 7013(9) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7713(9)).

(1) IN GENERAL.—Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 pursuant to section 301 and available for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities as specified in the funding table in section 4301, $10,000,000 shall be available for payments under section 363 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106–398; 114 Stat. 1654A–77; 20 U.S.C. 7703a).

(2) ADDITIONAL AMOUNT.—Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 pursuant to section 301 and available for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities as specified in the funding table in section 4301, $20,000,000 shall be available for use by the Secretary of Defense to make payments to local educational agencies determined by the Secretary to have higher concentrations of military children with severe disabilities.

(3) REPORT.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Secretary shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the Department’s evaluation of each local educational agency with higher concentrations of military children with severe disabilities and subsequent determination of the amounts of impact aid each such agency shall receive.

SEC. 552. Management of special education in schools operated by Department of Defense Education Activity.

(a) Improvements to staffing.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the Department of Defense Education Activity, shall implement the following measures to improve staffing of special education teachers and staff at schools operated by the Activity:

(1) Require the inclusion, in the staffing model for a school, of service minutes required by the individualized education programs of students attending the school to more effectively determine appropriate staffing for the school.

(2) Collect the following data on underutilized special education staff members:

(A) When such staff members are requested to transfer to a school with greater needs for such staff members.

(3) Collect data on the turnover of special education teachers and staff, including reasons for departure.

(4) Review access to and requirements for crisis training, publicize Activity-wide policies with respect to such training for consistency, and expand such training to relevant special education teachers and staff, such as paraeducators, who are not required, as of the date of the enactment of this Act, to receive such training.

(5) Require district and regional administrators to track training requirements for special education teachers and staff to ensure that such teachers and staff are meeting such requirements.

(b) Clarification of guidance.—The Secretary, acting through the Director, shall implement the following measures to improve and clarify guidance relating to special education provided by schools operated by the Department of Defense Education Activity:

(1) Review the list of types of disabilities recognized by the Activity as of the date of the enactment of this Act and determine if that list meets the most recent best practices for special education.

(2) Standardize and implement instructions for providing special education materials to students across schools operated by the Activity.

(3) Develop and implement a plan for standardizing special education training across the Activity.

(4) Standardize reading intervention guidance and requirements across schools operated by the Activity, including by requiring each school and district operated by the Activity to have the same resources and instructions, and provide clear guidance on how to access additional support materials if required.

(1) INITIAL BRIEFING.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Director shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the following:

(A) Coordination by the Department of Defense Education Activity with the Educational and Developmental Intervention Services programs of the military departments to determine what medical services the military departments are required to provide based on the needs of students attending schools operated by the Activity.

(B) A description of the process in effect as of the date of the briefing, if any, to resolve a dispute with respect to required services under a student’s individualized education program.

(D) An assessment of how support instructional specialists can better assist teachers with developing curriculum for special education students.

(E) A description of how the Activity provides services in the case of civilian or military dependents with severe medical or special education requirements that a school cannot meet, including any data on how many such cases arise an annual basis and in what locations.

(F) A description of the process in effect as of the date of the briefing for reassigning a family from a school located outside the United States if the education needs of a child in the family cannot be met at that school and data, for the 5 school years preceding the briefing, on where such reassignments have been done and the frequency of such reassignments.

(G) An assessment of the pay scale for special education teachers and staff in effect as of the date of the briefing, an identification of the last time the pay scale was updated, a description of how the pay scale is determined, and a statement of how often the pay scale is updated.

(H) Data on school and district-level requests for additional reading intervention curriculum, including the locations of such requests and whether such requests were approved or denied.

(2) SEMI-ANNUAL BRIEFINGS.—The Director shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the progress made in implementing the measures described in subsection (a)—

(B) every 180 days thereafter until the Director certifies that each such measure has been implemented.

SEC. 553. Enrollment of children of certain American Red Cross employees in defense dependents' education system.

“(i) are performing, on a full-time basis, services for the Armed Forces, including emergency services; and

“(ii) reside in an overseas area supported by a school of the defense dependents' education system.”.

SEC. 554. Regulations on the use of portable electronic mobile devices in Department of Defense Education Activity schools.

(a) Regulations required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the Department of Defense Education Activity, shall update existing regulations on student use of portable electronic mobile devices in Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) schools to prohibit disruption in the learning environment by minimizing the use of such mobile devices to the greatest extent practicable and to standardize such regulations across all DODEA schools.

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than 60 days after completion of the updated regulations required under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the updated regulations, including—

(1) relevant evidence taken into consideration on the use of portable electronic mobile devices in and around the classroom on learning outcomes and social dynamics;

(2) a description of how the regulations have standardized policies across all DODEA schools;

(3) an assessment of the influence, if any, of public-school policies on mobile devices at school or in the classroom; and

SEC. 555. Administration of college admissions tests by the Department of Defense Education Activity.

(1) 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; and

(2) to provide the parents of each such student with the option for the student to take a college admissions test of the parents' choice, including any test that the Secretary determines to be appropriate.

SEC. 556. Support for expanding early child care options for members of the Armed Forces and their families.

(A) to identify gaps between existing early child care needs and available eligible child care providers;

(B) to use resources of the Department of Defense to support eligible child care providers in recruitment and retention of employees, including through professional development and financial incentives for such employees; and

(C) to seek to enter into an interagency partnership with a Federal agency with the ability to place national service participants and volunteers trained in education services, including senior volunteer programs, at military child development centers in accordance with applicable national service laws and with all the benefits accorded to such participants and volunteers; and

(2) provide training and resource subsidies to eligible child care providers and networks of such providers.

(1) ELIGIBLE CHILD CARE PROVIDER.—The term “eligible child care provider” has the meaning given that term in section 658P of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858n).

(2) MILITARY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER.—The term “military child development center” has the meaning given that term in section 1800 of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 557. Improved counseling and access to information relating to foster care for military families.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall require all counselors assigned to a Family Advocacy Program or Military and Family Life program at a military installation in the United States to be trained in the requirements and resources relating to foster care of the State in which the installation is located.

(2) FOSTER CARE LIAISONS.—A counselor who has received training under paragraph (1) shall be known as a “foster care liaison”.

(b) Inclusion of foster care information on Military OneSource.—The Secretary shall require Military OneSource to include a mechanism for military families to obtain information on foster care, including the requirements and resources relating to foster care of each State.

(c) Consultation with Administration for Children and Families.—The Secretary shall seek guidance from the Administration for Children and Families of the Department of Health and Human Services with respect to obtaining resources relating to foster care for military families, including curricula for training under paragraph (1).

SEC. 558. Pilot program on recruitment and retention of employees for child development programs.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may 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 in improving the ability of such programs to recruit and retain such employees.

(b) Compensation.—If the Secretary implements the pilot program authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide for the payment of compensation to employees of child development programs under the pilot program at a fair and competitive wage that maintains sustainable and high-quality child care conditions.

(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary implements the pilot program authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall select not fewer than three military installations for purposes of carrying out the pilot program.

(2) CONSIDERATIONS.—In selecting military installations under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider military installations with child development programs—

(B) subject to other conditions identified by the Secretary that affect the ability of the programs to operate at full capacity.

(d) Regulations.—The Secretary may prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out this section.

(e) Duration of pilot program.—If the Secretary implements the pilot program authorized by subsection (a), the pilot program shall—

(1) commence on the date on which the Secretary prescribes regulations under subsection (d); and

(2) terminate on the date that is 3 years after the date described in paragraph (1).

(1) INITIAL BRIEFING.—If the Secretary implements the pilot program authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall, when the pilot program commences in accordance with subsection (e)(1), brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on—

(A) the military installations selected under subsection (c) for purposes of carrying out the pilot program;

(2) FINAL BRIEFING.—If the Secretary implements the pilot program authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary shall, not later than 180 days before the pilot program terminates in accordance with subsection (e)(2), brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the outcomes and findings of the pilot program, including—

(A) data collected and analyses conducted under the pilot program with respect to the relationship between increased compensation for employees of child development programs and improved recruitment or retention of those employees; and

(B) any recommendations with respect to increases in compensation or other benefits for employees of child development programs across the Department of Defense as a result of the pilot program.

(g) Child development program defined.—In this section, the term “child development program” means a program to provide child care services for children, between birth through 12 years of age, of members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of the Department of Defense.

SEC. 559. Report on unmet need for child care in areas with significant populations of members of the Armed Forces.

(a) In general.—Not later than September 30, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the unmet need for child care in areas with populations of members of the Armed Forces that includes—

(A) the unmet need for each military installation, specifically those families who have no childcare at all;

(B) the military families on the waitlist for a child development center on an installation who may be using a family childcare home or fee assistance until they can get off of the waitlist; and

(2) a review of the efforts of the Department of Defense to recruit and retain eligible child care providers; and

(b) Appropriate committees of congress defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—

(a) In general.—The Secretary of each military department shall provide to 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.

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than September 1, 2026, the Secretary of each military department shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the following:

(1) A plan for implementing the requirement to provide access to legal services described in subsection (a).

(3) Data on the number of members of the Armed Forces with guardianship of incapacitated adult dependents or a plan to gather such data.

SEC. 572. Temporary authority to provide bonuses to Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps instructors.

(a) In general.—The Secretary concerned may pay to a member or former member of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary a one-time bonus of not more than $10,000 if the member or former member—

(1) agrees to be an instructor for the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps under section 2031(d) of title 10, United States Code; and

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until the termination date described in subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense shall brief the congressional defense committees on—

(2) the effectiveness of bonuses provided under subsection (a) on increasing the number of instructors for the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.

(c) Termination.—The authority provided by subsection (a) terminates on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(d) Secretary concerned defined.—In this section, the term “Secretary concerned” has the meaning given that term in section 101 of title 10, United States Code.

“(a) In general.—Section 2031 of title 10, United States Code, is amended, in the first subsection designated subsection (i), by striking ‘support not fewer than 3,400, and not more than 4,000, units’ and inserting ‘support not fewer than 3,600, and not more than 4,200, units’.”.

(i) by striking “the Secretary may make an honorary promotion (whether or not posthumous) of a former” and inserting “the Secretary of a military department is authorized to make an honorary promotion, including a posthumous honorary promotion, for a former”; and

(ii) by striking “if the Secretary determines that the promotion is merited”; and

“(2) The honorary grade given to a member described in paragraph (1) shall be commensurate with such member’s contributions to the armed forces or the national defense.

“(3) The authority shall not be used to award an honorary promotion solely on the basis that an individual described in paragraph (1) was recommended for such promotion prior to separating from service.

“(4) The Secretaries of the military departments are only authorized to make an honorary promotion under paragraph (1) upon receipt of a favorable recommendation by a board of at least three independent officers convened specifically for the purpose of reviewing the proposed honorary promotion.”;

(2) in subsection (b), by striking “The Secretary” and inserting “The Secretaries of the military departments”; and

(3) in subsection (c), by striking “Secretary” and inserting “Secretaries of the military departments”.

(a) Designation.—Chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) Designation.—The last full week of September is the National Week of Military Recruitment.

“(b) Proclamation.—The President is requested to issue each year a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe the National Week of Military Recruitment with appropriate ceremonies and activities.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 148 the following new item:

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.

“(4) EFFECT OF COURSE GRADUATION.—The Secretary concerned may exclude from the population to be considered for purposes of determining the percentage limitations imposed by section 520(a) of title 10, United States Code, any enlisted person who has graduated from a future servicemember preparatory course established pursuant to this section with a score on the Armed Forces Qualification Test that is at or above the thirty-first percentile, provided that—

“(A) the Armed Forces Qualifications Test score that is at or above the thirty-first percentile is obtained within the same fiscal year in which the individual was originally enlisted to serve on active duty; and

“(B) such score is obtained during the period the individual was originally enlisted to serve on active duty, as determined by the Secretary concerned.”; and

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (6) as paragraphs (3) through (8), respectively;

(B) by inserting before paragraph (3), as redesignated by subparagraph (A), the following new paragraphs:

“(1) Percentage of nonprior service enlisted accessions scoring below the thirty-first percentile on the Armed Forces Qualification Test upon original enlistment.

“(2) Percentage of nonprior service enlisted accessions scoring below the thirty-first percentile on the Armed Forces Qualification Test following graduation from the preparatory course or subsequent reclassification, as applicable.”; and

(2) in clause (ii), by striking “provide to military recruiters access to” and inserting “facilitate upon request made by military recruiters for military recruiting purposes not fewer than four in-person recruitment events per academic year, across different grading periods, which may include”; and

(a) Policy compliance.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 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; 5 U.S.C. 5701 note) and related implementing guidance, regarding the prompt deactivation and closure of government-issued travel charge card accounts upon the separation, retirement, or termination of military or civilian personnel.

(b) Comptroller review.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report describing—

(1) actions taken to verify consistent implementation of deactivation and closure policies for government-issued travel charge cards across the military departments and defense agencies;

(2) any gaps or inconsistencies identified in the execution of current policy; and

(3) recommendations, if any, to improve compliance, oversight, or prevention of unauthorized card use following personnel separation.

SEC. 601. Modifications to calculation of basic allowance for subsistence for enlisted members.

“(1) (A) The monthly rate of basic allowance for subsistence to be in effect for an enlisted member for a year (beginning on January 1 of that year) shall be—

“(i) except as provided by clause (ii), equal to the monthly cost of a liberal food plan for a male in the United States who is between 19 and 50 years of age, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture each October 1; and

“(ii) in the case of such a member who is subject to monthly deduction from pay for meals under section 1011(b) of this title, the amount computed under clause (i) reduced by the amount of such deduction from pay, in accordance with policies prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.

“(B) The monthly rate of basic allowance for subsistence to be in effect for an enlisted member for a year under subparagraph (A)(i) may not decrease relative to the rate in effect for the preceding year.”; and

(2) in subsection (d), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “subsection (b)(1)” and inserting “subsection (b)(1)(A)(i)”.

(a) In general.—Chapter 19 of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each pay statement issued to a member of the Armed Forces includes, for each type of pay, allowance, and deduction listed on the statement, a brief and plain-language description of—

“(1) the statutory or regulatory authority under which the pay, allowance, or deduction is made;

“(3) the criteria for determining eligibility of the member for the pay, allowance, or deduction; and

“(4) possible changes in the eligibility of the member for the pay, allowance, or deduction, including the circumstances under which the pay, allowance, or deduction may be suspended, expire, or modified.

“(b) Requirements.—The descriptions required to be included on a pay statement under paragraph (1) shall be—

“(2) presented in language easily understood by individuals without specialized knowledge of military finance, accounting, or law.”.

(b) Applicability.—The requirements of section 1016 of title 37, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to pay statements issued on or after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 603. Increased awareness and improved calculation of rates for basic allowance for housing.

(a) Increasing awareness.—The Secretary of Defense shall seek to improve transparency of the calculation of the basic allowance for housing under section 403 of title 37, United States Code, by—

(1) developing a clear, accessible document that explains how rates of the basic allowance for housing are determined, including methodology and types of data sources used, which shall be—

(A) reviewed and updated not less frequently than annually and as rates and calculation methods change; and

(B) made available on a publicly accessible internet website and distributed across all relevant components of the Department of Defense; and

(2) providing to members of the Armed Forces when such members experience a permanent change of station, permanent change of assignment, change in dependency status, change in grade, or any other event that may impact their eligibility for or rate of basic allowance for housing—

(B) an explanation of the type of rental housing the rate of basic allowance for housing received by such members is intended to support in each locality.

(b) Development of alternative methodology.—Consistent with the recommendations of the 14th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation issued under section 1008(b) of title 37, United States Code, the Secretary shall—

(1) develop a methodology to compute rates of the basic allowance for housing using an approach based on the number of bedrooms in a housing unit and incorporating available and verified occupied rental market data;

(2) conduct a pilot program using the methodology developed under paragraph (1); and

(3) using that methodology, set notional rates for the basic allowance for housing for 2026 and 2027 for a minimum of 10 military housing areas.

(c) Briefing required.—Not later than February 1, 2027, the Secretary shall provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that includes—

(1) a comparison of the notional rates set under subsection (b)(3) with the actual rates for basic allowance for housing for 2026 and 2027;

(A) the methodology used as of the date of the enactment of this Act for setting rates for the basic allowance for housing; and

(B) using the methodology developed under subsection (b)(1) for setting such rates;

(3) a determination of whether the methodology developed under subsection (b)(1) is more or less likely than the methodology described in paragraph (2)(A) to ensure that rates for the 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 cost estimate for 2027 under both the methodology described in paragraph (2)(A) and the methodology developed under subsection (b)(1);

(5) an identification of any additional legislative authority required to fully implement the methodology developed under subsection (b)(1); and

(6) the recommendation of the Secretary with respect to whether to implement the use of the methodology developed under subsection (b)(1) and the timing for such implementation.

(a) In general.—Consistent with the recommendations of the 14th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation issued under section 1008(b) of title 37, United States Code, and not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall commence a 12-month educational campaign to improve the understanding and awareness of members of the Armed Forces and their families with respect to the major components of monetary and nonmonetary military compensation.

(b) Elements.—At a minimum, the campaign required by subsection (a) shall address—

(1) the elements of regular military compensation (RMC), as defined in section 101(25) of title 37, United States Code;

(5) health care for members of the Armed Forces serving in active components and their families; and

(a) Initial review.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall—

(1) commence a review of each area designated under section 351(a)(3) of title 37, United States Code, to determine whether the area is one in which a member of the uniformed services is subject to imminent danger of physical injury due to threat conditions; and

(2) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the review, including any changes to designations under that section that result from the review.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 1, 2031, and every 5 years thereafter, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall conduct a review described in subsection (a)(1).

(2) REPORTS REQUIRED.—Not later than 60 days after completing a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the review, including any changes to designations under that section that result from the review.

(c) Reports on designation changes between reports.—If, at any time between the submission of reports required by subsections (a)(2) and (b)(2), the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department conducts a review of areas designated under section 351(a)(3) of title 37, United States Code, 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.

“(B) AVIATION INCENTIVE PAY EVALUATION.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary shall complete the evaluation required by subparagraph (A) with respect to aviation incentive pay under section 334 of title 37, United States Code. In conducting that evaluation, the Secretary shall make a specific determination with respect to the percentage of such aviation incentive pay, if any, that is paid specifically to maintain skill certification or proficiency under section 357 of title 37, United States Code.

“(C) SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAY FRAMEWORK.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a detailed report on the special and incentive pay assessment framework, required by the Senate report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31), that includes the Secretary’s plan and timeline for implementing such framework.”; and

“(3) INITIATION OF PAYMENTS.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary concerned shall begin making aviation incentive payments under section 357 of title 37, United States Code, pursuant to the determination made under paragraph (2)(B).”.

SEC. 613. Pilot program on improving retention of members with degrees in their fields of specialty.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program to assess the feasibility and advisability of paying incentive pay to certain enlisted members of the Armed Forces with degrees in their fields of specialty to improve the retention of such members.

(b) Payment of incentive pay.—Under the pilot program required by subsection (a), the Secretary concerned may pay monthly incentive pay to a member of the Armed Forces who—

(3) has a degree in the member's field of specialty, as determined by the Secretary concerned; and

(c) Termination.—The pilot program required by subsection (a) shall terminate on the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(d) Report required.—After the termination under subsection (c) of the pilot program required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the effectiveness of the pilot program in retaining highly qualified members that includes an assessment of—

(e) Secretary concerned defined.—In this section, the term “Secretary concerned” has the meaning given that term in section 101 of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 621. Extension of enhanced authority for selective early retirement and early discharges.

SEC. 623. Extension of authority to provide voluntary separation pay and benefits.

SEC. 624. Designation of United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll as remote and isolated military installation.

(a) Designation.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the Commander of the United States Army Pacific, shall designate United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll as a remote and isolated military installation.

(b) Notification.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the designation described in subsection (a) is completed, the Secretary of the Army shall submit a notification to the congressional defense committees confirming completion of the designation.

(c) Briefing required.—Not later than 90 days after the date on which the Secretary of the Army submits the notification described in subsection (b), the Commander of the United States Army Pacific shall brief the congressional defense committees on adjustments to Department of Defense resourcing for and support to United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll as a result of the designation described in subsection (a).

(d) Definition.—In this section, the term “remote and isolated military installation” means a military installation determined to be remote and isolated pursuant to the criteria 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.

“(C) The Secretary concerned may, subject to the applicable requirements of this section, enter into contracts to provide counseling under this paragraph with individuals and organizations that provide counseling with respect to housing, including—

“(i) organizations that are certified under section 106(e) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701x(e)); and

“(ii) other individuals and organizations the Secretary concerned determines are qualified to provide helpful, unbiased counseling with respect to housing.”; and

(2) in subsection (f)(3), by striking “and mortgages” and inserting “mortgages, and other financial products related to the purchase or lease of a primary residence (and information on fees related to such products)”.

SEC. 627. Program to provide Government-funded transportation for certain members of the Armed Forces stationed overseas.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program to provide Government-funded transportation for unaccompanied members of the Armed Forces from designated overseas locations to the members' homes of record, or to other locations of comparable or lesser cost, in accordance with this section.

(b) Eligibility.—Transportation under this section may be provided to a member of the Armed Forces who—

(1) is assigned to an overseas duty location designated by the Secretary for purposes of this section;

(2) is serving an unaccompanied tour of at least 24 consecutive months at such location, including any authorized extensions; and

(3) is otherwise eligible in accordance with implementing regulations prescribed by the Secretary.

(c) Transportation mode.—Transportation under this section may be provided using military air in accordance with established space-available policies or through commercial air travel, as determined appropriate by the Secretary.

(d) Limitations.—The Secretary may prescribe limitations on the number of authorized trips per overseas tour, and may restrict travel during certain periods at the beginning or end of such tours.

(e) Implementation.—The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to implement this section, including the designation of eligible overseas duty locations and specified destinations.

(f) Additional limitations.—Transportation provided under this section shall be subject to applicable restrictions, including compliance with the Department of Defense Foreign Clearance Guide, and limitations on the use of Government travel cards for any leisure-related expenses.

SEC. 628. Prohibition on procurement and commissary sales of seafood originating or processed in the People's Republic of China.

(a) Prohibition on procurement of seafood originating or processed in the People's Republic of China for military dining facilities.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by paragraph (2) or (3), the Secretary of Defense may not enter into a contract for the procurement of seafood that originates or is processed in the People’s Republic of China for use in military dining facilities, including galleys onboard United States naval vessels.

(A) UNDUE BURDEN.—The Secretary of Defense, or a designee of the Secretary, may grant exceptions to the prohibition under paragraph (1) to facilities on military installations located outside of the United States if such prohibition would unduly burden or prevent seafood from being served at such facility.

(B) UNITED STATES VESSELS VISITING FOREIGN PORTS.—The Secretary of Defense, or a designee of the Secretary, may grant exceptions to the prohibition under paragraph (1) to United States vessels visiting foreign ports.

(3) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition under paragraph (1).

(b) Prohibition on sales of seafood originating in the people’s republic of china at commissary stores.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 2484 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(l) Prohibition on sales of seafood originating in the People’s Republic of China.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by paragraph (2), raw or processed seafood or seafood products originating in the People’s Republic of China may not be sold at commissary stores.

“(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition under paragraph (1).”.

“(E) an assessment of compliance with the prohibition under section 2484(l) of this title; and”.

(A) APPLICABILITY.—The prohibition under subsection (l) of section 2484 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall apply on and after the date that is 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(B) DISPOSAL OF REMAINING STOCK.—The Director of the Defense Commissary Agency may determine how to dispose of any stock covered by the prohibition under subsection (l) of section 2484 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), that remains as of the date described in subparagraph (A).

(c) Effective date.—The prohibitions under this section, and the amendments made by this section, shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 701. Inclusion of additional requirements in notifications to modify scope of services provided at military medical treatment facilities.

(2) by striking “the extent” and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting “the following:”; and

“(A) An endorsement from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the proposed modification will have no effect on operational requirements of the armed forces.

“(B) An endorsement from the Surgeon General of the military department concerned that the proposed modification will have no effect on the training or readiness of military medical personnel in the military department concerned.

“(C) 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.

SEC. 703. Assessment of behavioral health and social health conditions of military personnel and their families assigned to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Director of the Defense Health Agency, shall assess the behavioral health and social health conditions of members of the Air Force assigned to Creech Air Force Base, Nevada, and their families related to such assignment.

(b) Tools used.—In carrying out the assessment required under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Air Force shall use tools such as site assistance visits, behavioral health epidemiological consultations, and community-wide assessments.

(1) establish the behavioral health and social health outcomes that impact individual, family, and unit readiness at Creech Air Force Base;

(2) identify factors, to include unique social and occupational stressors, affecting the behavioral health and social health of members of the Air Force and their families stationed at Creech Air Force Base; and

(3) make recommendations to address those factors and to improve the health and readiness of members of the Air Force and their families stationed at Creech Air Force Base, and in doing so, advancing the readiness of the Air Force.

(d) Briefing.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of the Air Force shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the methods used to conduct the assessment required under subsection (a) and on the findings and recommendations of the assessment.

SEC. 704. Authority to provide sexual assault medical forensic examinations on a nonreimbursable basis to certain otherwise ineligible individuals.

(a) Authority To provide forensic examinations.—The Secretary of Defense, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary, shall authorize medical personnel of the Department of Defense to provide sexual assault medical forensic examinations, in a military medical treatment facility on a nonreimbursable basis, to an individual who—

(2) reports a sexual assault offense for which the Defense Criminal Investigative Service may initiate an investigation; and

(3) is eligible for a forensic examination in accordance with those regulations.

(b) Additional elements.—The regulations prescribed under subsection (a) may provide for the handling, storage, and transfer to law enforcement of a completed sexual assault medical forensic examination kit.

SEC. 705. Fertility treatment for certain members of the uniformed services and dependents.

(a) Fertility treatment.—Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1074o the following new section:

“§ 1074p. Fertility treatment for certain active duty members of the uniformed services and their dependents

“(a) Coverage.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure 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.

“(b) In vitro fertilization.—In the case of in vitro fertilization treatment furnished to an individual pursuant to subsection (a), coverage under such subsection shall include—

“(2) unlimited embryo transfers provided in accordance with the guidelines of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, using single embryo transfer when recommended and medically appropriate.

“(1) The term ‘infertility’ means a disease, condition, or status characterized by—

“(A) the failure to establish a pregnancy or to carry a pregnancy to live birth after regular, unprotected sexual intercourse in accordance with the guidelines of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine;

“(B) the inability of an individual to reproduce without medical intervention either as a single individual or with the partner of the individual; or

“(C) the findings of a licensed physician based on the medical, sexual, and reproductive history, age, physical findings, or diagnostic testing of the individual.

“(A) In vitro fertilization or other treatments or procedures in which human oocytes, embryos, or sperm are handled when clinically appropriate.

“(E) Artificial insemination, including intravaginal insemination, intracervical insemination, and intrauterine insemination.

“(I) Such other information, referrals, treatments, procedures, testing, medications, laboratory services, technologies, and services facilitating reproduction as determined appropriate by the Secretary of Defense.”.

(b) Program on fertility treatment coordination.—Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program on the coordination of fertility-related care by the Secretary for purposes of ensuring patients receive timely fertility-related care.

“(b) Training and support.—In carrying out the program established under subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide to community health care providers training and support with respect to the unique needs of members of the uniformed services and the dependents of such members.

“(c) Fertility-Related care defined.—In this section, the term ‘fertility-related care’ has the meaning given that term in section 1074p(c) of this title.”.

(c) Conforming amendment.—Section 1079(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(21) Fertility-related care shall be provided in accordance with section 1074p of this title.”.

(d) Exclusion from contracts for former members and their dependents.—Section 1086 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in subsection (c), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “subsection (d)” and inserting “subsections (d) and (j)”; and

“(j) A plan contracted for under subsection (a) may not include coverage for services under section 1074p of this title for former members of the uniformed services or dependents of former members of the uniformed services.”.

(e) Regulations.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations or subregulatory guidance regarding the implementation of the amendments made by this section.

(f) Application.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to services provided on or after October 1, 2027.

(g) Rules of construction.—Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section shall be construed—

(1) to provide new benefits to or alter existing benefits for former members of the uniformed services or the dependents of former members of the uniformed services; or

(2) to authorize the Secretary of Defense to make payments related to human cloning, artificial womb technology, or international surrogacy.

(a) In general.—Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1093 the following new section:

“(a) Restriction on use of funds.—Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform or facilitate sex change surgeries.

“(b) Restriction on use of facilities.—No military medical treatment facility or other facility of the Department of Defense may be used to perform or facilitate a sex change surgery.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1093 the following new item:

(1) by redesignating subsections (a) through (j) as subsections (b) through (k), respectively;

(2) by inserting before subsection (b), as redesignated by paragraph (1), the following:

“(a) Director of the Defense Health Agency.— (1) There is in the Defense Health Agency a Director.

“(A) be a military officer and hold a rank that is the same or greater than the rank of any officer serving as the Surgeon General of a military department under section 7036, 8031, or 9036 of this title; and

“(B) be a joint qualified officer in accordance with section 661 of this title.”;

(A) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “, by not later than September 30, 2021”;

(B) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “, commencing when the Director begins to exercise responsibilities under that paragraph,”; and

(4) in subsection (f), as so redesignated, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “Not later than September 30, 2024, and subject to subsection (f)” and inserting “Subject to subsection (g)”;

(5) in subsection (g), as so redesignated, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “subsection (e)” and inserting “subsection (f)”; and

(6) in subsection (h), as so redesignated, by striking “subsection (e)(1)” and inserting “subsection (f)(1)”.

(b) Conforming amendment.—Section 1091a(b)(2) of such title is amended by striking “section 1073c(i)” and inserting “section 1073c(k)”.

SEC. 712. Establishment of policies for priority assignment of medical personnel of Department of Defense.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish policies for the priority assignment of medical personnel of the Department of Defense.

(b) Application to military departments.—The Secretary of each military department shall assign medical personnel within that military department consistent with the policies established under subsection (a) and in coordination with the Director of the Defense Health Agency.

(1) IN GENERAL.—If, in the judgment of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department fails to comply with the assignment priorities established under subsection (a), the Secretary may authorize the Director of the Defense Health Agency to reassign medical personnel of that military department in accordance with the policies established under subsection (a).

(2) BRIEFING.—Not later than 90 days after the effective date of any reassignment under paragraph (1), the Director of the Defense Health Agency shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on such reassignment.

(a) Demonstration program required.—Notwithstanding section 1104 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall seek to establish a demonstration program to expand partnerships between covered medical facilities of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

(b) Purpose.—The purpose of the demonstration program under subsection (a) is to increase case volume for graduate medical education programs of the Department of Defense.

(c) Parameters.—In seeking to establish a demonstration program under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall make efforts to ensure the following:

(1) Credentialing and privileging of medical personnel as necessary to work in any covered medical facility.

(2) Expedited access to installations of the Department of Defense for the purpose of providing medical care under the demonstration program to non-Department of Defense beneficiaries.

(3) Inclusion of “in-kind” or non-cash payment or reimbursement for expenses incurred under the demonstration program.

(d) Annual briefing.—Not later than December 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on the implementation of this section.

(e) Covered medical facility defined.—In this section, the term “covered medical facility” means—

(1) a medical facility of the Department of Defense with a certified graduate medical education program; and

SEC. 714. Modification of administration of medical malpractice claims by members of the uniformed services.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “subsection (h)” and inserting “subsection (i)”;

(2) in subsection (b)(6), by striking “subsection (h)” and inserting “subsection (i)”;

(3) in subsection (d)(1), by striking “subsection (h)” and inserting “subsection (i)”;

(4) by re-designating subsections (g) through (k) as subsections (h) through (l), respectively; and

“(g) Appeals.— (1) Any appeal from the denial of a claim under this section shall be considered by a third-party review board jointly established by the Judge Advocates General of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

“(2) The third-party review board established under paragraph (1) shall consist of not more than five members, all of whom possess sufficient legal or medical background, or both.

“(3) A claimant under this section that seeks an appeal under paragraph (1) may submit the appeal directly to the third-party review board established under such paragraph.

“(4) In considering an appeal from the denial of a claim under this section, the third-party review board established under paragraph (1) shall, at the request of the claimant, allow for a hearing on the merits of the appeal in an adversarial nature.

“(5) The Secretary of Defense shall provide to a claimant seeking an appeal under paragraph (1) a copy of any response to the appeal that is submitted on behalf of the Department of Defense.

“(6) The third-party review board established under paragraph (1) shall not consist of any member of the uniformed services or civilian employee of the Department of Defense.”.

(b) Appointment of members.—Not later than 180 days after the effective date described in subsection (d), the Judge Advocates General of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force shall jointly appoint members to the board established under subsection (g)(1) of section 2733a of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(5).

(c) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the establishment of the board required under subsection (g)(1) of section 2733a of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(5), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report indicating—

(3) a statement indicating the independence of each member of the board from the Department of Defense.

(d) Effective date.—This section, and the amendments made by this section, shall take effect on the date that is 10 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 715. Improvement of transition of medics in the Armed Forces to the civilian workforce in health care occupations.

(a) Recommendations required.—The Secretary concerned, in consultation with each of the States (through the Defense-State Liaison Office of the Department of Defense), the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of Labor, shall develop recommendations to improve the transition of medics under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned into the civilian workforce in health care occupations, including as certified nurse aides, licensed practical nurses, or medical assistants.

(b) Considerations.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary concerned shall—

(A) to improving the ability of the Secretary concerned to determine and communicate how the military credentials and experience of a medic separating from the Armed Forces translate to credentialed civilian employment in health care occupations;

(B) that exist to the standardization among the Armed Forces of military medic credentials and experience and the alignment of such credentials and experience to credentialed civilian employment in health care occupations;

(C) that exist to ensuring members of the Armed Forces with military medic credentials and experience have earned the equivalent civilian credential prior to separation from the Armed Forces in addition to receiving their military credentials;

(D) to the increased establishment and uptake of accelerated or bridge programs to assist separating members of the Armed Forces in translating military credentials and experience into civilian health care credentials and employment;

(E) to increasing the availability and accessibility of preparatory activities under the SkillBridge program established under section 1143(e) of title 10, United States Code, in the health care sector for members of the Armed Forces preparing for separation, to include—

(i) the approval timeline for separating members to participate in SkillBridge programs in the health care sector; and

(F) to providing information on civilian health care credentials and employment under the Transition Assistance Program to medics separating from the Armed Forces, including information on State-by-State licensing and credentialing; and

(A) clarification by States through legislation, actions of State licensing boards, or actions of State credentialing boards of the civilian equivalents of certain military credentials and experience in health care;

(B) implementation, including through State-provided incentives, of accelerated programs to bridge military medic credentials and experience with civilian health care credentials and licenses;

(D) requiring the military departments to align military health care credentials with civilian equivalents; and

(E) requiring the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Labor to track and report the number of separated members of the Armed Forces with health care-related military credentials and experience who continue in the civilian health care sector, including the type of employment they pursue.

(c) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall submit to the relevant committees of Congress a report containing—

(1) MEDIC.—The term “medic” means a member of the Armed Forces acting in a clinical health care-related occupation while serving in the Armed Forces.

(2) RELEVANT COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.—The term “relevant committees of Congress” means—

(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the Senate; and

(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the House of Representatives.

(A) the Secretary of Defense, with respect to matters concerning the Department of Defense; and

(B) the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to matters concerning the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Department of the Navy.

(4) STATE.—The term “State” means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands that have a Defense-State Liaison Office.

(5) TRANSITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.—The term “Transition Assistance Program” means the program of the Department of Defense for pre-separation counseling, employment assistance, and other transitional services provided under sections 1142 and 1144 of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 716. Improvement of provider directory accuracy for specialty care providers under the TRICARE program.

(a) In general.—By not later than five years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Defense Health Agency (in this section referred to as the “Director”) shall 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.

(b) Measurement of accuracy.—Average accuracy under subsection (a) shall be measured biannually and shall be disaggregated by provider type for each specialty care provider group.

(c) Inclusion in contracts.—The Director shall ensure that each managed care contract under the TRICARE program includes requirements that the managed care contractor comply with the accuracy requirement under subsection (a), including by requiring each such contractor to—

(1) conduct comprehensive outreach campaigns, to include electronic and non-electronic means, and mass email campaigns to network providers providing—

(A) information relating to T–5 Contract penalties associated with inaccurate provider directory information;

(2) make it a condition of joining the TRICARE network managed by such contractor for providers to validate their provider directory information not less frequently than quarterly;

(3) ensure that when providers file for reimbursement, such providers are prompted to review and verify their directory accuracy; and

(4) create a mechanism by which beneficiaries under the TRICARE program can report provider directory inaccuracy to the contractor.

(d) Other methods.—The Director shall carry out any other methods that the Director finds useful for the improvement of provider directory accuracy.

(e) Testing of directory information.—Not less frequently than quarterly, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall conduct random tests, encompassing all specialty care provider types, of the accuracy of information relating to specialty care providers contained in the provider directory under the TRICARE program.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Director shall submit a report and provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on progress towards reaching the average accuracy target required under subsection (a).

(2) ELEMENTS.—Each report under paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(A) A description of the techniques that are most effective in improving accuracy of provider directories.

(B) An identification of the authorities or tools that the Defense Health Agency lacks for improving such accuracy.

(D) An assessment of the impact of efforts of the Defense Health Agency towards improving such accuracy on providers either leaving the TRICARE program or on the willingness of non-network providers to join the TRICARE program.

(g) Comptroller General review.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United States shall—

(1) conduct a holistic review of provider directory accuracy under the TRICARE program to measure the progress of the Director towards meeting the requirement under subsection (a); and

SEC. 717. Review of disclosure requirements under processes and forms relating to health care provider credentialing and privileging of Department of Defense.

(a) Review.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall review all processes and forms relating to health care provider credentialing and privileging of covered applicants to—

(1) identify questions, required disclosures, or other information required to be provided by the applicant that asks or requires the applicant to disclose mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related health conditions of the applicant, including requirements contained in—

(A) applications for credentialing, peer reference, or competency assessment; and

(B) employee manuals, guidance, and policies of the Department of Defense governing the requirements for credentialing, privileging, or employment of health care providers;

(2) review and compare credentialing, peer reference, and competency assessment forms for health care providers across the military departments and the Defense Health Agency, including a review of—

(A) which forms require disclosure of mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related health conditions; and

(B) whether such disclosure of mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related health conditions include past and current diagnoses and treatment.

(b) Report.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing the following:

(2) A detailed plan outlining steps the Secretary has taken or will take, including a timeline for completion of such steps, to update the processes and forms reviewed under such subsection to refrain from requiring disclosures of mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related health conditions when there is no current impairment, including an identification of the steps the Secretary will take to engage advocates outside the Department of Defense who have subject matter expertise.

(c) Covered applicant defined.—In this section, the term “covered applicant” means an applicant for a position as a health care provider who—

(A) at a military medical treatment facility or other clinic of the Department of Defense; or

(B) through the civilian network of the TRICARE program (as defined in section 1072 of title 10, United States Code).

(a) Plan.—Not later than 90 days after the date on which the President submits a budget for fiscal year 2027 to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of each military department, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive, strategic infectious disease medical research plan (referred to in this section as the “Plan”).

(1) all infectious disease medical research conducted by the Department of Defense, including the coordination process, to ensure that such research is linked to—

(C) relevance to individuals eligible for care at military medical treatment facilities or through the TRICARE program (as defined in section 1072(7) of title 10, United States Code);

(2) the infectious disease research projects funded under the Defense Health Program Account under section 1100 of title 10, United States Code, including projects under—

(A) the Congressional Directed Medical Research Program of the Department of Defense;

(3) the process for ensuring synergy across the military medical research community—

(D) to leverage and modernize the existing medical research and development infrastructure of the Department of Defense; and

(4) the efforts of the Secretary to coordinate with other Federal departments and agencies to increase awareness of complementary infectious disease research efforts that are being carried out by the Federal Government.

(c) Budget display information.—The Secretary shall submit to the President, in conjunction with the materials of the Department of Defense supporting the fiscal year 2027 budget request submitted to Congress by the President pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, and annually thereafter in conjunction with each subsequent budget request through fiscal year 2032, a detailed budget for carrying out the Plan that includes—

(1) the resources necessary for infectious disease medical research to carry out the activities described in subsection (b) for the applicable fiscal year and the 4 following fiscal years, disaggregated by the activities described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (b);

(A) amounts displayed by account, budget activity, line number, line item, and line item title; and

(A) amounts displayed by account, budget activity, line number, program element, and program element title; and

(A) amounts displayed by account title, budget activity title, line number, and subactivity group title; and

(A) amounts displayed by account, budget activity, budget subactivity, and budget subactivity title; and

(6) with respect to each project under military construction accounts, the country, location, project title, and project amount by fiscal year;

(A) amounts displayed by account title, budget activity title, line number, and subactivity group title; and

(9) with respect to the amounts described in each of paragraphs (2)(A), (3)(A), (4)(A), (5)(A), (6), (7)(A), and (8)(A) for a fiscal year—

(i) the amount requested in the budget of the President for such fiscal year; and

(ii) the amount projected in the previously submitted budget request of the President for such fiscal year;

(B) a detailed summary of the amounts obligated for the Plan during the most recently concluded fiscal year; and

(i) the amounts obligated for the Plan during the most recently concluded fiscal year; and

(ii) the amounts requested for the Plan in the budget of the President for the applicable fiscal year.

SEC. 722. Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense–Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund.

SEC. 723. Pilot program on wastewater surveillance system of Department of Defense.

(a) Pilot program required.—Commencing not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall carry out a pilot program under which the Secretary shall develop and implement a comprehensive wastewater surveillance system at not fewer than four installations of a military department at which the Secretary seeks to improve the testing, identification, and analysis of usage of covered drugs and to identify the prevalence of infectious diseases among members of the Armed Forces at the installation (in this section referred to as the “pilot program”).

(b) Technologies and data system used.—In carrying out the pilot program, the Secretary shall ensure the system developed and implemented under subsection (a) is comprised of appropriate technologies and a uniform data system across the Department of Defense.

(1) at least one wastewater surveillance system for monitoring of use of covered drugs at one installation; and

(2) at least one wastewater surveillance system for monitoring of infectious diseases at one installation.

(d) Duration.—The pilot program shall be carried out during a two-year period beginning on the date of the commencement of the pilot program.

(e) Report.—Not later than 90 days after the termination of the pilot program, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the following:

(1) A summary of the findings from the wastewater surveillance system under the pilot program.

(2) Recommendations for interventions or policy changes based on trends observed under the pilot program.

(3) An assessment of the effectiveness of the pilot program in enhancing force health protection and readiness.

(1) except as provided in paragraph (2), means a drug included on schedule I or schedule II established under section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and

(B) was previously approved under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355); and

SEC. 801. Transition of program executive officer role to portfolio acquisition executive.

(a) Definition.—Section 1737(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:

“(4) The term ‘portfolio acquisition executive’ refers to the member of the acquisition workforce responsible for the overall management of requirements, programming, and acquisition of defense acquisition capabilities. These capabilities are assigned by the service acquisition executive or component acquisition executive. The portfolio acquisition executive has direct control over all necessary officials and functional support, including the ability to provide input into performance evaluations, to the maximum extent practicable. This authority provides them with all necessary authority to develop, procure, and sustain military capabilities. For purposes of managing requirements, the portfolio acquisition executive is subject to the authority, direction, and control of the chief of the military service, while remaining under the overall authority, direction, and control of the service acquisition executive or component acquisition executive. The Secretary of Defense shall ensure a minimum of non-statutory guidance and approvals issued by officials external to the portfolio acquisition executives.”.

(b) Critical acquisition positions.—Section 1731(a)(1)(B)(i) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “Program executive officer” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”.

(1) in the subsection heading, by striking “Program executive officers” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(2) by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(d) Government performance of certain acquisition functions.—Section 1706(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking “Program executive officer” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking “Deputy program executive officer” and inserting “Deputy portfolio acquisition executive”.

(e) Duties related to cadre of intellectual property experts.—Section 1707(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(f) Portfolio acquisition executive office .—Section 1509 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 10 U.S.C. 167b) is amended—

(1) by striking “program executive office” each place that it appears and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive office”; and

(2) in subsection (c), by striking “program executive office” in the subsection heading and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive office”.

(g) Technology release and foreign disclosure reform initiative.—Section 918(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 301 note) is amended by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(h) Software development and software acquisition training and management programs.—Section 862 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92; 10 U.S.C. 1741 note) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by striking “program executive officers” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executives”; and

(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(B) by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(i) Authority to establish different minimum requirements.—Section 1764(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “Program executive officer” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”.

(j) Prizes for advanced technology achievements.—Section 4025(g)(2)(C) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “program executive officer” both places it appears and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(k) Rating chains for system program managers.—Section 323 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 1696) is amended by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

(l) Space system acquisition and the adaptive acquisition framework.—Section 807 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 9081 note) is amended—

(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking “Program executive officer” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(B) by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking “Program executive officer” and inserting “Portfolio acquisition executive”; and

(B) by striking “program executive officer” and inserting “portfolio acquisition executive”.

Chapter 221 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of each military department shall establish a capstone requirement approach for three or more portfolio acquisition executives for which that official has responsibility to enable greater speed, agility, and innovation in fielding military capabilities. Each such capstone requirement shall be established in consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight Council.

“(b) Elements.—Under the capstone requirements for an acquisition portfolio, the Secretary of the military department shall—

“(1) develop a general set of requirements for the acquisition portfolio in accordance with subsection (c) under which programs or projects may be initiated;

“(2) authorize the portfolio acquisition executive or similar portfolio manager for the portfolio to change the scope and requirements for programs within the portfolio, subject to subsection (d);

“(3) assign representatives of operational forces to the acquisition portfolio and authorize them to perform the functions specified in subsection (e);

“(4) maximize commercial market research, the use of commercial and nondevelopmental items, and minimum viable products to shape capability scope and requirements;

“(5) authorize the portfolio acquisition executive or similar portfolio manager to resource and acquire commercial or non-developmental items under the capstone requirement by validating the need with the representatives assigned under paragraph (3);

“(6) manage information technology requirements using dynamically prioritized lists of user needs rather than large static requirements documents; and

“(7) iteratively define, prioritize, and refine requirements at the portfolio, program, and iteration levels based on user input, previous deliveries, and continuous commercial market research.

“(c) Capstone set of requirements.—The capstone set of requirements for an acquisition portfolio developed under subsection (b)(1) shall be designed—

“(1) to guide the iterative delivery of an integrated suite of capabilities to maximize operational impact;

“(2) to provide enduring themes based on strategic needs and relevant concepts of operation, not system-specific;

“(3) to include measures of force effectiveness for a force mix of capabilities to be measured against; and

“(4) to include kill chains, effects chains, vignettes of operational scenarios, the effect of timely delivery of capability, and related mission engineering initiatives across the Department of Defense.

“(d) Authority to revise programs within a portfolio.—The authority under subsection (b)(2)—

“(1) shall be carried out in consultation with operational commands and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council; and

“(2) does not include authority to change key performance parameters for a major defense acquisition program.

“(e) Functions of operational representatives.—An operational representative assigned to an acquisition portfolio under subsection (b)(3) shall be provided authority—

“(2) to provide the acquisition community and developers insights into operations;

“(4) to validate the suitability of existing commercial or non-developmental items, or the likelihood that the commercial market may be enticed to produce those items, or, as a last resort, validate that no commercial vendor will ever produce a suitable product and a developmental program is necessary;

“(5) to foster collaboration among the acquisition community, developers, and users of the capability to be fielded; and

“(6) to provide advice to the portfolio acquisition executive or similar portfolio manager.”.

(1) in subsection (b), by striking “the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program,” and inserting “the portfolio acquisition executive, or the decision authority, when the decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department or the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment,”;

(i) by striking “the Under Secretary, or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program,” and inserting “the portfolio acquisition executive, or the decision authority, when the decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department or the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment,”;

“(A) the strategy clearly describes the proposed business case and capability management approach for the program or system, and to the maximum extent practicable, describes how a portfolio of capabilities within an enduring set of requirements will be developed, procured, and fielded rather than detailing a specific end-item;”; and

(iii) in subparagraph (B), by striking “how the strategy is designed to be implemented with available resources, such as time, funding, and management capacity” and inserting “the resources, such as time, funding, and management capacity required to deliver the capability”; and

“(A) An approach that delivers required capabilities in increments, each depending on available mature technology, and that recognizes up front the need for future capability improvements or transitions to alternative end-items through use of continuous competition.

“(B) Requirements related to logistics, maintenance, and sustainment in accordance with sections 2464 and 2466 of this title, and the acquisition of technical data, computer software, and associated licenses, to enable such requirements in accordance with sections 3771 through 3775 of this title.

“(C) A process for collaborative interaction and market research with the science and technology community, including Department of Defense science and technology reinvention laboratories, government innovation cells, academia, small businesses, nontraditional defense contractors, and other contractors.

“(D) Identification of enterprise-wide designs and standards in support of an architecture that provides for an integrated suite of capabilities that focuses on simplicity of implementation and speed of delivery.

“(E) Overarching roadmaps that create integrated strategic schedules of legacy systems and new capabilities and a mapping of enduring requirements to elements of the portfolio of capabilities.

“(F) A contracting strategy that develops long-term partnerships with multiple companies to actively contribute to architectures, development, production, and sustainment across the portfolio of capabilities by decomposing large systems into smaller sets of projects across time and technical component.

“(G) An assignment of roles and responsibilities to the acquisition workforce within the portfolio acquisition executive, identification of external stakeholder dependencies, and the need for subject matter expert inputs at critical points in the program, including the need for special hiring authority or advisory and assistance services.

“(H) A process of testing and experimentation with the test community and end users to ensure continuous user feedback, acceptance, and development of concepts of operations.”; and

“(d) Review.—The decision authority shall review and approve, as appropriate, the acquisition strategy for a major defense acquisition program or major system prior to the acquisition decision memorandum and ensure that the strategy is updated at regular intervals to incorporate significant changes to program requirements, resourcing, or acquisition decisions.

“(e) Decision authority defined.—In this section, the term ‘decision authority’, with respect to a major defense acquisition program or major system, means the official within the Department of Defense designated with the overall responsibility and authority for acquisition decisions for the program or system, including authority to approve entry of the program or system into the next phase of the acquisition process.”.

(a) In general.—Section 4401 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

“(1) The term ‘authorized third party’ means an entity approved by the Department of Defense to access developer resources for integration or sustainment.

“(2) The term ‘industry standards’ means widely adopted technical standards or protocols from recognized organizations.

“(3) The term ‘machine-readable format’ means a format that can be easily processed by a computer without human intervention.

“(A) means a high-level subsystem or assembly, including hardware, software, or an integrated assembly of both, that can be mounted or installed on a major system platform through modular system interfaces; and

“(B) includes a subsystem or assembly that is likely to have additional capability requirements, is likely to change because of evolving technology or threat, is needed for interoperability, facilitates incremental deployment of capabilities, or is expected to be replaced by another major system component.

“(5) The term ‘major system platform’ means the highest level structure of a system that is not physically mounted or installed onto a higher level structure and on which a major system component can be physically mounted or installed.

“(6) The term ‘modular open systems approach (MOSA)’ means a system design approach using modular systems, enabling innovation and competition in the development, sustainment, or upgrade of weapon systems.

“(7) The term ‘modular system’ refers to a weapon system or weapon system component that—

“(A) is able to execute independently without relying on the execution of other specific systems or components;

“(B) can communicate across component boundaries and through modular system interfaces; and

“(C) functions as a module that can be separated, recombined, and connected with other weapon systems or weapon systems components in order to achieve various effects, missions, or capabilities.

“(8) The term ‘modular systems interfaces’ means a shared boundary between modular systems, defined by various physical, logical, and functional characteristics, such as electrical, mechanical, fluidic, optical, radio frequency, data, networking, or software elements, that is free of proprietary restrictions and documented via a machine-readable format, including—

“(A) software-defined interface syntax and properties, specifically governing how values are validly passed to and received;

“(B) definition of the relationship between the delivered interface and interfaces available in the repositories established pursuant to section 4403 of this title; and

“(C) test cases, including example code, demonstrating the proper use of the modular systems interface.

“(9) The term ‘operational data’ means government-owned data generated by or necessary for system operation, maintenance, or enhancement.”.

(b) Requirements.—Section 4402 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking subsections (a) through (f) and inserting the following:

“(a) Program compliance and MOSA implementation.— (1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that every major defense acquisition program (as defined in section 4201 of this title) submits a modular open systems approach (MOSA) implementation plan within its acquisition strategy, detailing compliance with this section. Other defense acquisition programs shall incorporate MOSA to the maximum extent practicable.

“(2) In the case of a major defense acquisition program that uses a modular open system approach, the acquisition strategy required under section 4211 of this title shall—

“(A) clearly describe the modular open system approach to be used for the program;

“(B) differentiate between the major system platform and major system components being developed under the program, as well as major system components developed outside the program that will be integrated into the major defense acquisition program;

“(C) clearly describe the evolution of major system components that are anticipated to be added, removed, or replaced in subsequent increments;

“(D) clearly describe security classification requirements for each major system component as related to the modular system interface for that component;

“(E) clearly describe how intellectual property and related issues, such as technical data deliverables, that are necessary to support a modular open system approach, will be addressed; and

“(F) clearly describe the approach to systems integration and systems-level configuration management to ensure mission and information assurance.

“(3) Contracts for covered programs shall include enforceable clauses requiring delivery of data rights consistent with sections 3771 through 3775 of this title and modular systems interfaces as specified in subsection (c).

“(b) Waivers and exceptions.—The Secretary of Defense may waive specific MOSA requirements, or deviate from the requirements in subsection (c), for a program only if—

“(1) deviation would demonstrably impair national security or operational capability; and

“(2) a detailed justification is submitted to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after issuing the waiver.

“(c) MOSA requirements.— (1) All covered programs shall require the use of modular systems, including—

“(A) modular systems interfaces published to the repositories established pursuant to section 4403 of this title;

“(B) delivery of sufficient data rights to share developer resources with authorized third parties for government purposes, as determined by the Secretary of Defense;

“(C) allowing for the use of existing industry standards for interfaces where applicable;

“(D) government ownership of operational data in a usable, nonproprietary format, extractable without original equipment manufacturer dependency; and

“(E) system designs allowing integration of new or substitute modules with minimal manual reconfiguration, provided they conform to relevant modular systems interfaces published to the repositories.

“(2) The Secretary of Defense, secretaries of military departments, and commanders of combatant commands with acquisition authorities shall not—

“(A) unless required for operational compatibility with existing legacy systems, mandate specific internal technical implementations, data structures, defense specific standards, or formats beyond the necessity that there are modular systems with modular systems interfaces published to the relevant repository; or

“(B) permit contracts restricting government control over developer resources or operational data, or locking the government into a single vendor, absent a national security exemption.

“(3) Contractors providing modular systems shall upload required modular systems interface data to an appropriate repository. Contract closeout shall not occur until such uploads are verified by the contracting officer.

“(d) Implementation and flexibility.— (1) Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall issue regulations and guidance to implement this section across military departments, Defense agencies, and combatant commands.

“(2) The requirements of this section shall not apply to programs with approved acquisition strategies at the time of the date of the enactment of this subsection.

“(3) Requirements shall not prescribe specific technologies or limit contractor innovation, provided interface documentation obligations are met, nor exclude new entrants or small businesses capable of compliance.

“(4) Requirements shall not force the use of industry or consensus-based standards except as necessary to interface with existing systems using such standards.”.

(c) Repositories and interface access.—Section 4403 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the following new paragraphs:

“(1) establish a federated set of digital repositories within the Department of Defense to store modular systems interfaces required under subsection (c) of section 4402 of this title, which shall—

“(B) enable contractors to publish and manage their contributions (at approved access levels) with accountability and version control;

“(C) be searchable and accessible to authorized Department of Defense components and contractors based on access levels; and

“(D) incorporate cybersecurity measures consistent with Department of Defense standards;

“(2) ensure distribution of interfaces to promote interoperability, consistent with the requirements of section 3771 of this title, by—

“(A) providing access to interfaces and relevant documentation in the repository established in paragraph (1) to authorized Federal Government and nongovernmental entities; and

“(B) restricting nongovernmental entities that receive access under subparagraph (A) from further release, disclosure, or use such data except as authorized;”.

(a) Authority.—The Secretary of Defense shall issue guidance to establish an alternative test and evaluation (T&E) pathway for certain Department of Defense acquisition programs to enhance agility, accelerate delivery of capabilities, and ensure data-driven decisionmaking, while maintaining independent oversight of evaluation outcomes.

(b) Alternative test and evaluation pathway.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish an alternative test and evaluation pathway for covered programs that includes the following requirements:

(1) For each covered program, the military department concerned, through its service test activities, shall—

(A) design and execute a unified test and evaluation strategy that aligns developmental testing (DT) and operational testing (OT) to a single set of test objectives that build system understanding throughout the test program to more effectively support capability delivery within rapid prototyping and iterative updates with early and continuous operational feedback;

(B) develop and execute a test data strategy, updated as needed, that includes—

(i) collection of raw data from system components during test events and operational activities, including submission of industry derived data from their development and testing evolutions;

(ii) evaluation criteria to assess the mission effects and suitability of the system based on the data to be collected, including from live-fire test events, if applicable;

(iv) provision of resources for automated data collection, storage, and access; and

(v) automated analytics tools to assess performance trends, reliability, and maintenance needs;

(ii) continuous data collection from prototypes and fielded systems to refine designs and update lifecycle costs;

(iii) test subsystem prototypes throughout system development to assess their contribution to the mission effect of the fielded system; and

(iv) integration of supporting or complementary data from digital twins or other model-based systems engineering tools;

(D) define general test and evaluation objectives and data needs while allowing detailed execution plans to evolve based on test results and emerging requirements, avoiding rigid milestone-driven schedules; and

(E) ensure all raw test data and associated analytics are owned by the government, stored in accessible repositories, and available to authorized Department entities, including the Director of Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), throughout the program lifecycle.

(A) the requirement to develop and submit a Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) under Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02 or other policies, provided a unified test and evaluation strategy and data strategy under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) are implemented;

(B) milestone-specific operational test events, such as Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E), mandated under section 4171 of title 10, United States Code, or related regulations; and

(C) any other test and evaluation documentation or approval processes that the Secretary determines are inconsistent with the agile and iterative nature of this pathway.

(c) Role of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.—For covered programs under the alternative test and evaluation pathway designated for oversight by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall—

(1) provide independent evaluation of test data across all phases of the program lifecycle, including—

(A) assessing the sufficiency of the program’s test and evaluation strategy and data strategy to demonstrate military effectiveness;

(B) evaluating whether the program collects and analyzes sufficient raw data, learns from test results at a pace relevant to operational needs, and converges on military effectiveness based on data trends;

(C) identifying deficiencies in test and evaluation strategies that risk system performance, suitability, or survivability; and

(2) have unrestricted access to all raw test data, data repositories, and analytics maintained by military departments for covered programs;

(A) specific test plans, execution methods, or documentation formats or require pre-approval of test and evaluation activities as a condition of testing, data collection, or evaluation; or

(B) Director of Operational Test and Evaluation-approved Test and Evaluation Master Plans or other pre-execution documentation under existing policies; and

(4) include in its annual report to Congress under section 139(h) of title 10, United States Code, a summary of the adequacy of data strategies, rates of learning, and risks that aligns with the evaluation processes established in this section.

(d) Guidance required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments and the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, shall issue guidance to implement the alternative test and evaluation pathway, including standards for data strategies and modern testing practices and procedures to support evaluation by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation under subsection (c)(2).

(e) Report.—Not later than three years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the implementation of this section, including an assessment of the effectiveness of the pathway in accelerating capability delivery and improving system performance and any recommendations for expanding or modifying the pathway.

(f) Covered program defined.—In this section, the term “covered program” means a defense acquisition program that is—

(1) designated under the Software Acquisition Pathway pursuant to section 3603 of title 10, United States Code, initiated on or after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(2) designated by the Secretary of Defense on or after the issuance of guidance under subsection (d).

The Department of Defense representative on the Cost Accounting Standards Board pursuant to section 1501 of title 41, United States Code, shall be the Director of Defense Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition Policy or its successor organization.

(a) Authority.—Each commander of a combatant command shall have 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.

(b) Procedures.—For activities carried out under subsection (a), the commander of a combatant command may use—

(1) operation and maintenance funds, including for the purchase of items having an investment item unit cost not greater than the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) guidance regarding threshold for determination of expense and investment costs; and

(2) special contracting authorities described in section 843 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 3601 note), provided that the procedures described in such section are followed.

(c) Recommendation for follow-on production.—Upon completion of an experiment, prototype, or technology demonstration, if a combatant command submits a written determination that the demonstrated technology or capability successfully meets the operational need of the combatant command, the written determination may be used to fulfill the following requirements:

(1) A justification for using other than competitive procedures under section 3204 of title 10, United States Code, or follow-on production authorities under section 4022 of such title, to acquire the technology or capability which was successfully demonstrated.

(1) by striking “means an entity that is not currently performing” and inserting the following: “means an entity that—

(2) by striking “such section.” and inserting the following: “such section; or

“(2) does not qualify as a covered segment as defined under the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 231.205–18 or successor regulation.”.

(a) Financing costs.—Financing costs incurred for a covered activity shall be allowable and allocable as a direct or an indirect overhead cost for contracts and subcontracts of the Department of Defense, provided such costs are—

(1) reasonable in amount and consistent with prevailing market rates for similar financing; and

(1) The term “covered activity” means an activity taken by a prime contractor or subcontractor—

(A) to manage an inventory of completed products or components used in production;

(B) to improve inventory management of products or components necessary for sustainment or maintenance;

(2) The term “financing costs” means interest on borrowings, bond discounts, and costs of financing and refinancing capital.

(3) The term “financing entity” means any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, trust, or other organization that is created under Federal or State law and that, as part of its regular business activities, extends credit, loans, or other forms of financing to other persons or entities, provided that such legal entity is not owned by, controlled by, or under common control with the person or entity receiving such financing.

Nontraditional defense contractors, as defined by section 3014 of title 10, United States Code, shall not be subject to any of the following requirements:

(1) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.242–7006, or successor regulation.

(2) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.234–7002, or successor regulation.

(3) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.215–7002, or successor regulation.

(4) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.242–7004, or successor regulation.

(5) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.245–7003, or successor regulation.

(6) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.244–7001, or successor regulation.

(7) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.242–7005, or successor regulation.

(8) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 215.407, or successor regulation.

“(2) The requirement under paragraph (1) may be waived or modified with a written determination approved by the head of contracting activity, delegable to no lower than the senior contracting official. The written determination shall include a justification for why commercial procedures should be waived or modified, such as tailored market research demonstrating that potential suppliers could not effectively provide the required product or services under commercial procedures.”;

“(c) Preference inapplicable.—The authority under subsection (a)(1) shall not be construed to give preference to the purchase of a product or service pursuant to section 3453 of this title solely on the basis that such offered product or service is deemed commercial as a result of the exercise of such authority.”.

(1) in subsection (b), by striking “procurement officials in that agency,” and inserting “acquisition officials in that agency, including consultants, researchers, and any individuals providing advisory services to acquisition officials,”;

(2) in subsection (c), by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5) as paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively;

“(3) The head of an agency shall establish a process for determinations regarding the non-availability of commercial products or services, including that—

“(A) a defense unique-development product or service may not be procured until the head of the agency determines that the market research conducted in accordance with paragraph (2) of this section resulted in no commercial product, commercial service, or nondevelopmental item suitable to meet the agency's needs; and

“(B) prior to acquiring a defense-unique development product or service, a program manager shall, consistent with the policies and regulations of the Department of Defense, submit a written memorandum summarizing why a defense-development unique product is required based on results of the determination in subparagraph (A), which shall be signed by the program executive officer.”; and

“(f) Definition.—The term ‘defense-unique development’ means a Department of Defense financed product or service to provide a defense-unique capability that does not repurpose a commercial product, commercial service, or nondevelopmental item.”.

(b) Determinations.—Section 3456 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

“(2) assist military departments and Defense Agencies with performing market research and satisfying the requirements under section 3453 of this title pertaining to market research and the determination regarding the non-availability of commercial products or services and analysis used to determine the reasonableness of price for the purposes of procurements by the Department of Defense.”; and

(2) in subsection (b)(2), by inserting after the first sentence the following: “The contracting officer should consider the results summarized in the memorandum issued by the program manager in accordance with the requirement in section 3453(c)(3)(B) of this title when issuing the written commercial or noncommercial determination.”.

“(a) Authority.—The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments may acquire commercial products, commercial services, and nondevelopmental items through a competitive selection of proposals resulting from a general solicitation and the peer review, technical review, or operational review (as appropriate) of such proposals, and may issue, without further justification, follow-on contract awards or agreements, including sole source awards or agreements, to the recipient.”;

(3) by redesignating subsection (c) and (d) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively;

“(c) Sole-source follow-on.—The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments may issue follow-on contract awards or agreements, including sole source awards, for any products, services, or items acquired through the competitive procedures described under subsection (a) subject to approval requirements in sections 3204 or 4022 of this title.”.

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.

(1) in subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii), by striking “at least 30 days before” and inserting “at the time”; and

“(j) Authority to award a production transaction to rapidly field an existing capability.—A production transaction may be awarded, with or without the use of competitive procedures, to acquire emergent and proven technologies and field production quantities of new or upgraded systems that do not require additional development and have been demonstrated in a relevant environment when the appropriate service or component acquisition executive determines in writing that exceptional circumstances justify the use of such a transaction to address a high priority warfighter need. The Secretary of Defense shall provide the written determination to the congressional defense committees at the time such authority is exercised.”.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “ordnance, signal, chemical activity, transportation, energy, medical, space flight, telecommunications, and aeronautical supplies, including parts and accessories, and designs thereof,” and inserting “demonstrations, prototypes, products, supplies, parts, accessories, auxiliary services, and design for defense-related articles”; and

Chapter 253 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) Authority.—The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments may acquire technology-supported capabilities through consumption-based solutions.

“(b) Guidance required.—The Secretary of Defense shall amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement to implement the authority under subsection (a), including creating a new subcategory of services under part 237 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement , entitled ‘Consumption-based solutions’ that—

“(1) is any combination of hardware, equipment, software, labor, or services that together provides a seamless capability;

“(4) requires the awardee to notify the Department of Defense contracting officer when consumption under the contract reaches 75 percent and 90 percent of the funded amount, respectively, of the contract; and

“(5) treats modifications to a contract entered into under the authority established in subsection (a) to add new features or capabilities in an amount less than or equal to 25 percent of the total value of such contract, as originally awarded, as competitive procurements under chapter 221 of this title.

“(c) Funding.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated for acquisitions using the authority under subsection (a)—

“(2) may be used to enter into incrementally funded contracts or other agreements, including advanced payments.

“(d) Consumption-based solution defined.—In this section, the term ‘consumption-based solution’ means a model under which a technology-supported capability is provided to the Department of Defense and may utilize any combination of software, hardware or equipment, data, and labor or services that provides a capability that is metered and billed based on actual usage at fixed price units.

“(e) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the use of the authority created under this section in combination with another contract type provided for under the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement.”.

Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 4651 note prec.) is amended—

(A) by striking “not less than 50 percent” and inserting “majority”; and

(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking “operates” and inserting “has fossil fuel business operations”;

(2) in subsection (b)(3), by inserting ", including by general license," after “Department of the Treasury”; and

(i) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) as clauses (iii) and (iv), respectively; and

“(ii) 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 this section;” and

(B) in paragraph (3), by inserting “that has fossil fuel business operations” after “person”.

Section 3452 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking subsections (b) through (e) and inserting the following new subsections:

“(b) Applicability of defense-unique statutes to contracts for commercial products and commercial services.—The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement shall include a list of defense-unique contract clause requirements based on statute, executive orders, or acquisition policies that are applicable to contracts for the procurement of commercial products and commercial services entered into by the Department of Defense.

“(c) Applicability of defense-unique statutes to subcontracts for commercial products and commercial services.— (1) The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement shall include a list of defense-unique contract clause requirements based on statute, executive orders, or acquisition policies that are applicable to subcontracts for the procurement of commercial products and commercial services.

“(A) the term ‘other supply agreements’ means any agreement entered into by a contractor or subcontractor for the supply of products, materials, or services that are intended for use in the performance of multiple contracts with the Department of Defense or other parties and are not identifiable to any particular contract; and

“(i) includes a transfer of commercial products and commercial services between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of a contractor or subcontractor; and

“(3) This subsection does not authorize the waiver of the applicability of any provision of law or contract clause requirement with respect to any first-tier subcontract under a contract with a prime contractor reselling or distributing commercial products and commercial services of another contractor without adding value.

“(d) Applicability of defense-unique statutes to contracts for commercially available, off-the-shelf items.—The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement shall include a list of defense-unique contract clause requirements based on statute, executive orders, or acquisition policies that are applicable to subcontracts for the procurement of commercially available off-the-shelf items entered into by the Department of Defense.”.

Chapter 247 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“§ 3459. Limitation on required flowdown of contract clauses to subcontractors providing commercial products or commercial services

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may not require that a clause be included in a subcontract for the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services other than a clause required by a provision of law that is on the lists required by section 3452 of this title or unless otherwise applicable pursuant to subsection (e) of such section.

“(b) Applicability to other supply agreements.—The Secretary of Defense shall not require the flowdown of any contract clauses to other supply agreements unless otherwise applicable pursuant to subsection (e) of section 3452 of this title.

“(c) Definitions.—In this section, the terms ‘other supply agreement’ and ‘subcontract’ have the meanings provided in subsection (c)(2) of section 3452 of this title.”.

It shall be the policy of the Department of Defense that references to Department of Defense policy documents, instructions, and manuals in contracts shall contain a specific version or date. If the version or date of a policy document, instruction, or manual is not referenced, the contractor will comply with the version of the document in effect at the time the solicitation is issued. Updated versions of referenced policy documents, instructions, and manuals shall not apply unless mutually agreed.

(a) Consideration of risk of loss.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that due consideration is given to a contractor for equitable adjustments resulting from the loss of work in process on a covered contract.

(b) Limitations.—Considerations limiting the contractor’s assumption of the risk of loss in subsection (a) shall not apply to loss caused by the willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of any of the contractor’s directors or officers, managers, superintendents, or other equivalent representatives.

(1) COVERED CONTRACT.—The term “covered contract” means any classified, fixed-price type contract, entered into with the Department of Defense on or after the date of the enactment of this section where, due to the classified nature of the underlying program—

(A) the contractor cannot get a third-party commercial insurance provider to insure the work in process; or

(B) the third-party commercial insurance provider cannot process the contractor’s claim.

(2) LACK OF GOOD FAITH.—The term “lack of good faith” has the meaning given the term in section 252.228–7001 of the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or any successor regulation.

(3) WILLFUL MISCONDUCT.—The term “willful misconduct” has the meaning given the term in section 252.228–7001 of the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or any successor regulation.

(A) means an item at any stage of production or manufacture at any time from the initiation of contract performance until delivery to and acceptance by the government; and

(B) specifically includes a “covered aircraft” as that term is defined in section 252.228–7001 of the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or any successor regulation.

(d) Conforming regulations.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation to conform with the changes made by this section.

(a) Reporting of increases above specified prices.—Chapter 271 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) In general.—An offeror shall be required to report to the relevant contracting officer not later than 30 days after becoming aware that the price of a product or service under a covered contract reaches or exceeds—

“(1) 25 percent above the price specified in the contract bid or the government paid for that product or service the previous calendar year; or

“(2) 50 percent above the price paid for such a product or service 5 years earlier.

“(b) Covered contract defined.—In this section, the term ‘covered contract’ means a cost-reimbursement contract awarded without competition under section 3204 of this title and as defined under section 6.302 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.”.

(b) Inclusion of noncompliance information in FAPIIS.—Chapter 271 of title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a), is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“§ 3710. Inclusion of noncompliance information in Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System

“The Director of the Defense Contract Audit Agency or the relevant service acquisition executive shall report in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) housed within the System for Award Management the following information:

“(1) Contractors who fail to report price increases as required under 3705(a)(2) of this title.

“(2) Updated findings from audits conducted by the Agency regarding noncompliance with the requirement.

“(3) With respect to unreported product or service price increases, the product or service’s National Stock Number, order quantity, unit cost, total cost, purchasing or reimbursing entity, and date of the order.”.

(a) In general.—Chapter 363 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) Requirement to deliver instructions.— (1) The Secretary of Defense (referred to in this section as the ‘Secretary’) may not enter into a contract or agreement for the procurement, sustainment, or subsequent modifications of covered defense equipment unless the contract or agreement requires that the contractor deliver, or offer as a negotiated price option, Instructions for Continued Operational Readiness (‘ICOR’) to the Secretary upon delivery of the equipment.

“(2) The Secretary may grant an exception to paragraph (1) if the product support strategy and associated business case analysis for the covered defense equipment indicates that the Government does not have a justified need for ICOR, consistent, when applicable, with section 3771 of this title.

“(3) The contractor shall deliver the ICOR to the Department of Defense (referred to in this section as the ‘Department’) and provide the Secretary with the rights to diagnose, maintain, and repair the covered defense equipment.

“(4) The Secretary shall withhold payment to the contractor under the contract or agreement until the Secretary accepts the ICOR as complete under subsection (c)(2).

“(5) When ICOR are required to be delivered under a contract or agreement, the Secretary shall ensure that updated ICOR data is required as necessary in subsequent contracts or agreements or included as priced options to reflect modifications in data deliverables.

“(b) Contents of Instructions for Continued Operational Readiness.—A contractor for covered defense equipment shall include in the ICOR, at a minimum, data that is necessary for operations, maintenance, installation, and training, form fit, and function data, and any additional data required for operational readiness, which may include—

“(1) recommended methods, techniques, inspections, processes, procedures, maintenance manuals, service bulletins, diagnostic procedures, proprietary systems, special tooling, special testing procedures, and equipment necessary to maintain, repair, and sustain the covered defense equipment in a condition for safe and effective operation, including diagnostic protocols, troubleshooting guides, and overhaul instructions, consistent with the maintenance practices of the contractor or those of the authorized maintenance providers of the contractor;

“(2) an operational limitations section (‘OLS’) that includes mandatory schedules for replacement of life-limited components, inspection intervals, and other sustainment requirements critical to equipment reliability and safety, approved by the Secretary;

“(4) a complete list of replacement parts, components, and specialized equipment required for maintenance and repair, including part numbers, specifications, and sources, to ensure availability to authorized maintenance providers;

“(5) procedures for documenting maintenance actions, life-limited component replacements, and compliance with the OLS, including standardized formats for maintenance logs to ensure traceability and verification of operational readiness; and

“(6) clear identification of maintenance information essential for safe operation, distinguished from non-safety-related service enhancements, to facilitate compliance with operational readiness requirements.

“(c) Submission, acceptance, and updates.— (1) A contractor shall submit the ICOR to the Secretary as a contract deliverable prior to equipment delivery or within a timeframe specified by the contract.

“(2) The Secretary shall review and accept the ICOR, verifying that they provide sufficient information to maintain the operational readiness of the equipment.

“(3) In accordance with design changes and contract modifications approved by the Secretary and in a manner that is in accordance with subsection (a), the contractor shall deliver updates to the ICOR for approval by the Secretary whenever modifications, upgrades, safety issues, or new sustainment requirements are identified.

“(d) Maintenance and repair providers.—A contractor shall not impose restrictions on the use of the ICOR by authorized maintenance providers of the Department, including requirements to use only contractor-supplied parts, unless such restrictions are explicitly approved by the Secretary as necessary for safety or operational reliability.

“(e) Conditions for alternative maintenance and repair.— (1) Notwithstanding restrictions approved by the Secretary pursuant to subsection (d), the Secretary may authorize alternative maintenance or repair actions for covered defense equipment, if any of the following conditions are met:

“(A) A program cannot reasonably obtain sufficient data to maintain operational readiness.

“(C) The contractor cannot deliver required parts, repairs, or ICOR within a timeframe that meets operational needs, as defined by the Secretary, resulting in unacceptable readiness degradation.

“(D) The contractor discontinues support for a component or software critical to the equipment’s operation without providing a viable substitute or sufficient ICOR to enable sustainment of the equipment by the Department.

“(E) An urgent operational or logistical circumstance, such as wartime conditions, active combat, or disrupted logistics, necessitates immediate repair or part production to maintain mission readiness.

“(F) The Secretary determines alternative maintenance or repair actions would result in significant cost savings.

“(2) If an alternative action is authorized under paragraph (1), the Secretary may—

“(A) issue a written determination citing the relevant condition described in paragraph (1), including evidence of contractor practices that prevent delivery of or restrict license rights to the ICOR in a manner that may impede competition, consistent with antitrust laws; and

“(3) If time permits, the Secretary shall notify the contractor if any of the conditions described in paragraph (1) are met and shall provide the contractor with not more than 30 days to address the issue before the alternative action is taken.

“(4) Alternative maintenance or repair actions may include, but is not limited to, reverse engineering, use of existing technical data, fabrication of parts by the Department or third-party providers, or advanced manufacturing, as necessary to restore operational readiness. This provision does not restrict the ability of the Secretary to employ these practices in other contexts.

“(f) Contractor responsibilities.— (1) A contractor shall ensure the ICOR contains sufficient information to maintain the operational readiness of the equipment, including updates to address safety or performance issues and necessary information on systems or components produced by subcontractors.

“(2) A contractor shall promptly notify the Secretary of any safety-related deficiencies in the ICOR and provide corrected materials at no additional cost.

“(3) If a contractor fails to comply with the requirements of this section, the Secretary may withhold contract payment, enforce contract penalties, take corrective action, reduce contractor performance ratings, or exclude the contractor from future contracts or agreements with the Department.

“(g) Oversight.— (1) The Secretary shall establish procedures to verify contractor compliance with the requirements of this section, including periodic audits of the content and availability and maintenance of ICOR.

“(2) The Secretary shall maintain a centralized repository of ICOR for covered defense equipment, accessible to maintenance providers authorized by the Secretary, to ensure consistent application.

“(h) Report.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section, and every year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a list of the items designated as excluded commercial items to which the requirement to deliver ICOR does not apply.

“(1) The term ‘covered defense equipment’ means any system, subsystem, or component procured by the Secretary, including aircraft, ships, ground vehicles, electronic systems, and other systems, that require contractor-provided maintenance or repair data to ensure operational readiness, excluding any excluded commercial items.

“(2) The term ‘excluded commercial item’ means an unmodified product customarily used by the general public or by nongovernmental entities or sold, leased, or licensed to the general public and maintained under standard commercial practices, as designated by the Secretary.

“(3) The terms ‘Instructions for Continued Operational Readiness’ and ‘ICOR’ mean contractor-provided technical data, software, and other information, including maintenance instructions and manuals, operational limitations, parts identification, record-keeping procedures, safety-related provisions, engineering drawings, schematics, software, service bulletins, wiring diagrams, diagnostic procedures, and other data or information necessary to maintain and repair covered defense equipment in a condition for safe and effective operation.”.

(b) Compliance oversight.—Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every two years thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that assesses—

(1) the compliance of the Secretary of Defense with section 4664 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a);

(2) the effectiveness of the requirements of section 4664 in ensuring operational readiness and reducing sustainment costs;

(4) the frequency and impact of the conditions described in section 4664(e)(1); and

(5) recommendations for improving the maintenance and repair capabilities of the Department of Defense.

(c) Implementation guidance.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall issue guidance to implement this section that includes—

(1) procedures for integrating the requirements of section 4664 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), into acquisition contracts and agreements of the Department of Defense;

(2) the criteria for designating items as excluded commercial items, as defined in section 4664(i);

(3) processes for reviewing, accepting, and updating instructions for continued operational readiness (as defined in section 4664(i)) and operational limitations sections, in accordance with section 4664;

(4) mechanisms for tracking contractor compliance and resolving disputes over instructions for continued operational readiness and compensation; and

(5) directions for the operation, repair, and maintenance of defense equipment that government-owned, government-operated entities of the Department of Defense can use if the contract or agreement for the defense equipment does not require the delivery of ICOR.

(d) Applicability.—Section 4664 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), applies to contracts and agreements for covered defense equipment, as defined in subsection (i) of that section, entered into on or after one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(a) In general.—The review of requests submitted by a contractor to a Department of Defense contracting officer pursuant to Public Law 85–804 (50 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) for indemnification against nuclear and unusually hazardous risks, including those involving the procurement of commercial nuclear technology, shall include, to the maximum extent practicable, input from the Defense Contract Management Agency, including reviews of insurance markets and coverage availability from the Contractor Insurance/Pension Review group.

(b) Deadline.— The review of all indemnification requests submitted by contractors as described in subsection (a) shall be completed with a final decision on approval or denial, including an executed Memorandum of Decision, within 90 days.

(c) Delegation.—The Secretary of each military department should delegate authority to provide indemnification under Public Law 85–804 (50 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) for contracts relating to advanced nuclear energy systems or components to such subordinate officials, commands, or agencies as the Secretary determines appropriate to ensure timely and effective program execution.

“(5) the cost or pricing data were obtained by or otherwise made available to the prime contractor or subcontractor more than 30 days before, but submitted to the head of the agency after, the date of agreement on the price of the contract or, if applicable consistent with subsection (a)(2), such other date agreed upon between the parties.”.

(A) by striking “June 30, 2018” each place it appears and inserting “June 30, 2026”;

(B) in subparagraph (A), by striking “$2,000,000” and inserting “$10,000,000”; and

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking “$2,000,000” and inserting “$10,000,000”; and

(3) in subparagraph (3)(A), by striking “$2,000,000” and inserting “$10,000,000”.

Section 1792 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 132 Stat. 2238; 50 U.S.C. 4531 note) and section 226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 50 U.S.C. 4531 note) are repealed.

(a) In general.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, acting through the Director of the Joint Production Accelerator Cell of the Department of Defense and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a strategy for ensuring that the defense industrial base of the United States can meet requirements for small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS).

(b) Coordination.—In developing the strategy required under subsection (a), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall coordinate with the following officials:

(1) The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition.

(2) The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology.

(3) The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

(1) An assessment of emerging technologies or manufacturing processes that would support the modernization or expansion of the defense industrial base of the United States to meet requirements for production of sUAS components and finished articles.

(D) Government-owned, Government-operated manufacturing facilities for sUAS components.

(1) REVIEW.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall 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 that includes the following:

(A) An assessment of the capacity and capability of the existing sUAS industrial base, including the supply base and personnel of such manufacturers, to support the expansion of the sUAS industrial base.

(B) The capability and capacity of potential new entrants to the sUAS industrial base, including private entities that might be subsidized by the Federal Government.

(C) An assessment of the process for qualifying vendors, including potential new entrants and existing vendors proposing new manufacturing processes.

(D) An assessment of the capacity and capability of the sUAS industrial base to support the demands of existing programs.

(E) An assessment of the capacity and capability of the sUAS industrial base to support potential future demands of programs.

(F) A mapping of programs and potential future sUAS programs for manufacturer throughput.

(G) Identification of current and potential shortfalls in critical materials, such as rare earth elements and lithium.

(H) A broad assessment of commercial sector, civil sector, and Department of Defense demands on the sUAS industrial base.

(A) SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.—Not later than September 30, 2026, a federally funded research and development center that enters into a contract under this subsection shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on the results of the review conducted under paragraph (1).

(B) CONGRESS.—Not later than 30 days after receipt of the report described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall submit the report, along with any comments of the Secretary, to the congressional defense committees.

(e) Small unmanned aircraft system components defined.—The term “small unmanned aircraft system components” refers to critical components used in the manufacture and operation of unmanned aircraft systems for small unmanned aircraft, as those terms are defined in section 44801 of title 49, United States Code.

(A) by striking “subsection (c) or subsection (e)” and inserting “subsections (c) and (e)”; and

(B) in paragraph (1), by striking “subsection (c)” and inserting “subsections (c) and (e)”; and

“(3) APPLICATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY WAIVER FOR STRATEGIC MATERIALS.—If the Secretary of Defense or the authorized delegate has made a determination under subsection (k) of section 4863 of this title for a national security waiver of the restrictions under subsection (a) of that section for a specific end item, the Secretary or authorized delegate may apply that waiver to the restrictions under subsection (a) of this section for the same covered material and end item.”.

(1) in subsection (c), by striking “Subsection (a)” and inserting “(1) Except as provided by paragraph (2), subsection (a)”; and

“(2) If the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the military department concerned applies the exception set forth in this subsection for the procurement of any clothing and the materials and components thereof or any item listed in subsection (b)(1)(D), no contract may be awarded for the procurement of any such items produced in the People's Republic of China, Iran, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or the Russian Federation.”.

(b) Applicability.—The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply only with respect to agreements entered into on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security for travel expenses, not more than 90 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense—

(1) 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; 10 U.S.C. 4819 note) have been implemented; and

(2) submits a plan and timeline for continued implementation of such requirements, including details on how the Department of Defense plans to ensure, beyond self-certification, that contractors and subcontractors are completing any assessment and mitigation requirements, including enforcement penalties if appropriate.

(1) DEFINITION OF COVERED MATERIAL.—Section 4872(f)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(2) EXCEPTIONS TO PROHIBITION.—Section 4872(c)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is amended –

(A) in subparagraph (C), by inserting “or samarium-cobalt magnet” after “neodymium-iron-boron magnet”; and

“(i) tantalum, tungsten, or molybdenum produced from recycled scrap if the contractor demonstrates that the scrap was produced outside of a covered nation and the melting of the scrap and further processing and manufacturing of the material takes place in the United States or in the country of a qualifying foreign government, as defined in section 4863(m)(11) of this title.”.

(1) DEFINITION OF COVERED MATERIAL.—Section 4872(f)(1) of title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a)(1), is further amended—

(B) in subparagraph (F), as added by subsection (a), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(2) EXCEPTIONS TO PROHIBITION.—Section 4872(c)(3)(D) of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(2) is amended by striking “or molybdenum” and inserting “molybdenum, gallium, or germanium”.

(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraphs (1) and (2) shall take effect on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(a) Multiple sourcing.—As soon as practicable, but not later than fiscal year 2031, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Department of Defense maintains multiple sources for products in the following critical sectors:

(b) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement under subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that maintaining multiple sources is unfeasible. The Secretary shall notify the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 30 days after issuing such a waiver.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract for the procurement of photovoltaic modules manufactured by a foreign entity of concern (as defined by section 9901(8) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (15 U.S.C. 4651(8)).

(b) Waiver authority.—The Secretary of Defense may waive subsection (a) if the Secretary—

(1) determines that there is no alternative source of photovoltaic cells, modules, or inverters other than from a foreign entity of concern;

(2) determines there is no national security risk posed by the use of photovoltaic cells, modules, or inverters manufactured by a foreign entity of concern; and

(3) submits a certification of such determination in writing to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days before entering into a contract described under such subsection.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) shall apply only to contracts regarding the direct procurement by the Department of Defense of photovoltaic modules or inverters and shall not apply to contracts involving any third party financing arrangements, including energy savings contracts and those involving privatized military housing or assets that enhance combat capability.

(2) DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE FOR ASSETS THAT ENHANCE COMBAT CAPABILITY.—The prohibition under subsection (a) shall not apply to assets that enhance combat capability for a period of one year following the date of the enactment of this Act, in order for the Department of Defense to determine alternate supply chains for such assets.

(d) Exemption for certain activities.—The prohibition under subsection (a) shall not apply if the operation, procurement, or contracting action is for the purposes of intelligence, electronic warfare, and information warfare operations, testing, analysis, and training.

(a) Authority to establish and operate.—The Secretary of the Army is authorized and directed to accelerate the modernization of the Army’s organic industrial base to meet the munitions requirements of the Army.

(b) Facilities and infrastructure.—The Secretary of the Army shall prioritize utilizing or modifying existing facilities, as well as existing environmental permits, security arrangements, and personnel required for the production of sensitive military munitions, to establish the production lines for the following items:

(2) Any of 13 precursor chemicals used widely across the Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition portfolio that are currently sourced solely from the People's Republic of China.

(3) Any of the 300 chemicals identified as single point failures by the Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition.

(c) Location.—The production line or lines described in subsection (b) shall be established at each Army organic industrial base installation that—

(1) has received less than $100,000,000 in cumulative modernization funding across all Army accounts during the two most recent fiscal years; and

(2) has substantial acreage available and suitable for future industrial or technical development.

(d) Expedited approvals and waivers.—The Secretary is encouraged to expedite the establishment of the production lines and shall utilize to the fullest extent possible the existing environmental permits and work expertise resident at installations described in subsection (c).

(e) Funds.—The Secretary of the Army may use such funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act that are available to establish the production line or lines described in subsection (b).

Section 4817 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may use the authorities provided by this section with respect to upstream, mid-stream, and downstream supply chains, including material, material production, components, subassemblies, and finished products, testing and qualification, infrastructure, facility construction and improvement, and equipment needed directly for the following:

“(B) Kinetic capabilities, including sensors, targeting systems, and delivery platforms.

“(D) Machine tools, including but not limited to subtractive, additive, convergent, stamping, forging, abrasives, metrology, and other production equipment.

“(G) Advanced manufacturing capacity, including echelon manufacturing forward in the Indo-Pacific Command theater.

“(H) Unmanned vehicles, including subsurface, surface, land, air one-way, attritables, and launch and recovery platforms.

“(L) Ship and submarine, including assembly and automation technologies and capabilities, new or modernized infrastructure for new construction or maintenance and sustainment and battle damage repair.

“(M) Other materiel solutions required to support Indo-Pacific Command operational plans as required.

“(2) PROHIBITION ON USE IN COVERED COUNTRIES.—The Secretary may not use the authorities provided by this section for any activity in a covered country.

“(3) USE OF AUTHORITIES FOR OTHER PURPOSES.—The Secretary may not use the authorities provided by this section for a purpose not described in paragraph (1) unless, not less than 30 days before doing so, the Secretary—

“(i) the use of the authority for that purpose is essential to the national security interests of the United States; and

“(ii) without the use of the authority for that purpose, United States industry cannot reasonably be expected to provide the capability needed in a timely manner; and

“(B) submits to the congressional defense committees a report on the determination that includes appropriate explanatory material.

“(h) Grants and other incentives for domestic industrial base capabilities.—To create, maintain, protect, expand, or restore domestic industrial base capabilities essential for the national security interests of the United States, the Secretary may make provision for—

“(1) use of contracts, grants, or other transaction authorities, including cooperative agreements;

“(2) incentives for the private sector to develop capabilities in areas of national security interest;

“(3) making awards to third party entities to support investments in small- and medium-sized entities working in areas of national security interest, including debt and equity investments, that would benefit missions of the Department of Defense; and

“(4) subsidies to offset market manipulation or ensure allied and domestic viability of grants made from other market uncertainties.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—To create, maintain, protect, expand, or restore industrial base capabilities essential for the national security interests of the United States, the Secretary may make provision for purchase commitments for—

“(A) Federal Government use or resale of an industrial resource or a critical technology item;

“(B) the encouragement of exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical materials;

“(E) the increased use of emerging technologies in defense program applications and the rapid transition of emerging technologies—

“(i) from Federal Government-sponsored research and development to commercial applications; and

“(ii) from commercial research and development to national defense applications.

“(A) PURCHASES.—Except as provided by subparagraph (B), purchase commitments under paragraph (1) may be made without regard to the limitations of existing law (other than section 1341 of title 31), for such quantities, and on such terms and conditions, including advance payments, and for such periods, but not extending beyond a date that is not more than 10 years from the date on which such purchase was initially made, as the Secretary deems necessary.

“(B) LIMITATION.—Purchases commitments under paragraph (1) involving higher than established ceiling prices (or if no such established ceiling prices exist, currently prevailing market prices) or that result in an anticipated loss on resale shall not be made, unless it is determined that supply of the materials could not be effectively increased or provisioned at lower prices or on terms more favorable to the Federal Government, or that such purchases are necessary to assure the availability to the United States of overseas supplies.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may take the actions described in subparagraph (B), if the Secretary finds that—

“(i) under generally fair and equitable ceiling prices, for any raw or nonprocessed material or component, there will result a decrease in supplies from high-cost sources of such material and that the continuation of such supplies is necessary to carry out the objectives of this section; or

“(ii) an increase in cost of transportation is temporary in character and threatens to impair maximum production or supply in any area at stable prices of any materials.

“(B) SUBSIDY PAYMENTS AUTHORIZED.—Upon a finding under subparagraph (A), the Secretary may make provision for subsidy payments on any such produced material from other than covered countries, in such amounts and in such manner (including purchase commitments of such material or component and its resale at a loss, and on such terms and conditions, as the Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure that supplies from such high-cost sources are continued, or that maximum production or supply in such area at stable prices of such materials is maintained, as the case may be.

“(4) INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT IN INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES.—If the Secretary determines that such action will aid the national security interests of the United States, the Secretary is authorized—

“(A) to procure and install additional equipment, facilities, processes or improvements to plants, factories, and other industrial facilities owned by the Federal Government;

“(B) to procure and install equipment including owned by the Federal Government in plants, factories, and other industrial facilities owned by private persons;

“(C) to provide for constructing new facilities, the modification, or expansion of privately owned facilities, including the modification or improvement of production processes, when taking actions under this subsection or subsection (h);

“(D) to sell or otherwise transfer equipment owned by the Federal Government and installed under this subsection to the owners of such plants, factories, or other industrial facilities;

“(E) to construct facilities for the purposes described in section subsection (g)(1); and

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Metals, minerals, materials, and components acquired pursuant to this subsection which, in the judgment of the Secretary, are excess to the needs of programs under this section, shall be transferred to the National Defense Stockpile established by the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98 et seq.), or other national reserves if available, when the Secretary deems such action to be in the public interest.

“(B) TRANSFERS AT NO CHARGE.—Transfers made pursuant to this paragraph shall be made without charge against or reimbursement from funds appropriated for the purposes of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98 et seq.), or other national reserves if available, except that costs incident to such transfer, other than acquisition costs, shall be paid or reimbursed from such funds.

“(6) SUBSTITUTES.—When, in the judgment of the Secretary, it will aid the national security interests of the United States, the Secretary may make provision for the development and qualification a of substitutes for strategic and critical materials, components, critical technology items, and other industrial resources.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain, modernize, restore, and expand the productive capacities of sources for strategic and critical materials, components, critical technology items, and industrial resources essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the United States.

“(2) STRATEGIC AND CRITICAL MATERIALS, COMPONENTS, AND CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY ITEMS.—

“(A) MAINTENANCE OF RELIABLE SOURCES OF SUPPLY.—The Secretary shall take appropriate actions to ensure that strategic and critical materials, components, critical technology items, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency.

“(B) APPROPRIATE ACTION.—For purposes of this paragraph, appropriate action may include—

“(ii) stockpiling or placing into reserve strategic and critical materials, components, and critical technology items;

“(iii) planning for necessary long-lead times for acquiring such materials, components, and items; or

“(iv) developing and qualifying substitutes for such materials, components, and items.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committee a report evaluating investments made and any other activities carried out using amounts in the Fund during the year preceding submission of the report.

“(A) measures of effectiveness of the investments and activities described in that paragraph in meeting the needs of the Department of Defense and the defense industrial base;

“(B) an evaluation of the return on investment of all ongoing investments from the Fund; and

“(C) a description of efforts to coordinate activities carried out using amounts in the Fund with activities to support the defense industrial base carried out under other authorities.

“(3) ADVICE.—In preparing a report required by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall take into account the advice of the defense industry and such other individuals as the Secretary considers relevant.

“(l) Coordination with other defense industrial base activities.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing how activities carried out under this section will be coordinated with—

“(1) activities carried out using amounts in the Defense Production Act Fund under section 304 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4534);

“(A) components of the munitions supply chains, including all elements of the munitions supply chain such as chemicals, casings, or other materials, are produced by only one reliable source; or

“(B) the increased production of a component would significantly increase total output of munitions.

“(3) RELIABLE SOURCE.—The term ‘reliable source’ means a citizen or business entity organized under the laws of—

“(B) a country of the national technology and industrial base, as defined in section 4801; or

“(C) a qualifying country, as defined in section 225.003 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement or any successor document.

“(5) STRATEGIC AND CRITICAL MATERIALS.—The term ‘strategic and critical materials’ has the meaning given that term in section 12(1) of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98h–3(1)).”.

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

“(3) to foster innovation for the defense industrial base and to diversify and expand the defense industrial base.”.

(b) Increased funding limit for Bureau of Indian Affairs service areas.—Section 4955(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “$1,000,000” and inserting “$1,500,000”.

(c) APEX centers of excellence.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment may establish APEX centers of excellence to allow APEX centers to provide specialized expertise to business entities outside of the geographic bounds of the center. In carrying out this program, the Under Secretary may utilize the cost sharing waiver to enter into a cooperative agreement under section 4954 of title 10, United States Code.

Section 844(a) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 134 Stat. 3766) is amended—

“(B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘; or’; and

“‘(3) enter into a contract for any covered material mined, refined, or separated in any covered nation.’”.

(a) Study.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into a contract or other agreement with a qualified organization to conduct an independent examination of the acquisition workforce of the Department of Defense.

(b) Purpose.—The study required under subsection (a) shall include an assessment and comprehensive review of—

(1) the effectiveness of the acquisition workforce in managing procurements and facilitating positive acquisition outcomes for the warfighter, including through the use of process performance measures or other business health metrics;

(2) the process and authorities for recruiting and retaining the workforce, including a comparison of pay scales with other Federal agency and commercial analogues, the use of specialization within the acquisition field, and the use of career incentives or other specialized opportunities, such as job-broadening assignments or external training opportunities;

(3) current training of the workforce, including training offered by and the structure of Defense Acquisition University and the Eisenhower School at National Defense University, as well as commercially available training or identification of certification or stackable micro-certification opportunities;

(4) the size and mix of the acquisition workforce, including for acquisition-adjacent fields such as industrial security, counterintelligence, and finance;

(5) the workload and span of control over contracting actions, based on contract award value and total number of individual awards;

(6) the dependencies between contracting actions and the impact on the industrial security needs to support National Industrial Security Program requirements, including additional compliance costs, increased workload for security-related action, transparency on needs and requirements between the acquisition and security communities, and mechanisms to improve communication on needs and requirements between acquisition and security professionals;

(7) the role of the acquisition workforce and its communication and integration with the requirements and budget communities; and

(8) the data, productivity tools, and other information systems available to support acquisition workloads, including the availability of commercial tools.

(c) Final report.—Following the completion of the study under subsection (a), the qualified organization that conducts the study shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on the results of the study. The report shall include—

(1) a summary of the research and other activities carried out as part of the study; and

(2) recommendations to improve all aspects of acquisition workforce, including recruiting, retention, training, management, and workforce mix.

(d) Report to Congress.—Not later than December 31, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives an unaltered version of the report required under subsection (c), together with the Secretary’s assessment of the findings and recommendations of the study, including a plan for implementing the recommendations.

(1) IN GENERAL.—If a contractor, through the use of supply chain illumination policies, procedures, or analytical tools, discovers an item in the supply chain that is non-compliant with the restrictions outlined in subsection (d) but promptly discloses that discovery to the program office, the contractor shall be eligible for an expedited interim national security waiver in accordance with subsection (b) to deliver a capability, provided that the program manager is satisfied with the contractor’s corrective plan described in subsection (e).

(2) DISCLOSURES.—Disclosures that are eligible under paragraph (1) include any disclosures made by the contractor to the program office, including disclosures resulting from supply chain illumination efforts conducted by the contractor, a sub-contractor, or by a third-party entity acting on behalf of the contractor or sub-contractor to increase supply chain transparency. Discoveries of non-compliance by the United States Government do not constitute eligible disclosures under paragraph (1).

(1) IN GENERAL.—A waiver described under this subsection is a waiver issued by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary concerned (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code) to a restriction outlined under subsection (d) allowing a contractor to—

(A) accept delivery of an end item that contains non-conforming items if the program manager determines the non-confirming part does not represent a security, safety, or flight risk; and

(2) DELEGATION.—The authority to issue a waiver under paragraph (1) may be delegated—

(A) in the case of a waiver for one or more acquisition programs within a military department, to the senior acquisition executive of that military department; and

(B) in the case of a waiver applicable to more than one military department, to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

(1) WRITTEN DETERMINATION.—An interim national security waiver shall be issued through a written determination that includes the following:

(A) The preliminary facts and circumstances regarding the identified non-compliant parts and the likely cause for non-compliance.

(B) The types of parts to which the interim waiver applies, including any additional parts currently being evaluated for potential non-compliance with the defense sourcing restriction statutes based on the findings in subparagraph (A).

(C) A determination that the non-compliant parts and any additional parts being evaluated for potential non-compliance do not represent a security, safety, or flight risk.

(D) An assessment of program risk due to non-compliance to include an overall risk level determination that if exceeded would require a new interim national security waiver.

(2) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—Any interim national security waiver determination shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees within five days of the date of issuance.

(3) DURATION.—The authority to issue an interim national security waiver under this subsection shall expire not later than January 1, 2027.

(d) Supply chain restrictions.—For the purposes of this section, non-compliant components are those that are covered by the following provisions of law:

(1) Section 4863 of title 10, United States Code, relating to a requirement to buy strategic materials critical to national security from American sources.

(2) Section 1211 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4651), relating to a prohibition on procurements from Chinese military companies.

(3) Section 4873 of title 10, United States Code, relating to additional requirements pertaining to printed circuit boards.

(4) Section 154 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4651), relating to a prohibition on availability of funds for procurement of certain batteries.

(5) Section 244 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4651), relating to a limitation on sourcing chemical materials for munitions from certain countries.

(6) Section 805 the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4651), relating to a prohibition on procurements related to entities identified as Chinese military companies operating in the United States.

(e) Contractor responsibility.—A contractor receiving a waiver under this section shall retain the responsibility to develop and implement a corrective plan to ensure future compliance and demonstrate the noncompliance was neither willful nor knowing. The contractor shall use reasonably expedient means to qualify an alternative compliant supplier, where available, for procurements of items that are to be incorporated into future deliveries of end items.

(g) Briefings.—Not later than April 1, 2026, and April 1, 2027, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives on expedited acceptances authorized under this section and corrective action plans of contractors to ensure future compliance with existing authorities.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that details the stockpiles of critical munitions required to fight simultaneous conflicts in different theaters.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following elements:

(A) An estimate of the amount of each critical munition that would be required over the course of simultaneous conflicts, modeled on the assumption that a contingency operation in any one of the western Pacific, Europe, Middle East, or Korean Peninsula theaters would increase the likelihood of a contingency operation in the other theaters, including consideration of the prepositioning of stockpiles and the risk posed by moving stocks out of each theater.

(B) The number of days before the joint force would exhaust its current stockpiles of critical munitions during simultaneous conflicts.

(C) An estimate of the time required for the industrial base to replenish critical munition inventories during a simultaneous conflict, taking into account the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement directed by section 222c of title 10, United States Code, and the study required by section 1705 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2968), but not the assumptions mandated by Department of Defense Instruction 3000.04, entitled ‘‘DoD Munitions Requirements Process”.

(D) Production requirements for each critical munition needed to address the shortfall between current production rates and those required to meet the requirements determined pursuant to subparagraph (A).

(E) The lessons learned from the war in Ukraine with respect to munition consumption rates.

(F) Consideration of the projected munitions stockpiles of the military forces of the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China, Iran, and the Democratic Republic of Korea, and forces affiliated with such military forces.

(G) An exploration of the projected munitions stockpiles of the relevant United States allies in each theater and opportunities for them to enhance their contributions to burden-sharing.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan to implement critical munitions requirements to fight simultaneous conflicts in the next budget cycle. The plan shall include a description of what would be required of industry and United States arsenals and depots to meet such requirements.

(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary may waive the requirement under paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a report with a justification for the decision not to implement the results of the report required by subsection (a) into the requirements process for the next budget cycle. The report shall include an assessment of the gap between current requirements for critical munitions and those requirements identified in the report required by subsection (a).

(c) Critical munitions defined.—In this section, the term “critical munitions” includes those designated on the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s critical munitions list.

“(B) commercially advanced digital manufacturing facilities for rapid, distributed parts production closer to the point of use; and”;

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish an annual requirement for the production of an estimate of the demand by United States allies and partners for United States-produced munitions and specified expendables across the future-years defense plan.

(A) information set forth in all approved letters of offer and acceptance from foreign military sales cases;

(C) estimates based on an operational analysis of foreign partner munitions needs for critical operational or contingency planning scenarios;

(D) estimates based on an analysis of wargaming results that include foreign partner contributions in the relevant scenario; and

(E) estimates based on bilateral or multilateral discussions between the United States Government and foreign governments.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall issue guidance for the development and collection of data necessary to support the production of the estimate required by subsection (a).

(A) a consideration of the manner in which the requirement for such an estimate may be leveraged to support operational and contingency planning activities, wargaming, and net assessment activities; and

(B) an analysis of the effect of the addition of such an estimate to the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement required by section 222c of title 10, United States Code.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 30, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall conduct an assessment of existing relevant Department of Defense information systems of record to determine whether any such system, or combination of such systems, may be used or modified to collect and analyze data necessary to support the production of the estimate required by subsection (a) on an ongoing basis.

(2) CONSIDERATION.—The assessment required by paragraph (1) shall take into consideration—

(A) the cost and technical challenges of adopting or adapting a system described in that paragraph, or combination of such systems, for the purpose described in that paragraph; and

(B) the estimated cost and technical challenges of establishing a new information system of record for such purpose.

(e) Specified expendables defined.—In this section, the term “specific expendables” includes—

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise subpart 242.15 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to modify contractor performance information requirements to establish an objective, fact-based, and simplified system for reporting contractor performance. The revised system shall—

(1) focus exclusively on negative performance events that are verifiable and measurable to reduce subjectivity and inconsistency in evaluations;

(2) reduce the administrative burden on contracting officers by limiting reporting to prior contractor failures or poor performance; and

(3) ensure the government can identify and avoid contractors with a history of poor performance or bad actions.

(b) Revision of contractor performance information requirements.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise subpart 242.15 of the DFARS and related guidance, including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to provide for the following requirements related to contract performance information:

(1) ELIMINATION OF SUBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE RATINGS.— (A) Subjective performance ratings for contracts subject to this section shall be eliminated.

(B) Performance evaluations shall be limited to the reporting and scoring of negative performance events as described in subsections (c) and (d).

(2) SCOPE OF REPORTING.— (A) Contracting officers shall report only negative performance events with verifiable data which have a material impact on contract performance or government interests, including events involving subcontractors.

(B) Reporting shall exclude positive or neutral performance assessments, except as necessary to provide context for a negative performance event.

(3) FREQUENCY AND TIMING.— (A) Contracting officers shall report negative performance events within 30 days of identifying and verifying the event.

(B) Annual or periodic performance evaluations shall not be required unless a negative performance event occurs.

(4) USE IN SOURCE SELECTION.— (A) Negative performance events and their associated scores, as calculated under subsection (c), shall be considered in source selection evaluations to assess contractor risk and responsibility.

(B) The absence of negative performance events for a contractor, including nontraditional defense contractors or new entrants, shall not be considered a deficiency in past performance evaluations. Such contractors shall be evaluated based on technical capability, price, and other relevant factors.

(c) Scoring mechanism for negative performance events.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise subpart 242.15 of the DFARS and related guidance, including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to provide for the following requirements related to a scoring mechanism for negative performance events:

(1) STANDARDIZED SCORING MECHANISM.—To ensure fair and equitable evaluation of contractors, a standardized scoring mechanism shall normalize negative performance events based on the number of transactions and the dollar volume of contracts performed by the contractor.

(2) APPLICATION OF SCORES.— (A) The composite score shall be reported in CPARS alongside the negative performance events and used in source selection to assess past performance risk.

(B) Scores shall be calculated automatically by the CPARS system based on data entered by contracting officers, including the number of transactions and contract dollar value.

(3) TRANSPARENCY.— (A) Contractors shall have access to their composite scores and the underlying data (number of events, transactions, and dollar volume) through CPARS.

(B) Contractors may submit comments or rebuttals to reported events or scores, which shall be maintained in CPARS for consideration in source selection.

(d) Key issues of negative performance.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise subpart 242.15 of the DFARS and related guidance, including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to provide for the following requirements related to key issues of negative performance:

(1) MANDATORY REPORTING.—Contracting officers shall report the following negative performance events, based on verifiable data or objective evaluations:

(A) DELIVERY OF DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS.—Delivery of products failing to meet contract requirements, as verified by government inspection reports, quality assurance records, or testing results.

(B) DELINQUENT DELIVERIES.—Failure to meet contract delivery schedules, as documented in contract milestones, delivery orders, or government correspondence.

(C) IMPROPER MARKINGS OR RIGHTS ASSERTIONS ON TECHNICAL DATA DELIVERIES.—Incorrect or unauthorized markings on technical data or software, or improper assertions of restrictive rights, as verified by government review or legal findings.

(D) DEFECTIVE PRICING.—Submission of inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading cost or pricing data, as identified through audits by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or other authorities.

(E) FAILURE TO FLOW DOWN REQUIRED CLAUSES TO SUBCONTRACTORS.—Failure to include mandatory contract clauses in subcontracts, as verified by contract reviews or audits.

(F) FALSE CLAIMS OR MISREPRESENTATIONS.—Submission of false claims, fraudulent invoices, or misrepresentations, as substantiated by investigations, legal findings, or government records.

(G) NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SAFETY OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS.—Failure to comply with safety, environmental, or other regulatory requirements, as documented by government inspections or citations.

(H) SIGNIFICANT CYBERSECURITY BREACHES OR FAILURES.—Failure to meet cybersecurity requirements or significant breaches caused by contractor negligence, as verified by government assessments or incident reports.

(e) Additional performance indicators.—The Secretary of Defense may establish additional negative performance indicators, provided they are—

(2) published in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) with clear criteria for identification and reporting.

(1) TEMPLATES.— Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall issue revised regulations under revise subpart 242.15 of the DFARS to include standardized templates for reporting negative performance events and calculating composite scores.

(A) TRAINING.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop and provide training for contracting officers on—

(ii) entering data for transaction counts and contract dollar values to support the scoring mechanism.

(B) GUIDANCE.—Guidance shall emphasize the use of objective evidence and the exclusion of subjective judgments, including—

(ii) guidelines for weighting negative performance scores in source selection; and

(iii) procedures for quality assurance reviews and contractor dispute resolution.

(3) SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall modify the CPARS system to—

(D) include a mechanism for contractors to review and respond to reported events and scores; and

(E) integrate with the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) for seamless data sharing.

(A) EXISTING CPARS EVALUATIONS.—For contracts awarded prior to the effective date of the revised regulations, contracting officers may complete existing CPARS evaluations under the prior system until the contract is closed or terminated.

(B) NEW EVALUATIONS.—New evaluations for contracts awarded after the date of the revised implementing regulations shall comply with this section.

(1) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the implementation of the revised Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System required by this section.

(2) GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE REVIEW.—Not later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a review of the revised contractor performance information system to assess—

(1) NEGATIVE PERFORMANCE EVENT.—The term “negative performance event” means a verifiable instance of contractor failure or poor performance, as described in subsection (d).

(2) NONTRADITIONAL DEFENSE CONTRACTOR.—The term “nontraditional defense contractor” has the meaning given the term in section 3014 of title 10, United States Code.

(3) VERIFIABLE DATA.—The term “verifiable data” means objective evidence documented in contract records, inspection reports, audits, correspondence, or other government records.

(2) Section 874 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3101).

(3) Section 810 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3101).

(6) Subsections (a)–(c) of section 804 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 122 Stat. 4356).

(7) Section 822 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104–106; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3201).

(13) Section 852 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(14) Subsections (a)–(f) of section 866 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(15) Section 143 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(16) Section 254 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(17) Section 886 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(18) Section 851 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(19) Section 314 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(20) Section 826 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–398; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(21) Section 806 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105–261; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3241).

(23) Section 875 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3344 ).

(24) Section 816 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3344).

(26) Section 883 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 10 U.S.C. 3372 note).

(30) Section 891 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 3804 note).

(35) Section 812 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(37) Section 227 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4141).

(38) Section 252 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4141).

(40) Section 828 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4201).

(41) Section 1252 of the Defense Procurement Reform Act of 1984 (Public Law 98–525; 10 U.S.C. 4205 note).

(42) Section 812 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4211).

(43) Section 806 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4211).

(44) Section 818 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4231).

(47) Section 814 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 4271 note).

(51) Section 831(b) of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4501).

(52) Section 863(a)–(h) of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4501).

(53) Section 832 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4501).

(54) Section 883(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4571).

(55) Section 938 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4571).

(63) Section 846(a) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 4811 note).

(65) Section 849 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 131 Stat. 1487).

(66) Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 123 Stat. 2402).

(67) Section 881 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4601).

(68) Section 802 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3062).

(69) Section 913 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 (Public Law 99–145; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3201).

(70) Section 821 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3451).

(71) Section 824(a) of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. 3774 note).

(72) Section 805 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3451).

(75) Subtitle D of title II of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 119 Stat. 3175).

(77) Section 218 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 8013 note).

(80) Section 222 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. 4014 note).

(81) Section 230 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(82) Section 843 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4171).

(83) Section 938 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4571).

(85) Section 1064 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. 4571 note).

(86) Section 854 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 10 U.S.C. 4571 note).

Section 865 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 4811 note) is amended—

“(3) produce all critical readiness parts and systems, including those identified as having sole-source dependencies, excessive lead times, unreasonable pricing, or other supply chain deficiencies; and”;

(B) in paragraph (8), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

“(9) the Department of Defense avoids duplication of review processes for the approval of aircraft parts and components and repairs that have already been approved by a civil aviation authority under a Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) or Designated Engineering Representative (DER) spare or repair certification and approval processes unless a written justification is approved by the commander of a systems command of a military service and reported to the congressional defense committees.”;

(3) by redesignating subsections (f) through (j) as subsections (g) through (k), respectively;

“(f) Expedited qualification panels.—Each military department shall establish an Expedited Qualification Panel (EQP). The EQP shall develop standardized templates for Source Approval Requests (SARs) and review expedited SARs or PMAs within 14 days, issuing conditional approvals (valid for 12 months) or full approvals based on tiered risk criteria, and leverage designated engineering representatives or equivalent third-party certified engineers when appropriate.”; and

“(1) The term ‘critical readiness parts and systems’ has the meaning given the term in section 4324 of title 10, United States Code.

“(2) The term ‘non-safety critical items, or non-mission critical items’ includes the following items:

“(A) Major risk parts or systems whose failure causes structural damage or significant mission degradation and requires finite element modeling, fracture analysis, comparison to similar parts, or similar methods.

“(B) Minor risk parts and systems that only have form, fit, and function requirements verified by dimensional coordinate measuring machines, go/no-go gauges, or similar methods.

“(C) Low risk parts and systems that are consumable or non-critical, requiring material certification, visual inspections, or similar methods.

“(3) The term ‘safety critical items or mission critical items’ means parts or systems whose failure causes loss of control, catastrophic failure, or loss of life, and require full qualification, simulation, and physical testing with Engineering Support Activity witnessing.”.

(A) in subparagraph (B), by inserting “in coordination with operational commands and users” after “appropriate metrics”; and

(B) by striking subparagraph (I) and redesignating subparagraph (J) as subparagraph (I);

“(1) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall require that each covered system be supported by a product support manager that shall integrate sustainment activities across the Portfolio Acquisition Executive, materiel and systems commands, sustainment working capital funds, and other elements of the sustainment enterprise by establishing a coordinated process to ensure weapon system readiness and affordability throughout the lifecycle.”;

(B) in paragraph (2) by striking subparagraphs (B) through (I) and inserting the following new subparagraphs:

“(B) adopt predictive analytics and simulation and modeling tools to improve material availability and reliability, increase operational availability rates, and reduce operation and sustainment costs;

“(C) select, transfer, direct, and coordinate product support integrators and product support providers across materiel commands, depots, sustainment working capital funds, and commercial entities to execute the product support strategy and maintain updated parts cataloging and provisioning;

“(D) review and recommend resource allocations across product support integrators and product support providers to meet performance requirements of the product support strategy;

“(E) prevent and resolve all diminishing manufacturing supply and material shortages and critical readiness parts and systems issues;

“(F) manage the end-to-end coordination of qualification, certification, and test of alternative sources of supply;

“(i) a parts selection plan that enables interoperability, maintainability, and commercially supportable designs;

“(iii) data rights and data ordering consistent with the intellectual property management plan in the life cycle sustainment plan;

“(H) inspect, accept, and manage data deliveries and conformance of such data with configuration changes in consultation with Defense Contract Management Agency; and

“(I) update the product support strategy continuously as required, at a minimum every five years.”; and

“(3) ORGANIZATION.—Each Portfolio Acquisition Executive shall establish a Major Program Manager to manage sustainment activities for in-service systems and oversee all product support managers of covered systems to ensure an expert focus on sustainment.

“(4) CAREER MANAGEMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a formal career path for product support managers, including selection criteria, training programs, and certification requirements, aligned with the standards set forth in chapter 87 of this title. Product support managers shall be selected from military and civilian personnel with demonstrated expertise in sustainment, logistics, supply chain, or engineering, and incentivized with career progression opportunities equivalent to acquisition program managers.

“(5) LIAISON OFFICER PROGRAM.—Each sustainment working capital fund entity shall establish a liaison officer program to serve as the dedicated point of contract to align working capital fund management with product support manager activities for all covered systems.”; and

(A) in paragraph (5) by inserting “any acquisition or in-service program that is” after “The term ‘covered system’ means”; and

“(9) CRITICAL READINESS PARTS AND SYSTEMS.—The term ‘critical readiness parts and systems’ means all parts and systems causing parts causing Mission Impaired Capability Awaiting Parts (MICAP), Not Mission Capable Supply (NMCS), or Casualty Report (CASREP) Category 3 or 4 status, as defined by the Department of Defense and respective military services, or other parts or systems designated by the Secretary of Defense as impacting readiness.”.

(A) in clause (vi), by adding “or real estate system” after “An installations management”; and

(3) in section 3012(3)(B), by striking “lowest overall cost alternative” and inserting “best value”;

(A) in subsection (a), by striking “if that head of an agency” and all that follows through “a complete end item”;

“(i) in the case of a contract for an amount exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (but not more than $100,000,000)—

“(I) by the competition advocate for the contracting activity (without further delegation); or

“(ii) in the case of a contract for an amount exceeding $100,000,000 (but not more than $500,000,000)—

“(III) for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense Innovation Unit, or the Missile Defense Agency, by the director of the agency; or

“(I) by the senior procurement executive for the agency as designated for the purpose of section 1702(c) of title 41 (without further delegation);

“(II) in the case of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, acting in the capacity as the senior procurement executive for the Department of Defense, by the delegate of the Under Secretary as designated pursuant to paragraph (6); or

“(III) for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense Innovation Unit, or the Missile Defense Agency, by the director of the agency; and”; and

(i) by striking “(A) The authority of the head” and all that follows through “(B) The authority of the Under Secretary” and inserting “The authority of the Under Secretary”;

(ii) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively; and

(iii) by redesignating subclauses (I) and (II) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively;

“(A) to cover any increased program costs identified by a revised cost analysis or target developed pursuant to subsection (b);

“(B) to acquire additional end items in accordance with section 3069 of this title; or

(A) in the heading, by striking “certain reduced” after “Allowed profit to reflect”;

“(3) the increased cost risk of the contractor with respect to any costs incurred prior to the award of the undefinitized contractual action when such costs—

“(A) would otherwise have been directly chargeable under the contract post-award; and

(9) in section 3703(a)(1)(A), by striking “competition that results in at least two or more responsive and viable competing bids” and inserting “price competition”;

“(b) Alternative sources required.—In the event the contracting officer is unable to determine proposed prices are fair and reasonable by any other means, an offeror who fails to make a good faith effort to comply with a reasonable request to submit data in accordance with subsection (a) is ineligible for award unless the head of the agency initiates the assessment of the offeror as a source of supply for industrial capabilities under the authorities provided by sections 865 and 882 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159).”;

(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking “$300,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1990 constant dollars)” and inserting “$1,000,000,000 (based on fiscal year 2024 constant dollars)”; and

(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking “$1,800,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1990 constant dollars)” and inserting “$5,000,000,000 (based on fiscal year 2024 constant dollars)”; and

“(3) An acquisition program for software and covered hardware as described by section 3603 of this title.”;

(12) in section 4882, by striking “the President, through the head of any department,” each place it appears and inserting “the Secretary of Defense”; and

(13) in section 4884, by striking “The President” and inserting “The Secretary of Defense”.

(B) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections (c) and (d), respectively;

“(a) Conditions with respect to certain low-rate initial production.— (1) The number of low-rate initial production lots associated with a major defense acquisition program may not be more than one if—

“(A) the milestone decision authority authorized the use of a fixed-price type contract at the time of Milestone B approval; and

“(B) the scope of the work covered by the fixed-price type contract includes the development and the low-rate initial production of items for the major defense acquisition program.

“(2) The acquisition executive of the applicable service, or a designee of the executive, may waive the limitation under paragraph (1) if—

“(B) written notification of the waiver, which includes the associated rationale, is provided to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after the date on which the waiver is issued.

“(b) Conditions with respect to certain shipbuilding contracts.— (1) With respect to a fixed-price type contract for the procurement of shipbuilding associated with a major defense acquisition program, the number of ships to be procured under the contract, including all options, may not be more than two ships if the scope of the work covered by the contract includes the detail design for the ship and the construction of items for the launch and eventual delivery of the completed ship.

“(2) The Secretary concerned may waive the limitation under paragraph (1) if, not later than 30 days after the date on which the waiver is issued, the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a written notification of the waiver that includes a certification that the basic and functional design of any ship to be procured under the contract described in paragraph (1) is complete.”; and

“(1) The term ‘basic and functional design’ has the meaning given such term in section 8669c of this title.

“(2) The term ‘construction’ means steel cutting, module fabrication, assembly, outfitting, keel laying, and module erection.

“(3) The term ‘detail design’ means design using computer-aided modeling to enable the generation of work instructions that show detailed system information and support construction, including—

“(4) The term ‘major defense acquisition program’ has the meaning given such term in section 4201 of this title.

“(5) The term ‘Milestone B approval’ has the meaning given such term in section 4172 of this title.

“(6) The term ‘milestone decision authority’ has the meaning given such term in section 4211 of this title.”.

(1) JOHN S. MCCAIN NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019.—Section 890 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 3701) is amended—

(2) SERVICEMEMBER QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVEMENT AND NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025.—Section 864(d) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159) is amended—

(A) in the subsection heading, by striking “Capacity-Based” and inserting “Capability-Based”; and

(B) in paragraph (4), by striking “increased capacity” and inserting “increased capability”.

“(f) Minimum production levels.— (1) 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, shall annually determine the minimum production level for each variant of munitions required to meet the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement reported under subsection (a)(1).

“(2) The minimum production level for each munition shall be calculated based on the Total Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement, as specified in subsection (c)(6), and shall account for the following:

“(A) The inventory objective requirements for each category listed in paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (c) and paragraph (8) of such subsection.

“(C) The time required to meet the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement, as reported pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (e).

“(3) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the minimum production levels determined under this subsection are incorporated into the planning, programming, budgeting, and execution process of the Department of Defense to align munitions procurement with the Out-Year Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirement.”.

(a) In general.—For critical readiness parts and systems, the Secretary of Defense shall enhance military readiness by incentivizing the design activity to expand sources of supply for critical readiness parts and systems, through expedited qualification processes, advanced manufacturing techniques, and risk-informed certification.

(1) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all new or modified contracts with a prime contractor shall include contracting incentives to expand sources of supply with each design activity at any tier of the supply chain for systems with critical readiness parts and systems.

(2) MANDATORY AMSC RECLASSIFICATION.—For any identified critical readiness part or system, the design activity shall, not later than 60 days after notification by the Department of Defense, conduct a review and propose reclassification of the Acquisition Method Suffix Code (AMSC) to reduce sole-source dependency for any part or system with a lead time greater than, unless the Secretary of Defense grants a waiver based on national security or operational necessity.

(3) IMPLEMENTATION.—The design activity shall submit supplier diversification plans not later than 90 days after contract award, detailing proposed supplier qualifications and projected benefits.

(4) ENFORCEMENT.—Noncompliance shall result in corrective action requests, reduced contractor performance ratings, or contract termination.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall expedite qualification procedures for critical readiness parts and systems in collaboration with the design activity at any tier of the contract supply chain.

(2) DELEGATION.—The Secretary of Defense may delegate authority to designated engineering representatives (DERs) of the Federal Aviation Administration or equivalent third-party certified engineers for specific tasks for parts approved through the Federal Aviation Administration’s Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) processes.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall mandate the use of simulation-based verification for certifying critical readiness parts and systems, reducing reliance on physical testing for non-safety critical items, or non-mission critical items, as those terms are defined in section 865 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 4811 note).

(2) SUBMISSION OF SIMULATION-BASED EVIDENCE.—Design activities or DERs shall submit to the Department upon request simulation-based evidence, such as structural/strength analysis reports and fault trees.

(3) ACCEPTANCE OF SIMULATION-BASED EVIDENCE.—Engineering Support Activities (ESAs) shall accept simulation data as primary evidence for non-safety critical items, or non-mission critical items, with conditional approvals issued within 14 days for critical readiness parts and systems.

(4) SIMULATION VALIDATION FRAMEWORK.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a Department-wide simulation validation framework incorporating third-party lab testing.

(e) Data rights enforcement and reverse engineering.—If a design activity is unwilling or unable to initiate expedited qualification or source alternative suppliers for critical readiness parts and systems within 30 days of notification, the Secretary of Defense shall—

(1) review and enforce government access to technical data deliverables to enable alternative sourcing under subchapter I of chapter 275 of title 10, United States Code; or

(2) initiate reverse engineering to qualify new suppliers using the pilot program established under section 882 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 3771 note).

(f) Report.—Not later than December 31, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees report detailing—

(1) the number of critical readiness parts and systems addressed through AMSC reclassification, supplier diversification, and reverse engineering;

(2) the implementation status of expedited templates, simulation use, and fast-track processes;

(3) compliance by design activities, including enforcement actions and data rights disputes; and

(4) the impact on critical readiness parts and system resolution times and readiness metrics.

(1) The term “critical readiness parts and systems” has the meaning given the term in section 4324 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) The term “design activity” has the meaning given the term in Revision C to Military Standard 31000 (MIL–STD–31000C), entitled “Technical Data Packages”, or successor document.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by paragraph (2), the Secretary of Defense shall issue a duty-free entry certificate for any of the following supplies imported pursuant to a procurement contract entered into by the Department of Defense:

(A) An end product or component imported from a country with which the United States has a memorandum of understanding for reciprocal procurement of defense items in effect under section 4851 of title 10, United States Code.

(B) A defense item that is an eligible product as defined in section 308 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2518).

(2) EXCEPTIONS.—Paragraph (1) does not apply with respect to a product or component described in that paragraph if—

(A) the product or component is eligible for duty-free treatment under the column 1 special rate of duty column of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States; or

(B) the product or component has already entered the customs territory of the United States and the contractor already has paid the duty with respect to the product or component.

(1) track the impact of economic fluctuations, include tariffs, supply chain disruptions and inflation, on all major prime contracts entered into by the Department of Defense; and

(2) not later than January 30, 2026, submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes—

(A) an assessment of cost increases to both the Department and contractors as a result of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862);

(B) an assessment of the effects of such tariffs on supply chains and lead times for major defense platforms; and

(C) a summary of agreements entered into under section 4851 of title 10, United States Code, and an assessment of the application of those agreements to the defense supply chain.

(c) Report on duty-free entry certificates.—Not later than January 30, 2026, and annually thereafter until January 30, 2030, the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Defense Contract Management Agency, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on articles classified under subheading 9808.00.30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States that includes—

(1) a summary of such articles for which the Secretary issued a duty-free entry certificate; and

(2) a summary of such articles for which a duty-free entry certificate was requested and denied.

Any project carried out by the Department of Defense using other transaction authority under section 4021 of title 10, United States Code, shall be reported in the same manner as other Department of Defense expenditures for inclusion in the searchable public website established by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (31 U.S.C. 6101 note; Public Law 109–282).

(a) Definition.—In this section, the term “Department” means the Department of Defense.

(b) Retrospective reviews of approved mergers.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an assessment of the competitive effects of defense contractor mergers and acquisitions during the 10-year period ending on the date of enactment of this Act that includes—

(2) effectiveness of remedies to address competition concerns, industrial base sustainability, and national security risks raised by the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, and Department in the merger review process;

(3) information sharing between the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, and the Department in the merger and acquisition review process;

(4) Department processes for measuring the impacts of vertical integration on competition, including data collection and ability to access industry information to assess anticompetitive practices; and

(5) implementation of previous Government Accountability Office, Department, and Defense Science Board recommendations to enhance competition.

(a) Evaluation required.—The Secretary of Defense shall evaluate telecommunications equipment and services manufactured or provided by TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. and its subsidiaries to determine whether such equipment and services 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; 41 U.S.C. 3901 note prec.).

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than December 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall brief the congressional defense committees on the determination made under subsection (a).

The Department of Defense may not procure for resale any generic drug unless the seller of such generic drug discloses the country the generic drug was manufactured in and the country of origin for all active pharmaceutical ingredients and key starting materials.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may not directly or indirectly acquire any computer or printer if the manufacturer is a covered Chinese entity.

(b) Prohibition on indirect sales.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the prohibition under subsection (a) also applies to indirect sales through exempt subsidiaries. No covered entity may use an exempt subsidiary to circumvent the prohibition on the acquisition of computers, unified communication devices, or printers.

(c) Applicability.—This section shall apply only with respect to contracts or other agreements entered into, renewed, or extended in accordance with the percentage thresholds specified in subsection (d), for end user computing devices such as laptops, desktops, and other physical computing equipment. This section shall not apply to contracts or other agreements for cloud-based services, including virtual desktops, or cellular telephones.

(d) Required percentages.—The percentage thresholds referred to in subsection (c) are, for both computers and printers, as follows:

(1) Not less than 10 percent of the Department’s total procurement beginning in fiscal year 2026.

(2) Not less than 25 percent of the Department’s total procurement beginning in fiscal year 2027.

(3) Not less than 50 percent of the Department’s total procurement beginning in fiscal year 2028.

(4) 100 percent of the Department’s total procurement beginning in fiscal year 2029.

(e) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may allow acquisition of items not for operational use, to conduct testing, evaluation, exfiltration, and reverse engineering missions on adversarial products and capabilities.

(A) means an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other high speed data processing device performing logical, arithmetic, or storage functions, and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device; and

(B) does not include an automated typewriter or typesetter, a portable handheld calculator, or other similar device.

(2) COUNTRY OF CONCERN.—The term “country of concern” means the Government of the People's Republic of China.

(3) COVERED CHINESE ENTITY.—The term “covered Chinese entity” means an entity that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of the National Intelligence or the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, determines to be—

(A) an entity whose ultimate parent company is domiciled in the People's Republic of China and therefore required to comply with China's 2015 National Security Law, China's 2017 National Intelligence Law, and other Chinese laws that require such ultimate parent company to cooperate with Chinese national defense and national intelligence agencies; or

(B) an entity or parent company of any entity in which a country of concern has an ownership stake.

(A) the entity that transforms raw materials, miscellaneous parts, or components into the end item;

(B) any entity that subcontracts with the entity described in subparagraph (A) for the entity described in such subparagraph to transform raw materials, miscellaneous parts, or components into the end item;

(C) any entity that otherwise directs the entity described in subparagraph (A) to transform raw materials, miscellaneous parts, or components into the end item; or

(D) any parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate of the entity described in subparagraph (A).

(A) means desktop printers, multifunction printer copiers, and printer/fax combinations taken out of service that may or may not be designed to reside on a work surface, and include various print technologies, including laser and light-emitting diode (electrographic), ink jet, dot matrix, thermal, and digital sublimation, and “multi-function” or “all-in-one” devices that perform different tasks, including copying, scanning, faxing, and printing;

(B) includes floor-standing printers, printers with optional floor stand, or household printers; and

(C) does not include point of sale (POS) receipt printers, calculators with printing capabilities, label makers, or non-standalone printers that are embedded into products that are not covered by the definition in subparagraphs (A) and (B).

(a) Prohibition on agency operation or procurement.—The Secretary of Defense may not operate, or enter into or renew a contract for the procurement of—

(A) is manufactured in a covered foreign country or by an entity domiciled in a covered foreign country;

(B) uses operating software developed in a covered foreign country or by an entity domiciled in a covered foreign country; or

(C) uses network connectivity or data storage located in or administered by an entity domiciled in a covered foreign country; or

(2) a system or systems that incorporates, interfaces with, or otherwise uses additive manufacturing systems or machines described in paragraph (1).

(b) Exception.—The prohibition under subsection (a) does not apply to the operation or procurement of additive manufacturing systems or machines for the purposes of testing, analysis, and training related to intelligence, electronic warfare, and information warfare operations.

(c) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition under subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the congressional defense committees that the operation or procurement of additive manufacturing systems or machines is required in the national interest of the United States.

(1) ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING MACHINE.—The term “additive manufacturing machine” means a system of integrated hardware and software used to realize an additive manufacturing process, including the deposition of material and the associated post-processing steps as applicable.

(2) ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING PROCESS.—The term “additive manufacturing process” means a process of joining materials to make parts from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer, as opposed to subtractive manufacturing methodologies.

(3) COVERED ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING COMPANY.—The term “covered additive manufacturing company” means any of the following:

(A) Any entity that produces or provides additive manufacturing machines and is included on—

(i) the Consolidated Screening List maintained by the International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce; or

(ii) the civil-military fusion list maintained under section 1260H of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).

(ii) is subject to unmitigated foreign ownership, control, or influence by a covered foreign country, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program or any successor to such program.

(4) COVERED ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING MACHINE.—The term “covered additive manufacturing machine” means additive manufacturing machines and any related services and equipment manufactured by a covered additive manufacturing company.

(5) COVERED FOREIGN COUNTRY.—The term “covered foreign country” means the People’s Republic of China, Iran, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation.

(a) In general.—Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“(a) Establishment.—There is established in the Department of Defense an Economic Defense Unit (in this section referred to as the ‘Unit’).

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The head of the Unit shall be the Director (in this section referred to as the ‘Director’).

“(2) APPOINTMENT.—The Director shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense from among—

“(A) employees in Senior Executive Service positions (as defined in section 3132 of title 5); or

“(B) individuals from outside the civil service who have successfully held equivalent positions.

“(A) shall serve as a principal staff assistant to the Secretary of Defense on matters within the responsibilities of the Unit;

“(B) shall report directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense without intervening authority; and

“(C) may communicate views on matters within the responsibilities of the Unit directly to the Deputy Secretary without obtaining the approval or concurrence of any other official within the Department of Defense.

“(1) Coordinating among, and harmonizing economic competition activities by, components of the Department of Defense, including by serving as a co-chair of the National Defense Economic Competition Research Council.

“(2) Developing and maintaining requirements for economic competition activities to reinforce military advantage, including requirements described in subsection (d).

“(3) Developing and maintaining a campaign plan for economic competition activities to reinforce military advantage.

“(4) Conducting or sponsoring analyses and other net assessment activities to scope economic competition activities, gaps, needs, or requirements related to activities of the United States, allies of the United States, or adversaries.

“(6) Developing programming and budget submissions for economic competition activities.

“(7) Advising the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary with respect to economic competition activities, including with respect to coordinating integration of economic competition requirements or programs into joint and interagency planning activities.

“(8) Acting as the principal interlocutor for interagency activities related to economic competition activities.

“(9) Leading outreach of the Department of Defense to relevant private actors engaged in economic competition activities, including by liaising with private actors under section 1047 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).

“(10) Sponsoring or conducting regular tabletop exercises related to economic competition activities in order to—

“(A) assess the economic impacts of decisions of the Department of Defense during crises and conflicts;

“(B) evaluate the economic tools available to the United States Government to augment the capabilities of the Department of Defense in competition, crises, and conflicts; or

“(C) evaluate planning scenarios or concept development, including to test proposed doctrine, tactics, or other nonmaterial approaches for economic competition activities that might be used by the Department of Defense.

“(11) Selecting economic competition activities projects to be carried out using funds made available to the Unit, allocating funds to organizations to carry out such projects, and monitoring the execution of such projects.

“(13) Carrying out such other activities as the Deputy Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

“(14) Regularly updating the National Security Council and relevant Federal agencies with respect to the economic competition activities of the Department of Defense.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The requirements for economic competition activities developed and maintained by the Unit under subsection (c)(2) may include requirements for—

“(D) ensuring the access of the United States to critical materials and capabilities; and

“(2) CONSULTATIONS.—In developing requirements for economic competition activities under subsection (c)(2), the Director shall consult—

“(A) integrated priorities lists from combatant commanders derived from operational plans or theater campaign plans;

“(B) integrated priorities lists of defense industrial base shortfalls or investment opportunities; and

“(C) the outcomes of experimentation events, science and technology activities, and examinations of issues of economic competition by concept development organizations.

“(1) QUARTERLY BRIEFINGS.—Not less frequently than quarterly, the Director shall provide to the Secretary of Defense and the congressional defense committees a briefing on, for the quarter preceding the briefing—

“(2) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not less frequently than annually, the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the matters described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1) for the year preceding submission of the report.

“(f) Economic competition activities defined.—In this section, the term ‘economic competition activities’ means actions that are taken to reinforce military advantage in and through the economic domain, including such actions taken—

“(3) to protect or enhance the economic or technological advantage of the United States or allies of the United States;

“(4) in the information environment or cyber environment or as other sensitive operations; or

(b) National Defense Economic Competition Research Council.—Section 228(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 4001 note) is amended—

“(1) CHAIR.—The Director of the Economic Defense Unit shall be the chair of the Council.”; and

(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (N) as clauses (i) through (xiv), respectively, and by moving such clauses, as so redesignated, two ems to the right; and

(B) by striking “The co-chairs” and all that follows through “the following:” and inserting in the following: “The Council shall include the following:

(c) National Security Capital Forum.—Section 1092(b) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 149 note) is amended to read as follows:

“(b) Co-chairs.—The Director of the Office of Strategic Capital and the Director of the Economic Defense Unit shall serve as co-chairs of the forum established under subsection (a).”.

“(A) charge and collect fees for the costs of services provided by the Office and associated with administering programs under this section, including for project-specific transaction costs and direct costs relating to such services; and

“(B) establish those fees at amounts that will ensure recovery of the full costs of administering those programs.

“(i) be deposited into the Credit Program Account established under subsection (e)(5); and

“(B) LIMITATION ON USE OF FEES.—Notwithstanding subsection (e)(5)(B), none of the fees collected under paragraph (1) may be used to pay salaries or expenses of civilian employees of the Department of Defense.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by subparagraph (B), the authority under paragraph (1) to charge and collect fees shall expire on the date specified in paragraph (9)(A) of subsection (e) for the expiration of the authority of the Director to make new loans and provide new loan guarantees under paragraph (3)(A)(i) of that subsection.

“(B) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN ASSETS.—With respect to a loan or loan guarantee provided under this section that is outstanding as of the expiration date under subparagraph (A), the authority of the Director under paragraph (1) to charge and collect fees for services relating to the loan or loan guarantee shall remain in effect for the duration of the loan or loan guarantee.

“(A) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than March 1 of each year, the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes—

“(i) a detailed summary of the fees collected under paragraph (1) in the preceding fiscal year; and

“(i) conduct an audit of fees charged and collected under paragraph (1) not less frequently than once every two years; and

“(ii) not later than June 1 of the year in which an audit is conducted under clause (i), submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the results of the audit.

“(g) Authority to accept services.—Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, the Director may accept services, such as legal, financial, technical, or professional services, associated with administering programs under this section, including accepting such services as payment in kind for services provided by the Office.

“(h) Presumption of compliance.—Each agreement for a loan or loan guarantee executed by the Director shall be conclusively presumed to be issued in compliance with the requirements of this section.

“(i) Authority to collect debts.—In the case of a default on a loan or loan guarantee provided under this section, the Director may exercise any priority of the United States in collecting debts relating to the default.”.

(b) Determinations of loan default under pilot program on capital assistance to support defense investment in industrial base.—Subsection (e)(3)(A)(ii)(VI) of such section is amended by striking “Secretary” and inserting “Director”.

(1) by striking “consist of amounts” and inserting the following: “consist of—

SEC. 903. Modifications to responsibilities of Director for Operational Test and Evaluation.

(2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

“(7) maintain, on behalf of the Secretary of Defense, enabling and cross-cutting activities that support operational test and evaluation across the Department, including—

“(D) the Joint Technical Coordinating Group for Munitions Effectiveness Program;

SEC. 904. Directive authority for matters for which Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering has responsibility.

(A) by inserting “elements of the Department relating to” after “supervising, all”; and

(B) by inserting “and to enhance jointness” after “and engineering efforts”; and

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

“(4) directing the Secretaries of the military departments and the heads of all other elements of the Department with regard to matters for which the Under Secretary has responsibility.”.

SEC. 905. Modification of energetic materials strategic plan and investment strategy of Joint Energetics Transition Office.

(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

SEC. 906. Limitation on availability of funds pending establishment of Joint Energetics Transition Office.

SEC. 907. Modification of covered technology categories for Office of Strategic Capital.

(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (U) through (GG) as subparagraphs (V) through (HH), respectively; and

SEC. 908. Modification of organization and authorities of Assistant Secretaries of Defense with duties relating to industrial base policy and readiness.

(a) Establishment of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Armaments Cooperation.—Section 138(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by redesignating paragraphs (7) and (8) as paragraphs (8) and (9), respectively; and

“(7) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Armaments Cooperation, who shall report directly to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. The principal duty of the Assistant Secretary shall be to carry out section 133b(b)(10) of this title.”.

(b) Renaming of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, Capabilities, and Readiness.—On and after the date of the enactment of this Act—

(1) the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities shall be known as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, Capabilities, and Readiness; and

(2) any reference in any law or regulation to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities shall be deemed to be a reference to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, Capabilities, and Readiness.

(c) Elimination of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.—The position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness is eliminated.

(a) Mission.—Subsection (b) of section 181 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (1) through (7) and inserting the following:

“(1) evaluating global trends, threats, and adversary capabilities to inform understanding of joint operational problems and shape a joint force design;

“(2) coordinating with commanders of combatant commands with respect to compiling, refining, and prioritizing joint operational problems;

“(3) continuously reviewing and assessing military capabilities of the armed forces, Defense Agencies, or other entities of the Department of Defense to meet applicable requirements in the national defense strategy under section 113(g) of this title;

“(4) identifying and prioritizing gaps and opportunities in military capabilities to meet such requirements, including making recommendations for changes to address such gaps and leverage such opportunities;

“(5) identifying advances in technology, innovative commercial solutions, and concepts of operation that could improve the ability of the joint force in achieving military advantage for the United States;

“(6) designing the joint force in a manner that addresses joint operational problems and, in doing so, evaluating force design initiatives of the armed forces to recommend acceptance, mitigation, or alternative force designs;

“(7) maintaining a repository of joint operational problems and identification of military capabilities that are addressing those problems; and

“(8) evaluating impact to joint military capability requirements for the purposes of section 4375(b).”.

(b) Composition.—Subsection (c)(1) of such section is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

“(G) In any case in which the Council is considering a topic of significant interest to a combatant command, the commander of the combatant command or a designee of the commander who is a general or flag officer.”.

(A) by striking “, and strongly consider,” and inserting “and consider”; and

(B) by striking “under subsection (b)(2) and joint performance requirements pursuant to subsection (b)(3)”;

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking “, and strongly consider,” and inserting “and consider”; and

“(5) INPUT FROM INDUSTRY.—The Council may seek views from industry on commercially available technology to address joint operational problems or capability gaps.”.

(d) Performance requirements.—Subsection (e) of such section is amended by striking “and, except” and all that follows through “Council”.

(3) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated, the following new paragraph (1):

“(1) The term ‘capability requirement’ means a capability that is critical or essential to address a joint operational problem.”; and

(4) by inserting after paragraph (2), as so redesignated, the following new paragraph (3):

“(A) means a challenge across the joint force faced by a combatant command in achieving an assigned military objective; and

“(B) may include limitations in capabilities, resources, or the ability to effectively and efficiently coordinate across the joint force, with another combatant command, or among joint military capabilities.”.

(1) ACQUISITION-RELATED FUNCTIONS OF CHIEFS OF THE ARMED FORCES.—Section 3104(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “(subject, where appropriate, to validation by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council pursuant to section 181 of this title)”.

(2) LIMITATIONS ON DEFENSE MODERNIZATION ACCOUNT.—Section 3136(e)(1)(A) of such title is amended—

(A) by striking “in excess of—” and all that follows through “(i) a specific limitation” and inserting “in excess of a specific limitation”; and

(3) FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR MILESTONE A APPROVAL.—Section 4251(e)(1) of such title is amended by striking “approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council”.

(4) FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR MILESTONE B APPROVAL.—Section 4252(b) of such title is amended—

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (15) as paragraphs (9) through (14), respectively.

(5) BREACH OF CRITICAL COST GROWTH THRESHOLD.—Section 4376 of such title is amended—

(A) in subsection (a), by striking “, after consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight Council regarding program requirements,”;

(B) in subsection (b)(2)(B), by striking “to meet the joint military requirement (as defined in section 181(g)(1) of this title)”; and

(6) ACQUISITION ACCOUNTABILITY ON MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM.—Section 5514(b)(2)(C)(ii) of such title is amended by striking “approved” and inserting “reviewed”.

SEC. 912. Transfer of responsibility for countering small unmanned aircraft systems.

(a) Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment as executive agent.—Section 133b(b)(5) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(2) in subparagraph (E), by striking the semicolon and inserting “; and”; and

“(F) the executive agent for the Department of Defense for oversight of efforts to counter small unmanned aircraft;”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Effective on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act—

(A) the Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office of the Army is terminated; and

(B) the functions, assets, and civilian employees of the Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office of the Army shall be transferred to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

(2) REFERENCES.—On and after the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, any reference in any law or regulation to the Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office of the Army shall be deemed to be a reference to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

(1) PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL KINETIC EFFECTORS FOR LOW, SLOW, SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT INTEGRATED DEFEAT SYSTEM.—Section 113 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159) is amended—

(i) by striking “Secretary of the Army” and inserting “Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment”; and

(C) in subsection (b), by striking “September 30, 2025, the Secretary of the Army” and inserting “September 30, 2026, the Under Secretary”.

(2) COUNTER UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM THREAT LIBRARY.—Section 353 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 130i note) is amended—

(A) in subsection (a), by striking “Not later” and all that follows through “Office,” and inserting “Not later than June 30, 2027, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment”; and

(i) by striking “The Secretary” and all that follows through “Office,” and inserting “The Under Secretary”; and

(ii) by striking “the Secretary of the Army” and inserting “the Under Secretary”.

SEC. 913. Study on feasibility and advisability of establishing a Joint Capabilities and Programming Board.

(a) Study required.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study on the feasibility and advisability of establishing a Joint Capabilities and Programming Board (in this section referred to as the “Board”) within the Department of Defense to serve as a consolidated forum for addressing joint military capabilities and program budgeting for investments.

(b) Elements of study.—The study required by subsection (a) shall assess and provide recommendations on the following elements for the proposed Board:

(A) reviewing and recommending actions on joint military capabilities spanning multiple components of the Department of Defense to address priority capability needs; and

(B) evaluating and recommending actions on investment portfolio evaluation and budgeting matters to prioritize joint military capabilities and optimize lethality based on available resources.

(2) The feasibility of the Board being co-chaired by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation and the Chairman of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, including the roles, authorities, and responsibilities of the co-chairpersons.

(iii) representatives from the Office of the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation;

(iv) representatives from the Armed Forces and combatant commands to reflect military user perspectives; and

(v) representatives of portfolio acquisition executives or equivalent managers to reflect program execution perspectives;

(B) a flexible structure permitting the establishment of ad hoc or standing committees to address specific areas or issues, drawing from the core membership;

(C) separate staff directly accountable to each co-chairperson to assist in identifying, reviewing, coordinating, and analyzing matters brought before the Board; and

(D) mission engineering and integration analysis cells that evaluate the effectiveness of current and proposed value chains of the Department of Defense and inform the assessment of alternative courses of action for capability and resource investments.

(A) maintaining autonomy for the Armed Forces and portfolio acquisition executives to make decisions and execute programs without requiring approval by or the submission of documentation to the Board;

(B) issuing recommendations by majority vote of members of the Board, to be forwarded to the Deputy Secretary of Defense unless unanimously rejected by the co-chairpersons; and

(C) allowing the members or representatives of the Board to submit dissenting opinions alongside recommendations for consideration by the Deputy Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Defense.

(i) nominated by members of the Board, the Armed Forces, the combatant commands, or portfolio acquisition executives; and

(ii) addressing capability gaps, resource constraints, or programmatic challenges requiring joint or departmental action; and

(B) flexible quorum and voting procedures to ensure efficient decision-making and requiring participation from representatives of military users and program acquisition executives directly impacted by any recommendation.

(6) The provision of sufficient staff, directly accountable to the co-chairpersons, to support the Board’s operations and analysis of issues.

(7) The impact of the proposed Board on existing entities of the Department of Defense, including the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and the Office of the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, including potential overlaps, redundancies, or synergies between the missions and responsibilities of those entities and the Board.

(8) The anticipated benefits of enhanced joint capability prioritization and resource allocation, including the ability to consolidate or remove existing processes and decision forums.

(9) Potential barriers to establishing the Board, including resource requirements and alignment with existing acquisition and budgeting processes.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than July 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the results of the study required by subsection (a).

(A) a comprehensive analysis of the feasibility and advisability of establishing the Board, addressing each element specified in subsection (b);

(i) specific recommendations for the organizational structure, governance, voting mechanisms, quorum requirements, and operational procedures of the Board; and

(ii) an estimation of the costs, resource requirements, and timeline for establishing and operating the Board; and

(C) any additional findings or recommendations to improve joint capability development, program budgeting, and resource allocation within the Department of Defense.

(d) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the establishment of a Joint Capabilities and Programming Board before the completion and review of the study required by subsection (a).

SEC. 914. Briefing on restructuring of Army Futures Command and Training and Doctrine Command.

(a) In general.—Not less than 60 days before executing any plan to merge, consolidate, or otherwise reorganize the Army Futures Command and the Training and Doctrine Command of the Army, the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the Army shall provide to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive briefing on the merger, consolidation, or other reorganization.

(b) Elements.—The briefing required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A description of the proposed merger, consolidation, or other reorganization, including affected commands, subordinate entities, and organizational structures.

(2) The strategic, operational, and fiscal rationale for the proposed merger, consolidation, or other reorganization.

(3) An assessment of potential impacts of the proposed merger, consolidation, or other reorganization on the readiness and mission effectiveness of the Army.

(4) An identification of resource reallocations, including installation realignment or closures and personnel movements.

(5) A timeline for implementation of the proposed merger, consolidation, or other reorganization.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall designate a senior official of the Department of Defense to oversee policy and programs related to the transition of members of the Armed Forces from active duty to—

(2) QUALIFICATIONS.—The official designated under paragraph (1) shall be designated from among individuals with—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall prescribe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the official designated under subsection (a)(1).

(2) ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND AUTHORITIES REQUIRED.—The roles, responsibilities, and authorities prescribed pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include, with respect to the transition of members of the Armed Forces and their families from active duty to civilian life and reserve components—

(A) serving as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness on policies, operations, and programs and activities relating to the transition of members;

(B) assisting the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness with policies, operations, and programs and activities relating to the transition of members;

(C) working, in coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of Education, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of all activities relating to the transition of members;

(D) serving as the chief transition officer of the Department of Defense, with the mission of coordinating and overseeing the effectiveness of transition programs of the Department of Defense and ensuring all members of the Armed Forces are well equipped for civilian life or the reserve components, as the case may be;

(E) overseeing the Military-Civilian Transition Office and the implementation of transition programs across the Department of Defense;

(F) conducting a review and assessment of all transition programs and services offered by the Department of Defense, including the Transition Assistance Program and Skillbridge Program, and proposing legislative or administrative action—

(ii) to ensure compliance with all legal requirements related to transition assistance; and

(G) working with Federal agencies, State and local governments, and nongovernmental organizations to improve the delivery of transition support services.

(c) Briefing on designation and implementation.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on—

(2) the implementation of the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the official under subsection (b).

“(h) Removal of members of Joint Chiefs of Staff.— (1) If the President removes a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from office or transfers a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to another position or location before the end of the term of the member as specified in statute, the President shall, not later than five days after the removal or transfer takes effect, submit to Congress, including the congressional defense committees, notice that the member is being removed or transferred and a statement of the reason for the removal or transfer.

“(2) Nothing in this subsection prohibits a personnel action authorized by another provision of law.”.

SEC. 917. Longer term and eligibility for appointment to rank of Admiral of Commander of Naval Sea Systems Command.

(a) Term.—Section 526 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(k) (1) An individual serving as the Commander of the Naval Sea Systems Command—

“(B) is eligible to be appointed to the rank of Admiral during the final three years of that term.

“(2) The Secretary of the Navy may terminate the term of an individual serving as the Commander of the Naval Sea Systems Command before the end of the eight-year term specified in paragraph (1)(A) if the Secretary notifies the congressional defense committees of the termination.”.

(b) Extension of time period for retirement for years of service.—Section 636(c) of such title is amended—

(1) by striking “In the administration” and inserting “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), in the administration”; and

“(A) may continue to serve after 40 years of active commissioned service in order to complete the term of the Commander specified in section 526(k)(1)(A) of this title; and

“(B) may in no case serve more than 45 years of active commissioned service.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy, acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition and in coordination with the Commander of the Naval Sea Systems Command, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on incentives that would promote private investment in the creation of two new private shipyards on the Pacific Coast. The incentives should be focused on new construction shipyards. The report may include suggested locations based on strategic laydown or other relevant defense industrial base matters.

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—In preparing the report required by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall—

(B) assess the potential for investment in or establishment of a United States subsidiary of a foreign-owned shipbuilding company, with special preference to companies based in Japan and the Republic of Korea.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The report required by paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

(B) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The unclassified portion of the report required by paragraph (1) shall be made available to the public.

SEC. 918. Delay of disestablishment of Navy Expeditionary Combat Command Pacific.

(a) In general.—During the one-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy may not take any action to disestablish the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command Pacific located at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary (or a designee of the Secretary) shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on—

(1) the status of the decision of the Secretary with respect to the disestablishment of the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command Pacific; and

SEC. 919. Limitation on use of funds for consolidation, disestablishment, or elimination of geographic combatant commands.

(1) A detailed plan for consolidation, disestablishment, or elimination of the geographic combatant command, including associated timelines and detailed accounting of the associated costs.

(2) A detailed analysis of the anticipated impact of the consolidation, disestablishment, or elimination on the ability of the Department of Defense to accomplish objectives in the affected area of responsibility, including the ability of the Department to effectively deter conflict, maintain peace and security, and conduct military operations, exercises, and security cooperation activities with allies and partners.

SEC. 920. Elimination of statutory provisions relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Department of Defense.

(a) Duties of Secretary of Defense.—Section 113 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively;

(B) by redesignating clauses (viii), (ix), and (x) as clauses (vii), (viii), and (ix), respectively;

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “to measure—” and all that follows through “(C) the efforts” and inserting “to measure the efforts”: and

(i) by striking “shall—” and all that follows through “(A) ensure that” and inserting “shall ensure that”;

(ii) by striking the semicolon after “extent practicable” and inserting a period: and

(A) by striking “, disaggregated by gender, race, and ethnicity,” each place it appears;

(B) in paragraph (1), by striking “disaggregated by gender, race, and ethnicity,”; and

(b) Chief diversity officer of the department of defense.—Section 147 of title 10, United States Code, is repealed.

(A) in section 573(b), by striking “The members of a selection” and all that follows through “extent practicable.”;

(B) in section 612(a)(1), by striking “The members of a selection” and all that follows through “extent practicable.”; and

(2) OTHER SELECTION BOARDS.—Section 503(c) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 573 note) is repealed.

(d) Diversity in military leadership.—Section 656 of title 10, United States Code, is repealed.

(e) Identification of gender or personal pronouns in official correspondence.—Section 986 of title 10, United States Code, is repealed.

(f) Human relations training.—Section 2001(a)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “include” and all that follows through the period and inserting “shall include honor, excellence, courage, and commitment.”.

(g) Strategic plan for diversity and inclusion.—Section 529 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92; 10 U.S.C. 656 note) is repealed.

(h) Senior advisors for diversity and inclusion for the military departments and coast guard.—Section 913(b) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 147 note) is repealed.

(i) Conforming amendment.—Section 118(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “to carry out—” and all that follows through “(2) guidance” and inserting “to carry out guidance”.

SEC. 921. Defense Science Board study on optimal organizational structure for digital engineering solutions.

(a) Study required.—The Secretary of Defense shall direct the Defense Science Board to conduct a comprehensive study to evaluate and recommend the most optimal organizational structure within the Office of the Secretary of Defense to support digital solutions engineering activities across the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments.

(b) Elements.—The study required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) An assessment of existing organizational structures and organizations supporting digital solutions engineering across the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments, including—

(A) current responsibilities, requirements, and deliverables of service-based software delivery organizations;

(F) integration challenges and opportunities with Department-wide digital initiatives.

(2) An evaluation of potential organizational courses of action for supporting digital solutions engineering within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, including—

(A) establishment of a new defense agency or Department of Defense field activity;

(B) integration into an existing defense agency or Department of Defense field activity;

(C) consolidation of digital development functions within existing Office of the Secretary of Defense staff organizations;

(E) hybrid approaches combining elements of the options described in subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D); and

(F) any other organizational structures deemed appropriate by the Defense Science Board.

(3) Recommendations on the selection of the optimal organizational structure, including—

(A) analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each course of action evaluated under paragraph (2);

(D) application of lessons from similar industry or academic entities performing similar work;

(F) assessment of the implementation of and execution of governance structures, including artificial intelligence model management;

(G) coordination mechanisms with existing Department components and combatant commands;

(H) recommendations for unique hiring authorities to support digital solutions engineering workforce requirements; and

(I) recommendations for unique acquisition authorities to support rapid digital solutions engineering and deployment.

(4) Transition recommendations for implementing the selected organizational structure, including—

(1) TRANSMITTAL TO SECRETARY.—Not later than February 1, 2027, the Board shall transmit to the Secretary of Defense a final report on the study conducted pursuant to subsection (a).

(2) TRANSMITTAL TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary receives the final report under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit the report to the congressional defense committees, together with such comments as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(1) DIGITAL SOLUTIONS ENGINEERING.—The term “digital solutions engineering” means the development, deployment, and sustainment of artificial intelligence systems, software applications, data engineering solutions, data analytics platforms, and other digital technologies for operational and business purposes within the Department of Defense.

(2) SOFTWARE DELIVERY ORGANIZATIONS.—The term “software delivery organizations” means organizational units within the military services dedicated to the rapid development, deployment, and sustainment of software applications and digital solutions.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish an Advanced Nuclear Transition Working Group (referred to in this section as the “working group”).

(1) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment.

(2) The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy, and Environment.

(3) The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment.

(4) The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Energy, Installations, and Environment.

(6) The Principal Director for Energy Resilience of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

(9) The heads of such other components of the Department of Defense, as determined by the Chair.

(c) Chair.—The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs, or a designee, shall serve as the Chair of the Working Group.

(1) To develop and execute a strategy to accelerate the procurement and fielding of commercial advanced nuclear capabilities, in compliance with laws, regulations, and agreements, and consistent with best practices.

(2) To identify and elevate the critical energy requirements of the combatant commands, United States military installations, and the infrastructure and mission capabilities needs of the combatant commands and military installations that may be addressed with advanced nuclear reactors.

(3) To connect the combatant commands and military installations with ongoing and planned efforts.

(4) To create an accelerated pathway to leverage advanced nuclear technologies to address operational gaps.

(5) To provide a forum for members of the Working Group to coordinate advanced nuclear demonstration and transition efforts, including by increasing opportunities and venues for government and commercial research and development, testing and evaluation, and procurement activities.

(6) To advocate for appropriate levels of resourcing within planning, programming, budgeting, and execution processes to advance the development and use of nuclear energy technologies across the Department of Defense.

(7) To coordinate interagency activities and develop best practices on workforce development, regulatory pathways, licensing frameworks, access to fuel sources, safety and security standards, and decommissioning that currently hinder more rapid fielding of advanced nuclear reactors.

(8) To establish venues through which to engage commercial companies developing advanced reactors so as to review the technology readiness, timeline, and availability of reactor capabilities for defense applications.

(9) To inform and complete the briefings and reports required in subsection (f).

(e) Meetings.—The Working Group shall meet at the call of the Chair and not less than once per quarter.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 30, 2026, and annually thereafter until 2029, the Chair shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing the status of advanced nuclear projects, associated funding and requirements, planned program transitions, actions, and milestones of the Working Group, and other matters as determined by the Secretary of Defense and the Working Group during the preceding year.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) A summary on the adequacy of existing energy storage and distribution systems to meet mission requirements in a contested or austere operating environment.

(B) An identification of the critical energy requirements of the combatant commands, United States military installations, and the infrastructure and weapons capabilities needs of the combatant commands and military installations that may be addressed with the use of microreactors or small modular reactors, including through expeditionary, transportable, stationary, space-based, or floating power plants.

(3) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(1) AUTHORITY.—Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary in the national interest, the Secretary may transfer amounts of authorizations made available to the Department of Defense in this division for fiscal year 2026 between any such authorizations for that fiscal year (or any subdivisions thereof). Amounts of authorizations so transferred shall be merged with and be available for the same purposes as the authorization to which transferred.

(2) LIMITATION.—Except as provided in paragraph (3), the total amount of authorizations that the Secretary may transfer under the authority of this section may not exceed $6,000,000,000.

(3) EXCEPTION FOR TRANSFERS BETWEEN MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS.—A transfer of funds between military personnel authorizations under title IV shall not be counted toward the dollar limitation in paragraph (2).

(b) Limitations.—The authority provided by subsection (a) to transfer authorizations—

(1) may only be used to provide authority for items that have a higher priority than the items from which authority is transferred; and

(2) may not be used to provide authority for an item that has been denied authorization by Congress.

(c) Effect on authorization amounts.—A transfer made from one account to another under the authority of this section shall be deemed to increase the amount authorized for the account to which the amount is transferred by an amount equal to the amount transferred.

(d) Notice to Congress.—The Secretary shall promptly notify Congress of each transfer made under subsection (a).

SEC. 1002. Amendments and repeals to budgetary requirements for defense acquisition.

(1) BODY ARMOR PROCUREMENT.—Section 141 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 10 U.S.C. 221 note) is amended to read as follows:

(2) EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL DEFENSE PROGRAM.—Section 2284 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEM.—Section 219 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 113–66; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

(2) SEPARATE PROGRAM ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE.—Section 213 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

(3) SEPARATE PROCUREMENT LINE ITEMS FOR FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS PROGRAM.—Section 111 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

(4) SEPARATE PROCUREMENT AND RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION LINE ITEMS AND PROGRAM ELEMENTS FOR SKY WARRIOR UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS PROJECT.—Section 214 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

(5) REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE DISPLAY OF BUDGETS FOR AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ.—Section 1502 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

(a) In general.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit to the congressional defense committees a one-time briefing on any anticipated issues in establishing beginning balances for audits of the financial statements of the Department of Defense.

(1) a detailed identification of each budgetary account known to have and anticipated to have unsupported beginning balances;

(2) a description of the specific issues preventing the establishment of supported beginning balances for each identified account;

(3) an explanation of whether generally accepted accounting principles provide sufficient authority, processes, and procedures to resolve such issues, and if not, the alternative sources or methods proposed to establish beginning balances; and

(4) the projected impact to receiving an unmodified audit opinion of that account without a supported beginning balance.

“(b) Reporting requirements.—On the same date as the submission of audited financial statements required pursuant to section 240a of this title, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees an updated report on the Defense Business Systems Audit Remediation Plan under subsection (a).”.

SEC. 1011. Requirements related to Medium Landing Ships and Light Replenishment Oilers.

(a) Design standards and construction practices.—The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that covered vessels procured by the Secretary are, to the maximum extent practical, constructed using commercial design standards and commercial construction practices that are consistent with the best interests of the Federal Government.

(b) Vessel construction manager.—The Secretary of the Navy shall provide for an entity other than the Department of the Navy to contract for the construction of covered vessels.

SEC. 1012. Modification of authority to purchase used vessels under the National Defense Sealift Fund.

SEC. 1013. Exemption of unmanned surface vessels and unmanned underwater vehicles from certain technical authority requirements.

(a) Exemption from senior technical authority requirements.—Unmanned surface vessels and unmanned underwater vehicles acquired or developed by the Department of the Navy are exempt from any requirement for oversight by a senior technical authority established under section 8669b of title 10, United States Code, except the requirements, specifications, and approvals described in subsection (c).

(b) Limitation relating to Office of the Chief Engineer.—Subject to subsection (c), the Chief Engineer of the Naval Sea Systems Command may not establish any requirement, specification, or approval for an unmanned surface vessel or an unmanned underwater vehicle unless such action is approved in advance by the program manager responsible for the respective unmanned system.

(c) Exceptions.—As the Secretary of the Navy considers appropriate, unmanned surface vessels and unmanned underwater vehicles may be subject to requirements, specifications, and approvals established by technical domain managers or technical warrant holders with responsibility for cybersecurity, ordnance and explosives, or warfare systems, without advanced approval described in subsection (b).

(1) UNMANNED SURFACE VESSEL.—The term “unmanned surface vessel” means a vessel designed to operate on the surface of the water without an onboard human crew.

(2) UNMANNED UNDERWATER VEHICLE.—The term “unmanned underwater vehicle” means a vehicle designed to operate below the surface of the water without an onboard human crew.

SEC. 1014. Prohibition on retiring and decommissioning oceanographic research vessels of the Navy.

SEC. 1015. Report accompanying requests for new flights or blocks of major shipbuilding programs.

(a) In general.—Chapter 863 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 8669c the following new section:

“§ 8669d. Report accompanying requests for new flights or blocks of major shipbuilding programs

“(a) In general.—If the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for a fiscal year pursuant to section 1105 of title 31 includes a request for a new flight or block of ships, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit a report accompanying such request.

“(b) Elements.—Each report required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(A) An identification of the degree to which detail design and production design drawings and related documents have been completed in accordance with the shipbuilding contract.

“(B) An identification of the number of changes to the new flight or block of ships from the previous multiyear procurement authorization for the class of ship concerned.

“(C) An identification of the risks associated with any design changes to the new flight or block of ships from the previous multiyear procurement authorization for the class of ship concerned.

“(2) A certification that the findings of any such review support the start of construction.

“(3) An assessment of the readiness of the shipyard facilities and workforce to begin construction.

“(4) The Navy’s estimated delivery date and a description of any risks that could affect such delivery date.

“(5) An assessment of the extent to which adequate processes and metrics are in place to measure and manage program risks.

“(6) With respect to the first ship, a description of the plans of the Navy to oversee and document the construction of the ship to ensure that the detail design supports the construction schedule for the ship.

“(A) the ship is the first ship to be constructed under the new flight or block of ships; or

“(B) the shipyard at which the ship is to be constructed has not previously started construction on a ship under the new flight or block of ships.

“(2) MAJOR SHIPBUILDING PROGRAM; PRODUCTION READINESS REVIEW.—The terms ‘major shipbuilding program’ and ‘production readiness review’ have the meanings given those terms in section 8669c(c) of this title.

“(3) NEW FLIGHT OR BLOCK OF SHIPS.—The term ‘new flight or block of ships’ means a new flight, block, or major modification to a current ship class under a major shipbuilding program that was previously authorized and met the previous requirements as a new ship class.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 863 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 8669c the following new item:

(a) In general.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 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, shall jointly submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on co-production of non-nuclear auxiliary vessels across the Armed Forces.

(b) Elements.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A list of non-nuclear auxiliary vessels suitable for co-production with foreign governments and industry, including details related to operational roles, prospects for co-production, and compatibility with the Navy, the Army, and the Marine Corps.

(2) A plan for implementing co-production for each type of vessel on the list required by paragraph (1), including estimated timelines and costs.

(3) A description of authorities needed to co-produce such vessels, including statutory or regulatory changes.

(4) A description of barriers to co-production, including operational, regulatory, security, and economic challenges and challenges related to international agreements, with recommendations for resolution.

(5) A description of input from industry and private capital stakeholders on joint venture terms, incentives, and opportunities.

(6) A list of foreign partners with the willingness and capacity to engage in joint ventures to co-produce each vessel on the list required by paragraph (1) and the associated shipyard.

(c) Form.—The report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, with a classified annex if necessary.

(1) A list of non-nuclear vessels that could be suitable for contracting under a long-term leasing program.

(2) A plan outlining how the Navy would implement a leasing program for surface vessels.

(3) A description of authorities necessary for the Navy to lease commercially built and privately owned vessels.

(4) A description of input from industry and private capital stakeholders on suggested lease terms and incentives to encourage industry to participate in such a leasing program.

SEC. 1018. Pilot program on use of automated shipbuilding technologies and capabilities.

(a) In general.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall establish a pilot program on the use of automated assembly technologies and capabilities in naval shipbuilding to reduce overall construction times and alleviate workforce constraints (in this section referred to as the “pilot program”).

(b) Elements of pilot program.—In carrying out the pilot program, the Secretary of the Navy shall—

(1) identify and select available novel automated hull assembly technologies for incorporation and demonstration;

(2) designate at least one surface ship or submarine program to demonstrate the automated technologies identified under paragraph (1);

(A) across a range of functions, including plate preparation, welding, and block assembly; and

(B) for compatibility and ease of adoption into the existing shipbuilding value chain; and

(5) assess the feasibility and effectiveness of automated approaches in improving subassembly construction times, overall ship construction schedules, and workforce efficiency and safety.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 30, 2026, and annually thereafter until the pilot program terminates, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the implementation and results of the pilot program.

(2) ELEMENTS OF REPORTS.—Each report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) An identification of the time required to adapt specific technologies and processes.

(B) A description of the impact of the pilot program on workforce and construction schedules.

(d) Termination.—The pilot program shall terminate on the date that is three years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

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.

(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”; and

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking “is or was held on or after January 20, 2009” and inserting “has been held since any date that is on or before October 1, 2009”.

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.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”; and

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.

(3) by striking “any individual detained in the custody or under the control of the Department of Defense at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,” and inserting “any individual detained at Guantanamo”; and

“(b) Individual detained at Guantanamo defined.—In this section, the term ‘individual detained at Guantanamo’ has the meaning given that term in section 1034(f)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (10 U.S.C. 801 note; Public Law 114–92).”.

SEC. 1024. Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or relinquish control of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

SEC. 1025. Clarification regarding definition of individual detained at Guantanamo.

(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “as of” and inserting “on or before”; and

(2) in subparagraph (B)(i), by inserting “at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba” after “Department of Defense”.

SEC. 1031. Prohibition on use of funds to support entertainment projects with ties to the Government of the People’s Republic of China.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for the Department of Defense may be used to knowingly provide 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, or an entity under the direction of the People’s Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party, to censor the content of the project in a material manner to advance the national interest of the People’s Republic of China.

(b) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition under subsection (a) if the Secretary submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a written certification that such a waiver is in the national interest of the United States.

SEC. 1032. Prohibition on destruction or scrapping of World War II–era aircraft.

(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of Defense may not destroy, dismantle, scrap, cannibalize, or otherwise render permanently inoperable any aircraft that—

(2) is in the custody or administrative control of the Department of the Air Force as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Authorized dispositions.—Aircraft described in subsection (a) may only be—

(2) transferred to the National Museum of the United States Air Force or other official Department of Defense museums;

(3) transferred to qualified Federal agencies, nonprofit institutions, or museums with demonstrated indoor preservation and public display capabilities; or

(4) de-accessioned under a plan approved by the Secretary of Defense that supports long-term preservation of such aircraft, and consistent with guidelines established in the committee report accompanying this Act.

(c) Waiver authority.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the restriction under subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis only if—

(1) the aircraft is determined by qualified personnel to be beyond practical restoration or preservation;

(2) no eligible institution expresses interest in accepting the aircraft within 12 months following public notice of its availability; and

(3) written notification and justification of the waiver is submitted to the congressional defense committees not less than 30 days prior to execution of any disposal action.

(d) Aircraft defined.—In this section, the term “aircraft” includes any fixed-wing or rotary-wing manned aircraft in military service prior to December 31, 1945.

SEC. 1033. Support for counterdrug activities and activities to counter transnational organized crime.

(a) Quarterly reporting.—Subsection (h) of section 284 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as subparagraphs (B) and (C), respectively; and

(B) by inserting before subparagraph (B), as redesignated by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the following new subparagraph:

“(ii) the budget, implementation timeline with milestones, anticipated delivery schedule for support, and completion date for the purpose or project for which support is provided;

“(iii) the source and planned expenditure of funds provided for the project or purpose;

“(iv) a description of the arrangements, if any, for the sustainment of the project or purpose and the source of funds to support sustainment of the capabilities and performance outcomes achieved using such support, if applicable;

“(v) a description of the objectives for the project or purpose and evaluation framework to be used to develop capability and performance metrics associated with operational outcomes for the recipient;

“(vi) information, including the amount, type, and purpose, about the support provided the agency during the three fiscal years preceding the fiscal year for which the support covered by the notice is provided under this section with respect to—

“(II) counterdrug activities authorized by section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105–85; 111 Stat. 1811); or

“(III) any other significant program, account, or activity for the provision of security assistance that the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State consider appropriate.”; and

(2) in paragraph (3)(B)(i), by striking “the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives” and inserting “the congressional defense committees”.

(b) Rule of construction regarding use of authority for immigration enforcement.—Such section is further amended—

“(i) Rule of construction regarding use of authority for immigration enforcement.—No support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the Federal Government or of any State, local, tribal, or foreign law enforcement agency may be provided under this section for the detention of an individual at a military installation, Department of Defense facility, or Department of Defense-funded facility unless the Secretary of Defense independently verifies the nexus to drug activities or transnational organized crime prior to the transfer of such individual to such installation or facility.”.

SEC. 1034. Senior leaders of the Department of Defense and other specified persons: authority to provide protection.

“(A) previously served in the positions identified in paragraphs (1) through (7); and

“(B) face serious and credible threats arising from duties performed while employed by the Department of Defense.”;

(B) in paragraph (4), by inserting “or reimbursement” after “personal security”; and

“(A) IN GENERAL.— Except as provided in subparagraph (D), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committee determinations made pursuant to this subsection as follows:

“(i) An initial determination made under paragraph (4), not later than 15 days after the date on which the determination is made, including the justification for such determination and a current threat assessment by an appropriate law enforcement, security, or intelligence organization.

“(ii) A determination to deny the renewal of physical protection and security or reimbursement, not later than 15 days after the date on which the determination is made, including—

“(II) a current threat assessment by an appropriate law enforcement, security, or intelligence organization; and

“(III) a certification that threats to the individual arising from duties performed while employed by the Department of Defense can be sufficiently mitigated without physical protection and security or reimbursement.

“(iii) A determination to terminate physical protection and security or reimbursement during a previously authorized period of protection, not later than 48 hours after the date on which the determination is made, including—

“(II) a current threat assessment by an appropriate law enforcement, security, or intelligence organization; and

“(III) a certification that threats to the individual arising from duties performed while employed by the Department of Defense can be sufficiently mitigated without protection and security or reimbursement.

“(iv) A determination to deny a request for reimbursement of an individual described in subsection (a)(8), not later than 15 days after the date on which the determination is made, including—

“(II) a current threat assessment by an appropriate law enforcement, security, or intelligence organization; and

“(III) a certification that threats to the individual arising from duties performed while employed by the Department of Defense can be sufficiently mitigated without reimbursement.”; and

(ii) in subparagraph (C), by inserting “and a description of any changes to such guidelines” after “paragraph (1)”; and

SEC. 1035. Notification of the use of military aircraft for immigration enforcement operations.

(1) The type and variant of military aircraft used to support the enforcement operation.

(2) The number of individuals on board the military aircraft employed by the Department of Defense.

(3) The type, variant, and number of any military aircraft utilized to support the military aircraft being used in the enforcement operation, including aerial refueling aircraft.

(D) the number of flight hours required to complete the round-trip mission of the supporting aircraft.

(6) When the destination country of the military aircraft is Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, reporting on both inbound and outbound flights in accordance with the requirements of paragraphs (1) through (5).

(7) Reassignment of Department of Defense personnel from Joint Task Force Guantanamo or another Department of Defense entity to support alien detention operations.

(8) Facility maintenance or upgrades to support operations and costs of any Federal agency.

SEC. 1036. Modification of requirements relating to support of civil authorities by Armed Forces.

(1) in subsection (a), in the subsection heading, by striking “Requirement” and inserting “Response to civil disturbances”;

“(b) Support to civilian law enforcement agencies by members of the armed forces.—Whenever a member of the armed forces (including the National Guard) provides support to civilian law enforcement agencies, each such member providing such support shall visibly display the name of the armed force in which such member operates.”; and

(A) by striking “requirement under subsection (a)” and inserting “requirements under subsections (a) and (b)”; and

(1) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The heading for section 723 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “Federal authorities in response to civil disturbances” and inserting “civil authorities”.

(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 41 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 723 and inserting the following new item:

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.

(a) In general.—After January 1, 2028, no connected vehicle on the list required under subsection (b) may be operated on a military installation or on any other property of the Department of Defense.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall establish and publish on a publicly available website of the Department of Defense a list of prohibited connected vehicles that—

(A) are designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign entity of concern; and

(i) an undue risk of sabotage to or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology and services in the United States;

(ii) an undue risk of catastrophic effects on the security or resiliency of critical infrastructure in the United States or the digital economy of the United States; or

(iii) an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons.

(2) INCORPORATION OF EXISTING FEDERAL RULES.—In establishing the list required under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall incorporate existing Federal rules for identifying prohibited connected vehicles.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall review the list required under paragraph (1) not less frequently than once each year and shall make such additions, subtractions, supplements, or amendments to the list as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(B) EXPLANATION OF SUBTRACTIONS.—Any review under subparagraph (A) that makes subtractions from the list required under paragraph (1) shall include an explanation of why the subtraction was made.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall consult with the head of any Federal department or agency that the Secretary determines is appropriate in making the list required under paragraph (1) and conducting any annual review under paragraph (3).

(B) TRANSMITTAL OF LIST.—The Secretary shall transmit a copy of the list required under paragraph (1), and any modification to that list, to the heads of each Federal department or agency determined appropriate under subparagraph (A).

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than June 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall establish and provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on an implementation plan for carrying out the prohibition under subsection (a).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The implementation plan required under paragraph (1) shall include—

(A) an identification of the lead organization within the Department of Defense responsible for implementing and overseeing the prohibition under subsection (a);

(B) a description of the process by which the Department will identify and assess prohibited connected vehicles;

(C) a description of the means by which the Department will conduct coordination with appropriate Federal departments and agencies;

(D) an identification of the metrics by which the Department will assess connected vehicles for threats to national security;

(E) a description of the means by which military installations will ensure compliance with such prohibition; and

(F) an assessment of resource requirements necessary to implement and maintain such prohibition.

(1) CONNECTED VEHICLE.—The term “connected vehicle” has the meaning given that term in section 791.301 of title 15, Code of Federal Regulations, or successor regulations.

(2) FOREIGN ENTITY OF CONCERN.—The term “foreign entity of concern” has the meaning given that term in section 9901 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (15 U.S.C. 4651).

(3) MILITARY INSTALLATION.—The term “military installation” has the meaning given that term in section 2801(c) of title 10, United States Code.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 10 days after the date on which the President submits a budget of the United States Government for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on any cancellations of contracts during the preceding fiscal year.

(2) REPORTING ON FISCAL YEAR 2025 CANCELLATIONS.—The Secretary of Defense shall include in the first report submitted under paragraph (1) reporting on any cancellations of contracts during fiscal year 2025.

(b) Elements.—The report required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(D) requirement exists, but the contract did not meet requirements for cost or the schedule or performance are unacceptable; or

(6) For any Contract Line Item Number tagged pursuant to paragraph (5)(E), a brief proposed timeline for issuing a new contract to meet the specified requirement.

(a) Repeal of annual report on military technicians.—Section 115a of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (g).

(b) Incorporation of annual civilian personnel management report into annual defense manpower profile report.—

(A) by redesignating subsections (d) through (f) as subsections (e) through (g), respectively; and

“(d) (1) The Secretary shall include in each report required under subsection (a) a detailed discussion of the management of the civilian workforce of the Department of Defense. The discussion shall include the matter specified in paragraph (2) for the civilian workforce of each of the following:

“(A) The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Defense Agencies and Department of Defense Field Activities.

(2) TRANSFER OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.—Such title is further amended by transferring paragraph (2) of section 129(c) of such title to section 115a, inserting such paragraph at the end of subsection (d) of such section 115a, as added by paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection, and amending such paragraph (2)—

(A) by striking “Each report under paragraph (1) shall contain” and inserting “The matter to be included in each discussion under paragraph (1)”; and

(B) by striking “under the jurisdiction of the official submitting the report” and inserting “of each element of the Department of Defense named in that paragraph”.

(3) CONFORMING REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE ANNUAL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT REPORT.—Section 129 of such title is amended by striking subsection (c).

SEC. 1043. Report on National Guard sexual assault prevention and response training.

(2) annually, beginning in 2027 and ending in 2031, by not later than March 30 of each year.

SEC. 1044. Reports to Congress on Department of Defense support for immigration enforcement operations.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Department of Defense approves a Request for Assistance for support for immigration enforcement operations, the Secretary of Defense shall electronically transmit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on such support not later than 30 calendar days after the date on which the Secretary approves the Request for Assistance and every 30 calendar days thereafter.

“(2) ELEMENTS.—Each report required by paragraph (1) shall include information on the following:

“(A) The use of transportation support provided by the Department of Defense, the type of such support, and the cost of such support.

“(B) The use of installation or facility support provided by the Department of Defense, the name of the installation or facility, and the cost of such support.

“(C) The reassignment of Department of Defense personnel to conduct support for immigration enforcement operations, the units from which such personnel were reassigned, the duration of the orders, and the cost of such reassignment.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with the Commander of the Military Sealift Command, and in consultation with the Commander of United States Transportation Command, the Commander of United States Fleet Forces Command, and the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on efforts to improve recruitment and retention of Military Sealift Command Mariners.

(A) opportunities to enhance the integration of Military Sealift Command civilian mariners into the military command structure;

(B) providing training on the roles and significance of Military Sealift Command civilian mariner workforce to relevant military commands; and

(b) Report on extending charter durations.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report assessing the merits of extending the maximum charter durations of commercial and specialty vessels for the Military Sealift Command.

(a) Report.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not less frequently than monthly thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report containing—

(1) the number of aliens held at installations of the Department of Defense, disaggregated by location; and

(2) the total cost of detention of aliens at installations of the Department of Defense, regardless of location.

(b) Alien defined.—In this section, the term “alien” has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101).

SEC. 1047. Briefing on expenditures or planned expenditures of funds allocated for exploration and development of existing Arctic infrastructure.

SEC. 1051. Modification of limitation on assistance in support of Department of Defense accounting for missing United States Government personnel.

SEC. 1052. Extension of admission to Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands for certain H–2B nonimmigrants.

SEC. 1053. Prohibiting Secretary of Defense from developing voting technology or methodology.

SEC. 1054. Assessment of the feasibility and advisability of using personnel of the Department of Defense to support U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

(a) Assessment and report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security—

(1) conduct an assessment of the advisability, feasibility, and cost of using personnel of the Department of Defense to support U.S. Customs and Border Protection by providing translation and interpretation services in connection with border security operations; and

(2) submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the assessment conducted pursuant to paragraph (1).

(b) Contents.—The report submitted pursuant to subsection (a)(2) shall include the following:

(1) An assessment of the current capabilities and availability of Department personnel with relevant language skills to support the needs of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and assist with interviews, including with respect to Mandarin Chinese, Arabic, Russian, Swahili, Korean, Urdu, Farsi, and other languages that may be encountered at the United States border.

(2) An evaluation on the potential impact of the use of personnel described in subsection (a)(1) on Department readiness, operations, and personnel.

(3) An evaluation of the impact of such use of personnel on operations at the United States border.

(4) A cost estimate for such use of personnel, including administrative, training, deployment, and sustainment costs;

(5) A summary of any prior or ongoing interagency efforts or agreements relating to foreign language support between the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security and if such support was provided on a reimbursable or nonreimbursable basis.

(6) Such recommendations as the Secretary of Defense may have for legislative or administrative action to facilitate such use of personnel.

SEC. 1055. Limitation on availability of funds for travel expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

(1) submits to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate unredacted copies of documents requested by the committee during the period beginning on January 1, 2024, and ending on June 1, 2024;

(2) submits to the congressional defense committees overdue notifications regarding sensitive military operations required by section 130f of title 10, United States Code;

(3) submits to the requesting committee overdue quarterly reports regarding execute orders of the Department of Defense required by section 1744 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92; 10 U.S.C. 113 note);

(4) submits to the congressional defense committees the plan for integrating signals intelligence capabilities on fielded armed overwatch aircraft required by section 167 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(5) issues guidance on the governance and oversight of the contracts of the Department of Defense that support or enable sensitive activities required by section 867 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(6) submits to the congressional defense committees the review of authorities relevant to the conduct of irregular warfare activities by the Department of Defense required by section 1065 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(7) submits to the congressional defense committees the plan for implementing and institutionalizing the responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, and other matters, required by section 907(b) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159); and

(8) submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives the report on Department of Defense efforts to identify, disseminate, and implement throughout the Department lessons learned from the war in Ukraine required by the conference report accompanying the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159).

(a) Oversight of Department of Defense Sensitive Activities.—Chapter 3 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 130f the following new section:

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall keep the congressional defense committees fully and currently informed of Department of Defense sensitive activities.

“(b) Notification.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees notice in writing of a compromise or failure of any Department of Defense sensitive activity not later than 48 hours following the compromise or failure.

“(c) Procedures.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the congressional defense committees, shall establish and submit to such committees procedures for complying with the requirements of subsection (a) and (b) consistent with the national security of the United States and the protection of operational integrity. The Secretary shall promptly notify the congressional defense committees in writing of any changes to such procedures at least 14 days prior to the adoption of any such changes.

“(d) Sensitive activity defined.—In this section, the term ‘sensitive activity’ means operations, actions, activities, or programs that, if compromised, could have enduring adverse effects on United States foreign policy, Department of Defense activities, or military operations, or cause significant embarrassment to the United States, United States allies, or the Department of Defense.”.

(b) Process for coordinating and deconflicting contracts.—Consistent with section 867 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4601), the Secretary of Defense shall establish a process for coordinating and deconflicting contracts of the Department of Defense that support or enable sensitive activities with other departments and agencies of the Federal government, as appropriate.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may establish and maintain an Irregular Warfare Exercise Laboratory to—

(1) support the training, experimentation, preparation, and validation of the United States Armed Forces to conduct full-spectrum irregular warfare activities; and

(2) enable activities to build the capacity and interoperability of the security forces of friendly foreign countries.

(b) Authorities.—In carrying out the activities authorized under subsection (a), the Secretary may use the authorities under chapter 16 of title 10, United States Code, and other applicable statutory authorities available to the Secretary of Defense.

SEC. 1058. Semiannual report on Department of Defense operations at the southern land border.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on operations at the southern land border.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall include a detailed description of—

(i) combating transnational organized crime in the United States Northern Command and the United States Southern Command areas of responsibility;

(ii) reducing the cross-border flow of illicit synthetic drugs, including fentanyl, fentanyl analogs, and fentanyl precursors; and

(iii) reducing the cross-border illicit trade of firearms and human trafficking;

(B) the Department of Defense’s steady-state plan and posture on the southern land border;

(C) the Department of Defense’s assessment of the operational and readiness impact under the Department’s steady-state plan and posture on the southern land border, and any revisions of such plan and posture;

(D) each military installation and each Department of Defense facility on or off the installation that is being used to support—

(E) the funding sources for the Department of Defense’s current operations along the southern land border;

(G) the Department of Defense’s assessment of its compliance with section 1385 of title 18, United States Code (commonly known as the “Posse Comitatus Act of 1878”), in its execution of—

(H) any challenges the Department of Defense has faced in the execution of the efforts described in subparagraphs (A) and (F).

(b) Semiannual updates.—Not less frequently than once every 180 days after submitting the report required under subsection (a) and during the effective period of the national emergency declared by Proclamation 100886 (90 Fed. Reg. 8327; relating to a Declaration of a National Emergency at the Southern Border of the United States), Executive Order 14165 (90 Fed. Reg. 8467; relating to Security Our Borders), and Executive Order 14167 (90 Fed. Reg. 8613; relating to Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial Integrity of the United States), the Commander of the United States Northern Command shall submit to the congressional defense committees updates to the information included in such report.

SEC. 1059. University-based secure innovation incubator program of Department of Defense.

(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program to develop, operate, and maintain incubator programs for secure facilities and networks at select universities across the United States—

(1) to accelerate the development and transition of innovative technologies to meet national security needs;

(2) to increase the availability of secure facilities and networks for classified work at university locations;

(3) to foster collaboration between academic researchers, private sector entities, and Department of Defense personnel;

(4) to expand the pool of security-cleared technical talent available to support defense organizations and personnel in critical defense technology areas; and

(5) to create regional innovation hubs that strengthen the national security innovation base.

(b) Program elements.—The program established pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) FACILITY REQUIREMENTS.—Each university-based secure facility and network shall—

(A) meet all physical, technical, and personnel security requirements for handling classified information up to the Top Secret or Sensitive Compartmented Information level;

(B) be designed to accommodate diverse use cases, including secure meetings, classified research, and technology development activities;

(D) leverage modern design principles to maximize utilization and effectiveness.

(2) UNIVERSITY SELECTION CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall select universities based on—

(A) the absence of a fully functional secure facility and network on the university campus;

(B) demonstrated commitment to national security-relevant research and development;

(F) capacity to support the administrative and security requirements of operating a secure facility and network.

(A) ACCESS MODEL.—The Secretary shall establish a flexible subscription-based system for access to the university-based secure facilities and networks, with—

(i) tiered access levels calibrated to different user needs and security requirements;

(ii) pricing structures that may vary based on organizational size, usage patterns, and security clearance-processing needs; and

(iii) priority access for Department components and entities working on projects sponsored by the Department.

(i) IN GENERAL.—Access to classified information and secure facilities within the program established pursuant to subsection (a) shall be strictly controlled and granted consistent with Executive Order 12968 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note; relating to access to classified information).

(ii) AUTHORIZED USERS.—Authorized users of classified information and secure facilities within the program established pursuant to subsection (a) may include—

(II) private sector entities, particularly small businesses and startups, that are participating in specific defense innovation programs;

(IV) personnel from other Federal agencies engaged in work related to national security.

(1) PILOT PROGRAM.—In carrying out the program required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall—

(A) not later than 540 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, establish an initial pilot program with not fewer than three university partners;

(B) ensure that at least one of the locations for the pilot program established pursuant to subparagraph (A) is at a university located within 100 miles of the geographic center of the United States;

(C) evaluate the effectiveness of the pilot program established pursuant to subparagraph (A) based on metrics, including utilization rates, project outcomes, and participant feedback; and

(D) not more than 900 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, submit to the congressional defense committees a report on—

(i) the findings of the Secretary with respect to the pilot program established pursuant to subparagraph (A); and

(ii) such recommendations as the Secretary may have for expanding the pilot program.

(2) PROGRAM EXPANSION.—Subject to successful evaluation of the pilot program established pursuant to paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary shall, not later than four years after the date of the enactment of this Act, expand the program required by subsection (a) to not fewer than 10 universities.

(d) Cost-sharing.—The Secretary may enter into cost-sharing agreements or other appropriate agreements with universities participating in the program established pursuant to subsection (a), other Federal departments and agencies, State and local governments, Tribal governments, and private sector partners to support the establishment and operation of the secure facilities and networks under the program.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Each year, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees an annual report on the program established pursuant to subsection (a).

(2) CONTENTS.—Each report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall cover the following:

(D) Measurable outcomes from activities conducted within the secure facilities and networks included in the program.

(E) Recommendations for legislative or administrative action relating to the program.

(f) Program and report expiration.—The program authorized under subsection (a) and the annual report requirement under subsection (e) shall terminate 10 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 1060. Priority consideration of energy projects that are likely to experience significant temporal impact due to seasonal Arctic climate conditions.

“(i) DOD SERVICES.—The Secretary of Defense may provide to the Commission, on a nonreimbursable basis, such administrative services, funds, staff, facilities, and other support services as are necessary for the performance of the Commission's duties under this section.

“(ii) OTHER AGENCIES.—In addition to any support provided under clause (i), the heads of other Federal departments and agencies may provide to the Commission such services, funds, facilities, staff, and other support as the heads of such departments and agencies determine advisable and as may be authorized by law.”.

“(7) CONTRACTING.—The Co-Chairpersons of the Commission may, to such extent and in such amounts as are provided in appropriation Acts, enter into contracts to enable the Commission to discharge its duties under this section.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—There is established as of January 5, 2026, an independent commission in the legislative branch to be known as the “Commission on the National Defense Strategy” (in this section referred to as the “Commission”).

(2) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Commission is to examine and make recommendations with respect to the national defense strategy of the United States.

(3) SCOPE AND DUTIES.—In order to provide the fullest understanding of the national defense strategy the Commission shall perform the following duties:

(A) NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY REVIEW.—The Commission shall review the most recent national defense strategy of the United States including the assumptions, strategic objectives, priority missions, major investments in defense capabilities, force posture and structure, operational concepts, and strategic and military risks associated with the strategy.

(B) ASSESSMENT.—The Commission shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of the strategic environment, including—

(ii) the threats to the national security of the United States, including both traditional and non-traditional threats;

(vii) the strategic and military risks present in the national defense strategy.

(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of establishment of the Commission, the Commission shall transmit to the President and Congress a report containing the review and assessment conducted under paragraph (3), together with any recommendations of the Commission.

(ii) CONTENTS.—The report required by clause (i) shall include the following elements:

(I) An appraisal of the strategic environment, including an examination of the traditional and non-traditional threats to the United States, and the potential for conflicts arising from such threats and security challenges.

(II) An evaluation of the strategic objectives of the Department of Defense for near-peer competition in support of the national security interests of the United States.

(III) A review of the military missions for which the Department of Defense should prepare, including missions that support the interagency and a whole-of-government strategy.

(IV) An identification of any gaps or redundancies in the roles and missions assigned to the Armed Forces necessary to carry out military missions identified in subclause (III), and the roles and capabilities provided by other Federal agencies and by allies and international partners.

(V) An assessment of how the national defense strategy leverages other elements of national power across the interagency to counter near-peer competitors.

(VI) An evaluation of the resources necessary to support the strategy, including budget recommendations.

(VII) An examination of the efforts by the Department of Defense to develop new and innovative operational concepts to enable the United States to more effectively counter near-peer competitors.

(ee) modifications to personnel requirements, including professional military education; and

(IX) An assessment of the risks associated with the strategy, including the relationships and tradeoffs between missions, risks, and resources.

(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the establishment of the Commission, the Commission shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on the status of the review and assessment required by paragraph (3), including a discussion of any interim recommendations.

(ii) INTERIM BRIEFINGS.—At the request of the Chair and Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, or the Chair and Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, the Commission shall provide the requesting Committee with interim briefings in addition to the briefing required by clause (i).

(A) HEARINGS.—The Commission may hold such hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable to carry out its duties under this section.

(B) INFORMATION FROM FEDERAL AGENCIES.—The Commission may secure directly from any Federal department or agency such information as the Commission considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. Upon request of the Chair of the Commission, the head of such department or agency shall furnish such information to the Commission.

(C) USE OF POSTAL SERVICE.—The Commission may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.

(i) IN GENERAL.—The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services, goods, and property from non-Federal entities for the purposes of aiding and facilitating the work of the Commission. The authority under this paragraph does not extend to gifts of money.

(ii) DOCUMENTATION; CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.—The Commission shall document gifts accepted under the authority provided by clause (i) and shall avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest.

(iii) COMPLIANCE WITH CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS RULES.—Except as specifically provided in this section, a member of the Commission shall comply with rules set forth by the Select Committee on Ethics of the Senate and the Committee on Ethics of the House of Representatives governing employees of the Senate and the House of Representatives, respectively.

(6) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than February 5, 2027, the Commission shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives an unclassified report, with classified annexes if necessary, that includes the findings and conclusions of the Commission as a result of the studies required under this section, together with its recommendations for such legislative actions as the Commission considers appropriate in light of the results of the studies.

(B) one shall be appointed by the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives;

(E) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;

(F) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;

(G) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives; and

(H) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

(A) CHAIR.—The Chair of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Chair of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, with the concurrence of the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall jointly designate 1 member of the Commission to serve as Chair of the Commission.

(B) VICE CHAIR.—The Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, with the concurrence of the Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, shall jointly designate 1 member of the Commission to serve as Vice Chair of the Commission.

(A) APPOINTMENT DATE.—Members shall be appointed to the Commission under paragraph (1) by not later than 30 days after the date of the establishment of the Commission.

(B) NOTIFICATIONS.—Individuals making appointments under paragraph (1) shall provide notice of the appointments to the Secretary of Defense (in this section referred to as the “Secretary”), the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, and the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

(i) IN GENERAL.—If an appointment under this subsection is not made by the date specified under paragraph (3)(A), the authority to make such appointment shall devolve to a member of Congress of the same party and same chamber eligible to appoint under this subsection.

(ii) EXPIRATION OF APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY.—If an appointment is not made within 60 days of establishment, the authority to make such appointment shall expire.

(D) RESTRICTION ON APPOINTMENT.—Officers or employees of the Federal Government (other than experts or consultants the services of which are procured under section 3109 of title 5, United States Code) may not be appointed as members of the Commission.

(E) RESTRICTION ON MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.—Members of Congress may not serve on the Commission.

(A) APPOINTMENT DURATION.—Members shall be appointed for the life of the Commission.

(B) VACANCIES.—Any vacancy in the Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment.

(C) REMOVAL OF MEMBERS.—A member may be removed from the Commission for cause by the individual serving in the position responsible for the original appointment of such member under subsection (b)(1), provided that notice has first been provided to such member of the cause for removal and voted and agreed upon by three quarters of the members serving. A vacancy created by the removal of a member under this subsection shall not affect the powers of the Commission, and shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment was made.

(5) QUORUM.—.A majority of the members serving on the Commission shall constitute a quorum.

(6) INITIAL MEETING.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which all members of the Commission have been appointed as published in the Congressional Record, the Commission shall hold its initial meeting.

(1) STATUS AS FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.—Notwithstanding the requirements of section 2105 of title 5, United States Code, including the required supervision under subsection (a)(3) of such section, members of the Commission shall be deemed to be Federal employees in the legislative branch subject to all the laws and policies applicable to legislative branch employees.

(2) OATH OF OFFICE.—Notwithstanding the provision of section 2903(b) of title 5, United States Code, an employee of an Executive Branch agency, otherwise authorized to administer oaths under section 2903 of title 5, United States Code, may administer the oath of office to Commissioners for the purpose of their service to the Commission.

(3) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—The appropriate Federal departments or agencies shall cooperate with the Commission in expeditiously providing to the Commission members and staff appropriate security clearances to the extent possible pursuant to existing procedures and requirements, except that no person may be provided with access to classified information under this Act without the appropriate security clearances.

(4) PAY FOR MEMBERS.—Each member of the Commission may be compensated at a rate not to exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation additional to that received for their services as officers or employees of the United States.

(A) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.—The Chair of the Commission may appoint and fix the rate of basic pay for an Executive Director in accordance with section 3161 of title 5, United States Code.

(B) COMMISSION STAFF.—The Executive Director may appoint and fix the rate of basic pay for additional personnel as staff of the Commission in accordance with section 3161 of title 5, United States Code.

(C) DETAILEES AUTHORIZED.—On a reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis, the heads of departments and agencies of the Federal Government may provide, and the Commission may accept personnel detailed from such departments and agencies, including active-duty military personnel.

(D) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—The members and staff of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission.

(A) IN GENERAL.—Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense for support of the Commission, the Secretary may make transfers to the Commission for Commission expenses, including compensation of Commission members, officers, and employees, and provision of other such services, funds, facilities, and other support services as necessary for the performance of the Commission’s functions. Funds made available to support and provide assistance to the Commission may be used for payment of compensation of members, officers, and employees of the Commission without transfer under this subparagraph. Amounts transferred under this subparagraph shall remain available until expended. Transfer authority provided by this subparagraph is in addition to any other transfer authority provided by law. Section 2215 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to a transfer of funds under this subparagraph.

(B) TREASURY ACCOUNT AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary of the Treasury may establish an account or accounts for the Commission from which any amounts transferred under this clause may be used for activities of the Commission.

(2) LIAISON.—The Secretary shall designate at least one officer or employee of the Department of Defense to serve as a liaison officer between the Department and the Commission.

(3) ADDITIONAL SUPPORT.—To the extent that funds are available for such purpose, or on a reimbursable basis, the Secretary may, at the request of the Chair of the Commission—

(A) enter into contracts for the acquisition of administrative supplies and equipment for use by the Commission; and

(B) make available the services of a Federal funded research and development center or an independent, nongovernmental organization, described under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code.

(4) PRELIMINARY ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AUTHORIZED.—Upon the appointment of the Chair and Vice Chair under subsection (b), the Secretary may provide administrative support authorized under this section necessary to facilitate the standing up of the Commission.

(e) Termination of Commission.—The Commission shall terminate 90 days after the submission of the report required by subsection (a).

SEC. 1064. Provision by Air Force of meteorological and environmental services for intelligence community.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall provide meteorological and environmental services for operations of the intelligence community.

(b) Intelligence community defined.—In this section, the term “intelligence community” has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003).

(a) All exposures.—The Secretary of Defense shall expand the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record (in this section referred to as “ILER”) to document all exposures of members of the Armed Forces, including those that occur within the United States, so it can be available for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs when such members transition to civilian life, including the following:

(2) Environmental hazards that were known or found later to which the member was exposed, including through conducting any monitoring in the area.

(b) Medical information.—The Secretary of Defense shall expand the ILER to include the following medical information of members of the Armed Forces so it can be available for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs when such members transition to civilian life:

(1) Medical encounter information relating to exposures (such as diagnosis, treatment, and laboratory data).

(c) Availability to certain professionals.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the ILER is available, for purposes of improving internal processes, to the following:

(1) Health care providers of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

(2) Epidemiologists and researchers of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

(3) Disability evaluation and benefits determinations specialists of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall document in the service records of a member of the Armed Forces whether such member served at a location where there was a potential of toxic exposure.

(2) PROTECTION OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that service at any location that is classified is protected from disclosure.

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.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall classify the Nevada Test and Training Range as a location where contamination occurred.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall establish a process to identify members of the Armed Forces and former members of the Armed Forces that were stationed at the Nevada Test and Training Range since January 27, 1951.

(2) DOCUMENTATION.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall establish a process to permit members of the Armed Forces and former members of the Armed Forces to provide documentation or evidence of their assignment within the Nevada Test and Training Range to assist the Secretary in identifying those members and former members under paragraph (1).

(3) EFFORTS.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall make all efforts to identify individuals described in paragraph (1) and shall not require members of the Armed Forces or former members of the Armed Forces to submit evidence of their stationing.

(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries concerned shall establish a pathway for medically disqualified entry-level service members to enter civilian positions for which they are qualified in the Department of Defense or any of its components.

(b) Air Force DRIVE program.—The Air Force's Develop, Redistribute, Improve, Vault, Expose (DRIVE) program shall be considered sufficient to meet the requirements of subsection (a) and may, but need not, serve as a baseline from which the other military departments design their programs.

(c) Entry-level service member defined.—In this section, the term “entry-level service member” means a regular or reserve member of the Armed Forces who is currently attending or has military orders to attend within 90 days—

(5) an officer accession program, including officer candidate school, officer training school, officer development school, or equivalent program.

SEC. 1082. Provision of information on career opportunities in the defense industrial base to persons ineligible for military service.

“§ 996. Provision of information on career opportunities in the defense industrial base to persons medically disqualified for military service

“(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish and implement a program to provide individuals who are not medically qualified for military service with information on employment opportunities in the defense industrial base or other employment opportunities in support of the national interests of the United States.

“(b) Program.—The program established under subsection (a) shall inform and refer persons described in subsection (a) to employment, apprenticeship, and training opportunities in—

“(5) any other non-military opportunity the Secretary considers in the national interests of the United States.

“(c) Collaboration.—The Secretary of Defense shall consult with entities in the defense industrial base, other Federal agencies, and academic institutions to carry out this section.”.

SEC. 1083. Provision to Navy personnel of information on career opportunities at Military Sealift Command.

(a) In general.—Notwithstanding section 1599b of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall direct the Director of the Defense Travel Management Office to update the Joint Travel Regulations, not later than February 1, 2026, 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, during the 30-day period following the scheduled date of the dependent’s departure for the travel, be transferred to a location in the United States or travel to the United States for home leave.

(1) INITIAL BRIEFING.—Not later than February 1, 2026, the Secretary shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the update to the Joint Travel Regulations required by subsection (a).

(2) SUBSEQUENT BRIEFINGS.—Not later than one year after providing the briefing required by paragraph (1) and annually thereafter until February 1, 2029, the Secretary shall brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the use of the authority described in subsection (a) and the cost to the Federal Government of the use of that authority.

(c) Covered employee defined.—In this section, the term “covered employee” means an employee of the Department of Defense Education Activity assigned to United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

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.

SEC. 1103. One-year extension of temporary authority to grant allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on official duty in a combat zone.

(1) in paragraph (8), by inserting “, in accordance with subsection (b)” before the period;

“(1) STUDENTS.—The head of a Department of Defense organization that partners with the program may, without regard to the provisions of subchapter I of chapter 33 of title 5, noncompetitively appoint a member of the program to a position in such organization for a term of one year, renewable for not more than a total of four one-year terms.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The head of an organization described in paragraph (1) may—

“(i) renew the appointment a successful graduate of the program serving a one-year term under such paragraph until such graduate is appointed to a permanent position in such organization, except that the appointment may not be renewed for more than a total of four one-year terms; and

“(ii) noncompetitively appoint the graduate from a one-year term appointment renewed under clause (i) into a vacant position in the competitive or excepted service of the Department.

“(B) LEVEL.—The position of a graduate in a term or permanent position described in subparagraph (A) shall be at the level of GS–9 of the General Schedule or an equivalent level for which the participant is qualified, without regard to any minimum time-in-grade or time-based experience requirements.

“(C) LIMIT.—The authority under this section may not be used for more than 60 graduates of the program in any calendar year.

“(3) SUNSET.—The authority under this subsection shall terminate on December 31, 2029.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 31, 2026, and annually thereafter until January 31, 2030, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the use of the authority under this subsection.

“(B) ELEMENTS.—Each report required by subparagraph (A) shall include the following:

“(i) The number of graduates of the program for which the authority under this section was used in the prior year.

“(ii) An identification of the Department of Defense organizations that used the authority to appoint graduates of the program under paragraph (2)(ii).

“(C) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—

“(i) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and

“(ii) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives.”.

SEC. 1105. Modifications to requirements for the President of the Defense Acquisition University.

SEC. 1106. Modification of direct hire authority for domestic defense industrial base facilities.

(a) In general.—Section 1125(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (10 U.S.C. 1580 note prec.) is amended by inserting “, including to Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair positions” after “Facilities Base”.

(b) Annual report.—At the end of each fiscal year, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the relevant congressional committees a report that includes the following elements:

(1) The number of Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair positions filled in comparison to the previous fiscal year.

(2) The extent to which direct hire authority has affected recruitment and retention for Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair positions.

(3) Other data and information related to the hiring process for the Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair that the Secretary of the Navy considers appropriate.

(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives.

(a) In general.—Section 1599f of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

“(A) establish, as positions in the excepted service, such qualified positions in the Department of Defense as the Secretary considers necessary to carry out the cyber mission of the Department and are not in the Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System, including—

“(i) positions in the Defense Digital Executive Service established under subsection (c); and

“(B) carry out a program of personnel management authority provided in subsection (b) in order to facilitate recruitment of eminent experts in cyber for the Department; and

“(C) implement an interagency transfer agreement between qualified positions in the excepted service established under this section and positions in the competitive service in the Department, including the military departments.

“(2) APPLICABILITY.—Unless explicitly provided otherwise by law, the authority of the Secretary under this section applies without regard to any other provision of law relating to the appointment, number, classification, or compensation of employees that the Secretary determines is incompatible with the approach to talent management under this section.

“(A) without regard to any provision of title 5 governing the appointment of employees in the civil service, appoint individuals to qualified positions established under subsection (a)(1); and

“(B) subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), fix the compensation of employees appointed under subparagraph (A).

“(A) shall fix the rates of basic pay for employees appointed under paragraph (1)(A)—

“(i) with the rates of pay provided for employees in comparable positions in the Federal Government; and

“(ii) subject to the same limitations on maximum rates of pay established for such employees by statute or regulation; and

“(B) may prescribe the rates of basic pay for employees appointed under paragraph (1)(A) at rates not in excess of a rate equal to 150 percent of the maximum rate of basic pay authorized for positions at Level I of the Executive Schedule under section 5312 of title 5.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (C), the Secretary may, with respect to an employee appointed under paragraph (1)(A), other than such an employee receiving the maximum rate of basic pay prescribed under paragraph (2)(B), provide the employee compensation (in addition to basic pay), including payments, benefits, sabbaticals, incentives, awards, and allowances—

“(i) in accordance with relevant provisions of other laws, including provisions of title 5;

“(ii) consistent with, and not in excess of the level authorized for, comparable positions in the Federal Government; and

“(iii) to the extent compatible with the approach to talent management under this section.

“(B) ALLOWANCES.—An employee appointed under paragraph (1)(A) shall be eligible for an allowance under section 5941 of title 5, in addition to such basic pay, on the same basis and at least to the same extent as if the employee was an employee covered by such section, including eligibility conditions, allowance rates, and all other terms and conditions in statute or regulation.

“(C) MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION.—No additional compensation may be provided to an employee under this paragraph in any calendar year if, or to the extent that, the employee’s total annual compensation in such calendar year will exceed the maximum amount of total annual compensation payable at the salary set in accordance with section 104 of title 3.

“(c) Defense Digital Executive Service.—The Secretary may establish a Defense Digital Executive Service for positions established under subsection (a)(1)(A)(i) that are comparable to Senior Executive Service positions.

“(d) Defense Digital Senior Level positions.—The Secretary may designate as a Defense Digital Senior Level position any defense cyber position that, as determined by the Secretary—

“(2) does not satisfy functional or program management criteria for being designated as a position in the Defense Digital Executive Service; and

“(e) Two-year probationary period.—The probationary period for all employees hired under the authority provided by this section shall be two years.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—An individual occupying a position on the date of the enactment of this section that is selected to be converted to a position in the excepted service under this section shall have the right to refuse such conversion.

“(2) POSITION CONVERSION.—After the date on which an individual who refuses a conversion under paragraph (1) stops serving in the position selected to be converted, the position shall be converted to a position in the excepted service.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The authority provided by this section shall become effective 30 days after the date on which the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a plan for the implementation of such authority.

“(2) ELEMENTS.—The plan described in paragraph (1) shall include the following:

“(A) An assessment of the current scope of the positions covered by the authority provided by subsection (a).

“(C) An assessment of the anticipated workforce needs for the cyber mission of the Department across the future-years defense program.

“(h) Collective bargaining agreements.—Nothing in subsection (a) may be construed to impair the continued effectiveness of a collective bargaining agreement with respect to an office, component, subcomponent, or equivalent of the Department that is a successor to an office, component, subcomponent, or equivalent of the Department covered by the agreement before the succession.

“(i) Required regulations.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, shall prescribe regulations for the administration of this section.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section and not less frequently than once each year thereafter until the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of this section, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in coordination with the Secretary, shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a detailed report on the administration of this section during the most recent one-year period.

“(2) ELEMENTS.—Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include, for the period covered by the report, the following:

“(A) A discussion of the process used in accepting applications, assessing candidates, ensuring adherence to veterans' preference, and selecting applicants for vacancies to be filled by an individual for a qualified position.

“(i) How the Secretary plans to fulfill the critical need of the Department to recruit and retain employees in qualified positions.

“(iii) Any actions taken during the reporting period to fulfill such critical need.

“(C) A discussion of how the planning and actions taken under subparagraph (B) are integrated into the strategic workforce planning of the Department.

“(D) The metrics on actions occurring during the reporting period, including the following:

“(i) The number of employees in qualified positions hired, disaggregated by occupation and grade and level or pay band.

“(ii) The placement of employees in qualified positions, disaggregated by military department, Defense Agency, or other component within the Department.

“(iv) The number of separations of employees in qualified positions, disaggregated by occupation and grade and level or pay band.

“(v) The number of retirements of employees in qualified positions, disaggregated by occupation and grade and level or pay band.

“(vi) The number and amounts of recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives paid to employees in qualified positions, disaggregated by occupation and grade and level or pay band.

“(vii) The number of employees in qualified positions who held an appointment related to cybersecurity at a Federal agency outside of the Department during the three-year period prior to being appointed under this section.

“(1) AVAILABILITY OF ANNUAL REPORT.—The Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall make available to the Comptroller General of the United States each report required by subsection (j).

“(A) assess any differences in recruitment and retention for cyber positions experienced by Federal agencies based on unique hiring and pay authorities for cyber professionals, including with respect to Senior Executive Service positions and Senior Level positions; and

“(B) not later than five years after the date of the enactment of this section, submit to the appropriate committees of Congress the results of that assessment.

“(1) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.—The term ‘appropriate committees of Congress’ means—

“(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

“(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

“(2) COMPETITIVE SERVICE.—The term ‘competitive service’ has the meaning given that term in section 2102 of title 5.

“(3) EXCEPTED SERVICE.—The term ‘excepted service’ has the meaning given that term in section 2103 of title 5.

“(4) QUALIFIED POSITION.—The term ‘qualified position’ means a position, designated by the Secretary for the purpose of this section, in which the individual occupying such position performs, manages, or supervises functions that execute the cyber mission of the Department.

“(5) SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE POSITION.—The term ‘Senior Executive Service position’ has the meaning given that term in section 3132(a) of title 5.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 1599f and inserting the following new item:

SEC. 1108. Prohibition on use of funds to reduce the workforce at public shipyards.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be used to reduce the workforce at public shipyards, including probationary employees.

(b) Exemption.—The workforce at public shipyards and any other positions at a public shipyard not specified in subsection (c) shall be exempt from any workforce reductions related to spending cuts, reprogramming of funds, or the probationary status of employees.

(c) Workforce at public shipyards defined.—In this section, the term “workforce at public shipyards” includes any of the following positions at a public shipyard:

(12) Positions supporting implementation of the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program.

(d) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section may be construed to restrict the authority of the Secretary of Defense to manage the workforce of the Department of Defense under existing procedures in cases of misconduct or poor performance.

(a) Training with friendly foreign countries: payment of training and exercise expenses.—

(1) TRAINING AUTHORIZED.—Subsection (a) of section 321 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “or other security forces” and inserting “, or other security forces that perform a similar function,”;

(2) AUTHORITY TO PAY TRAINING AND EXERCISE EXPENSES.—Subsection (b) of such section is amended—

(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “subsection (e)” and inserting “subsection (f)”;

“(1) Expenses of forces assigned or allocated to that command in conjunction with activities conducted under this section.”;

(D) in paragraph (3), by striking “training” and inserting “activities”;

(F) in paragraph (5), by striking “training described in” and all that follows through “paragraph (4)” and inserting “training and exercises under this section”; and

(3) SEMIANNUAL REPORT.—Subsection (e) of such section is amended to read as follows:

“(e) Semiannual report.—Not less frequently than semiannually, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on training and exercises conducted under this section during the preceding 180-day period.”.

(A) SECTION HEADING.—Section 321 of title 10, United States Code, is amended, in the section heading, by inserting “and exercises” after “Training”.

(B) TABLE OF SECTIONS.—The table of sections for subchapter III of chapter 16 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 321 and inserting the following:

(b) Repeal of Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative.—Section 1332 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 135 Stat. 2007; 10 U.S.C. 301 note) is repealed.

SEC. 1202. Modification of payment of costs for Regional Centers for Security Studies.

SEC. 1203. Modification of authority for Naval Small Craft Instruction and Technical Training School.

“(3) Tuition fees charged for personnel who attend the School may not include any amount for the fixed costs of operating and maintaining the School.”.

SEC. 1204. Permanent extension of acceptance and expenditure of contributions for multilateral security cooperation programs and activities.

SEC. 1205. Building capacity of the armed forces of Mexico to counter transnational criminal organizations.

(a) Plan.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State and with the agreement of the Government of Mexico, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees 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, including through—

(2) in consultation with the appropriate civilian government agencies specializing in countering transnational criminal organizations—

(C) counter illicit trafficking (including narcotics, weapons, and human trafficking, and illicit trafficking in natural resources); and

(D) assessments of key nodes of activity of transnational criminal organizations.

(b) Implementation.—Not later than 15 days after the date on which the plan required by subsection (a) is submitted under such subsection, the Secretary of Defense shall begin implementing the pilot program described in the plan.

(c) Definition of appropriate congressional committees.—In this section, the term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 1206. Cybersecurity cooperation with the Government of Panama and the Panama Canal Authority.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, using existing authorities of the Secretary, may establish a pilot program in Panama—

(A) to enhance the cybersecurity capabilities of the Panama Canal Authority and the national security forces of Panama; and

(B) to increase cybersecurity cooperation measures between the United States and Panama in current and future joint military training exercises.

(2) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the cybersecurity cooperation under paragraph (1) are—

(B) to provide training and technical assistance to, and enhance joint cooperation with, the national security forces of Panama so as to improve mitigation, deterrence, and detection of ransomware attacks on, and vulnerabilities of, critical infrastructure in and around the Panama Canal; and

(C) to incorporate cybersecurity cooperation measures into current and potential United States-Panama joint military training exercises so as to improve the security of the Panama Canal.

(3) ACTIVITIES.—Activities of the Department of Defense to further the purposes described in paragraph (2) may include the following:

(A) Provision of education and training to, and information sharing with, the Panama Canal Authority and the national security forces of Panama.

(B) Collaboration on cyber incident response best practices with the Panama Canal Authority and the national security forces of Panama.

(C) Provision of technical assistance to the Panama Canal Authority and the national security forces of Panama to detect and mitigate cybersecurity attacks.

(D) Development of supply chain security best practices and building a trusted vendor network with the Panama Canal Authority and the national security forces of Panama.

(E) Engagement with the national security forces of Panama on joint cybersecurity training exercises and other information-sharing and domain awareness activities relating to cybersecurity, including by—

(i) encouraging the participation of the Government of Panama in existing cybersecurity training facilitated or managed by the Department and approved by the Secretary;

(ii) incorporating cybersecurity into existing joint training exercises, such as PANAMAX; and

(4) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter through 2030, the Secretary shall—

(i) the implementation of this section and any challenges relating to such implementation;

(ii) any known cyber threats relating to Panama, such as incidents of ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure in and around the Panama Canal; and

(B) provide the congressional defense committees with a briefing on such report.

(5) PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION.—Any activity carried out under this section shall be conducted in a manner that appropriately protects sensitive information and the national security interests of the United States.

(1) CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.—The term “critical infrastructure” has the meaning given such term in section 1016(e) of the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)).

(2) PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY.—The term “Panama Canal Authority” has the meaning given such term in section 3(d) of the Panama Canal Act of 1979 (22 U.S.C. 3602(d)).

(A) an annual bilateral and multinational military exercise and training series relating to the security of the Panama Canal carried out in coordination with United States Southern Command and the military or security forces of—

(4) RANSOMWARE ATTACK.—The term “ransomware attack” has the meaning given such term in section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 650).

(1) considers the number of current partnerships assigned to the National Guard of a State; and

(2) gives 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.

SEC. 1209. Extension and modification of pilot program to improve cyber cooperation with foreign military partners in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands.

(1) in the section heading, by inserting “and the Pacific Islands” before the period;

SEC. 1211. Extension of authority for reimbursement of certain coalition nations for support provided to United States military operations.

(1) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026,”; and

(2) in subsection (d)(1), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”.

SEC. 1212. Extension and modification of authority to support operations and activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq.

(2) in subsection (d), by striking “fiscal year 2025” and inserting “fiscal year 2026”; and

(3) by redesignating subsections (d) through (h) as subsections (c) through (g), respectively.

SEC. 1213. Extension of authority to provide assistance to vetted Syrian groups and individuals.

(1) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”; and

(2) in subsection (l)(3)(E), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”.

SEC. 1214. Extension and modification of authority to provide assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

(1) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”;

(3) by redesignating subsections (h) through (o) as subsections (g) through (n), respectively;

(4) in subsection (i)(1)(C), as redesignated, by striking “subsection (l)(2)” and inserting “subsection (k)(2)”;

(A) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking “subsection (j)(1)(C)” and inserting “subsection (i)(1)(C)”; and

(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking “subsection (k)” and inserting “subsection (j)”; and

(6) in subsection (n)(6), as redesignated, by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2026”.

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4) as paragraphs (1) through (3), respectively; and

(3) in subsection (h), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2027”.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State and pursuant to authorities available to the Secretary of Defense, shall take appropriate measures to support the defenses of al-Hol and Roj camps and 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.

(b) Annual report.—Not later than March 31, 2026, and annually thereafter through March 31, 2028, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that—

(1) assesses the status of United States Armed Forces operations in northeast Syria related to counterterrorism and security efforts;

(3) describes support to vetted foreign security partners responsible for the administration and security of al-Hol and Roj camps and surrounding areas;

(4) assesses the effectiveness of support to vetted foreign security partners in maintaining the stability and security of al-Hol and Roj camps and surrounding areas;

(5) describes efforts to repatriate detainees from al-Hol and Roj camps to the home countries of such detainees or to third countries;

(7) includes recommendations for further actions to prevent the resurgence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

SEC. 1217. Limitation on use of funds for reduction or consolidation of United States Armed Forces bases in Syria.

(a) In general.—Until the date that is 15 days after the date on which the certification described in subsection (b) is submitted to the congressional defense committees, amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act may not be obligated or expended to reduce the number of, or consolidate, bases of the United States Armed Forces located in Syria.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The certification described in this subsection is a certification by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Central Command that a reduction of the number, or consolidation, of bases of the United States Armed Forces located in Syria resulting in an updated force posture or basing locations would continue to sufficiently meet objectives consistent with the purposes outlined in section 1209(a) of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 354).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The certification described in this subsection shall include the following:

(A) A description of the current posture of United States Armed Forces in Syria and levels of engagement by the United States Armed Forces with Syrian groups and individuals.

(B) A description of the planned posture of the United States Armed Forces in Syria and projected levels of engagement by such forces with Syrian groups and individuals that would result from such a reduction or consolidation.

(C) An assessment of any gaps that the planned posture of United States Armed Forces as a result of such a reduction or consolidation would generate, including in assistance, training, or enabling authorized for Syrian groups and individuals.

(D) A description of mitigation measures being taken to address any identified gaps in assistance, training, or enabling for Syrian groups.

(E) A plan to balance consolidation with an offshore presence to sustain counterterrorism operations.

SEC. 1218. Limitation on availability of funds for the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq.

(a) Limitation on obligation of funds.—Not more than 50 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees a certification that the Government of Iraq has taken credible steps—

(1) to reduce the operational capacity of Iran-aligned militia groups not integrated into the Iraqi Security Forces through a publicly verifiable disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration process;

(2) to strengthen the authority and operational control of the Prime Minister of Iraq as Commander-in-Chief over the Iraqi Security Forces; and

(3) to investigate and hold accountable members of militias or members of security forces operating outside the formal chain of command of the Iraqi Security Forces who engage in attacks on United States or Iraqi personnel or otherwise act in an illegal or destabilizing manner.

(b) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the limitation in subsection (a) for a period of not more than 180 days if the Secretary determines that such waiver is in the national security interest of the United States. Any such waiver shall be submitted in writing to the congressional defense committees not later than 15 days after issuance, along with a justification and a description of the steps being taken to achieve the objectives described in subsection (a).

SEC. 1221. Extension of prohibition on availability of funds relating to sovereignty of the Russian Federation over internationally recognized territory of Ukraine.

SEC. 1222. Extension of annual report on military and security developments involving the Russian Federation.

SEC. 1223. Extension and modification of Ukraine security assistance initiative.

“(6) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR PROGRAMS ACROSS FISCAL YEARS.—Amounts available in a fiscal year to carry out the authority in subsection (a) may be used for programs under that authority that begin in such fiscal year and end not later than the end of the second fiscal year thereafter.

“(7) AUTHORITY FOR INTERCHANGE OF SUPPLIES AND SERVICES.—The limitation in subsection (b)(2) of section 2571 of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply with respect to reimbursable support for the purpose of providing assistance under this section.”;

(3) in subsection (h), by striking “December 31, 2026” and inserting “December 31, 2028”.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall seek to partner with the Minister of Defense of Ukraine to develop a weapons depot maintenance strategic plan for Ukraine that includes, at a minimum—

(1) an outline of the planning and management processes necessary to establish for Ukraine a robust weapons depot maintenance capability, including the steps necessary to achieve such capability;

(2) a detailed plan for restoring the readiness of the military forces of Ukraine by repairing, replacing, or divesting the substantial quantities and wide variety of weapons systems and equipment that have been donated or procured to sustain the military operations of Ukraine; and

(3) the estimated resources, manpower, and timeline required to fully implement the strategic plan.

(b) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a detailed report on the strategic plan developed under subsection (a) that includes each element described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of that subsection.

(a) Prohibition on use of funds.—Until the date that is 90 days after the date on which the certification described in subsection (b) and the assessment described in subsection (c) are submitted to the congressional defense committees, amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act may not be obligated or expended—

(1) to reduce the total number of members of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the area of responsibility of the United States European Command below 76,000;

(2) to divest, consolidate, or otherwise return to a host country any site on the real property inventory of the United States European Command as of June 1, 2025;

(3) to divest, redeploy, withdraw, or otherwise permanently move out of the area of responsibility of the United States European Command any Department of Defense equipment or physical property positioned in such area of responsibility as of June 1, 2025, with an initial purchase value of more than $500,000; or

(4) to relinquish the role of the Commander of the United States European Command as North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

(b) Certification described.—The certification described in this subsection is a certification by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the United States European Command, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence, to the congressional defense committees that, as applicable, a reduction of the total number of members of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the area of responsibility of the United States European Command below 76,000, the divestment, consolidation, or return to a host country of any site on the real property inventory of the United States European Command as of June 1, 2025, the divestment, redeployment, withdrawal, or otherwise permanent moving of equipment or property described in subsection (a)(3), or the relinquishment of the role of the Commander of the United States European Command as NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe—

(2) is being undertaken only after appropriate consultations with all North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and relevant non-NATO partners.

(A) In the case of a reduction of the total number of members of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the area of responsibility of the United States European Command below 76,000, the divestment, consolidation, or return to a host country of any site on the real property inventory of the United States European Command, or the divestment, redeployment, withdrawal or otherwise permanent moving of equipment or property described in subsection (a)(3)—

(II) the security of North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and the strength and security of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a whole; and

(III) the ability of the United States to meet national North Atlantic Treaty Organization capability targets, regional and theater campaign plans, and other warfighting requirements, as determined by the Commander of the United States European Command and the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe;

(ii) an assessment of the threat posed by the Russian Federation to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the near term, medium term, and long term;

(iii) an analysis of the impact of such an action on the ability of the Armed Forces to execute contingency plans of the Department of Defense, including in support of operations and crisis response in the areas of responsibility of the United States Central Command and the United States Africa Command;

(iv) a detailed analysis of the costs for relocation of personnel, equipment, and associated infrastructure;

(v) an analysis of the impact of such an action on military training and major military exercises, including on interoperability and joint activities with North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and partners;

(vi) a description of consultations with each North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally and all relevant non-NATO partners;

(vii) an assessment of the impact of such an action on the credibility of United States extended deterrence commitments to North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies, and the potential for nuclear proliferation in the European theater;

(viii) an assessment of the impact of such an action on transatlantic cooperation to deter potential threats from the People’s Republic of China; and

(ix) an independent risk assessment by the Commander of the United States European Command and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of—

(I) the impact of such a reduction or divestment, consolidation, or return on the security of the United States;

(II) the ability of the Armed Forces to provide forward defense of the United States;

(III) the ability of the Armed Forces to execute contingency plans of the Department of Defense, including in support of operations outside the area of responsibility of the United States European Command; and

(IV) the impact of such a reduction or divestment, consolidation, or return on military training and major military exercises, including on interoperability and joint activities with North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and partners.

(B) In the case of the relinquishment of the role of the Commander of the United States European Command as the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe—

(i) a classified explanation of the role of United States nuclear weapons in supporting North Atlantic Treaty Organization operations and activities after having relinquished such role, including changes to command and control relationships and adjustments to United States nuclear posture;

(ii) a description of consultations with all North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and relevant non-NATO partners, including through the Nuclear Planning Group of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization;

(iii) an assessment of the impact of the withdrawal of a United States official as the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe on—

(I) the effectiveness of North Atlantic Treaty Organization nuclear deterrence; and

(iv) an independent risk assessment by the Commander of the United States European Command and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of—

(v) an independent assessment by the Commander of the United States Strategic Command of—

(I) the capability and capacity of nuclear-armed North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies to effectively deter and, if necessary, defeat likely adversaries in the nuclear domain absent a United States commander serving in the role of Supreme Allied Commander Europe;

(II) changes to be made to existing United States contingency plans if other North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries with nuclear capabilities were to provide extended nuclear deterrence to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; and

(III) the impact of such provision of extended nuclear deterrence on United States nuclear posture and deterrence planning requirements.

(2) SUBMISSION OF INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS.—Any independent assessment required under paragraph (1) shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees without modification or alteration.

(1) CERTIFICATION.—A certification described in subsection (b) shall be submitted in unclassified form.

(2) ASSESSMENT.—An assessment described in subsection (c) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 1226. Acceptance back into stock of equipment procured under Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Equipment procured to carry out this authority pursuant to subsection (a) may only be treated as stocks of the Department of Defense if—

“(A) the equipment procured has not yet been transferred to the Government of Ukraine and is no longer needed to support a program carried out pursuant to such subsection; or

“(B) the equipment procured has been transferred to the Government of Ukraine and is returned by Ukraine to the United States.

“(2) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary may not transfer back into stock equipment described in paragraph (1) until the date that is 15 days after the date on which the Secretary submits a notification to Congress describing how the conditions of such paragraph were met.”.

SEC. 1227. Statement of policy relating to Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.

“(A) to assist Ukraine in maintaining a credible defense and deterrence capability;

“(B) to bolster defense and security cooperation with Ukraine as a means of building a future force of Ukraine that is capable of defending Ukraine today and deterring future aggression; and

“(C) to advance continued reform of the democratic, economic, defense, and security institutions of Ukraine in order to advance the Euro-Atlantic integration and modernization of Ukraine.

“(2) CREDIBLE DEFENSE AND DETERRENCE CAPABILITY DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘credible defense and deterrence capability’ means the ability to defend against and deter any credible conventional military threat from the Russian Federation acting unilaterally or in concert with partners, through the use of conventional military means, possessed in sufficient quantity, including weapons platforms and munitions, command, control, communication, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities.”.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide intelligence support, including information, intelligence, and imagery collection authorized under title 10, United States Code, to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of supporting military operations of the Government of Ukraine that are specifically intended or reasonably expected to defend and retake the territory of Ukraine.

(b) Territory of Ukraine defined.—In this section, the term “territory of Ukraine” includes all territory internationally recognized to be the sovereign territory of Ukraine, including Crimea and the territory the Russian Federation claims to have annexed in Kherson Oblast, Zaporizhzia Oblast, Donetsk Oblast, and Luhansk Oblast.

SEC. 1229. International Security Cooperation Program funding for United States European Command.

SEC. 1230. Promotion of the Joint Ukrainian Multinational Program—Services, Training and Articles Rapid Timeline (JUMPSTART).

(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should leverage existing programs and authorities, including JUMPSTART, to employ resources from European partners via multination co-financing to support and expedite the delivery of weapons, training, and logistics to Ukraine.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes—

(A) an assessment of opportunities for leveraging JUMPSTART to deliver critical technologies to Ukraine, including technologies that also meet United States operational requirements;

(B) a summary of Department efforts to accelerate the rapid delivery of articles, training, and logistics through FMS;

(D) a description of opportunities for employing pooled partner and ally resources to deliver United States systems in support of Europe’s security needs;

(E) proposed legislative or regulatory changes necessary to enhance the effectiveness of JUMPSTART; and

(2) FORM.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall be in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex as necessary.

SEC. 1230A. Modification of United States basing and training, and exercises in North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries.

(a) In general.—Section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 464; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) is amended to read as follows:

“SEC. 1250. United States basing and training in North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries.

“(1) not less than 3.5 percent is dedicated to core defense requirements and North Atlantic Treaty Organization capability targets; and

“(2) not less than 1.5 percent is dedicated to other defense and security related investments.”.

(1) The table of contents for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 136) is amended by striking the item relating to section 1250 and inserting the following:

(2) The table of contents at the beginning of title XII of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 435) is amended by striking the item relating to section 1250 and inserting the following:

(a) Funding.—Subsection (c) of section 1251 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (10 U.S.C. 113 note) is amended—

(1) by striking “the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025” and inserting “the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026”; and

(1) in paragraph (1)(A), in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking “fiscal years 2026 and 2027” and inserting “fiscal years 2027 and 2028”; and

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking “fiscal years 2025 and 2026” each place it appears and inserting “fiscal years 2027 and 2028”.

(c) Extension of plan.—Subsection (e) of such section is amended, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “fiscal years 2026 and 2027” and inserting “fiscal years 2027 and 2028”.

SEC. 1232. Extension of authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup.

(a) Prohibition on use of funds.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act may not be obligated or expended 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 the date that is 90 days after the date on which the certification described in subsection (b) and the applicable assessment described in subsection (c) are submitted to the appropriate committees of Congress.

(b) Certification described.—The certification described in this subsection is a certification by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Forces Korea, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence, to the appropriate committees of Congress that, as applicable, a reduction in the total number of members of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the Republic of Korea below 28,500 or the completion of 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—

(2) is being undertaken only after appropriate consultations with allies of the United States, including the Republic of Korea, Japan, and any country that has sent military contributions to the United Nations Command.

(1) In the case of a reduction in the total number of members of the Armed Forces permanently stationed in or deployed to the Republic of Korea below 28,500, an assessment by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Forces Korea, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence that includes—

(B) an analysis of the impact of such a reduction on the ability of the Armed Forces to execute contingency plans of the Department of Defense, including in support of operations beyond the Korean Peninsula;

(D) an analysis of the impact of such a reduction on military training and major military exercises, including on interoperability and joint activities with the Republic of Korea and Japan;

(E) a description of consultations with the Republic of Korea, Japan, and countries that have sent military contributions to the United Nations Command;

(F) an assessment of the impact of such a reduction on the credibility of United States extended deterrence commitments to the Republic of Korea and Japan, and the potential for nuclear proliferation in the Indo-Pacific region; and

(G) an independent risk assessment by the Commander of the United States Forces Korea, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of—

(ii) the ability of the Armed Forces to execute contingency plans of the Department of Defense, including in support of operations beyond the Korean Peninsula; and

(iii) the impact of such a reduction on military training and major military exercises, including on interoperability and joint activities with the Republic of Korea and Japan.

(2) In the case of the completion of 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, an assessment by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Forces Korea, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence that includes—

(A) a description and characterization of the achievement of the Republic of Korea of the three required conditions set forth in the bilaterally approved conditions-based Operational Control Transition Plan;

(B) a detailed description of the manner in which a Republic of Korea-led Combined Forces Command will report to national command authorities in the United States and the Republic of Korea;

(C) a detailed description of the planned command relationship between a Republic of Korea-led Combined Forces Command and the United States-led United Nations Command;

(D) a description of consultations with countries that have sent military contributions to the United Nations Command;

(E) a description of the United States-Republic of Korea wartime operational control consultations with Japan, and an assessment of approaches for deconflicting military operations across the United States-Republic of Korea and the United States-Japan alliances;

(F) an assessment of the impact of the transition of wartime operational control on the potential for nuclear proliferation in the Indo-Pacific region; and

(G) an independent risk assessment by the Commander of the United States Forces Korea, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of—

(i) the ability of the Republic of Korea to meet the conditions for the transition of wartime operational control from United States-led command to Republic of Korea-led command; and

(ii) the impact of such transition on the potential for nuclear proliferation in the Indo-Pacific region.

(1) CERTIFICATION.—A certification described in subsection (b) shall be submitted in unclassified form.

(2) ASSESSMENT.—An assessment described in subsection (c) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

(e) Appropriate committees of Congress defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—

(1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 1234. Limitation on availability of funds for travel expenses of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

(1) the multi-year plan to fulfill the defensive requirements of the military forces of Taiwan, also known as the “Taiwan Security Assistance Roadmap”, required by section 5506 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (22 U.S.C. 3355);

(2) the independent study of the organizational structure and force posture of the United States Armed Forces in the area of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command required by section 1319 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 500);

(3) the plan to reconstitute United States Forces Japan as a joint force headquarters required by section 1343 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(4) the plan for Department of Defense activities to strengthen United States extended deterrence commitments to the Republic of Korea required by section 1344 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(5) the plan to advance trilateral defense cooperation among the United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea required by section 1345 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159);

(6) the report on Department of Defense activities that would be necessary to support the potential establishment of a regional contingency stockpile for Taiwan required by the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159); and

(7) the report on the adequacy of the logistics network in the Indo-Pacific region for supporting the operational and contingency plans of the United States Indo-Pacific Command required by the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159).

(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall establish and maintain a security cooperation initiative (referred to in this section as the “Partnership”) to strengthen cooperation among the defense industrial bases of the United States and allied and partner countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

(1) To enable the production and supply of the material necessary for equipping the Armed Forces of the United States and the military forces of allied and partner countries to achieve—

(A) the objectives set forth in the most recent national security strategy report submitted to Congress by the President pursuant to section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3043);

(B) the policy guidance of the Secretary of Defense provided pursuant to section 113(g) of title 10, United States Code; and

(C) the future-years defense program submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 221 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) To strengthen the collective defense industrial base by expanding industrial base capability, capacity, and workforce, including with respect to enhanced supply chain security, interoperability, and resilience among participating countries.

(3) To identify and mitigate industrial base vulnerabilities across partner countries.

(4) To advance research and development activities to provide the Armed Forces of the United States and the military forces of allied and partner countries with systems capable of ensuring technological superiority over potential adversaries.

(5) To promote co-development, co-production, and procurement collaboration in key defense sectors.

(6) To promote defense innovation, improve information sharing, encourage standardization, reduce barriers to cooperation, and otherwise mitigate potential vulnerabilities and facilitate collaboration.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall designate a senior civilian official of the Department of Defense at the Assistant Secretary level or above to lead relevant efforts of the Partnership, as determined by the Secretary.

(2) NOTIFICATION.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of Defense makes or changes a designation under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a notification of such designation or change.

(d) Participation.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall establish a process to determine which allies and partners of the United States (including Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, India, the Philippines, and New Zealand) shall be invited to participate as member countries of the Partnership.

(e) Authorities.—To carry out this section, the Secretary of Defense may do the following:

(1) Enter into agreements and memoranda of understanding with appropriate counterparts from participating countries.

(3) Provide technical assistance and capacity-building support to partner countries using authorities available to the Secretary under title 10, United States Code.

(4) Use funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for international cooperation programs, industrial base resilience, or other relevant purposes.

(5) Engage with industry, capital providers, academia, and any other stakeholders necessary to advance the objectives described in subsection (b).

(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 1, 2027, and annually thereafter through 2031, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the status and progress of the Partnership.

(B) ELEMENTS.—Each report required by subparagraph (A) shall include the following:

(ii) An overview of efforts among participating countries to enhance supply chain integrity and resilience.

(iii) A description of any joint defense production or co-development initiative, including any such initiative involving sensitive or classified technologies.

(v) Recommendations for legislative, regulatory, policy, or resourcing changes to achieve the objectives described in subsection (b).

(2) BRIEFING.—Not later than December 1, 2026, and annually thereafter through 2030, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the congressional defense committees with a briefing on the progress made toward achieving the objectives described in subsection (b).

(g) Termination.—The authority under this section shall terminate on December 31, 2030.

“(V) Medical equipment, supplies, and related combat casualty care capabilities.”; and

“(J) Medical equipment, supplies, and related combat casualty care capabilities.”; and

SEC. 1237. Joint program with Taiwan to enable fielding of uncrewed systems and counter-uncrewed systems capabilities.

(a) In general.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall 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 (22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.).

(b) Use of authorities.—In carrying out a joint program under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense may use the authorities under title 10, United States Code, and other applicable statutory authorities available to the Secretary.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter through 2029, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the joint program under subsection (a).

(2) ELEMENTS.—Each report required by paragraph (1) shall include, for the period covered by the report, the following:

(B) A description of activities undertaken by the Secretary of Defense and appropriate officials of Taiwan to enable the fielding of uncrewed systems and counter-uncrewed systems capabilities described in subsection (a).

(C) A description of progress made in finalizing defense trade foundational agreements between the United States and Taiwan, including—

(D) An identification of the additional resources or authorities necessary to enable the fielding of uncrewed systems and counter-uncrewed systems capabilities described in subsection (a).

(d) Appropriate committees of Congress defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—

(1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that—

(1) analyzes the critical digital infrastructure of Taiwan in the event of a military invasion or blockade by the People’s Republic of China; and

(2) identifies potential Department of Defense actions that could help enable the protection of such infrastructure, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96–8; 93 Stat. 14).

(b) Elements.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(1) A description of threats to the critical digital infrastructure of Taiwan in the event of a military invasion or blockade by the People's Republic of China.

(2) A description of the critical digital infrastructure capabilities of Taiwan, including—

(A) the type and amount of physical hardware available to support the transfer of large quantities of electronic data from Taiwan to a cloud-based system or a geographic location outside Taiwan; and

(B) the availability of resilient satellite communications from low-Earth orbit constellations and any other necessary activity relating to such a transfer.

(3) An identification of potential Department of Defense actions that could help enable the protection of the critical digital infrastructure of Taiwan in the event of a contingency, including—

(B) acquisition of cloud-based services and radio frequency satellite communications.

(4) Recommendations for any resources or authorities required to support the Department of Defense actions identified under paragraph (3).

(2) The risks associated with making assumptions about the availability of commercial vendors in the event of a military invasion or blockade of Taiwan by the People’s Republic of China.

(d) Form.—The report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in classified form.

(e) Collaboration.—To support the development of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary is encouraged to seek input from the following:

(1) Civilian executives from commercial technology companies that provided support to Ukraine in its fight against the Russian Federation’s war of aggression.

(2) Any other individual or agency of the Federal Government the Secretary considers appropriate.

(f) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary submits the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide the congressional defense committees with a briefing on the contents of the report.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report outlining Department of Defense efforts to support Japan in the fielding of an operational counterstrike capability.

(b) Elements.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(1) A description of the activities and objectives of the United States-Japan Roles, Missions, and Capabilities Working Group with respect to the fielding of an operational counterstrike capability by Japan.

(2) A description of the operations, activities, and investments the Department is undertaking in collaboration with the Government of Japan, including—

(A) a description of progress made by the United States and Japan in developing and deploying counterstrike capabilities, including in and across the First Island Chain;

(B) a description of the counterstrike capabilities of Japan and a characterization of the potential for enhancement of such capabilities; and

(ii) regulatory restrictions, including technology and foreign disclosure constraints;

(D) an articulation of the planning assumptions underpinning the assigned and anticipated roles, missions, and capabilities of the respective counterstrike capabilities of the United States and Japan;

(E) a description of the manner in which the United States and Japan will coordinate and deconflict counterstrike operations; and

(F) an assessment of potential alliance posture changes that would support an enhanced alliance counterstrike capability, including in the First Island Chain.

(3) A description of the command and control mechanisms and information-sharing requirements needed to enable coordination and deconfliction of allied counterstrike operations, including—

(B) the technical means needed to facilitate integrated planning for counterstrike operations; and

(4) An identification of challenges to the implementation of the operations, activities, and investments described in paragraph (2), and any recommended legislative changes, resourcing requirements, bilateral agreements, or other measures that would facilitate the implementation of such operations, activities, and investments.

(c) Form.—The report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

(a) In general.—Not later than June 1, 2026, and annually thereafter through 2031, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on enhancing United States security cooperation with the Philippines.

(b) Elements.—Each report required by subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(1) An assessment of progress with respect to the implementation of the United States-Philippines Bilateral Defense Guidelines.

(2) An organizational chart and overview of the functions of the alliance management bodies that report to the United States-Philippines Mutual Defense Board and Security Engagement Board.

(3) A summary of the activities and outcomes of the Roles, Missions, and Capabilities Working Group.

(4) An assessment of progress with respect to the bilateral Philippines—Security Sector Assistance Roadmap initiative, including a description of joint capability areas under such initiative.

(5) A projected resourcing plan for the Philippines—Security Sector Assistance Roadmap initiative that includes the projected use of national funds of the Philippines, Foreign Military Sales, Foreign Military Financing, and Department of Defense International Security Cooperation Program account funds.

(6) A description of the activities and investments the Department will implement during the five-year period beginning on the date on which the report is submitted for—

(A) increased bilateral training, exercises, combined patrols, and other activities between the United States Armed Forces and the military forces of the Philippines;

(B) enhancing multilateral security cooperation and capacity-building efforts among the Philippines, Japan, Australia, and other foreign partners; and

(C) improving information-sharing mechanisms and processes, including by adoption of enhanced security protocols, under the General Security of Military Information Agreement between the United States and the Philippines, signed at Manila November 18, 2024.

(7) A plan for improving the infrastructure at sites designated under the Agreement on Enhanced Defense Cooperation, signed at Quezon City April 28, 2014 (TIAS 14–625), including, for each such site—

(A) an identification of priority facility investments at the site across the future-years defense program;

(8) An articulation of requirements for pre-positioning of equipment and supplies in support of humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and other bilateral activities.

(9) A description of the current organization of the Joint United States Military Assistance Group—Philippines, and an analysis of the feasibility and advisability of modifying United States command structures in the Philippines to more effectively—

(10) An identification of challenges to the implementation of the activities and investments described in paragraphs (1) through (9), and any recommended legislative changes, resourcing requirements, bilateral agreements, or other measures that would facilitate the implementation of such activities and investments.

(c) Form.—Each report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

(d) Appropriate committees of Congress defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—

(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 1241. Modification to annual report on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China.

“(5) The military and security strategy of the People’s Republic of China on the Tibetan Plateau, including with respect to risks posed by political and regional conflicts, resource control and water-related resource conflicts, and infrastructure development.”.

SEC. 1242. Strategic partnership on defense industrial priorities between the United States and Taiwan.

(1) to enhance market opportunities for United States-based and Taiwan-based defense technology companies;

(4) to counter the development, by the Chinese Communist Party and adversarial proxy groups aligned with the Chinese Communist Party, of dual-use defense technologies; and

(5) in coordination with appropriate counterpart offices of the Ministry of National Defense of Taiwan—

(D) to collaborate on the coordinated development of dual-use defense capabilities, such as the following:

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense is strongly encouraged 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.

(b) Justification.—In the event a decision is made not to invite the naval forces of Taiwan to participate in any Rim of the Pacific exercise described in subsection (a), not later than 30 days after the date on which such decision is made, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a written justification for such decision.

SEC. 1244. Extension of Indo-Pacific extended deterrence education pilot program.

SEC. 1245. Inclusion on list of Chinese military companies of entities added to certain other lists.

SEC. 1246. Preventing circumvention by Chinese military companies in third-party countries.

(a) In general.—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; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) is amended to read as follows:

“(I) directly or indirectly owned by, controlled by, or beneficially owned by, affiliated with, or in an official or unofficial capacity acting as an agent of or on behalf of, the People’s Liberation Army, Chinese military and paramilitary elements, security forces, police, law enforcement, border control, the People’s Armed Police, the Ministry of State Security (MSS), or any other organization subordinate to the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party, the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council (SASAC), or the State Administration of Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND) operating inside or outside of China; or”.

(b) Effective date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 1247. Sense of Congress on defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region.

(1) enhancing cooperation with Japan, consistent with the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security Between the United States of America and Japan, signed at Washington, January 19, 1960, including by developing advanced military capabilities, upgrading commd and control relationships, fostering interoperability across all domains, and improving sharing of information and intelligence;

(2) reinforcing the United States alliance with the Republic of Korea, including by maintaining the presence of approximately 28,500 members of the United States Armed Forces deployed to the Republic of Korea, enhancing mutual defense base cooperation, and affirming the United States extended deterrence commitment using the full range of United States defense capabilities, consistent with the Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of Korea, signed at Washington, October 1, 1953, in support of the shared objective of a peaceful and stable Korean Peninsula;

(3) fostering bilateral and multilateral cooperation with Australia, consistent with the Security Treaty Between Australia, New Zealand, and the United States of America, signed at San Francisco, September, 1951, and through the partnership among Australia, the United Kingdom, and United States (commonly known as “AUKUS” )—

(4) advancing United States alliances with the Philippines and Thailand and United States partnerships with other partners in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to enhance maritime domain awareness, promote sovereignty and territorial integrity, leverage technology and promote innovation, and support an open, inclusive, and rules-based regional architecture;

(5) broadening United States engagement with India, including through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue—

(A) to advance the shared objective of a free and open Indo-Pacific region through bilateral and multilateral engagements and participation in military exercises, expanded defense trade, and collaboration on humanitarian aid and disaster response; and

(6) strengthening the United States partnership with Taiwan, consistent with the Three Communiques, the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96–8; 22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.), and the Six Assurances, with the goal of improving Taiwan’s defensive capabilities and promoting peaceful cross-strait relations;

(7) reinforcing the status of the Republic of Singapore as a Major Security Cooperation Partner of the United States and continuing to strengthen defense and security cooperation between the military forces of the Republic of Singapore and the United States Armed Forces, including through participation in combined exercises and training;

(8) engaging with the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Palau, and other Pacific island countries, with the goal of strengthening regional security and addressing issues of mutual concern, including protecting fisheries from illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing;

(9) collaborating with Canada, the United Kingdom, France, and other members of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to build connectivity and advance a shared vision for the region that is principled, long-term, and anchored in democratic resilience; and

(10) investing in enhanced military posture and capabilities in the area of responsibility of the United States Indo-Pacific Command and strengthening cooperation in bilateral relationships, multilateral partnerships, and other international fora to uphold global security and shared principles, with the goal of ensuring the maintenance of a free and open Indo-Pacific region.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall continue to seek 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.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than May 31, 2026, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on further implementation of an integrated air and missile defense architecture in the area of responsibility of the United States Central Command.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) An assessment of the threat to allies and partners within the area of responsibility of the United States Central Command posed by ballistic and cruise missiles, manned and unmanned aerial systems, and rocket attacks launched from Iran and by groups linked to Iran.

(i) the missile defense priorities and capability needs of the United States Central Command with respect to defense against the threats described in subparagraph (A); and

(ii) the planned regional missile defense architectures derived from such priorities and capability needs.

(C) An analysis of current integrated air and missile defense systems within the area of responsibility of the United States Central Command to defend against threats described in subparagraph (A) and to meet the priorities identified under subparagraph (B).

(D) A description of the progress made toward addressing challenges identified in the strategy required by section 1658(b) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2951) and toward meeting benchmarks set forth in such strategy.

(E) With respect to the defensive operations against aerial threats since October 7, 2023, the following:

(i) With respect to countering the April 13, 2024, and October 1, 2024, ballistic missile and drone attacks by Iran against Israel—

(I) lessons learned with respect to the adequacy of data-sharing agreements in facilitating effective joint responses, and recommendations for further improvements to such agreements;

(II) a comparative analysis of the performance of systems operated by the United States and the performance of systems operated by Israel in intercepting missiles and unmanned aerial systems launched by Iran during the attacks;

(III) an assessment of the extent to which a defense provided to other United States regional partners if attacked by Iran would be similarly effective, and an identification of changes necessary to address deficiencies; and

(IV) an evaluation of the extent to which the strategy required by section 1658(b) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2951) contributed to the defensive operations described in this clause.

(ii) Lessons learned with respect to countering projectiles launched by the Houthis in Yemen against maritime targets in the area of responsibility of the United States Central Command.

(iii) Any other such defensive operation the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.

(3) FORM.—The report submitted under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

(4) PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION.—Any activity carried out under this subsection shall be conducted in a manner that is consistent with protection of intelligence sources and methods and appropriately protects sensitive information and the national security interests of the United States.

SEC. 1252. Modification of program and processes relating to foreign acquisition.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, pursuant to existing authorities, shall seek to provide assistance, including training, equipment, logistics support, supplies, and services, to the Government of Jordan and the Government of Lebanon for the purpose 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.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than December 31, 2025, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Commander of the United States Central Command, and in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that describes the plan of the Department of Defense to provide assistance under subsection (a).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The required plan shall, at a minimum, include the following elements:

(A) A description of the available authorities to provide assistance described in subsection (a) to the Government of Jordan and the Government of Lebanon.

(B) A description of the objectives of assistance described in subsection (a), including specific capabilities that such assistance seeks to enhance and the recipient units of the military forces of Jordan and Lebanon for such assistance.

(C) An identification of any opportunities to transfer military equipment, including aircraft and unmanned systems, from existing inventory of the Department of Defense to bolster the capabilities of the military forces of Jordan.

SEC. 1254. Joint Program Office for Non-Programs of Record to support foreign acquisition.

(a) Establishment.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 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 (referred to in this section as the “Joint Program Office”) to support the acquisition of specified non-program of record systems by approved foreign partners and allies.

(1) LEADERSHIP.—The Joint Program Office shall be led by a senior executive or military flag officer of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, who shall have a deputy from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

(2) STAFFING.—The staff of the Joint Program Office shall include detailees from the international program offices of the military departments, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and the Defense Technology Security Administration.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Joint Program Office shall be responsible for the following:

(A) Coordinating with allies and partners to identify and procure non-program of record capabilities.

(B) Facilitating discussions between industry and foreign partners on new non-program-of-record capabilities.

(C) Liaising with combatant commands to identify new specified non-program of record systems aligned with the strategic priorities of the combatant commands for theater security cooperation.

(D) Promoting capabilities with foreign partners that align with priority capabilities for the combatant commands.

(E) Coordinating with, and as necessary, providing additional support to, the international program offices of the military departments to expedite delivery of capabilities to foreign partners and allies.

(F) Coordinating internal Department of Defense approval processes to expedite the delivery of non-program of record capabilities.

(d) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the establishment of the Joint Program Office, the Secretary shall provide the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives with a briefing on the charter, responsibilities, resources, and plan of activities for the Joint Program Office for the subsequent fiscal year.

(e) Specified non-program of record system defined.—In this section, the term “specified non-program of record system” means a record system that does not exist formally as a program of record within the Department of Defense, including—

(1) an international or civil variant of a program of record with nonstandard configurations, or a type 1 non-program of record system;

(2) a prior program of record that is no longer supported in United States inventory, or a type 2 non-program of record system;

(3) a program consisting of commercially developed munitions items, or a type 3 non-program of record system;

(4) a program consisting of commercially developed dual-use items, or a type 4 non-program of record system;

(5) a program consisting of commercially developed dual-use items combined with program of record elements, or a type 5 non-program of record system; and

(6) a program consisting of commercially developed dual-use items with military end-use, or a type 6 non-program of record system.

SEC. 1255. Extension and modification of United States-Israel anti-tunnel cooperation.

(1) in subsection (b)(4), by striking “$50,000,000” and inserting “$80,000,000”; and

(2) in subsection (f), by striking “December 31, 2026” and inserting “December 31, 2028”.

SEC. 1256. Extension and modification of United States-Israel cooperation to counter unmanned aerial systems.

(1) in subsection (b)(4), by striking “$55,000,000” and inserting “$75,000,000”; and

(2) in subsection (f), by striking “December 31, 2026” and inserting “December 31, 2028”.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall issue updated guidance, in accordance with section 382 of title 10, United States Code, to streamline and align the roles, responsibilities, and authorities, and improve transparency, relating to Department of Defense processes for international arms transfers, including Foreign Military Sales.

(b) Elements.—The updated guidance required by subsection (a) shall do the following:

(1) Streamline the roles and responsibilities relating to Department processes for international arms transfers (including the Foreign Military Sales and technology security and foreign disclosure processes) so as to ensure effective implementation of such roles and responsibilities among the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the Defense Technology Security Administration, and the military departments.

(2) Designate a lead official, to be known as the “Data Czar”, who, in coordination with the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense, shall be responsible for collecting, tracking, coordinating, and sharing data and information on Foreign Military Sales cases for the purposes of—

(A) facilitating transparency across the Department of Defense international cooperation enterprise (including industry and international partners within such enterprise and components and subcomponents of the Department); and

(B) sharing information on Foreign Military Sales case development, execution, contracting, and implementation processes.

(3) Develop a framework to facilitate the use of the Foreign Military Sales process to deliver defense articles and services to allies and partners through programs other than a program of record.

(B) aligns with the United States Conventional Arms Transfer Policy described in National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSM-10, dated April 19, 2018;

(C) is informed by priorities identified in the National Defense Strategy, Department planning guidance, and theater campaign plans; and

(i) the risk factors for arms transfers identified in the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.); and

(c) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the issuance of the updated guidance required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives with a briefing on the development and implementation of such guidance that describes the manner in which the procedures set forth in the guidance will streamline, and enhance the transparency of, international cooperation processes of the Department.

(d) Dissemination of FMS-specific guidance.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall disseminate the Foreign Miliary Sales-specific guidance described in subsection (a)(4) to each member of the Department of Defense international cooperation enterprise.

(a) Framework development.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the National Disclosure Policy Committee (in this section referred to as the “Committee”) shall develop and submit to Congress a framework for revising and updating the National Disclosure Policy (NDP–1).

(b) Framework elements.—The framework developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A comprehensive assessment of emerging and advanced defense items, including artificial intelligence, directed energy, microwave systems, counter-unmanned aerial systems, missile defense, machine learning, cybersecurity, quantum technologies, hypersonic, and autonomous systems, and necessary updates to NDP–1 to enable the transfer and sharing of this technology with United States allies and partners.

(2) Guidelines for balancing national security considerations with the need to share critical information and technology with allies and partners to enhance interoperability and collective security.

(3) Recommendations for updating the NDP–1 to help bolster the defense industrial base and accommodate the use of emerging and advanced defense items in multi-domain operations, joint military exercises, and allied operational requirements.

(4) Mechanisms to accelerate the approval process for disclosures, ensuring timely and effective information sharing.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the first submittal of the framework to Congress pursuant to subsection (a) and on an annual recurring basis thereafter, the Committee shall implement revisions to the National Disclosure Policy based on the recommendations and any future recommendation based upon the stakeholder engagement in subsection (c) contained in the framework.

(A) include specific provisions addressing the secure disclosure of emerging and advanced technologies to allies and partners of the United States;

(B) establish metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the updated policy in enhancing security, interoperability, and interchangeability; and

(d) Stakeholder engagement.—In carrying out subsections (a), (b), and (c), the Committee shall, not less frequently than once every 6 months, consult with the following:

(1) Representatives of such governments that are allies or partners of the United States as the Committee considers appropriate, to gather input on enhancing interoperability, interchangeability, and collaborative security measures.

(2) Such representatives from the defense industry as the Committee considers appropriate, including representatives from nontraditional defense contractors (as defined by section 3014 of title 10, United States Code).

(e) Annual report to Congress.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Director of the Defense Technology Security Administration, shall submit with the budget submission each year a report to Congress detailing—

(3) recommendations for further updates or legislative actions to enhance the policy;

(4) a description of the roles and missions of the committees and subcommittees of the Department of Defense’s Technology Security and Foreign Disclosure enterprise and a detailed explanation of how these bodies report back to the Arms Transfer and Technology Release Senior Steering Group; and

(f) Classified annex.—If necessary, the annual report shall include a classified annex to address sensitive national security information.

(g) Unclassified public annex.—The submission shall include a publicly releasable annex to be made available upon submission of the report to Congress.

SEC. 1259. Improvements to security cooperation workforce and defense acquisition workforce.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall, consistent with the requirements of section 384 of title 10, United States Code, seek to ensure that—

(A) members of the defense acquisition workforce involved in the foreign military sales process—

(i) are aware of evolving United States regional and country-level defense capability-building priorities; and

(ii) coordinate with the security cooperation workforce to enhance responsiveness to foreign partner requests and capability-building priorities; and

(B) members of the defense acquisition workforce are professionally evaluated using metrics to measure—

(i) adherence to meeting the foreign capability requirements identified in Department of Defense strategy documents;

(iii) ability to meet foreign partner capability and delivery schedule requirements; and

(iv) advancement of foreign capability-building priorities described in the guidance updated under subsection (b).

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall update, as necessary, Department of Defense guidance governing the execution of foreign military sales by the Department to ensure that such guidance—

(A) incorporates priorities of the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy associated with foreign partner contributions;

(B) is informed by the theater campaign plans and theater security cooperation strategies of the combatant commands;

(D) is disseminated to the security cooperation workforce and the defense acquisition workforce.

(i) regional and country-level foreign defense capability-building priorities; and

(ii) levels of urgency and desired timelines for achieving foreign capability-building objectives; and

(B) provide guidance to the defense acquisition workforce regarding levels of resourcing, innovation, and risk tolerance that should be considered in meeting urgent needs.

(3) PURCHASER WITH A SPECIAL DESIGNATION DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “purchaser with a special designation” means Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, major defense partners, major security partners, and eligible purchasers that are members of the national technology and industrial base.

(c) Foreign Military Sales Continuous Process Improvement Board.—Section 1210(b) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159) is amended to read as follows:

“(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a Foreign Military Sales Continuous Process Improvement Board (in this section referred to as the ‘Board’) to serve as an enduring governance structure within the Department of Defense that reports to the Secretary on matters relating to the foreign military sales process so as to enhance accountability and continuous improvement within the Department, including the objectives of—

“(A) improving the understanding, among officials of the Department, of ally and partner requirements;

“(F) working with other departments and agencies to promote broad United States Government support; and

“(G) any other matters determined by the Secretary to be relevant to the Board.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Board shall be composed of not fewer than 7 members, each of whom shall have expertise in security cooperation, security assistance, defense acquisition, business process reform, or any disciplines the Secretary determines to be important to the functioning of the Board.

“(i) IN GENERAL.—Of the members of the Board, 3 such members shall be individuals who are not—

“(ii) CLEARANCE.—Each member of the Board described in this subparagraph shall be appropriately cleared for security risks.

“(3) INAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The Board shall not be subject to chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the ‘Federal Advisory Committee Act’).

(1) DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE.—The term “defense acquisition workforce” means the Department of Defense acquisition workforce described in chapter 87 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) SECURITY COOPERATION WORKFORCE.—The term “security cooperation workforce” has the meaning given the term in section 384 of title 10, United States Code.

(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to purchasers with a special designation, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a requirement that, in developing letters of offer and acceptance, the acquisition program office of each military department shall develop, at program inception—

(2) ASSOCIATED RISK.—In developing each acquisition strategy required by subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1), the acquisition program office of the military department concerned shall—

(A) measure, and justify with respect to the urgency of delivering a capability in full or in phases, the associated risk, risk mitigation, and risk cost;

(B) in the case of a sole-source program that is not a program of record, transparently consult with the prime contractor to seek consensus on cost and schedule; and

(C) provide, in coordination with the appropriate regional directorate of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, to the acquisition leadership of such military department a briefing on the results of the measurements under subparagraph (A) and the consultation under subparagraph (B).

(3) DECISION.—Not later than 30 days after the date of a briefing under paragraph (2)(C), the acquisition leadership of the military department concerned shall issue a decision with respect to the acquisition strategy selected.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, in the development of acquisition strategies for purchasers with a special designation under subsection (a), the purchaser with a special designation is provided an opportunity to provide input with respect to risk tolerance.

(2) INFORMATION SHARING.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that a purchaser with a special designation is briefed on risks identified, alternate approaches that may be taken, and the schedule, cost, and capability tradeoffs associated with such alternate approaches.

(3) INCLUSION IN BRIEFING.—Purchaser input gathered under this paragraph shall be included in the briefing required by subsection (a)(2)(C) and appropriately weighed in making a final decision with respect to the appropriate acquisition approach.

(1) IN GENERAL.—A United States prime contractor may enter into a covered agreement with a manufacturer to begin the process of acquiring long-lead Government-furnished equipment, including sensitive and closely controlled items such as communications security devices, military grade GPS, and anti-spoofing devices, on forecast prior to the execution of a signed commercial contract or issuance of a letter of offer and acceptance.

(2) COVERED AGREEMENT DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “covered agreement” means an agreement between a United States prime contractor and a manufacturer pursuant to which—

(A) the prime contractor, in anticipation of a foreign military sale, contracts for the production by the manufacturer of one or more articles that will be supplied to the prime contractor as government-furnished equipment prior to execution of a signed commercial contract or issuance of a letter of offer and acceptance in connection with such sale;

(B) the parties agree to the allocation of risks, obligations, profits, and costs in the event the anticipated foreign military sale does not occur, including whether the articles manufactured under the agreement are retained by the manufacturer for eventual supply to the prime contractor or a third party in connection with a future foreign military sale or other transaction; and

(C) the United States Government assumes no liability with respect to either party in the event the anticipated foreign military sale does not occur.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall implement policies, and ensure that the head of each military department implements policies, that allow United States prime contractors to enter into covered agreements with manufacturers of Government-furnished equipment.

(I) negotiating directly with the manufacturer of Government-furnished equipment, including with respect to the terms and conditions described in paragraph (2)(B); and

(ii) transfer of Government-furnished equipment from such manufacturer to the primary contractor shall not occur until the date on which a letter of offer and acceptance or commercial contract is produced.

(4) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as authorizing, requiring, or providing for the United States Government to assume any liability or other financial responsibility with respect to a covered agreement.

(d) Purchaser with a special designation defined.—In this section, the term “purchaser with a special designation” means Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, major defense partners, major security partners, and eligible purchasers that are members of the national technology and industrial base.

SEC. 1262. Redesignation of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies as the James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies.

(a) In general.—The Department of Defense regional center for security studies known as the Africa Center for Strategic Studies is hereby redesignated as the “James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies”.

(1) REFERENCE TO REGIONAL CENTERS FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES.—Section 342(b)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “Africa Center for Strategic Studies” and inserting “James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies”.

(2) ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS AND DONATIONS.—Section 2611(a)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking “Africa Center for Strategic Studies” and inserting “James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies”.

(3) PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE TO SUDAN.—Section 1270A(b)(1) of the Sudan Democratic Transition, Accountability, and Fiscal Transparency Act of 2020 (22 U.S.C. 10010(b)(1)) is amended by striking “Africa Center for Strategic Studies” and inserting “James M. Inhofe Center for Africa Security Studies”.

(c) References.—Any reference to the Department of Defense Africa Center for Strategic Studies in any law, regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United States shall be deemed to be a reference to 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.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a program using the authority provided under section 2103(b) of title 10, United States Code, to promote the participation of foreign students in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (in this section referred to as the “Program”).

(2) ORGANIZATION.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the Secretaries of the military departments, the commanders of the combatant commands, the participant institutions in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program, and any other individual the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, shall be responsible for, and shall oversee, the Program.

(b) Objective.—The objective of the Program is to promote the readiness and interoperability of the United States Armed Forces and the military forces of partner countries by providing a high-quality, cost effective military-based educational experience for foreign students in furtherance of the military-to-military program objectives of the Department of Defense and to enhance the educational experience and preparation of future United States military leaders through increased, extended interaction with highly qualified potential foreign military leaders.

(1) identify to the military services’ Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program the foreign students who, based on criteria established by the Secretary, the Secretary recommends be considered for admission under the Program;

(2) coordinate with partner countries to evaluate interest in and promote awareness of the Program;

(3) establish a mechanism for tracking an alumni network of foreign students who participate in the Program; and

(4) to the extent practicable, work with the participant institutions in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program and partner countries to identify academic institutions and programs that—

(A) have specialized academic programs in areas of study or interest to participating countries; or

(B) have high participation from or significant diaspora populations from participating countries.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 30, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a strategy for the implementation of the Program.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The strategy required by paragraph (1) shall include the following elements:

(iii) the functions and duties of such governing body with respect to establishing and maintaining the Program; and

(iv) mechanisms for coordinating with partner countries whose students are selected to participate in the Program.

(B) A list of additional authorities, appropriations, or other congressional support necessary to ensure the success of the Program.

(C) A description of targeted partner countries and participant institutions in the Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps for the first three fiscal years of the Program, including a rationale for selecting such initial partners.

(D) A description of opportunities and potential timelines for future Program expansion, as appropriate.

(E) A description of the mechanism for tracking the alumni network of participants of the Program.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 20, 2027, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the Program.

(2) ELEMENTS.—Each report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following elements:

(A) A narrative summary of activities conducted as part of the Program during the preceding fiscal year.

(B) An overview of participant Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps programs, individuals, and countries, to include a description of the areas of study entered into by the students participating in the Program.

(f) Limitation on authority.—The Secretary of Defense may not use the authority provided under this section to pay for tuition or room and board for foreign students who participate in the Program.

SEC. 1264. Modification of authority for assistance in support of Department of Defense accounting for missing United States Government personnel.

(a) Funding allocation.—Of the $282,830,000 authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2026 in section 301 and made available by the funding table in division D for the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program established under section 1321 of the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Act (50 U.S.C. 3711), the following amounts may be obligated for the purposes specified:

(6) For activities designated as Other Assessments/Administrative Costs, $28,323,000.

(b) Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction funds.—Funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 301 and made available by the funding table in division D for the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program shall be available for obligation for fiscal years 2026, 2027, and 2028.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2026 for expenses, not otherwise provided for, for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense, as specified in the funding table in section 4501.

(b) Use.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated under subsection are authorized for—

(1) the destruction of lethal chemical agents and munitions in accordance with section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 ( 50 U.S.C. 1521); and

(2) the destruction of chemical warfare materiel of the United States that is not covered by section 1412 of such Act.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 5(b) of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98d(b)) is amended—

(C) by striking “has been specifically authorized by law” and inserting “was included in the most recent annual materials plan submitted to the congressional defense committees (as defined in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code) under section 11(b)(1)(G)”; and

“(2) Not later than 15 days after making a disposal under paragraph (1), the National Defense Stockpile Manager shall notify the congressional defense committees of the disposal.”.

(2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 6(a) of such Act (50 U.S.C. 98e(a)) is amended—

(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “President” and inserting “National Defense Stockpile Manager”; and

“(7) dispose of materials in the stockpile in accordance with the most recent annual materials plan submitted to the congressional defense committees under section 11(b)(1)(G) and notify the congressional defense committees of such disposals as required by section 5(b)(2).”.

(b) Reduction of wait periods.—Sections 5(a)(2), 6(d)(1), and 6(d)(2) of such Act (50 U.S.C. 98d(a)(2), 98e(d)(1), 98e(d)(2)) are each amended by striking “45 days” and inserting “30 days”.

SEC. 1501. Delay in implementation of environmental assessment for rocket cargo test and demonstration at Johnston Atoll.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study to assess the operational capacity, infrastructure, and long-term sustainability of heavy and super heavy space launch sites at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base, with a focus on evaluating the suitability of such sites for ongoing and future missions, and to explore alternate launch locations that may offer advantages with respect to mission-efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and strategic value.

(b) Elements.—The study required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) An analysis of the current capacity and use of the heavy and super heavy space launch sites at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base, including existing infrastructure, launch frequencies, and operational efficiency.

(2) A detailed evaluation of the infrastructure at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base, including transportation access, environmental considerations, safety protocols, the adequacy of current facilities to support heavy and super heavy space launches, and the estimated costs of maintaining and upgrading such infrastructure.

(3) A review of environmental regulations, policies, and potential impacts related to heavy and super heavy space launches at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base, including any limitations or challenges imposed by Federal, State, or local regulations and an evaluation of potential strategies to mitigate adverse environmental effects.

(4) A comparative analysis of alternate locations for heavy and super heavy space launches, including sites on Federal lands, private land partnerships, and locations outside the continental United States. Such analysis shall consider geographic, environmental, logistical, and regulatory factors that may make alternate locations viable or advantageous, including cost comparisons and potential challenges in establishing infrastructure at such locations.

(5) An examination of the manner in which Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Vandenberg Space Force Base, and any potential alternate locations align with national defense and space exploration goals, including launch site proximity to key orbital paths, security considerations, and redundancy for critical missions.

(6) An exploration of the manner in which advancements in space launch technology, including reusable launch vehicles and space traffic management, could influence the future demand and operational needs for heavy and super heavy space launch sites.

(7) An assessment of any innovative technologies that could enhance the capacity or reduce the environmental impact of existing or alternate heavy and super heavy space launch sites.

(8) A financial analysis of the long-term costs associated with the use and maintenance of Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base for heavy and super heavy space launches, and the estimated costs for establishing and operating alternative heavy and super heavy space launch sites. Such analysis shall include considerations applicable to Government funding, private sector partnerships, and cost-sharing models.

(c) Consultation.—The study required by subsection (a) shall be conducted in consultation with relevant stakeholders, including commercial space industry representatives, environmental agencies, and local governments.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 31, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the findings of the study required by subsection (a).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) Recommendations on the future use of heavy and super heavy space launch sites at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Vandenberg Space Force Base, and alternate locations.

(B) A summary of findings and recommendations on the continued use of Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Vandenberg Space Force Base for heavy and super heavy space launches.

(D) Policy recommendations for addressing infrastructure needs, environmental concerns, and regulatory challenges for heavy and super heavy space launch operations.

(E) A summary of stakeholder input and any proposed legislative or regulatory changes based on the findings of the study.

SEC. 1503. Acquisition and operation of space systems for space warfighting and control.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall acquire and operate space systems to be used primarily for space warfighting and control to meet the requirements specified by one or more combatant commanders in carrying out the responsibilities set forth in section 164 of title 10, United States Code.

(b) Role of commercial space systems.—One or more commercial space systems may be used to augment the space systems acquired and operated under subsection (a).

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may waive the application of subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that such a waiver is in the national security interest of the United States.

(2) NOTIFICATION.—Not later than 10 days after exercising the waiver authority under paragraph (a), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a notification of the use of such authority that includes—

(A) a description of the national security interest upon which the exercise of such authority is based;

(B) the anticipated vulnerabilities to national security posed by the use of such waiver; and

SEC. 1504. Blast damage assessment guide for space vehicles at Air Force launch complexes.

(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall publish a liquid oxygen and methane blast damage assessment guide for space launch vehicles at Air Force launch complexes.

(b) Notice and briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the assessment guide required by subsection (a) is published, the Secretary shall—

(2) provide the congressional defense committees with a briefing on the contents of the assessment guide.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may waive the one-year publication timeline under subsection (a) for national security purposes, or if the Secretary determines that such timeline is impractical, if the Secretary notifies the congressional defense committees with respect to an alternate date on which the publication shall occur.

(2) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may exercise the waiver authority under paragraph (1) not more than once.

(a) Finding.—Congress finds that robust competition in the space industrial base is essential to ensuring United States space superiority and the ability of the United States Space Force to provide national security mission-critical space warfighting systems and operations across the joint force.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 135 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“The head of an agency shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure that—

“(2) mission-critical national security space-based systems that deliver space-based tactical data within a program and across the armed forces shall, to the greatest extent practicable, be procured from an open competition allowing for competition between multiple vendors, and the products of such vendors shall comply with interfaces and standards that maximize resilience and interoperability with Department of Defense systems.”.

(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for chapter 135 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

SEC. 1506. Use of middle tier acquisition program for proliferated warfighter space architecture of the Space Development Agency.

(a) In general.—The Director of the Space Development Agency shall use a middle tier acquisition program for the rapid fielding of satellites and associated systems for each of the following tranches of the of the proliferated warfighter space architecture of the Agency:

(b) Rapid prototyping and fielding.—Any tranche of satellites or associated systems developed and fielded under subsection (a) shall have a level of maturity that allows such satellites or systems to be rapidly prototyped within an acquisition program or rapidly fielded within five years of the development of an approved requirement for such satellites or systems.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment may designate a tranche described in subsection (a) as a major capability acquisition program consistent with Department of Defense Instruction 5000.85, titled “Major Capability Acquisition” and issued on August 6, 2020 (or a successor instruction).

(2) NOTICE TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 days before the date on which a designation under paragraph (1) is made, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall notify the congressional defense committees of the intent of the Under Secretary to make such designation and include with such notice a justification for such designation.

(1) REVIEW.—In accordance with section 9021 of title 10, United States Code, the Space Acquisition Council shall review each tranch described subsection (a) to ensure integration across the national security space enterprise.

(2) WAIVER.—The Space Acquisition Council may waive the requirements of subsection (a) with respect to a tranch or portion of a tranch described in such subsection if the Council—

(A) on the basis of the review conducted under paragraph (1), determines that the use of a middle tier acquisition program is not warranted for such tranch or portion thereof; and

(B) not later than 14 days after making such determination, submits to the congressional defense committees notice of the intent of the Council to issue such a waiver.

(e) Middle tier acquisition program defined.—In this section, the term “middle tier acquisition program” means an acquisition program or project that is carried out using the rapid fielding or rapid prototyping acquisition pathway under section 3602 of title 10, United States Code, in a manner consistent with Department of Defense Instruction 5000.80, titled “Operation of the Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA)” and issued on December 30, 2019 (or a successor instruction).

SEC. 1507. Continuation of operation of Defense Meteorological Satellite Program.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall 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 under such program.

(b) Briefing.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on—

(2) the requirements, capabilities, and costs for such program for fiscal year 2026; and

(A) to carry out such program for the functional life of the satellites in orbit as of the date of the enactment of this Act under such program; and

SEC. 1511. Matters relating to intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United States.

(a) Initial operational capability.—Not later than September 30, 2033, and subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Secretary of the Air Force, shall ensure the LGM-35A Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile weapon system achieves initial operational capability, as defined jointly by the Commander of United States Strategic Command and the Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command.

(b) Inventory requirement.—Section 9062 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(n) (1) The Secretary of the Air Force shall maintain a total inventory of intercontinental ballistic missiles sufficient to ensure that no fewer than 400 such missiles are available for deployment at all times.

“(2) Such intercontinental ballistic missiles shall be deployed among no fewer than 150 launch facilities dispersed across each of the following locations (for a total of no fewer than 450):

“(A) The term ‘intercontinental ballistic missile’ means any combination of the LGM-30A Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile or the LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile.

“(B) The term ‘deployed’ means armed with one or more nuclear weapons and contained within a launch facility and available for employment in support of United States Strategic Command requirements or presidentially directed operations.”.

(c) (1) PROHIBITION.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for fiscal year 2026 or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense may be obligated or expended for the following, and the Department may not otherwise take any action to do the following:

(A) Reduce, or prepare to reduce, the responsiveness or alert level of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United States.

(B) Reduce, or prepare to reduce, the quantity of deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United States to a number less than that specified by subsection (n) of section 9062 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (b).

(2) Exception.—The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall not apply to any of the following activities:

(B) Ensuring the safety, security, or reliability of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

(C) Facilitating the transition from the LGM-30G Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile to the Sentinel LGM-35A intercontinental ballistic missile.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall reverse any changes made to the manpower, composition, roles, or responsibilities of the Air Force Global Strike Command related to efforts to establish an Integrated Capabilities Office or an Integrated Capabilities Command since October 1, 2023.

(2) FUNDING LIMITATION.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of the Air Force, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Air Force notifies the congressional defense committees that the requirement described in paragraph (1) has been completed.

(3) LIMITATION ON FUTURE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES.—Neither the Secretary of the Air Force nor the Chief of Staff of the Air Force may authorize any alterations or adjustments to the composition, roles, or responsibilities of Air Force Global Strike Command in the development of requirements relating to strategic deterrence or the execution of Joint Forces Air Component Command operational and planning support for the United States Strategic Command unless—

(A) the Secretary of Defense, jointly with the Commander of United States Strategic Command, certifies to the congressional defense committees that such alterations or adjustments will not adversely affect the missions of the United States Strategic Command missions in supporting the operational requirements of the United States Strategic Command or activities of the Department of Defense to achieve presidential nuclear employment guidance objectives; and

(b) Oversight of nuclear deterrence mission.—Section 9040(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting “in coordination with the Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command” after “duties”;

(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively;

“(2) Coordinate with and support the activities of Air Force Global Strike Command, the Air Force Nuclear Systems Center, and any other applicable Air Force organization in the sustainment and modernization of weapon systems associated with the nuclear deterrence mission of the Air Force.”;

(4) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking “and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force” and inserting, “, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and the Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command.”; and

“(5) Represent Air Force nuclear deterrence mission equities on behalf of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command within the Nuclear Weapons Council processes and other Department of Defense fora, as appropriate.”.

(c) Enduring guidance.—Consistent with section 9040(b) of title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (b), the provisions of Air Force Mission Directive 63, dated July 12, 2018, shall remain in force until changed by law.

(d) Update of supplementary guidance.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall issue an update to Air Force Program Action Directive D16-01, dated August 2, 2016, to reflect the requirements of this section.

“(1) operationally certified to employ nuclear gravity bombs not later than 180 days after the date on which such aircraft achieves initial operational capability; and

“(2) operationally certified to employ the AGM-181 Long Range Standoff Weapon not later than two years after the date on which either the B-21 bomber or the AGM-181 Long Range Standoff Weapon achieves initial operational capability, whichever is later.”.

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.

(1) updated all applicable regulations, polices, and departmental guidance to reflect the establishment of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs; and

(2) realigned personnel, facilities, and budgetary resources to reflect the implementation of section 138(b)(4) of title 10, United States Code.

(1) in subsection (a), in the first sentence, by inserting “The Council shall be the primary mechanism for integrating, streamlining, and ensuring unity of purpose and direction for nuclear deterrence related activities within the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy.” after “Energy.”;

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (13) as paragraphs (2) through (14), respectively;

“(1) Supervising nuclear deterrence activities of the Department of Defense and the National Nuclear Security Administration, including oversight of policy and resources, and developing options for adjusting the deterrence posture of the United States in response to evolving international security conditions.”;

“(6) Evaluating safety, security, and control issues for existing weapons and for proposed new weapon program starts and approving adjustments as required.”;

(D) in paragraph (7), as so redesignated, by striking “Ensuring that adequate consideration is given to” and inserting “Approving”;

“(A) nuclear weapon delivery systems and platforms and priorities on military capability development within the armed forces and the broader Department of Defense; and

“(B) nuclear weapons and priorities among activities, including production, surveillance, research, construction, and any other programs within the National Nuclear Security Administration.”;

“(9) Coordinating and approving activities conducted by the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy for the study, development, production, and retirement of nuclear warheads and weapon systems, including concept definition studies, feasibility studies, engineering development, hardware component fabrication, warhead and weapon system production, and warhead retirement.”;

(G) in paragraph (10), as so redesignated, by inserting “and weapon system” after “warhead”;

(H) in paragraph (12), as so redesignated, by inserting “and related weapon systems supporting nuclear deterrence missions” after “weapons”; and

“(f) Budget and funding matters.— (1) The Council shall annually review the plans and budget of the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Military Services to assess whether such plans and budget meet the current and projected requirements relating to nuclear weapons and related weapon systems supporting nuclear deterrence missions.”.

SEC. 1516. Limitation on availability of funds pending notification of tasking authority delegation.

SEC. 1517. Modification of requirement for nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile initial operational capability.

(1) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g), as subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h), respectively;

“(b) Rapid fielding parallel path.—In parallel to the major defense acquisition program described in subsection (a), the Department of Defense is authorized to utilize the middle tier acquisition authorities established by section 3602 of title 10, United States Code, to rapidly develop, prototype, and field a nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile that can provide for a residual operational capability prior to the date of initial operational capability established by subsection (c).”; and

(3) in subsection (c), as so redesignated, by striking “2034” and inserting “2032”.

SEC. 1518. Pilot program for unmanned aerial vehicle resupply to launch control facilities.

(a) Authorization.—The Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command, is authorized to carry out a pilot program under which the Secretary may establish a partnership to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing a low cost and repeatable resupply of intercontinental ballistic missile launch facilities or control centers using unmanned aircraft systems.

(b) Elements.—If the Secretary carries out the pilot program authorized under subsection (a), such pilot program shall include—

(1) demonstration flights conducted in unrestricted airspace, including the transportation of cargo, from a main Air Force Base to intercontinental ballistic missile launch facilities or control centers;

(2) consultation with the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and the heads of other Federal agencies, as the Secretary determines appropriate, to facilitate the flights described in paragraph (1);

(4) an evaluation of the potential of unmanned aircraft systems to resupply intercontinental ballistic missile launch facilities or control centers more efficiently than ground-based resupply methods; and

(5) the incorporation, implementation, and utilization of unmanned aircraft system service supplier airspace system integration services for enhanced safety, awareness, and command and control.

(c) Termination.—The authorization to carry out the pilot program under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date that is 3 years after the date on which the Secretary establishes such a pilot program.

(d) Annual report.—Not later than December 1 of each year in which the pilot program authorized under subsection (a) is carried out, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report summarizing the activities of the pilot program during the preceding year, including information on how the pilot program is supporting Air Force Global Strike Command requirements.

(e) Briefing on refining legislation.—Not later than 180 days after the establishment of a pilot program authorized under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Air Force shall brief the congressional defense committees on any statutory adjustments required to enable or continue the efficient execution of such pilot program.

(f) Definition of intercontinental ballistic missile launch facility or control center.—In this section, the term “intercontinental ballistic missile launch facility or control center” has the meaning given that term in section 183a(h) of title 10, United States Code.

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.

SEC. 1520. Deep cleaning of launch control centers of the Air Force Global Strike Command.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of the Air Force, acting through the Commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command, shall ensure that each launch control center within the 3 missile wings comprising the 20th Air Force undergoes a deep cleaning of its crew capsules every 5 years until each such launch control center is decommissioned by the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program.

(b) Waiver.—The Commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command may waive the deep cleaning of a particular launch control center based upon conditions that are unforeseen, impracticable, or due to national security. If such a waiver is exercised, the Commander shall report to the congressional defense committees the particular launch control center that is waived and when such launch control center is expected to be deep cleaned.

(c) Annual report.—Each fiscal year, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that identifies each launch control center that was deep cleaned during such fiscal year and any additional matters of concern with respect to the launch control centers.

(a) In general.—Unless authorized by an Act of Congress, no action shall be taken 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 any Federally-funded research and development center supporting—

(1) any atomic energy defense activity, as defined in section 2 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101);

(A) nuclear weapons delivery systems and platforms of the Department of Defense;

(3) the development, testing, or fielding of technologies supporting the Golden Dome missile defense system.

(b) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect or limit the application of, or any obligation to comply with, the requirements of section 3744(a)(16) of title 10, United States Code, or section 4304(a)(16) of title 41, United States Code.

(a) Revision to National Missile Defense policy.—Section 5501 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

“(1) to provide for the common defense of citizens of the United States and the United States by deploying and maintaining a next-generation missile defense shield;

“(2) to deter and defend the United States, citizens of the United States, and critical infrastructure of the United States, against the threat of foreign attack by increasingly complex ballistic, hypersonic glide, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial threats;

“(3) to guarantee the viability of an effective nuclear response capability and support the continued deterrence of strategic attacks against the homeland of the United States; and

“(4) to cooperate on missile defense capabilities and technologies with allies and partners of the United States to aid in the defense of allied and partner populations and forward-deployed armed forces of the United States.”.

(1) BRIEFINGS REQUIRED.—Concurrent with the first submission to Congress of a budget pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, after the date of the enactment of this Act, and with each submission of a budget to Congress pursuant to such section until the Secretary of Defense determines that the Golden Dome missile defense system achieves full operational capability, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the development and deployment of the Golden Dome missile defense system.

(A) The current architecture of the Golden Dome missile defense system as compared to the prior year.

(B) A consolidated list of funds estimated within the most recent future-years defense program under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, for the Golden Dome missile defense system as compared to the prior fiscal year, including with respect to—

(viii) operations and maintenance, including advanced planning and infrastructure sustainment, renovation, and maintenance funds;

(3) MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS.—Each briefing under paragraph (1) shall include notable highlights and changes affecting the progress towards initial and full operational capability of the Golden Dome missile defense system.

(1) IN GENERAL.— (A) Beginning not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall initiate such actions as are necessary to establish and ensure the validation of requirements for two replacement missile instrumentation range safety vessels for the National Defense Reserve Fleet to allow for the construction of such vessels to begin no later than September 30, 2026.

(B) The Director shall, in coordination with such Department of Defense officials as the Director considers necessary to carry out subparagraph (A), consult with the Maritime Administrator regarding options to enter into an agreement with a vessel construction manager, or other appropriate entity, to contract for the construction of the vessels under subparagraph (A).

(2) USE OF VESSEL.—A vessel constructed pursuant to this subsection shall be available for use by other Federal agencies on a reimbursable basis, provided such usage does not—

(B) impede activities to maintain the operational availability of such vessel or any instrumentation onboard; or

(C) result in deferment of any modifications, maintenance, or upgrades to such vessel or onboard instrumentation the Director determines necessary to meet current or future Department requirements.

(3) CONSTRUCTION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.—The Director shall take such steps as may be necessary to ensure a vessel constructed pursuant to this section meets the requirements for and be issued a certificate of documentation and a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 of title 46, United States Code.

(4) DESIGN STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.—Subject to paragraph (3), the Director shall take such steps as necessary to ensure a vessel constructed pursuant to this section shall be constructed using commercial design standards and commercial construction practices that are consistent with the best interests of the Federal Government.

(5) CONSULTATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL ENTITIES.—The Director may consult and coordinate with other Federal entities regarding the vessels described in paragraph (1) and activities associated with such vessels, including requirements for additional, similar vessels.

(6) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR USED VESSELS.—In assessing options for amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for use by the Director to carry out this section may not be used for the procurement of any used vessel.

(d) Establishment of Golden Dome Direct Reporting Program Manager.—The provisions of the Secretary of Defense memorandum titled “Direct Reporting Program Manager Appointment for Golden Dome for America” and dated May 27, 2025, shall remain in force until changed by law.

(a) In general.—In complying with Executive Order 14186 (90 Fed. Reg. 8767; relating to The Iron Dome for America), the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that plans, reviews, strategies, and capabilities to improve missile defense of the United States also include improvements for the missile defense of Hawaii and Alaska, in addition to the continental United States.

(b) Briefing.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall brief the congressional defense committees on the progress of implementing Executive Order 14186, including specifically how missile defense of Hawaii and Alaska is included.

(c) Definition of missile defense.—In this section, the term “missile defense” means defense against all manner of aerial and space kinetic attacks, including ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks.

SEC. 1533. Inclusion of air and missile defense in unconstrained total munitions requirements.

(1) by redesignating paragraphs (5) through (8) as paragraphs (6) through (9), respectively; and

SEC. 1534. Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli cooperative missile defense program co-development and co-production.

(1) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for fiscal year 2026 for procurement, Defense-wide, and available for the Missile Defense Agency, not more than $60,000,000 may be provided to the Government of Israel to procure components for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system through co-production of such components in the United States by industry of the United States.

(A) AGREEMENT.—Funds described in paragraph (1) for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense program shall be available subject to the terms and conditions in the Agreement Between the Department of Defense of the United States of America and the Ministry of Defense of the State of Israel Concerning Iron Dome Defense System Procurement, signed on March 5, 2014, as amended to include co-production for Tamir interceptors.

(B) CERTIFICATION.—Not later than 30 days prior to the initial obligation of funds described in paragraph (1), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees—

(i) a certification that the amended bilateral international agreement specified in subparagraph (A) is being implemented as provided in such agreement;

(ii) an assessment detailing any risks relating to the implementation of such agreement; and

(iii) for system improvements resulting in modified Iron Dome components and Tamir interceptor sub-components, a certification that the Government of Israel has demonstrated successful completion of Production Readiness Reviews, including the validation of production lines, the verification of component conformance, and the verification of performance to specification as defined in the Iron Dome Defense System Procurement Agreement, as further amended.

(b) Israeli cooperative missile defense program, David’s Sling Weapon System co-production.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (3), of the funds authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 for procurement, Defense-wide, and available for the Missile Defense Agency not more than $40,000,000 may be provided to the Government of Israel to procure the David’s Sling Weapon System, including for co-production of parts and components in the United States by United States industry.

(2) AGREEMENT.—Provision of funds specified in paragraph (1) shall be subject to the terms and conditions in the bilateral co-production agreement, including—

(A) a one-for-one cash match is made by Israel or in another matching amount that otherwise meets best efforts (as mutually agreed to by the United States and Israel); and

(B) co-production of parts, components, and all-up rounds (if appropriate) in the United States by United States industry for the David’s Sling Weapon System is not less than 50 percent.

(3) CERTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees—

(A) a certification that the Government of Israel has demonstrated the successful completion of the knowledge points, technical milestones, and Production Readiness Reviews required by the research, development, and technology agreement and the bilateral co-production agreement for the David’s Sling Weapon System; and

(B) an assessment detailing any risks relating to the implementation of such agreement.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), of the funds authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 for procurement, Defense-wide, and available for the Missile Defense Agency not more than $100,000,000 may be provided to the Government of Israel for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program, including for co-production of parts and components in the United States by United States industry.

(2) CERTIFICATION.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a certification that—

(A) the Government of Israel has demonstrated the successful completion of the knowledge points, technical milestones, and Production Readiness Reviews required by the research, development, and technology agreement for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program;

(B) funds specified in paragraph (1) will be provided on the basis of a one-for-one cash match made by Israel or in another matching amount that otherwise meets best efforts (as mutually agreed to by the United States and Israel);

(C) the United States has entered into a bilateral international agreement with Israel that establishes, with respect to the use of such funds—

(i) in accordance with subparagraph (D), the terms of co-production of parts and components on the basis of the greatest practicable co-production of parts, components, and all-up rounds (if appropriate) by United States industry and minimizes nonrecurring engineering and facilitization expenses to the costs needed for co-production;

(ii) complete transparency on the requirement of Israel for the number of interceptors and batteries that will be procured, including with respect to the procurement plans, acquisition strategy, and funding profiles of Israel;

(iii) technical milestones for co-production of parts and components and procurement;

(iv) a joint affordability working group to consider cost reduction initiatives; and

(D) the level of co-production described in subparagraph (C)(i) for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program is not less than 50 percent.

(d) Number.—In carrying out paragraph (2) of subsection (b) and paragraph (2) of subsection (c), the Under Secretary may submit—

(1) one certification covering both the David’s Sling Weapon System and the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program; or

(e) Timing.—The Under Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees the certification and assessment under subsection (b)(3) and the certification under subsection (c)(2) not later than 30 days before the funds specified in paragraph (1) of subsections (b) and (c) for the respective system covered by the certification are provided to the Government of Israel.

(f) Appropriate congressional committees defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate congressional committees” means the following:

SEC. 1535. Requirement for Aegis Combat Systems operationally deployed under United States Indo-Pacific Command.

(a) Requirement.—Any 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), or successor document.

(b) Notice.—In any case in which a removal described in subsection (a) is carried out, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall submit to the congressional defense committees notice of the removal not later than 10 days after the date of the commencement of the removal.

SEC. 1536. Amendments to technical authority of Director of Missile Defense Agency regarding integrated air and missile defense activities and programs.

(a) In general.—Subsection (a) of section 5531 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by inserting “system level architectures,” before “the interfaces”; and

(A) by striking “under paragraph (1)” and inserting “under subsection (a)”; and

(B) by striking “with subparagraph (B)” and inserting “with paragraph (2)”; and

(A) by striking “under subparagraph (A)” and inserting “under paragraph (1)”; and

(B) by striking “under paragraph (1)” and inserting “under subsection (a)”.

(a) In general.—Consistent with section 4173(i) of title 10, United States Code, the Director of the Department of Defense Test Resource Management Center shall, not later than March 31 of each year until March 31, 2030—

(1) visit the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site and assess the state of infrastructure supporting test and evaluation facilities of the Department of Defense; and

(2) not later than 30 days after a visit under paragraph (1), provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the findings of the Director with respect to such visit and assessment.

(b) Delegation.—The Director may delegate a visit under subsection (a)(1) to a senior staff member of the Test Resource Management Center 30 days after notification to the congressional defense committees of the intent of the Director to make such delegation.

SEC. 1538. Biennial assessments of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site.

(a) Biennial assessments.—In 2027 and in each odd-numbered year thereafter through 2033, the Commander of the United States Strategic Command shall, in coordination with the Commander of the United States Space Command, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, and the commanders of such other combatant commands as the Commander of the United States Strategic Command considers appropriate, assess the capabilities and capacity, including supporting infrastructure, of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site (RRBMDTS) on United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll to meet the operational and weapon system developmental testing needs of the combatant commands.

(b) Report 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 a year for which an assessment under subsection (a) is completed, the Commander of the United States Strategic Command shall submit to the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a report containing—

(2) an identification and discussion of any capability or capacity gap or other shortfall with respect to the operational and testing needs described in subsection (a);

(3) an identification and discussion of any risks with respect to meeting current and future mission or capability requirements; and

(4) an identification and discussion of any matter having an adverse effect on the capability of the combatant commanders to accurately determine the matters covered by the assessment.

(c) Report to Congress.—Not later than March 15 of each year during which a report under subsection (b) is submitted, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees the report most recently received by the Secretary under subsection (b), without any edits and with such additional views as the Secretary or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff consider appropriate.

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.

SEC. 1540. Limitation on availability of funds for Missile Defense Agency pending arrangement for independent analysis of space-based missile defense capability.

SEC. 1541. Limitation on authority to reduce sustainment for or halt operation of the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar.

(a) Limitation.—Until the date on which the certification described in subsection (b) is submitted to the congressional defense committees, the Secretary of Defense—

(1) may not reduce sustainment efforts for, halt operation of, or prepare to reduce sustainment efforts for or halt operation of, the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar located at Eareckson Air Station on Shemya Island in Alaska;

(2) shall sustain the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar in a manner that preserves, at a minimum, the system’s current operational availability as of the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(3) shall ensure that the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar continues to meet the operational requirements of the combatant commands that are met by this system as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Certification described.—The certification described in this subsection is a written certification from the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chief of Space Operations and the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, indicating that the replacement capability for the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar—

(1) will reach initial operational capability at the same time or before the termination of operations for the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar; and

(2) at the time such replacement capability achieves initial operational capability, will have the ability to meet the operational requirements of the combatant commands that have been, or that are expected to be, assigned to such replacement capability.

(c) Exception.—The limitation described in subsection (a) shall not apply to temporary interruptions of operational availability for the AN/FPS–108 COBRA DANE radar provided such activities are necessary to support maintenance or modernization activities of the system.

SEC. 1542. Accelerating development of autonomous agents to defend against cruise missiles and unmanned systems.

(a) In general.—The Program Manager shall use all authorities available to the Program Manager to accelerate development of autonomous agents to cost-effectively defend the United States homeland and forward-deployed armed forces against raids of both large cruise missiles and unmanned systems as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(1) MISSILE.—The term “missile” means a ballistic, hypersonic, cruise, hypersonic cruise, or loitering munition.

(2) PROGRAM MANAGER.—The term “Program Manager” means the Direct Reporting Program Manager for Golden Dome for America.

(3) UNMANNED SYSTEM.—The term “unmanned system” means a remote-operated or autonomous unmanned system of any size maneuvering in land, sea, air, or space that is capable of single attacks, swarm attacks, or sensor and data collection and reconnaissance.

(a) In general.—The Secretary and the Program Manager shall ensure that a robust testing regime is established for all kinetic and nonkinetic interceptors or similar systems throughout the system’s lifecycle. To the maximum extent practicable, testing shall include execution of end-to-end missile defense detection, tracking, and destruction techniques that exercise multiple components of the Golden Dome system.

(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary and the Program Manager shall ensure that, not later than 540 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a demanding testing cadence begins, commencing with a virtual exercise commencing on or before the date that is 540 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(2) TEST PLANS.—Not later than 90 days before carrying out a test under this section, the Secretary and the Program Manager shall present to the congressional defense committees a detailed plan for the test.

(3) BRIEFINGS.—In any case in which the Program Manager fails to conduct a test under this section in accordance with a timeline specified in this section, the Program Manager shall provide the applicable subcommittees of the congressional defense committees an in-person briefing in each month for with the test is delayed.

(c) Live-fire exercise requirement.—At a minimum, kinetic and nonkinetic systems deemed to be mission essential by the Secretary to the capabilities of Golden Dome shall be tested on a semiannual basis in a live-fire exercise, starting after the virtual test described in subsection (b)(1).

(1) REQUIRED PARTICIPATION.—Each exercise under this section shall include the following participants:

(E) Representative from North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) or United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM).

(2) INVITED FOR PARTICIPATION.—For each exercise under this section, the Program Manager shall invite the participation of the following:

(1) IN GENERAL.—Pursuant to a request submitted to the Secretary under paragraph (2), the Secretary may waive the requirement in subsection (b) for an individual system.

(2) REQUESTS.—The Program Manager may submit to the Secretary a request for a waiver of the requirement in subsection (b) for an individual system.

(3) CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION.—Not later than 14 days after granting a waiver under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide the congressional defense committees an in-person briefing of the waiver with a detailed explanation of the reasons for the decision of the Secretary to grant the waiver.

(f) Annual reports.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not less frequently than once each year thereafter, the Secretary shall, in consultation with the heads of such government agencies as the Secretary considers relevant, submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing key regulations preventing rapid, iterative testing of systems vital to Golden Dome.

(1) The term “Golden Dome” shall means the holistic missile defense architecture described in this section.

(2) The term “missile” means a ballistic, hypersonic, cruise, hypersonic cruise, or loitering munition.

(3) The term “Program Manager” means the Golden Dome Direct Report Program Manager.

(a) Accelerating development of non-kinetic capabilities.—The Secretary shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development of non-kinetic capabilities to negate missile or unmanned system threats prior to launch or after launch. Such capabilities may include cyber (offense and defense), supply chain interdiction, artificial intelligence-driven battle management, electromagnetic spectrum, directed energy weapons, and high-power microwave defense options capable of defeating large-scale missile or unmanned system attacks.

(b) Accelerating development of information fusion platform using artificial intelligence to detect threats.—The Secretary shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development and rapid prototyping of high technology readiness level (TRL) capabilities in order to acquire and field an information fusion, software-centric platform that utilizes machine learning and artificial intelligence technologies capable of delivering air, land, space, and maritime domain awareness and early warning capabilities for homeland defense across disparate novel and legacy systems. Such platform shall employ a common data layer that can support the rapid integration of new sensors and effectors across all tiers of the integrated air and missile defense system.

(c) Requirement for next generation interceptor fielding and silo construction.—The Program Manager shall, with support from the Missile Defense Agency, assess the funding needs necessary to expand Next Generation Interceptor production and silo construction to field up to 80 interceptors for defense of the United States. Subject to the availability of appropriations, interceptor testing and initial fielding shall be completed not later than January 1, 2028.

(d) Requirement for combatant commands to account for missile defense interceptors and sensor requirements in their annual requests.—For each fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act, each commander of a combatant command shall include the terrestrial-based sensor requirements, space-based sensor requirements, and counter-unmanned system requirements of the combatant command of the commander in the supporting information for the Department of Defense submitted along with the budget of the President to Congress for such fiscal year pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code.

(e) Accelerating development of glide phase interceptor.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development of the Glide Phase Interceptor to defend against hypersonic threats to the United States homeland.

(f) Accelerating production and fielding of ground mobile interceptors.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate the production and fielding of ground mobile interceptors and radars for forward deployment and homeland defense as the Secretary and President consider appropriate.

(g) Accelerating development of resilient positioning, navigation, and timing for missile defense systems.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development and fielding of resilient positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) solutions that can operate effectively in ground positioning system (GPS)-denied environments. Such solutions may include the following:

(1) Quantum-enhanced inertial navigation and atomic clock technologies to maintain continuous positioning, navigation, and timing functionality in ground positioning system-degraded or denied scenarios.

(2) Enhanced terrestrial-based navigation systems for greater assured positioning in ground positioning system-contested environments.

(3) Robust data fusion techniques that integrate multiple positioning, navigation, and timing sources, such as radar-based tracking, vision-aided navigation, and low-Earth orbit (LEO) signals, to sustain operational effectiveness during electronic warfare (EW) attacks or cyber intrusions.

(4) Commercially available, field-proven alternative positioning, navigation, and timing solutions that leverage advanced sensor fusion, artificial intelligence-driven error correction, and resilient positioning, navigation, and timing processing to provide assured navigation for mobile and fixed defense platforms, including those currently deployed in hypersonic tracking and integrated air and missile defense applications.

(h) Accelerating development and fielding of low-cost scalable interceptor.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development, test, and fielding of a low-cost scalable interceptor that can augment existing production lines and provide resiliency to the integrated air and missile defense system.

(i) Accelerating development and deployment of space-based sensors and interceptors.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate development and deployment of proliferated space-based sensors and interceptors capable of ballistic and hypersonic missile intercept.

(j) Accelerating modernization of certain terrestrial domain capabilities.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate modernization of terrestrial-based radar capabilities and other such sensors to improve detection of intercontinental and sea-launched missile threats, as well as improve space domain awareness capabilities.

(k) Site selection and program execution plan for highly flexible missile defense sites.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Program Manager shall submit to Congress a report detailing a plan for a highly flexible, and if necessary mobile, terrestrial missile defense network capable of defending critical nodes across the United States, including noncontiguous States and territories, from likely attack vectors.

(l) Acceleration of munitions production for missile defense.—The Program Manager, working with the military departments, shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate production of critical munitions used for missile interception, including Standard Missile 3 Blocks IB and IIA and PAC–2 and PAC–3 munitions, to ensure their availability as an additional sub-layer of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system.

(m) Requirement for acceleration of procurement and fielding of air moving target indicator systems.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs required to accelerate the procurement and fielding of air moving target indicator (AMTI) systems capable of detecting, tracking, and distinguishing airborne moving targets from stationary or cluttered backgrounds.

(n) Requirement for accelerated development and expansion of integrated undersea surveillance system.—The Program Manager shall assess the funding needs to accelerate the development and expansion of the Integrated Undersea Surveillance System to detect and track undersea threats like submersibles that carry missiles near United States shorelines.

(o) Report.—Not later than March 31, 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report summarizing the results of the assessments carried out under this section.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term “commercial solution” means a product, other than real property, that—

(i) is of a type customarily used by the general public or by nongovernmental entities for purposes other than governmental purposes and—

(B) INCLUSION OF COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS, COMPONENTS, AND SERVICES.—The term “commercial solution” includes commercial products, components, and services in alignment with the Federal Government’s preference for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services, as set forth in sections 1906, 1907, and 3307 of title 41, United States Code, and sections 3451 through 3453 of title 10, United States Code, which establish acquisition policies more closely resembling those of the commercial marketplace and encourage the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services.

(2) GOLDEN DOME.—The term “Golden Dome” means the holistic missile defense architecture described in this section.

(3) MISSILE.—The term “missile” means a ballistic, hypersonic, cruise, hypersonic cruise, or loitering munition.

(4) PROGRAM MANAGER.—The term “Program Manager” means the Golden Dome Direct Report Program Manager.

(6) UNMANNED SYSTEM.—The term “unmanned system” means a remote-operated or autonomous unmanned system of any size maneuvering in land, sea, air, or space that is capable of single attacks, swarm attacks, or sensor and data collection and reconnaissance.

SEC. 1551. Independent assessment of the Department of Defense National Industrial Security Program.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (in this section referred to as the “National Academies”) for the National Academies to conduct the assessment under subsection (b) and submit the report under subsection (e).

(2) TIMING.—The Secretary shall seek to enter into the agreement described in paragraph (1) by not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Under an agreement between the Secretary and the National Academies entered into pursuant to subsection (a), the National Academies shall conduct an assessment of the Department of Defense National Industrial Security Program.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The assessment of the Program conducted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall cover the following:

(A) Understanding of the evolution of the Program over time to determine if it is up to date with current policies and regulatory responsibilities.

(B) Assessment of roles and responsibilities of parties involved with the Program to determine effectiveness, efficiencies, and alignment of responsibilities with operating authority.

(C) Assessment of whether the availability of security workforce to oversee execution of the Program is sufficient to satisfy the demand signal from entities under the Program.

(D) Analysis of available metrics or other data to determine a baseline of effectiveness for the Program.

(E) Assessment of data available to the Department that might be used to update, add, or refine measures of performance or effectiveness for the Program.

(F) Appraisal of operating business processes or methods, including a determination of where business process reengineering may be needed.

(G) Assessment of the availability of new tools or techniques that may be adopted by the Program to increase effectiveness, efficiency, and cost savings for the Program.

(H) Determination of whether available resources are aligned to the greatest area of need.

(I) Assessment of data on personnel security clearances and facility security clearances.

(J) Identification of opportunities to reduce costs for industry and the government in execution of the Program.

(c) Access to Department of Defense personnel, information, and resources.—Under an agreement entered into between the Secretary and the National Academies under subsection (a), the Secretary shall make available such personnel, information, and resources as are necessary to execute the assessment required by subsection (b).

(1) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—Under an agreement entered into between the Secretary and the National Academies under subsection (a), the National Academies shall, not later than one year after the date of the execution of the agreement, submit to the congressional defense committees a consensus report containing the findings of the National Academies with respect to the assessment under subsection (b).

(2) FORM.—The report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in an unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(3) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE VIEWS ON ASSESSMENT.—Not more than 90 days after the National Academies delivers the report to the congressional defense committees under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the views of the Secretary with respect to such report.

(a) Extension of period inactive security clearances.—The Secretary of Defense shall make such changes to Department of Defense Manual 5200.02 (relating to procedures for Department of Defense Personnel Security Program), or successor manual, as may be necessary to ensure 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 as long as—

(1) there is no indication the individual no longer satisfies the standards established for access to classified information;

(2) the individual certifies in writing to an appropriate security professional that there has been no change in the relevant information provided for the last background investigation of the individual; and

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of subjecting inactive security clearances to continuous vetting and due diligence.

(2) BRIEFING.—Not later than June 30, 2026, the Secretary shall provide to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a briefing on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the assessment conducted pursuant to paragraph (1).

SEC. 1553. Annual review of the Joint Electromagnetic Battle Management Software Program.

(a) Arrangement.—The Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense shall seek to enter into an arrangement with a federally funded research and development center to perform the services covered by this section.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Under an arrangement between the Chief Information Officer and a federally funded research and development center under subsection (a), the federally funded research and development center shall, not less frequently than once each fiscal year, carry out a review of the Joint Electromagnetic Battle Management Software Program.

(2) ELEMENTS.—In carrying out a review under paragraph (1), the federally funded research and development center shall assess—

(i) is using best practices, including those developed by the Government Accountability Office;

(B) such other matters as the federally funded research and development center considers important to meeting the mission of the program.

(c) Report.—Not later than September 30th of each year until September 30, 2031, the Chief Information Officer shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the most recently completed review carried out under this section.

SEC. 1554. Integration of electronic warfare into Tier 1 and Tier 2 joint training exercises.

(a) In general.—Chapter 25 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

“§ 500g. Integration of electronic warfare into Tier 1 and Tier 2 joint training exercises

“(a) In general.—During fiscal years 2026 through 2030, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall require the integration of offensive and defensive electronic warfare capabilities into Tier 1 and Tier 2 joint training exercises.

“(b) Inclusion of opposing force.—The Chairman shall require exercises conducted under subsection (a) to include an opposing force design based on a current intelligence assessment of the electromagnetic order of battle and capabilities of an adversary.

“(c) Waiver.—The Chairman may waive the application of subsection (a) or (b) with respect to an exercise if the Chairman determines that—

“(2) the integration of offensive and defensive electronic warfare capabilities into the exercise is cost prohibitive or not technically feasible based on the overall goals of the exercise.

“(d) Briefing.—Concurrent with the submission of the budget of the President to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030, the Chairman shall provide the congressional defense committees with a briefing on exercises conducted under subsection (a) that includes—

“(1) a description of such exercises planned and included in the budget submission for that fiscal year; and

“(2) the results of each such exercise conducted in the preceding fiscal year, including—

“(A) the extent to which offensive and defensive electronic warfare capabilities were integrated into the exercise;

“(B) an evaluation and assessment of the exercise to determine the impact of the opposing force on the participants in the exercise, including—

“(C) an assessment as to whether offensive and defensive electronic warfare capabilities were part of an overall joint fires and, if so, a description of the manner in which such capabilities were incorporated into the joint fires.

“(1) ELECTROMAGNETIC ORDER OF BATTLE.—The term ‘electromagnetic order of battle’ has the meaning given such term in Joint Publication 3–85 entitled ‘Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations’, dated May 2020.

“(2) HIGH INTEREST TRAINING ISSUE; HIGH INTEREST TRAINING REQUIREMENT; TIER 1; TIER 2.—The terms ‘high interest training issue’, ‘high interest training requirement’, ‘Tier 1’, and ‘Tier 2’ have the meanings given such terms in the Joint Training Manual for the Armed Forces of the United States (Document No. CJCSM 3500.03E), dated April 20, 2015.

“(3) JOINT FIRES.—The term ‘joint fires’ has the meaning given such term in the publication of the Joint Staff entitled ‘Insights and Best Practices Focus Paper on Integration and Synchronization of Joint Fires’, dated July 2018.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 25 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

SEC. 1555. Briefings on intercepts of unidentified anomalous phenomena by North American Aerospace Defense Command and United States Northern Command.

(a) In general.—Section 1683(l) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (50 U.S.C. 3373(l)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Each briefing under this subsection shall include, for the period covered by the briefing, details on any unidentified anomalous phenomena intercepts conducted by the North American Aerospace Defense Command or United States Northern Command.

“(B) SUMMARIES.—In providing a briefing under this subsection, the Director of the Office shall make available a summary of all instances of intercepts described in subparagraph (A), including—

“(ii) a description of the procedures and protocols followed during the intercepts, including any data collected or analyzed during such intercepts.

“(C) TIMELY INFORMATION.—The Director of the Office shall inform the appropriate congressional committees of any failure by the North American Aerospace Defense Command or United States Northern Command to provide timely information on unidentified anomalous phenomena intercepts.”.

(b) First briefing.—Notwithstanding paragraph (5) of such section, as added by subsection (a), for the first briefing provided under such section after the date of the enactment of this Act, the briefing shall include details on any unidentified anomalous phenomena intercepts conducted by the North American Aerospace Defense Command or United States Northern Command that occurred during the period beginning on January 1, 2004, and ending on the last day of the period otherwise covered by the briefing.

SEC. 1556. Consolidated security classification guidance matrix for programs relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director for the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office shall issue a consolidated security classification guidance matrix for programs relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena in order—

(1) to provide a resource for programs that support or may be affected by unidentified anomalous phenomena investigations; and

(2) to support increased reporting on unidentified anomalous phenomena events by ensuring individuals, members of the Armed Forces, and other Federal employees have adequate understanding of the constraints they would be under when reporting or discussing such event.

(b) Elements.—The consolidated security classification guidance required by subsection (a) shall include—

(1) a comprehensive list of resources for all levels of document control, including controlled unclassified information, based on the current list of security classification guides the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office relies upon and references;

(2) the ability to disseminate as a centralized document or other digital resource; and

(3) periodic updates based on the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office updates and community feedback on relevant security classification guides that are recommended for inclusion.

(c) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the issuance of the consolidated security guidance matrix under subsection (a), the Director of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office shall provide a copy of such guidance, as well as a briefing on the implementation of the security guidance matrix, to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

(a) In general.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for increasing the use of user activity monitoring capabilities on Department of Defense unclassified networks and systems.

(1) identification of additional networks or systems to be covered by user activity monitoring;

(2) opportunities to integrate user activity monitoring into other cybersecurity or personnel vetting information systems to enhance the availability of data, as well as increase performance for such systems;

(3) proposed timelines, milestones, and anticipated costs for expansion to the additional networks identified pursuant to paragraph (1);

(4) identification of resources to continue expansion or integration with other cybersecurity or personnel vetting information systems;

(5) an assessment of commercially available tools that could be integrated to improve performance of user activity monitoring capabilities;

(6) a description of what data is needed to determine measures of performance and effectiveness; and

(7) an assessment of the feasibility of integrating a dashboard capability for user activity monitoring performance data through the Advancing Analytics tool.

SEC. 1558. Support by the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing to EA–37B Compass Call Aircraft.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall ensure that the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing can adequately support the EA–37B Compass Call Aircraft, including establishment of an EA–37 software-in-the-loop (SITL) and hardware-in-the-loop (HITL) laboratory for the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing for—

(3) such other matters as the Secretary considers necessary for the continued development of the EA–37B to effectively operate in a nonpermissive spectrum environment.

(b) Notice of necessary timeframe.—Not later than March 31, 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees notice informing the committees of the timeframe necessary to establish the software-in-the-loop and hardware-in-the-loop laboratory required by subsection (a).

SEC. 1559. Report on the technical collection capabilities of the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the technical collection capabilities of the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba.

(b) Elements.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include an assessment of the following:

(1) The current technical collection capabilities, and potential expansion of such capabilities, of the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba.

(2) The counterintelligence risks associated with such capabilities, including risks to operations at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

(3) The capabilities and resources of the Department of Defense to counter any technical collection capabilities of the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cuba identified by this report.

(c) Form.—The report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may contain a classified annex.

(d) Appropriate committees of Congress defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—

(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 1560. Extension of protection of certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft.

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking “December 31, 2026” and inserting “December 31, 2027”; and

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking “November 15, 2026” and inserting “November 15, 2027”.

SEC. 1561. Consolidation of reporting requirements applicable to All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office.

(a) Consolidation.—Section 413 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (division X of Public Law 117–103; 50 U.S.C. 3373a) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “makes such data” and all that follows through the period and inserting “make such data available immediately, in a manner that protects intelligence sources and methods, to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office established under section 1683 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (50 U.S.C. 3373).”;

(3) by striking “(a) Availability of data on unidentified aerial phenomena.—.—”; and

(b) Section heading.—The heading of such section is amended by striking “Unidentified aerial phenomena task force” and inserting “All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office”.

SEC. 1562. Limitation on the divestment, consolidation, and curtailment of certain electronic warfare test and evaluation activities.

(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of the Army shall not take any action to divest, consolidate, or curtail any electronic warfare test and evaluation activities that were part of an Army element of the Major Range and Test Facility Base on or before the date of the enactment of this Act until the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees the report described in subsection (b).

(b) Report.—The report described in this subsection is a report on a decision of the Secretary to divest, consolidate, or curtail an electronic warfare test or evaluation activity described in subsection (a) that contains the following:

(1) A description of the analytic basis used by the Secretary for making the decision, including matters relating to any cost, workload, and workforce requirements, as well as any analysis relating to operational impact on users of the activities.

(2) The findings from an independent review by the Director of the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation of all analyses described in paragraph (1).

(3) A certification by the Director of the Test Resource Management Center that the analyses described in paragraph (1) and the decision of the Secretary meet the requirement of the Department of Defense, as required by section 4173(c)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 1563. Modification of functions of Electromagnetic Spectrum Enterprise Operational Lead for Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations to include dynamic spectrum sharing technologies.

(A) by striking “responsible for synchronizing” and inserting the following: “responsible for—

“(2) coordinating test and evaluation of tactics, techniques, and procedures for dynamic spectrum sharing technologies in joint electromagnetic operations.”; and

“(4) An assessment of any current gaps in testing, evaluation, and validation mechanisms for future joint use of dynamic spectrum sharing technologies.

“(5) The feasibility and advisability of establishing designated virtual testing ranges so that operators can develop tactics, techniques, and procedures for dynamic spectrum sharing technologies.”.

SEC. 1564. Limitation on modification of certain electromagnetic spectrum relied on by Department of Defense.

“(c) Limitation on modification of spectrum.— (1) Until the earlier of September 30, 2034, or the date on which the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certifies to the congressional defense committees that dynamic spectrum sharing (as defined in the Emerging Mid-Band Radar Spectrum Sharing (EMBRSS) Feasibility Assessment Report of the Department of Defense published in September 2023) is fully operational, the Secretary of Defense may not modify any existing or future applicable system between 3100 and 3450 megahertz and between 7400 and 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 for the armed forces.

“(2) In this subsection, the term ‘applicable system’ means a Department of Defense system that relies on the electromagnetic spectrum for its function, including any communications, weapons, precision munitions, sensor, geo-location, or wireless device.”.

(a) Strategy and report required.—Not later than January 31, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and in consultation with the Chief Information Officers and Principal Cyber Advisors of the military departments—

(2) submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the strategy developed under paragraph (1).

(b) Contents.—The report required by subsection (a)(2) shall include the following:

(1) An assessment of progress achieved and remaining gaps in implementation of the 2023–2027 Department of Defense Cyber Workforce Strategy, including identification of elements that should be continued, modified, or discontinued in the strategy developed under subsection (a)(1).

(2) A descriptive analysis of the Defense Cyber Workforce Framework (in this section referred to as the “Framework”), including the goals, activities, milestones, and key performance indicators used by the Department of Defense to measure progress and assess the effectiveness of the implementation of the strategy required by subsection (a)(1).

(3) Assessment of the scope of the affected workforce for the Framework, including specific workforce numbers, vacancy numbers, work roles, or other statistical data relating to personnel system metrics.

(4) Identification of progress of the Department in implementing the Framework based on the goals, activities, milestones, and key performance indicators described in paragraph (2).

(5) Identification of any issues, problems, or roadblocks identified by the Department in implementing the Framework, as well as any adjustments required to measurements of progress or inclusions of new goals, activities, milestones, key performance indicators, or work roles since publication of such framework, and any steps taken by the Department to overcome issues or lack of authority to address roadblocks.

(6) Opportunities to leverage support from non-Department entities, or of any workforce or talent management authorities that exist within other Federal agencies in which inclusion in the Framework might benefit the Department.

(7) The availability of commercial tools that support Framework talent management processes and might enhance performance or effectiveness, including for workforce qualification and certification tracking, talent identification and tracking, tagging for additional skill identifiers in existing personnel management systems, or enhancing skill development for specific work roles.

(8) Opportunities to leverage supplementary personnel models that might be adapted from other domains, such as cyber civilian reserves or cyber auxiliary forces.

(9) Integration of existing academic centers of excellence or other university partnerships to help improve workforce development, talent acquisition, and skills development.

(10) A review of Framework work roles for artificial intelligence, data science, and data engineering to assess alignment with corresponding work roles in industry and recommendations for modifications to enable more effective recruiting of industry talent.

(11) Resource requirements and implementation timeline for the strategy developed under subsection (a)(1), including budget estimates and key milestones.

(c) External views.—In developing the strategy required under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary may solicit or coordinate views from external organizations with relevant expertise in human resources planning or human capital strategy, higher education or training, or cyber professional industry associations.

(d) Form.—The report submitted pursuant to subsection (a)(2) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 1602. United States Cyber Command artificial intelligence industry collaboration roadmap.

(a) Roadmap required.—Not later than August 1, 2026, the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall, in coordination with the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense, the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the Director of the Defense Innovation Unit, complete development of a roadmap for industry collaboration on artificial intelligence-enabled cyber capabilities for cyberspace operations of the Department of Defense.

(b) Purpose.—The roadmap developed under subsection (a) shall establish a framework for coordination between the private sector and the Department of Defense to integrate state-of-the-art artificial intelligence capabilities into offensive and defensive cyberspace operations through—

(1) convening United States commercial artificial intelligence developers, cybersecurity experts, and relevant Federal Government offices; and

(2) facilitating information exchange on artificial intelligence technology and capabilities for cyber operations.

(1) Courses of action and selected approach on various alternatives to manage and execute collaborative research and development partnerships with industry.

(2) Collaborative development lines of effort for artificial intelligence-enabled cyber capabilities and associated near-term use cases.

(3) Strategy and methodology for industry engagement and commercial collaboration, including—

(A) contractual mechanisms for industry collaboration on cyber tools and capabilities;

(B) security clearance requirements, goals, and resource needs for industry partners; and

(C) evaluation of existing contract and collaboration authorities and identification of required policy changes or new authorities.

(4) Implementation objectives, milestones, and status of relevant pilot programs.

(7) Assessment of organizational structure options, including establishment of a new center or integration within existing organizations.

(1) INITIAL BRIEFING.—Not later than November 1, 2026, the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the roadmap developed under subsection (a).

(2) ANNUAL UPDATES.—During the period beginning on the date on which the President submits to Congress a budget for fiscal year 2028 pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, and ending on December 31, 2030, the Commander shall, not less frequently than once each year, provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the status of industry collaboration activities carried out in accordance with the roadmap developed under subsection (a).

SEC. 1603. Strategy for deterrence against cyberattacks against defense critical infrastructure of the United States.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Commander of United States Cyber Command, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Defense Continuity and Mission Assurance, develop a strategy and a list of various courses of action across the spectrum of military capabilities to create a credible deterrence against cyberspace attacks and posturing for future such attacks against United States defense critical infrastructure.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall ensure that the strategy required by subsection (a)—

(A) includes an evaluation of how to deter actions of adversaries in cyberspace across the full spectrum of offensive planning and action; and

(B) outlines a range of options available for the Department to demonstrate a credible deterrence through cost imposing courses of action.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The strategy required by subsection (a) shall incorporate the following elements:

(A) A comprehensive assessment of adversary cyber capabilities and intent regarding defense critical infrastructure attacks.

(B) Identification of what specific adversary cyber capabilities and actor’s actions under this strategy seeks to deter.

(C) Methodology and classification of types of targets to hold at risk and what actions would be necessary to impose costs at different levels of escalation.

(D) An assessment of the capabilities and any related requirement gaps to create the needed effects against these categories of targets and their relative impact to deterrence and escalation.

(E) An evaluation of the role of offensive cyber operations in combination with, as well as independent of, other means of military capabilities in creating an effective deterrent, and an assessment of the current capability and gaps in capability needed to successfully conduct these offensive cyber operations.

(F) An assessment of policy and authorities in effect with respect to holding adversary targets at risk and recommendations for modifications to enable effective deterrence and managed escalation.

(G) Evaluation of reveal and conceal criteria and methodology to demonstrate the United States capability of imposing costs while preserving operational security.

(H) Framework for integration of interagency partners, as well as allies and partners, industry, and academia, to enhance deterrence.

(3) DEADLINE.—The Secretary shall complete the development of the strategy required by subsection (a) on or before December 1, 2026.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The list of various courses of action required under subsection (a) shall include a list of military alternatives, guided by the strategy developed under such subsection, using the full range of military capabilities, including offensive cyber operations that actively impose or threaten to impose costs on an adversary to create a credible deterrence. The courses of action shall be organized for competition, crisis, and conflict.

(2) DEADLINE.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary shall complete the development of the list of various courses of action required by subsection (a).

(1) INTERIM BRIEFING.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees an interim briefing on the strategy required under subsection (a).

(2) FINAL BRIEFING AND SUBMITTAL.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary shall—

(A) provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the strategy developed under subsection (a) and the list of various courses of action developed under such subsection; and

(B) submit to the congressional defense committees a report on such strategy and such list of various courses of action.

(1) The term “defense critical infrastructure” has the meaning given that term “critical infrastructure of the Department of Defense” in section 1650(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note).

(2) The term “imposing costs” means actions taken against adversaries that result in economic, diplomatic, informational, or military consequences significant enough to change the adversary’s behavior or calculations regarding cyberspace operations against the United States.

SEC. 1604. Amendment to annual assessments and reports on assignment of certain budget control responsibility to Commander of the United States Cyber Command.

“(H) A review of investment in artificial intelligence capabilities, including an assessment of alignment with defined roadmap milestones and Department of Defense use cases.”; and

SEC. 1605. Report on reserve component integration into cyber mission force and cyberspace operations.

(a) Report required.—Not later than August 1, 2026, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall jointly, in coordination with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, the principal cyber advisors of each of the military departments, the chief of each reserve component, and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the integration of the reserve components into the cyber mission force in support of cyberspace operations.

(b) Contents.—The report required under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) An assessment of the different authorities available within each status of the reserve components, with particular focus on the National Guard and authorities under title 32, United States Code, and how the Department of Defense can use personnel of the reserve components in such statuses within the cyber mission force and in support of cyberspace operations.

(2) An analysis of current and planned efforts to work with the military departments, the National Guard, and the adjutants general of each State to develop unique cyber capabilities that address identified operational requirements and that maximize use of local industry expertise and academic partnerships.

(3) A description of methods to work with the military departments, the National Guard Bureau, and the adjutants general of each State to track and identify key skills and competencies that are not part of primary military occupational specialties of members of the military departments, but are developed through their civilian career experience.

(4) An identification of the billets, resources, and support infrastructure needed to maximize the unique expertise, capabilities, and authorities of the reserve components in support of the cyber mission of the Department.

(5) An evaluation of what types of authorities would be most beneficial to maximize the activation and support of the reserve components to cyberspace operations, including any legislative action that may be required.

(6) An evaluation of the existing barriers to or impediments for integration of the reserve components into the cyber mission force in support of cyberspace operations and an assessment of mitigation initiatives with respect to paragraphs (1) through (5).

(7) Such other matters as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Commander of United States Cyber Command consider appropriate.

(1) PLAN REQUIRED.—The implementation plan required by subsection (b)(6) shall detail how the Department should better integrate the reserve components into cyber mission forces and cyberspace operations of the Department.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The implementation plan required by subsection (b)(6) shall include the following:

(A) Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for the Department of Defense, the military departments, United States Cyber Command, and the National Guard Bureau.

(D) Resource requirements, including personnel, equipment, and funding necessary to implement the plan.

(E) Recommendations for policy changes and, if appropriate, legislative proposals to improve integration.

(F) A strategy for continuous assessment and improvement of reserve component integration.

(G) A detailed analysis of force structure requirements and optimal reserve component organization, including the appropriate balance between traditional aligned reserve component units and individual mobilization augmentees for cyber mission force requirements.

(H) A comprehensive assessment regarding funding for the activation of reserve component personnel possessing critical, low-density, and high-demand cyber skills, and an evaluation of readiness impacts resulting from insufficient dedicated funding for such activations.

(I) An evaluation of operational impacts to cyber mission force readiness when reserve component personnel and units with cyber capabilities are activated for missions outside the cyber domain.

(1) INTERIM BRIEFING.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall jointly provide to the congressional defense committees an interim briefing on the report required by subsection (a).

(2) FINAL BRIEFING.—Not later than August 1, 2026, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall jointly provide a final briefing to the congressional defense committees on the findings contained in the report submitted pursuant to subsection (a).

(e) Form.—The report required under subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(f) Definition of reserve component.—In this section, the term “reserve component” means a reserve component of the military departments named under section 10101 of title 10, United States Code.

(a) In general.—Not later than January 15, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the principal cyber advisors of the military departments, complete a comprehensive evaluation of the current structure of oversight for the cyber ranges of the Department of Defense, including an assessment of the separate executive agent designations for cyber test ranges and cyber training ranges.

(b) Elements.—The evaluation required by subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) A thorough assessment of the effectiveness of the current organizational structure under which separate executive agents exist for cyber test ranges and cyber training ranges.

(2) A detailed analysis of funding mechanisms and budgetary authority challenges and benefits associated with the current structure, potential alternative structures, and unified oversight options.

(3) A comprehensive evaluation of the potential integration of physical and logical ranges under various organizational structures.

(4) An assessment of how different organizational structures would affect the speed and ease of transferring systems or tools from test environments into operational use, including the incorporation of tactics, techniques, and procedures.

(5) A recommendation to the Secretary regarding whether the current separate executive agent structure should be maintained, or an alternative structure, including a unified executive agent structure, should be implemented.

(6) In the event the recommendation under paragraph (5) supports maintaining separate executive agents, the specific criteria that would need to be satisfied for the two functions to be managed under a singular organization in the future.

(c) Congressional notification.—Not later than March 1, 2027, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on—

(2) the determination made by the Secretary regarding the organizational structure for cyber range oversight; and

(3) a summary of the findings of the Secretary with respect to the evaluation conducted under subsection (a); and

(4) an implementation plan for any approved changes to the cyber range oversight structure.

SEC. 1607. Modification to reporting requirements for Senior Military Advisor for Cyber Policy.

(A) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking “the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy” and inserting “the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy”; and

(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking “, the following:” and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting “the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy”; and

(A) in clause (i), by striking “the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy” and inserting “the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy”;

(B) in clause (ii), by striking “Under Secretary” and inserting “Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy”;

(C) in clause (iii), by striking “Under Secretary of Defense for Policy” and inserting “Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy”; and

SEC. 1608. Planning, programming, and budget coordination for operations of cyber mission force.

“(f) Planning, programming, and budgeting.— (1) (A) In addition to the activities of a combatant command for which funding may be requested under section 166(b) of this title, the Commander of the United States Cyber Command shall, subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Principal Cyber Advisor of the Department of Defense, be responsible for directly controlling and managing the planning, programming, budgeting, and execution of resources to train, equip, operate, and sustain the cyber mission force, which shall include the following:

“(i) Preparation of a program objective memorandum and budget estimate submission for the resources required to train, equip, operate, and sustain the cyber mission force.

“(ii) Preparation of budget materials pertaining to the United States Cyber Command for inclusion in the budget justification materials that are submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the Department of Defense for a fiscal year, as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, that is separate from any other military department or component of the Department of Defense.

“(B) The responsibilities assigned to the Commander of the United States Cyber Command pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall not include the following:

“(ii) Funding for facility support that is provided by the military departments.

“(2) (A) Before the budget proposal for the United States Cyber Command for any fiscal year is submitted to the Secretary of Defense, the Commander of the United States Cyber Command shall consult with the Secretaries of the military departments concerning funding for units of the reserve components within the cyber mission force. If the Secretary of a military department does not concur in the recommended level of funding with respect to any such unit that is under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the military department, the Commander shall include with the budget proposal submitted to the Secretary of Defense the views of the Secretary of the military department concerning such funding.

“(B) Before the budget proposal for a military department for any fiscal year is submitted to the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the military department shall consult with the Commander of the United States Cyber Command concerning funding for cyber mission forces within the reserve component in the military personnel budget for that military department. If the Commander does not concur in the recommended level of funding with respect to individual augmentees or units within the reserve component, the Secretary of the military department shall include with the budget proposal submitted to the Secretary of Defense the views of the Commander.”.

SEC. 1609. Expansion of scope of affirmation of authority for cyber operations to include defense of critical infrastructure of the Department of Defense.

(a) Scope of affirmation of authority.—Subsection (b) of section 394 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting “defense of critical infrastructure of the Department of Defense,” after “force protection,”.

(b) Amendment to definitions.—Subsection (f) of such section 394 is amended—

(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively; and

“(2) The term ‘critical infrastructure of the Department of Defense’ means any asset of the Department of Defense of such extraordinary importance to the functioning of the Department and the operation of the armed forces that the incapacitation or destruction of such asset by a cyber attack would have a debilitating effect on the ability of the Department to fulfill its missions.”.

SEC. 1610. Review of future force employment concepts and associated personnel policy needs for evolving cyber forces.

(a) Review required.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the covered officials, conduct a review of future force employment concepts for the cyber force, including all elements of the Cyber Operations Force (COF), to assess where additional recommendations for personnel policy changes may be warranted.

(b) Elements of review.—The review and updates under subsection (a) shall address the respective roles of the military departments and United States Cyber Command with respect to the following:

(1) Evaluation of future force employment concepts of cyber forces, including the following:

(A) Inclusion of additional elements of the Cyber Operations Force in various geographic combatant command operational scenarios to provide tactical-level effects, or integration with non-cyber tactical units, using radio-frequency enabled cyber or other off-net cyber operations techniques.

(B) Assessment of new or novel formations outside of the current Cyber Mission Force construct.

(C) Experimentation with other doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy approaches for cyber effects or integrated non-kinetic effects beyond the current Cyber Mission Force approach for on-net operations.

(2) Coordination between United States Cyber Command and the military departments regarding recruiting and retention to ensure that personnel requirements of the cyber mission forces and the military departments are met appropriately.

(3) Opportunities for members of the cyber mission forces to enroll in professional military education for potential future forces, or needs for new professional military education opportunities for such forces.

(4) Assessment of expansion of promotion pathways for members of such future forces and an assessment of whether such opportunities are adequate to fulfill staffing requirements based on these future force employment concepts.

(5) Data sharing between the military departments and United States Cyber Command with respect to capturing information on, demographics and additional skill identifiers for personnel of such future forces.

(c) Report required.—Not later than September 1, 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on such review and any resulting updates to guidance and processes. The report shall also include such recommendations as the Secretary may have regarding matters described in subsection (a) or (b).

(d) Definition of covered officials.—In this section, the term “covered officials” means—

SEC. 1610A. Evaluation of Joint Task Force–Cyber in support of geographic combatant commands.

(a) Study and evaluation.—Not later than July 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in consultation with the Commander of United States Cyber Command, jointly conduct a comprehensive study on force employment in support of combatant commands and an evaluation of establishing Joint Task Force-Cyber elements across all of the geographic combatant commands.

(b) Elements of evaluation and study.—The study and evaluation required under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) An assessment of cyber force employment requirements and capabilities across all geographic combatant commands.

(2) An assessment of the benefits and limitations of the operational need for Joint Task Force-Cyber elements in each geographic combatant command area of operations under the following conditions:

(A) Under the operational control of the geographic command of the geographic combatant commanders.

(3) An analysis of the optimal command and control structures for Joint Task Force-Cyber elements, including—

(A) the designation of Joint Task Force Establishing Authority, as defined in joint doctrine and instructions;

(B) the alignment of operational control and tactical control over subordinate forces; and

(C) concurrent Joint Task Force Establishing Authority management structures between United States Cyber Command and respective geographic combatant commands.

(5) An evaluation of the integration and sustainment of cyber capabilities and effects.

(6) An identification of supporting infrastructure requirements for each geographic combatant command.

(7) A description of potential missions and lines of effort for Joint Task Force-Cyber elements.

(8) An analysis of relationships with existing entities within each geographic combatant command, including an assessment of complementary and duplicative activities.

(9) Such other matters as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff determine appropriate.

(c) Implementation plan for Joint Task Force-Cyber.—The study and evaluation required under subsection (a) shall include a comprehensive implementation plan for establishing Joint Task Force-Cyber elements across geographic combatant commands starting with United States Indo-Pacific Command, as determined appropriate based on the findings of the study and evaluation.

(d) Report required.—Not later than July 1, 2026, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Commander of United States Cyber Command shall jointly submit to the Secretary of Defense and the congressional defense committees a report containing—

(3) views from each of the geographic combatant commands regarding the results of the study in subsection (a) and the implementation plan in subsection (b); and

(4) recommendations for legislative or administrative actions required to implement the plan.

(e) Limitation on availability of funds.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act, or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, and available for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, not more than 90 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff submit to the congressional defense committees the complete report required under subsection (d).

SEC. 1610B. Prohibition on availability of funds to modify authorities of the Commander of United States Cyber Command.

SEC. 1610C. Program for talent management of cyber personnel through active and reserve transitioning.

(a) Program established.—The Secretary of Defense, as part of the Defense Cyber Workforce Framework, shall design and implement a program to support active management of cyber talent transitioning to the reserve cyber force by May 1, 2026.

(b) Elements.—The program as required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) The ability to track, reskill, and upskill transitioning active-duty cyber personnel and critical enablers from the Cyber Mission Force (CMF) for potential retention in the reserve component to meet emerging cyber mission demands.

(2) The ability to conduct transparent and time efficient means to recruit transitioning, fully qualified, and in good standing active-duty cyber mission force personnel and cyber enabling forces deemed necessary by the United States Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) and its subordinate commands.

(A) provide incentive services as a retention tool to aid transitioning CMF personnel in navigating the active to reserve component personnel system across the military services;

(C) enable transition to civilian occupations (specifically with critical need strategic industries and critical infrastructure providers) that could include mentorship, employment counseling, and education focused on critical high demand/low density cyber skills.

(4) The ability to expand such services to related areas, such as cyber auxiliary forces or direct commissioning programs directed towards cyber forces.

(c) Briefing.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the establishment of the program required under subsection (a), including—

(2) an assessment of resourcing needs for the program across the future years defense program; and

(3) identification of metrics or other assessment capabilities to determine the impact on retention of CMF forces and enabling cyber forces as part of a total force strategy.

(d) Pilot authority.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program to assess the feasibility and advisability of paying skill incentive pay or a skill proficiency bonus under section 353 of title 37, United States Code, to members of the Cyber Mission Force working for the United States Cyber Command that will expire on September 30, 2030.

SEC. 1610D. Designation of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy as principal staff assistant.

“(B) Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy—

“(i) shall serve as a principal staff assistant to the Secretary of Defense on matters within the responsibility of the Assistant Secretary;

“(ii) shall report directly to the Secretary without intervening authority; and

“(iii) may communicate views on matters within the responsibility of the Assistant Secretary directly to the Secretary without obtaining the approval or concurrence of any other official within the Department of Defense.”.

(1) in the section heading, by striking “network boundary and cross-domain defense” and inserting “full content inspection”;

(2) in subsection (a), by inserting “and cross-domain” after “network boundary”;

(i) by inserting “specified in subsection (a)” after “defense capabilities” both places in appears; and

(ii) in clause (ii), by inserting “that support operational missions as defined by the Department of Defense Cyber Defense Command” before the period at the end;

(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively;

“(B) By December 1, 2026, integrate the capabilities into the pilot program required by subparagraph (A) that leverages, where appropriate, investments in artificial intelligence to illuminate and actively counter foreign cyber aggression to Department of Defense networks.”;

(D) in subparagraph (C), as redesignated by subparagraph (B), by striking “deployment of modernized network boundary defense capabilities to the access points and cross-domain capabilities” and inserting “deployment of the same capabilities described in subsection (a) to the access points and cross-domain capabilities, and any other network interconnection point,”; and

(i) by striking “modernized network boundary defense capabilities” and inserting “the same capabilities described in subsection (a)”; and

(ii) by adding at the end the following new sentence: “To ensure the coverage of these capabilities is complete, the Secretary shall, acting through the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency and the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, create a list of remaining networks and enclaves.”; and

“(d) Briefings.—Not later than November 1, 2026, and not less frequently than once each year thereafter until December 31, 2028, the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency, and the Commander of the Department of Defense Cyber Defense Command shall jointly provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the status of deployment of the modernization program required by subsection (a), the results of the surveys conducted pursuant to subparagraphs (B) and (C) of subsection (b)(2), and identification of remaining networks and enclaves to be incorporated into the program.”.

SEC. 1612. Assessment regarding real-time monitoring of defense weapons platforms for cyber threats.

(a) Assessment required.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of the feasibility and advisability of establishing a Department of Defense-wide program—

(1) to remediate all weapon system platforms that do not currently have capabilities that satisfy requirements for weapon system platform cybersecurity through automated, real-time monitoring for threat detection and mitigation; and

(A) identifying and prioritizing weapon systems lacking real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities;

(B) establishing technical requirements and minimum cybersecurity standards for real-time protection across different categories of weapon systems;

(C) developing implementation schedules and funding requirements to retrofit existing systems with real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities;

(D) creating a verification and validation process to ensure deployed solutions effectively mitigate identified cybersecurity risks; and

(E) establishing a governance structure for ongoing maintenance, updates, and operational support of implemented capabilities.

(b) Elements.—The assessment required pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) A detailed assessment of the costs, timelines, and resources associated with developing, testing, acquiring, and implementing real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities, and the associated capabilities needed to aggregate and evaluate data from such applications.

(2) A thorough evaluation of existing real-time monitoring for self-protection solutions and their applicability to military weapon system environments.

(D) detailed operational implementation considerations, including development of tactics, training, and procedures for the employment of such applications; and

(A) weapon system platforms for which real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities are recommended;

(B) weapon system platforms for which such capabilities are not recommended, together with a justification for each such determination; and

(C) alternative cybersecurity methods being employed or proposed for platforms excluded from the recommendation for real-time monitoring for self-protection implementation.

(c) Coordination with related cybersecurity programs.—In conducting the assessment required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall coordinate with the Secretary for each of the military departments for programs within their department and with the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security regarding programs identified in the Strategic Cybersecurity Program.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the assessment conducted pursuant to subsection (a).

(2) CONTENTS.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the assessment conducted pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following:

(B) A comprehensive assessment of technical feasibility for implementing real-time monitoring for self-protection across different weapon system platform types.

(C) A thorough analysis of the advisability of developing a program for implementing such capabilities, including potential risks, benefits, and trade-offs.

(i) whether real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities should be implemented across Department weapon systems;

(ii) if implementation is recommended, which specific weapon systems should receive priority for such implementation;

(iii) appropriate acquisition strategies and funding mechanisms to support implementation;

(iv) any necessary policy or regulatory changes to support effective implementation; and

(v) proposed metrics for measuring successful implementation and operational effectiveness.

(E) For weapon system platforms deemed suitable candidates for real-time monitoring for self-protection capabilities—

(iii) estimated costs and funding requirements across the Future Years Defense Program; and

(iv) recommended technical approaches tailored to different platform categories.

(F) An assessment real-time monitoring for self-protection or similar capabilities currently deployed on Department of Defense weapon system platforms, including—

(i) a comprehensive inventory of platforms currently utilizing such capabilities, including relevant pilot programs;

(iii) an evaluation of the operational effectiveness of existing implementations; and

(iv) lessons learned that could inform future acquisition and implementation efforts.

(3) FORM OF REPORT.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 1613. Assessment of feasibility and advisability of establishing an operational technology cybersecurity training center of excellence.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than December 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense and in coordination with the Commander of United States Cyber Command and such representatives from the military departments as the Secretary considers appropriate, complete an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of establishing a center of excellence for operational technology cybersecurity training (in this section referred to as the “Center”) that would institutionalize training for the Department of Defense on security and protection of operational technology and industrial control systems.

(2) FUNCTIONS TO BE ASSESSED.—In carrying out the assessment required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall assess the need for a Center—

(A) to provide comprehensive training and other educational programs relating to operational technology and industrial control systems cybersecurity;

(B) to develop and regularly update the curriculum for such training and programs;

(C) to identify, develop, and integrate materiel and organizational requirements for Department of Defense operational technology and industrial control systems cybersecurity;

(D) to develop and manage the integration of operational technology and industrial control systems cybersecurity solutions with military service doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities; and

(E) to leverage and benefit from readily available capacity of a military installation with—

(ii) a cadre or workforce of engineering and infrastructure expertise designed for functions relating to the Armed Forces; and

(iii) current centers of excellence with specific consideration of existing facilities that support physical and logical cyber training ranges.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than December 1, 2026, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the assessment completed pursuant to subsection (a).

(2) RECOMMENDATION AND MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include a recommendation on whether the establishment of a Center is feasible and advisable and shall address the following:

(A) An identification of curricula relating to training and education of operational technology and industrial control systems, including such training that might be provided by private sector entities.

(B) Identification of anticipated throughput demands for such training for military and civilian personnel based on workforce estimates from the operational cyber community.

(C) Assessment of the resources needed to establish and maintain a Center and a cost-benefit analysis to determine if the anticipated training throughput in subparagraph (B) warrants such expenditure.

(D) An evaluation of potential locations that maximizes readily available capacity of a military installation and synergies with—

(ii) a cadre or workforce of engineering and infrastructure expertise designed for functions related to the Armed Forces of the United States; and

(iii) current centers of excellence with specific consideration of existing facilities that support physical and logical cyber training ranges.

(E) If the Secretary determines that establishing a Center is feasible and advisable—

(i) a proposed phased implementation approach, including initial operating capability milestones and full operational capability targets;

(ii) an assessment of how a Center could integrate training and education programs with existing Department of Defense cybersecurity certification requirements and career progression models;

(iii) proposed metrics and evaluation criteria that could be used to assess a Center’s effectiveness in improving operational technology and industrial control systems security outcomes across the Department of Defense, if established;

(iv) estimated funding, personnel, and resource requirements for establishment and maintenance of a Center; and

(v) analysis of potential challenges and limitations to establish a Center and recommendations to mitigate these challenges and limitations.

(F) Proposed metrics and evaluation criteria that could be used to assess the Center’s effectiveness in improving operational technology and industrial control systems security outcomes across the Department.

(1) INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEM.—The term “industrial control system” has the meaning given such term in section 2220C of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 665i(f)).

(2) OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGY.—The term “operational technology” has the meaning given such term in section 3 of the Internet of Things Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2020 (15 U.S.C. 278g–3a).

SEC. 1614. Framework for integration of information technology technical debt assessment into annual budget process.

(a) Framework development.—Not later than September 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, the Secretaries of the military departments, and the Chief Information Officers of the military departments, develop a framework for the integration of technical debt assessment, tracking, and management into existing Department of Defense processes for information technology investment decisions and budget justification materials.

(b) Technical debt definition.—The Secretary of Defense shall direct a comprehensive reevaluation of the Department's current definition of “technical debt” and develop a categorization framework that adequately reflects different types of technical debt, including application, physical infrastructure, architecture, and documentation components.

(1) INTEGRATION REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure the framework developed under subsection (a) provides for integration of technical debt considerations into existing Department management processes and structures relating to resourcing and programmatic decisions for existing or proposed information technology systems, services, or related programs of record.

(A) baseline measurement for technical debt for a specific technology or program;

(3) PROCESS INTEGRATION.—The framework developed under subsection (a) shall utilize existing governance structures for overseeing information technology investments.

(4) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.—The framework developed under subsection (a) shall—

(B) integrate technical debt management into the planning, programming, budgeting, and execution process, as well as information technology governance bodies;

(E) define organizational responsibilities for remediating assessed technical debt of a program or system.

(5) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense shall implement the framework developed under subsection (a) not later than October 1, 2026, to support the planning, programming, and process for the budget justification materials to be submitted to Congress in support of the Department, as submitted with the budget of the President for fiscal year 2027 under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code.

(1) JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.—Beginning with the fiscal year 2027 budget request, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, for each fiscal year, the budget justification materials to be submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the Department (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) include—

(2) PROGRAM ALIGNMENT.—The Secretary shall ensure Defense planning guidance and program objective memoranda address technical debt remediation requirements.

(e) Congressional briefing.—Not later than September 15, 2026, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the implementation and effectiveness of the technical debt management framework developed under subsection (a).

(1) The term “information technology” has the meaning given such term in section 11101 of title 40, United States Code.

(2) The term “technical debt” means design or implementation constructs that are expedient in the short-term, but that set up a technical context that can make a future change costlier or impossible, as defined in Department of Defense Instruction 5000.87, or successor instruction.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a task force to support the assessment of vulnerabilities to defense critical infrastructure necessary for the execution of existing defense operational and contingency plans.

(2) DESIGNATION.—The task force established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the “Mission Infrastructure Resilience Task Force” (in this section the “Task Force”).

(1) to conduct assessments and analysis of use case-based mission threads to comprehensively identify, develop, and operationalize the full spectrum of capabilities required to protect and maintain defense critical infrastructure; and

(2) to build and integrate the necessary resources, technologies, communication systems, tactics, techniques, and procedures, personnel with appropriate authorities, and exercise programs to ensure efficient and effective response when critical infrastructure supporting military operations and contingencies is threatened, degraded, or disrupted.

(1) CHAIR.—The Task Force shall be chaired by a representative from the Department of Defense Cyber Defense Command.

(2) MEMBERSHIP.—The Task Force shall include representatives from the following:

(B) The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Defense Continuity and Mission Assurance.

(G) The energy, installations and environment, or civil engineering organizations of the military departments.

(I) Each of the geographic and functional combatant commands, on an as-needed basis.

(1) conduct assessments and analysis of use case-based mission threads associated with defense operational and contingency plans, including through pilot programs, tabletop exercises, or studies that identify infrastructure dependencies and organizational transition points where operational responsibilities transfer between entities;

(2) identify vulnerabilities and capability gaps in mission-critical infrastructure and determine—

(A) the resources, authorities, technologies, partnerships with external and nongovernment entities, and funding necessary to address such vulnerabilities and gaps; and

(B) the designation of lead organizations responsible for remediation activities and associated costs;

(3) develop broad-based solutions to address gaps identified under paragraph (2), including—

(D) integration of unique capabilities, such as those provided by the National Guard;

(4) assign organizational leads for remediation of specific gaps and vulnerabilities and develop comprehensive plans to address such gaps, including identification of funding and budgeting requirements necessary for successful remediation efforts;

(5) monitor and assess the progress of remediation efforts and identify process improvements and solutions to address common deficiencies across multiple remediation activities;

(B) to identify additional deficiencies or vulnerabilities requiring remediation;

(7) establish a framework for readiness assessments to provide installation commanders and combatant commanders with visibility into the status of mission infrastructure resilience capabilities within their respective areas of responsibility;

(8) conduct targeted analysis of specific topics as directed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the Secretary of Defense; and

(9) perform such other duties as the Secretary of Defense may determine to be necessary and appropriate.

(1) TRANSITION PLAN REQUIRED.—The Task Force shall develop a comprehensive transition plan for converting the Task Force into a permanent organization within the Department of Defense.

(2) SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.—The transition plan required under paragraph (1) shall be developed and presented to the Secretary of Defense not later than 180 days prior to the termination date specified in subsection (f).

(3) BRIEFINGS TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 180 days before the termination date specified in subsection (f), and annually thereafter through September 30, 2033, the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the transition plan required under paragraph (1).

(2) The term “mission threads” means an end-to-end set of activities and tasks that support the execution of a specific operational mission or function.

SEC. 1616. Plan for deploying private fifth generation Open Radio Access Networks on Department of Defense bases.

(a) Requirement for prioritized list of bases.—Pursuant to section 1526 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 4571 note) and the Department of Defense Private 5G Deployment Strategy (dated October 2024), each Secretary of a military department shall develop a prioritized list of bases that merit investment in private fifth generation information and communications networks.

(b) Considerations.—In developing a list under subsection (a), a Secretary of a military department shall consider matters relating to the following:

(5) Enhanced and tailored security, including obscured data transport, within wireless network services.

(6) Base physical security and force protection requiring advanced processing of high-resolution distributed sensor feeds for perimeter monitoring, and detection and tracking of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), including through the potential use of a fifth generation information and communications network.

(8) The use of augmented or virtual reality technology for efficient maintenance and training.

(c) Informing task orders.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall use the prioritized list the Secretary developed under subsection (a) to inform task orders issued under the Enterprise Information Technology as a Service Base Infrastructure Modernization program. Task orders issued after the date of the enactment of this Act shall specify where Wi-Fi is fully adequate to meet requirements and where private fifth generation information and communications network performance is needed.

(d) Coordination required.—In developing prioritized lists under subsection (a), each of the Secretaries of the military departments shall coordinate with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, and such combatant commanders and directors of defense agencies as the Secretaries each consider appropriate.

(e) Plan for private 5G ORAN network deployments.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall—

(1) consolidate the prioritized base lists developed by the Secretaries of the military departments under subsection (a), and determine an optimal investment, deployment, and spend plan for private fifth generation Open Radio Access Network (ORAN) networks across the Department; and

(2) submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the lists consolidated under paragraph (1) and the determinations made pursuant to such paragraph.

SEC. 1617. Limitation on funds for travel pending briefing on process for best-in-class cyber data products and services.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, and available for travel expenses for the Office of the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, not more than 90 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of Defense provides the briefing required under subsection (b).

(b) Briefing required.—The Secretary shall, acting through the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense and in coordination with the Chief Information Officers from each of the military departments and the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency, provide a brief to the congressional defense committees on—

(1) how the Department of Defense plans to establish an open and competitive process through authorities granted in section 1521 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note) to procure best in class cybersecurity solutions, including endpoint, identity, and threat-hunting solutions; and

(2) the benefits associated with the use of multiple different cybersecurity providers to support operational resilience of Department networks.

(1) the status of the designation of an executive agent for Department of Defense-wide procurement of cyber data products and services as required by subsection (a) of section 1521 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note);

(2) the establishment and operational status of the program management office required by such subsection;

(3) progress made in developing Department-wide requirements for cyber data products and services; and

(4) a detailed timeline for full implementation of the requirements specified in section 1521 of such Act (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note).

(d) Acquisition strategy.—The brief required by subsection (b) shall include a comprehensive acquisition strategy that—

(1) outlines how the Department will leverage enterprise-wide procurement to achieve cost efficiencies compared to component-level procurements;

(2) identifies metrics for measuring the effectiveness and value of enterprise-wide cyber solutions;

(3) details plans to ensure accessibility of procured solutions across all military departments and components of the Department; and

(4) describes how the Department will maintain vendor diversity and competition throughout the acquisition lifecycle.

(e) Budget implications.—The brief required under subsection (b) shall include—

(1) estimated funding requirements for the implementation of enterprise-wide procurement of cyber data products and services for fiscal years 2026 through 2030; and

(2) a description of how enterprise-wide procurement will result in cost savings compared to current acquisition approaches.

SEC. 1618. Limitation of funds for travel expenses for the Office of the Chief Information Officer.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026 for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, and available for travel expenses for the Office of the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, not more than 85 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Chief Information Officers of the military departments, submits to the congressional defense committees the plan required under subsection (b).

(b) Plan required.—The Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Chief Information Officers of the military departments, shall develop and submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive plan to transition from legacy circuits to Internet Protocol-based circuits that comply with Department of Defense security requirements, including—

(1) identification of all legacy circuits currently in use across the Department of Defense and the military departments;

(2) establishment of timelines for the transition of each identified legacy circuit;

(4) identification of any technical, operational, or security challenges that may impact the transition and proposed solutions to address such challenges;

(5) specification of associated funding lines for each military department and defense agency participating in the transition; and

(6) identification of investments over the Future Years Defense Program required to complete the transition.

(1) The term “Internet Protocol-based circuits” means telecommunications circuits or services that utilize the Internet Protocol suite for packet switching and routing to transmit voice, data, and video communications.

(2) The term “legacy circuits” means telecommunications circuits that utilize outdated technology with limited bandwidth, security features, or interoperability capabilities as compared to modern Internet Protocol-based alternatives.

SEC. 1619. Limitation on availability of funds for the Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control initiative.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than February 1, 2026, the Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, and the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the plans and progress of transitioning the Joint Fires Network initiative to a program of record within the Air Force.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The briefing required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) An update on the charter for the program, including organizational relationships between the Air Force program manager, relevant stakeholders supporting developmental efforts, and operational customers of the Joint Fires Network.

(B) Details on the funding profile and milestones for the program across the future-years defense program, highlighting any potential challenges or delays, and recommendations for how to advance the Joint Fires Network program.

(C) A description of processes and guardrails related to the management of requirements and funding to ensure military department-specific requirements or funding pressures are not prioritized over joint requirements or needs of operational customers.

(D) A description and timeline of transition planning for providing specific capabilities to operational customers, including processes for balancing needs and requirements across multiple operational customers.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 30, 2026, the Commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command shall—

(B) provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the findings of the assessment.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The briefing required by paragraph (1) shall include the Commander's assessment of the following:

(A) The charter for the program and organizational relationships for facilitating coordination with the Combatant Command.

(B) Mechanisms to include feedback from operational customers in the program and continue the rapid delivery of the Joint Fires Network capability at the point of need.

SEC. 1620A. Prohibition on the elimination of certain cyber assessment capabilities for test and evaluation.

(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of Defense shall not take any action to divest, consolidate, or curtail any current cyber assessment capabilities or National Security Agency (NSA)-certified red teams supporting operational test and evaluation (OT&E) for Department of Defense programs until the Secretary provides the certification described under subsection (b).

(b) Certification.— The certification referred to in subsection (a) is a certification to the congressional defense committees that includes the following:

(1) The analytic basis for making the decision to take an action described in subsection (a), including any cost, workload, and workforce requirements, as well as any analysis related to operational impact on users of cyber assessment capabilities provided by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E).

(2) Independent review by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation of all such analyses provided under paragraph (1).

(3) Certification by the Director of the Test Resource Management Center that such analyses and such decisions meet the requirements of the Department of Defense, as required by section 4173(c)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code.

(4) A comprehensive transition plan for critical cyber test and evaluation capabilities currently managed by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, including identification of receiving organizations within the services or Office of the Secretary of Defense, timeline for transfer, and measures to ensure continuity of operations.

(5) A detailed assessment of funding requirements for maintaining and enhancing cyber test and evaluation capabilities during and after the transition, including how these funding elements will be incorporated into annual budget request documents.

(6) A review of staffing, tools, and specialized resources needed to support cyber operational test and evaluation across major weapons and information technology programs within the receiving organizations.

(7) A summary of efforts to integrate intelligence-informed threat data into operational cyber testing, including any remaining legal or technical barriers and proposed solutions.

(8) A plan to improve coordination and information-sharing between cyber test and evaluation stakeholders, United States Cyber Command, and the intelligence community following the organizational transition.

(9) Proposed metrics for evaluating mission effects in cyber-contested environments, consistent with guidance in the Cyber OT&E Guidebook, and how these will be maintained across organizational boundaries.

(10) An assessment of the effectiveness and future needs of cyber assessment programs, including resource gaps and how these will be addressed by the receiving organizations.

SEC. 1620B. Modification to certification requirement regarding contracting for military recruiting.

(1) in subsection (a), by striking “does not” and all that follows through the end and inserting the following: “does not—

“(1) rate or rank news or information sources for the factual accuracy of their content;

“(2) provide ratings or opinions on news or in formation sources regarding misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or ethics; or

“(3) acquire or use any service that provides any ratings, rankings, or opinions described in paragraph (1) or (2) from any other person.”; and

SEC. 1620C. Department of Defense working group, strategy, and report on ensuring the security, resiliency, and integrity of undersea cables.

(1) CONVENING.—Not later than March 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the Joint Staff, the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency, and such other agencies and combatant commands as the Secretary considers relevant, convene a working group—

(2) MEMBERSHIP.—The Working Group shall be composed of participants with relevant background or expertise, as determined by the Secretary, but shall include, at a minimum, the following:

(3) CHAIRPERSON.—The Secretary, or the Secretary's designee, shall serve as the chairperson of the Working Group.

(1) REQUIREMENT.—Not later than February 1, 2027, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report—

(A) assessing the unique challenges of protecting covered undersea cables and covered cable landing stations from threats posed by the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, naval and shadow fleets of adversaries of the United States, and subsea cable destruction mechanisms and any foreign entity of concern;

(B) specifically discussing the implications posed by relevant treaties and customary international law;

(C) examining the roles, responsibilities, and limits of the Department of Defense in ensuring the security, resiliency, and integrity of covered undersea cables;

(D) identifying gaps in current mechanisms for detection of, prevention of, and response to threats against covered undersea cables and covered cable landing stations; and

(E) identifying methods for the Department to create and disseminate lawfare or transparency methods to promote international law and deter future grey zone tactics and declassify instances of adversarial action, as may be appropriate.

(2) MATTERS TO BE INCLUDED.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include a description of each of the following:

(A) Past, ongoing, or planned efforts to protect covered undersea cables and covered cable landing stations from espionage, cybersecurity threats, physical damage, and natural disasters.

(B) Analysis of the capabilities of adversarial countries, including the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and others, to target, compromise, intercept data transmissions or sensitive information from covered undersea cables.

(C) Recommended areas for enhanced collaboration with industry stakeholders, including establishing standards, guidelines, and public-private reporting mechanisms.

(D) Assessment of training needs, including the development of a dedicated cadre of covered undersea cable security experts.

(E) Identification of resources required for expanded operations and enhanced interagency and international coordination.

(F) Recommendations for enhanced collaboration with allied and partner nations, including current best practices and lessons learned.

(G) Assessment of the maximum disruption to covered undersea cables and landing stations tolerable for the continuity of critical Department of Defense operations.

(H) The practicability of repairing any covered undersea cable within 100 hours, including through the development and use of aerial-deliverable, submersible, splicing robots.

(I) The utility and practicability of developing 72-hour deployable portable cable landing stations.

(J) Identification of the costs associated with the deployment of anti-tamper sensors.

(3) FORM.—The report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(c) Briefing.—Not later than March 15, 2027, the Working Group shall provide to the appropriate committees of Congress a briefing on the findings and recommendations contained in such report.

(d) Strategy.—Not later than February 1, 2027, the Working Group shall, in consultation with such governmental or non-governmental entities as the Working Group considers appropriate, submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a strategy to disseminate to allies and partners of the United States, industry, and such other entities as the Working Group considers appropriate to address the threats, gaps, roles, responsibilities, and challenges described in subsection (b)—

(1) to address threats to the physical security, cybersecurity resiliency, and integrity of covered undersea cables and covered cable landing stations, including redundancies and response options in the event of multiple or coordinated attacks on cable infrastructure;

(2) to enhance the Department of Defense’s international collaboration on matters relating to the security of covered undersea cable and covered cable landing stations, including joint exercises with allies and partners of the United States;

(3) to incorporate covered undersea cable security into mission sets and operational planning of relevant combatant commands (COCOMs);

(4) to foster engagement with private industry to ensure technological advancements and best practices are leveraged for the protection of covered undersea cable and covered cable landing stations; and

(5) to develop lawfare or transparency methods to promote international law and deter future grey zone tactics.

(1) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.—The term “appropriate committees of Congress” means the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

(2) COVERED CABLE LANDING STATION.—The term “covered cable landing station” means a covered undersea cable landing station in, owned by, or operated by the United States or an ally of the United States.

(3) COVERED UNDERSEA CABLE.—The term “covered undersea cable” means a commercial undersea telecommunications cable landing in, owned by, or operated by the United States or an ally of the United States.

(4) CYBERSECURITY THREAT.—The term “cybersecurity threat” has the meaning given such term in section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 650).

(5) FOREIGN ENTITY OF CONCERN.—The term “foreign entity of concern” has the meaning given such term in section 9901 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (15 U.S.C. 4651).

(6) WORKING GROUP.—The term “Working Group” means the working group convened pursuant to subsection (b)(1).

SEC. 1621. Public-private cybersecurity partnership for highly capable artificial intelligence systems.

(a) Establishment required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy shall establish a public-private partnership body to address cybersecurity and physical security threats and vulnerabilities to highly capable artificial intelligence and machine learning systems.

(b) Forum for engagement.—The public-private partnership body established under subsection (a) shall serve as a forum for engagement between the Department of Defense and commercial industry partners to align and enhance cybersecurity and physical security frameworks and practices applicable to both national security systems and artificial intelligence and machine learning systems at risk from sophisticated state actors.

(1) convene regular engagements to discuss cybersecurity and physical security threats and vulnerabilities specific to highly capable artificial intelligence and machine learning systems, with a focus on both current and emerging threats posed by state-sponsored cyber actors;

(2) facilitate the development, sharing, and alignment of best practices and robust cybersecurity and physical security frameworks between the Department and commercial industry to protect artificial intelligence and machine learning systems;

(3) promote collaborative threat intelligence sharing between the Department and commercial entities, with particular attention to vulnerabilities in artificial intelligence and machine learning systems used in critical infrastructure, defense operations, and sensitive national security functions; and

(4) develop recommendations for cybersecurity and physical security policy enhancements aimed at safeguarding artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies from state-sponsored cyber attacks and report findings and policy recommendations to Congress on an annual basis.

(d) Participants.—The public-private partnership body developed under subsection (a) shall include representatives from—

(D) the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense;

(I) such other entities in the Department of Defense and military departments with responsibilities for cybersecurity or artificial intelligence systems as the Assistant Secretary considers relevant;

(2) commercial industry companies with expertise in highly capable artificial intelligence and machine learning systems, or cybersecurity or physical security practices, including—

(E) such other industry leaders as the Assistant Secretary identifies as relevant and appropriate; and

(3) federally funded research and development centers, national laboratories, and academic institutions with demonstrated expertise in highly capable artificial intelligence and machine learning systems, cybersecurity or physical security practices.

(e) Reporting requirements.—Not later than one year after the date of the establishment of the public-private partnership body under subsection (a), and not less frequently than once each year thereafter until December 1, 2030, the Assistant Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report summarizing—

(1) the key finding from the engagements held under subsection (c)(1), including any identified cybersecurity or physical security vulnerabilities in artificial intelligence and machine learning systems;

(2) recommendations for enhancing cybersecurity or physical security policy and practices to protect artificial intelligence and machine learning systems across both the Department and commercial sectors; and

(3) an analysis of the progress made in aligning Department and commercial cybersecurity and physical security frameworks to address state-sponsored cyber threats.

(a) Requirement To establish.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall, acting through the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer and the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, establish a task force on artificial intelligence sandbox environments (in this section referred to as the “Task Force”).

(b) Purpose.—The Task Force shall identify, coordinate, and advance Department-wide efforts to develop and deploy virtual environments necessary to support artificial intelligence experimentation, training, familiarization, and development across the Department of Defense enterprise. These virtual environments, known as an “artificial intelligence sandbox”, shall—

(1) provide capability for personnel with varied technical proficiency, from novice users to experienced practitioners;

(2) enable the building, training, evaluation, and deployment of artificial intelligence models;

(3) facilitate familiarity with and utilization of existing artificial intelligence capabilities; and

(4) accelerate the responsible adoption of artificial intelligence across the Department.

(c) Co-chairs.—The Task Force shall be co-chaired by the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer and the Chief Information Officer.

(1) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the military departments, or in the absence of such position, the individual responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each military department;

(3) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the combatant commands and joint staff, or in the absence of such position, the individual responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each combatant commands;

(4) the chief information officers of the combatant commands, and joint staff, or in the absence of such position, the individual responsible for leading information technology efforts within each combatant commands;

(5) the Directors for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers/Cyber (J6) of the combatant commands, or their designees;

(6) the Director for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers/Cyber (J6) of the Joint Staff, or their designee; and

(7) such other officials of the Department as the co-chairs of the Task Force consider appropriate.

(1) identify and consolidate common requirements with respect to artificial intelligence sandbox environments across the Department, including requirements relating to interfaces for users with varying technical expertise, computational resources and infrastructure, pre-trained models and datasets, and educational and training materials;

(2) identify, inventory, and ensure the availability of existing solutions and technical documentation, including machine-readable documents, reference architectures, and user guides;

(3) publish an analysis matching common requirements identified under paragraph (1) with existing solutions identified under paragraph (2);

(4) utilize existing Department mechanisms to achieve efficiencies through enterprise licenses and contracts;

(5) identify and, where possible, streamline authority to operate approvals for each element of common artificial intelligence sandbox environment architectures; and

(6) publish guidance on the appropriate use of artificial intelligence sandbox environments for users at all skill levels.

(f) Briefing.—Not later than August 1, 2026, the co-chairs of the Task Force shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the goals and objectives of the Task Force.

(1) The term “artificial intelligence” has the meaning given such term in section 238(g) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(2) The term “artificial intelligence sandbox environment” means a secure, isolated computing environment that enables users with varying levels of technical expertise to access artificial intelligence tools, models, and capabilities for the purposes of experimentation, training, testing, and development without affecting operational systems or requiring specialized technical knowledge to operate.

(3) The term “authority to operate” means the official management decision given by a senior organizational official to authorize operation of an information system and to explicitly accept the risk to organizational operations and assets, individuals, other organizations, and the United States based on the implementation of an agreed-upon set of security controls, as defined in Committee on National Security Systems Instruction 4009, or successor document.

(a) Cross-functional team for artificial intelligence model assessment and oversight.—

(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall, in accordance with section 911 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 10 U.S.C. 111 note), establish a cross-functional team for artificial intelligence model assessment and oversight (in this section referred to as the “Cross-Functional Team”).

(2) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Cross-Functional Team is to develop a standardized assessment framework and governance structure to evaluate, oversee, and facilitate collaboration on artificial intelligence models employed by the Department of Defense.

(A) LEADERSHIP.—The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer shall lead the Cross-Functional Team.

(B) MEMBERSHIP.—The Secretary shall ensure that the Cross-Functional Team includes representatives from—

(ii) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the military departments, or in the absence of such position, the individual responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each military department;

(iv) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the combatant commands and the Joint Staff, or in the absence of such position, the individuals responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each such command and the Joint Staff;

(v) the chief information officers of the combatant commands and the Joint Staff, or in the absence of such position, the individuals responsible for leading information technology efforts within each such command and the Joint Staff; and

(A) To develop a standardized assessment framework for artificial intelligence models currently used by the Department of Defense.

(B) To establish Department-wide guidelines for artificial intelligence model evaluation for future models being considered for Department use.

(5) FRAMEWORK CONTENT.—The assessment framework developed under subsection (b) shall address—

(F) security requirements and compliance regulations, including the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program; and

(1) DESIGNATION.—The Secretary shall designate such Department organizations as the Secretary considers appropriate to serve as functional leads for artificial intelligence applications.

(2) SELECTION CRITERIA.—In designating functional leads under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider—

(3) CDAO RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer shall—

(A) serve as the functional lead for business systems with artificial intelligence models; and

(B) provide Department-wide guidance on commercial artificial intelligence models.

(c) Assessments of major artificial intelligence systems.—Not later than January 1, 2028, the Secretary shall, using the standard assessment framework developed by the Cross-Functional Team under subsection (a)(2), assess all major artificial intelligence systems of the Department.

(1) IN GENERAL.—In administering this section, the Secretary shall ensure the completion of each of the following milestones:

(A) The Cross-Functional Team is established in accordance with subsection (a) on or before June 1, 2026.

(B) The functional leads for artificial intelligence application are designated in accordance with subsection (b) on or before January 1, 2027.

(C) The Cross-Function Team completes development of the standardized assessment framework and governance structure required by subsection (a)(2) on or before June 1, 2027.

(D) Initial assessments of major artificial intelligence systems are conducted under subsection (c) and completed on or before January 1, 2028.

(2) CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of each milestone set forth under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the status of the Secretary in administering this section.

(2) TRANSITION.—Not later than June 30, 2030, the Secretary shall designate an organization to succeed the Cross-Functional Team and develop a plan to transfer the duties of the Cross-Functional Team specified by subsection (a)(4) to such successor organization.

(3) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF SUCCESSOR ORGANIZATION.—Not later than one year after the date on which the Cross-Functional Team is terminated and not less frequently than once each year thereafter until the date that is three years after the date on which the Cross-Functional Team is terminated, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees an annual report on the activities of the element of the Department to which the duties of the Cross-Functional Team were transferred.

(1) The term “artificial intelligence” has the meaning given in section 238(g) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(2) The term “functional area” refers to a specialized domain of artificial intelligence application within the Department where models are developed, evaluated, and employed for similar use cases under comparable operational conditions. Examples of functional areas may include decision support systems, business systems, avionics, cybersecurity, intelligence applications, logistics and maintenance, and health care.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a working group to develop and implement a common data ontology and governance structure across the Department of Defense.

(2) DESIGNATION.—The working group established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the “Department of Defense Ontology Governance Working Group” (in this section the “Working Group”).

(b) Purpose.—The purpose of the Working Group is to develop and implement a common data ontology and governance structure across the Department of Defense to improve data interoperability, enhance information sharing, and enable more effective decision making throughout the Department.

(4) the Chief Information Officers of the military departments and the combatant commands;

(5) such representatives from defense intelligence entities as the Secretary considers appropriate; and

(6) such other officers or employees of the Department as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(1) shall coordinate with and build upon any existing data ontology development efforts within the Department of Defense and intelligence community (as defined in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003)) to ensure complementary and nonduplicative efforts;

(2) incorporate Department-wide data as well as data from defense intelligence entities;

(3) develop and maintain domain-specific data ontologies that address specialized knowledge areas within the Department of Defense, including warfighting, logistics, personnel, intelligence, and cybersecurity domains;

(4) establish a process to identify and designate functional domain leads responsible for leading the development, review, approval, and respective guidance of data ontologies for their particular domains;

(5) evaluate what security risks are introduced with common and domain-specific data ontologies and how these risks should be mitigated; and

(A) a centralized repository to store the common and domain-specific data ontologies in a manner accessible to all authorized stakeholders;

(B) robust version control mechanisms to track changes, manage different versions, and ensure a stable and authoritative source;

(C) clear ownership designations and role definitions for data ontology management, including modification and access authorities for both enterprise-wide and domain-specific ontologies;

(D) standardized governance procedures for updating, reviewing, and maintaining the data ontologies to ensure relevance and accuracy;

(E) adherence to established data ontology engineering principles that promote interoperability and reusability across domains; and

(1) SELECTION CRITERIA.—In designating functional domain leads under subsection (d)(4), the Working Group shall select individuals who possess extensive subject matter expertise in their respective domains and maintain substantial equities or responsibilities within the domain.

(2) REPRESENTATION.—Functional domain leads selected under subsection (d)(4) shall be selected to ensure appropriate representation across the Department, including the military departments, combatant commands, defense agencies, and field activities.

(3) RESPONSIBILITIES.—Functional domain leads selected under subsection (d)(4) shall be responsible for—

(A) leading the development and maintenance of data ontologies within their domains;

(E) serving as the authoritative source for domain knowledge within the data ontology governance structure.

(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall ensure that the Working Group is established pursuant to subsection (a) not later than June 1, 2026, and the Working Group shall remain in effect for a period of not less than 5 years beginning on the date of the establishment of the Working Group, unless the Secretary determines that it is necessary to transition the Working Group into a permanent organization.

(2) FUNCTIONAL DOMAIN LEAD DESIGNATION.—Not later than August 1, 2026, the Working Group shall identify and designate functional domain leads in accordance with subsections (d)(4) and (e).

(3) DEPARTMENT-LEVEL POLICY.—Not later than June 1, 2027, the Working Group shall develop and distribute Department-level policy on the data ontology governance structure, including guidelines for the development, maintenance, and integration of domain-specific ontologies.

(4) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Working Group shall oversee the implementation of the governance structure by June 1, 2028.

(1) BRIEFING.—Not later than July 1, 2027, the Working Group shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on progress of the Working Group.

(2) REPORT.—Not later than June 30, 2028, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the implementation of the ontology governance structure, including the status of implementation for both enterprise-wide and domain-specific ontologies, and recommendations for sustainment and further development.

(1) The term “data domain ontology” means a data ontology that is specific to a particular functional, operational, or subject-matter area within the Department, including warfighting, logistics, personnel, intelligence, or cybersecurity domains.

(2) The term “data ontology” means a formal, structured representation and categorization of data elements, their properties, and the relationships between them within an information system or knowledge domain that enables consistent interpretation, integration, and analysis of data across different systems and users.

(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting “, including both dedicated Department of Defense owned and maintained computing assets, as well as commercially procured cloud services or other infrastructure-as-a service contracts” before the period at the end;

“(C) For any data centers to be built or expanded on a military installation, an estimate, to the degree that the Secretary determines that providing such an estimate will not delay the submittal of the triennial update required by paragraph (3), of the additional needs for those data centers, including—

“(ii) assessments of projected electricity and water usage requirements for the projected artificial intelligence data center footprint;

“(iii) anticipated impact on the installation and the surrounding community based on increased power, water, and other resource needs, including measures to mitigate any potential adverse impacts on military installations; and

“(iv) strategies to prevent disruptions to local utility services and to ensure community resilience, including consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies to align infrastructure planning with broader community needs.”; and

“(3) TRIENNIAL UPDATES.—Not later than March 1, 2027, and not later than March 1 of every third year thereafter until March 1, 2033, the Secretary shall update the roadmap required by paragraph (1) and submit to the congressional defense committees the updated roadmap.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than April 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a steering committee on artificial general intelligence.

(2) DESIGNATION.—The steering committee established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the “Artificial General Intelligence Steering Committee” (in this section the “Steering Committee”).

(3) The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, the Vice Chief of Staff of Naval Operations, the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the Vice Chief of Space Operations, and the Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau.

(8) Such representatives from the military departments as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(9) The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense.

(10) Representatives of such innovation centers within the defense innovation ecosystem as the Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

(11) Representatives of such other organizations and elements of the Department of Defense as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(c) Co-chairpersons.—The Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall serve as the Co-Chairpersons of the Steering Committee.

(1) analyzing the current trajectory of artificial intelligence models and enabling technologies that would support achievement of artificial general intelligence, including—

(G) such other technology disciplines as the Steering Committee determines appropriate;

(2) assess the technological, operational, and doctrinal trajectory of adversaries of the United States towards the goal of achieving an artificial general intelligence;

(3) analyzing the military applications and implications of artificial general intelligence for the Department;

(4) developing a strategy for the Department adoption of artificial general intelligence, including—

(B) required resources, including through the use of new or novel funding mechanisms like purchase commitments, financing arrangements, or loans or loan guarantees;

(D) mechanisms available for transition or adoption through public-private partnerships; and

(5) analyzing the threat landscape emanating from adversarial use of artificial general intelligence and developing options and counter-artificial general intelligence strategies to defend against such use.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 31, 2027, the Deputy Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Steering Committee with respect to the matters covered by subsection (d).

(2) FORM OF REPORT.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(3) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The Deputy Secretary shall make available to the public the unclassified portion of the report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1).

(f) Sunset.—The requirements and authorities of this section shall terminate on December 31, 2027.

(1) The term “artificial general intelligence” means artificial intelligence-capable systems with the potential to match or exceed human intelligence across most cognitive tasks, distinct from narrow artificial intelligence systems designed for specific tasks in defined domains.

(2) The term “innovation ecosystem” means a regionally based network of private sector, academic, and government institutions in a network of formal and informal institutional relationships that contribute to technological and economic development in a defined technology sector or sectors.

SEC. 1627. Physical and cybersecurity procurement requirements for artificial intelligence systems.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop a framework for implementation of cybersecurity and physical security standards and best practices relating to covered artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies to mitigate risks to the Department of Defense from the use of such technologies.

(2) COVERAGE OF RELEVANT ASPECTS OF SECURITY.—The framework developed under paragraph (1) shall cover all relevant aspects of the security of artificial intelligence and machine learning systems, including the following:

(B) Training and workforce development requirements, including with respect to the following:

(iii) Continuum of professional development and education of artificial intelligence security expertise.

(D) Risks relating to adversarial tampering with artificial intelligence systems.

(E) Risks relating to unintended exposure or theft of artificial intelligence systems or data.

(F) Security posture management practices, including governance of security measures, continuous monitoring, and incident reporting procedures.

(G) An evaluation of commercially available platforms for continuous monitoring and assessment.

(3) RISK-BASED FRAMEWORK.—The framework developed under paragraph (1) shall be risk-based, with higher security levels corresponding proportionally to the national security or foreign policy risks posed by the covered artificial intelligence technology being stolen or tampered with.

(4) USE OF EXISTING FRAMEWORKS.—To the maximum extent feasible, the framework developed under paragraph (1) shall—

(A) draw on existing cybersecurity references, such as the NIST Special Publication 800 series; and

(B) be implemented as an extension or augmentation of existing cybersecurity frameworks developed by the Department of Defense, such as the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification framework.

(A) HIGHLY CAPABLE CYBER THREAT ACTORS.—The framework developed under paragraph (1) shall take into account that the most highly capable artificial intelligence systems may be of great interest to the most highly capable cyber threat actors, such as intelligence and defense agencies of peer and near-peer nations.

(B) SECURITY LEVELS.—The Secretary shall ensure that cybersecurity frameworks provided for contractors contain security levels designed to mitigate risks posed by cyber threat actors described in subparagraph (A), with the highest levels being similar in scope to the level of protection offered by national security systems.

(C) GENERAL DESIGN WITH SPECIFIC COMPONENTS.—To the extent feasible, any additional security levels developed under subparagraph (B) shall be designed generally for all software systems, but may contain components designed specifically for highly capable artificial intelligence systems.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, or take other similar action, to require covered entities to implement the best practices described in the framework developed under subsection (a).

(2) RISK-BASED RULES.—Requirements implemented in rules developed under paragraph (1) shall be as narrowly tailored as practicable to the specific covered artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies developed, deployed, stored, or hosted by a covered entity, and shall be calibrated accordingly to the different tasks involved in development, deployment, storage, or hosting of components of those covered artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies.

(i) consider the costs and benefits to the Department and to United States national security and technological leadership, of imposing security requirements on covered entities; and

(ii) to the extent feasible, design requirements in a way that allows for transparent trade space analysis between competing requirements in order to minimize costs and maximize benefits.

(B) WEIGHING COSTS OF SLOWING DOWN DEVELOPMENT.—In carrying out subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall, in particular, weigh the costs of slowing down artificial intelligence and machine learning development and deployment against the benefits of mitigating national security risks and potential security risks to the Department of Defense from using commercial software.

(1) establishes timelines and milestones for achieving the objectives outlined in the framework;

(d) Reporting requirements.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees an update on the status of implementation of the requirements of this section.

(1) The term “artificial intelligence” has the meaning given such term in 238(g) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(2) The term “covered artificial intelligence and machine learning technology” means an artificial intelligence or machine learning system procured by the Department of Defense and all components of the development and deployment lifecycle of that artificial intelligence system, including source code, numerical parameters (such as model weights) of the trained artificial intelligence or machine learning system, details of any methods and algorithms used to develop that system, data used in the development of the system, and software used for evaluating the trustworthiness of the artificial intelligence or machine learning system during development or deployment.

(3) The term “covered entity” means an entity that enters into a Department of Defense contract that engages in the development, deployment, storage, or hosting of a covered artificial intelligence technology.

(1) REQUIREMENT REQUIRED REGARDING EXCLUSION AND REMOVAL FROM DEPARTMENT SYSTEMS AND DEVICES.—Except as provided in subsection (b), not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall require all Department of Defense offices and components to exclude or remove covered artificial intelligence from all Department of Defense systems and devices.

(2) CONSIDERATION OF GUIDANCE FOR DEPARTMENT SYSTEMS AND DEVICES.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall consider issuing guidance to all Department offices and components to exclude or remove artificial intelligence developed by a foreign adversary entity in cases in which the Secretary determines that the artificial intelligence poses a national security risk for all Department systems and devices.

(A) USE OF COVERED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.—Except as provided in subsection (b), not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, no contractor with an active Department contract may use covered artificial intelligence for fulfillment, assistance, execution, or otherwise support to complete, or support in part, a contract with the Department.

(B) USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DEVELOPED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY.—Except as provided in subsection (b), if the Secretary issues guidance described in paragraph (2) to exclude or remove an artificial intelligence developed by a foreign adversary entity that the Secretary determines poses a national security risk as described in such paragraph, no contractor with an active Department contract may use the artificial intelligence for fulfillment, assistance, execution, or otherwise support to complete, or support in part, a contract with the Department.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may waive a prohibition under subsection (a), on a case-by-case basis, if the Secretary determines that the waiver is necessary—

(A) for the purpose of scientifically valid research (as defined in section 102 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C. 9501));

(B) for the purpose of evaluation, training, testing, or other analysis needed for national security;

(C) for the purpose of conducting counter terrorism, counterintelligence, or other operational military activities supporting national security; or

(2) MITIGATION OF RISKS.—In any case in which the Secretary issues a waiver pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall take such steps as the Secretary considers necessary to mitigate any risks due to the issuance of the waiver.

(1) The term “artificial intelligence” has the meaning given such term in section 5002 of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020 (15 U.S.C. 9401) and includes the systems and techniques described in paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 238(g) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(A) any artificial intelligence, or successor artificial intelligence, developed by the Chinese company DeepSeek; and

(B) any artificial intelligence, or successor artificial intelligence, developed by High Flyer or an entity owned by, funded by, or supported by High Flyer or an entity with respect to which High Flyer directly or indirectly owns at least a 20 percent stake.

(3) The term “foreign adversary” has the meaning given the term “covered nation” in section 4872(f) of title 10, United States Code.

(B) a foreign person domiciled in, headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary;

(C) an entity with respect to which a foreign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraphs (A) or (B) directly or indirectly owns at least a 20 percent stake; or

(D) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraphs (A), (B), or (C).

(a) In general.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall develop a roadmap to guide potential future adoption and integration of digital content provenance capabilities across the Department of Defense.

(1) identify and assess current and proposed open technical standards for digital content provenance that could be applied to publicly released digital media assets produced by the Department of Defense, the military components, and field activities of the Department;

(2) identify strategic objectives relating to securing and authenticating public-facing digital content;

(3) describe relevant roles and responsibilities across military departments and components of the Department;

(4) explore the establishment of standardized processes to enable embedding and verification of content credentials in appropriate public-facing Department media;

(5) outline potential acquisition approaches for supporting technologies and solutions;

(6) develop metrics, as appropriate, to assess the effectiveness, reliability, and scalability of digital content provenance technologies;

(7) establish an engagement mechanism for coordination with relevant stakeholders, including federally funded research and development centers, industry, and academia, to align efforts with evolving best practices and technical capabilities; and

(8) establish notional milestones and resource needs, disaggregated by fiscal year, to inform longer-term planning.

(c) Briefing to congress.—Not later than July 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the Department’s roadmap for adopting digital content provenance standards. The briefing should address—

(1) initial findings regarding feasibility, opportunities, and potential barriers;

(d) Definition of digital content provenance.—In this section, the term “digital content provenance” means the verifiable history and origin of a digital asset, including information about its creation, ownership, and modifications over time.

SEC. 1630. Enhanced protection of data affecting operational security of Department of Defense personnel.

(a) Priorities for protection of personal data for operational security.—In carrying out the duties of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary shall identify and prioritize the protection of personal data that is related to or may have impacts on the operational security of members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of the Department of Defense through the prevention of collection, use, dissemination, or retention of such data that does not conform with provisions of law and practices relating to privacy that were in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Review and issuance of new guidance related to protection of personal data related to operational security.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Secretary of Defense will review all applicable guidance and policy relating to the protection of personal data that is related to or may have impacts on the operational security of Department personnel and, if necessary, issue revised or new guidance for enhanced protection measures for such data. Such guidance shall cover provisions of law and practices relating to privacy and personnel security that were in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act.

(1) LIMITATION.—The Secretary shall ensure that no Department personal data related to or that may have impacts on the operational security of Department personnel is stored on a non-Department server or cloud service except pursuant to a contract or other agreement entered into by the Secretary and a contractor or subcontractor of the Department or, for personnel data, with the permission of the data subject.

(2) WAIVERS.—The Secretary may waive paragraph (1) in a case in which the Secretary certifies in writing that such waiver—

(A) appropriately considers the operational security risks to an employee of the Department with respect to whom such data may relate;

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary changes a Department issuance relating to the protection of personal data that is related to or may have impacts on the operational security of Department personnel, the Secretary shall submit to Congress notice of the change.

(2) SUNSET.—The requirement of paragraph (1) shall terminate on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the occurrence of an event described in paragraph (2), the Secretary shall submit to Congress notice of the event.

(2) EVENTS DESCRIBED.—An event described in this paragraph is an occurrence of an event in which—

(B) personal data related to or that may have an impact on operational security of Department personnel is not stored according to Department regulations or exfiltrated in violation of Department regulations;

(C) personal data related to or that may have an impact on operational security of Department personnel is stored on a non-Department server or cloud service that has not undergone an authorization process in accordance with Department regulations; or

(D) personal data related to or that may have an impact on operational security of Department of Defense personnel is exposed in any cybersecurity incident.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop standards, training, reporting, and security debriefing requirements for Department personnel who receive write or read access privileges as system owners across more than one platform of Department information systems that hosts personal data related to or that may have an impact on operational security of Department personnel.

(2) SECURITY DEBRIEFINGS.—The Secretary shall ensure that personnel described in paragraph (1) are provided regular security debriefings, including after departing the Department.

(3) NOTIFICATION OF CONGRESS UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of the development of the standards, training, reporting, and security debriefing requirements in paragraph (1) the Secretary shall submit to Congress details of the requirements.

SEC. 2002. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by law.

(a) Expiration of authorizations after three years.—Except as provided in subsection (b), all authorizations contained in titles XXI through XXVII for military construction projects, land acquisition, facilities sustainment, family housing projects and facilities, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (and authorizations of appropriations therefor) shall expire on the later of—

(2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 2029.

(b) Exception.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to authorizations for military construction projects, land acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (and authorizations of appropriations therefor), for which appropriated funds have been obligated before the later of—

(2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for fiscal year 2029 for military construction projects, land acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, or contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program.

(a) Inside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2103(a) and available for military construction projects inside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Army: Inside the United States**
State	Installation	Amount
Alaska	Fort Wainwright	$208,000,000
Florida	Eglin Air Force Base	$91,000,000
	Naval Air Station Key West	$457,000,000
Georgia	Fort Gillem	$166,000,000
Guam	Joint Region Marianas	$440,000,000
Hawaii	Pohakuloa Training Area	$20,000,000
Illinois	Rock Island Arsenal	$50,000,000
Indiana	Crane Army Ammunition Plant	$161,000,000
Kansas	Fort Riley	$39,200,000
Kentucky	Fort Campbell	$212,000,000
New York	Fort Hamilton	$31,000,000
	Watervliet Arsenal	$29,000,000
North Carolina	Fort Bragg	$19,000,000
Pennsylvania	Letterkenny Army Depot	$91,500,000
	Tobyhanna Army Depot	$68,000,000
South Carolina	Fort Jackson	$51,000,000
Washington	Joint Base Lewis-McChord	$128,000,000

(b) Outside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2103(a) and available for military construction projects outside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Army: Outside the United States**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Germany	United States Army Garrison Ansbach	$92,000,000
	United States Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	$62,000,000
Republic of the Marshall Islands	United States Army Garrison Kwajalein	$161,000,000

(a) Construction and acquisition.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2103(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army may construct or acquire family housing units (including land acquisition and supporting facilities) at the installations or locations, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Army: Family Housing**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Belgium	Chièvres Air Base	$145,042,000
Germany	Army Garrison Bavaria	$50,692,000

(b) Planning and design.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2103(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army may carry out architectural and engineering services and construction design activities with respect to the construction or improvement of family housing units in an amount not to exceed $32,824,000.

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2025, for military construction, land acquisition, facilities sustainment, and military family housing functions of the Department of the Army as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

(b) Limitation on total cost of construction projects.—Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out under sections 2101 and 2102 of this Act may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

SEC. 2104. Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2021 project at Fort Gillem, Georgia.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (division B of Public Law 116–283; 134 Stat. 4294), the authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2101(a) of that Act (134 Stat. 4295) and most recently extended by section 2107 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2216), shall remain in effect 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.

**Army: Extension of 2021 Project Authorizations**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Georgia	Fort Gillem	Forensic Laboratory	$71,000,000

SEC. 2105. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (division B of Public Law 117–81; 135 Stat. 2161), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2101 of that Act (135 Stat. 2163) and extended by section 2108 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2216), shall remain in effect 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.

**Army: Extension of 2022 Project Authorizations**
State/Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Georgia	Fort Stewart	Barracks	$105,000,000
Germany	Smith Barracks	Live Fire Exercise Shoothouse	$16,000,000
Hawaii	West Loch Naval Magazine Annex	Ammunition Storage	$51,000,000
Texas	Fort Bliss	Defense Access Roads	$20,000,000

SEC. 2106. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (division B of Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2970), the authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2101 of that Act (136 Stat. 2971), shall remain in effect 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.

**Army: Extension of 2023 Project Authorizations**
State/Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Alabama	Redstone Arsenal	Physics Lab	$44,000,000
Hawaii	Fort Shafter	Water System Upgrade	$33,000,000
	Schofield Barracks	Company Operations Facility	$159,000,000
	Tripler Army Medical Center	Water System Upgrade	$38,000,000
Germany	East Camp Grafenwoehr	EDI: Battalion Trng Cplx1 (Brks/Veh Maint)	$104,000,000
		EDI: Battalion Trng Cplx2 (OPS/Veh Maint)	$64,000,000
Japan	Kadena Air Force Base	Vehicle Maintenance Shop	$80,000,000

SEC. 2107. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2025 projects.

(a) Smith Barracks, Germany.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2101(b) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2213) for Hohenfels Training Area, for construction of a barracks as specified in the funding table in section 4601 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2382), the Secretary of the Army may construct a barracks at Smith Barracks, Germany.

(1) MODIFICATION OF PROJECT AUTHORITY.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2212) for Naval Air Station Key West, Florida, for construction of a Joint Interagency Task Force South command and control facility, the Secretary of the Army may construct a command and control facility in the amount of $397,000,000.

(A) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The authorization table in section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2212) is amended in the item relating to Naval Air Station Key West, Florida, by striking “$90,000,000” and inserting “$397,000,000”.

(B) FUNDING AUTHORIZATION.—The funding table in section 4601 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2382) is amended in the item relating to Naval Air Station Key West, Florida, Joint Interagency Task Force South command and control facility, by striking “$90,000” and inserting “$397,000”.

(1) MODIFICATIONS OF PROJECT AUTHORITY.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2212) for Fort Cavazos, Texas, for construction of Motor Pool #70, the Secretary of the Army may construct a vehicle maintenance shop.

(A) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The authorization table in section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2212) is amended in the item relating to Fort Cavazos, Texas, by striking “$147,000,000” and inserting “$69,000,000”.

(B) FUNDING AUTHORIZATION.—The funding table in section 4601 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2383) is amended in the items relating to Fort Cavazos, Texas, by striking “Motor Pool #70” and inserting “Vehicle Maintenance Shop”.

(a) Inside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2203(a) and available for military construction projects inside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Navy and Marine Corps: Inside the United States**
State	Installation or Location	Amount
California	Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton	$171,020,000
	Naval Air Station Lemoore	$399,610,000
	Naval Base Coronado	$302,000,000
	Naval Base San Diego	$154,820,000
	Naval Base Ventura County	$164,000,000
	Naval Support Activity Monterey	$430,000,000
Connecticut	Naval Submarine Base New London	$255,000,000
District of Columbia	Naval Research Laboratory	$157,000,000
Florida	Naval Air Station Pensacola	$164,000,000
Guam	Andersen Air Force Base	$70,070,000
	Joint Region Marianas	$2,555,000,000
	Naval Base Guam	$105,950,000
	Naval Base Guam North Finegayan Telecommunications Site	$61,010,000
Hawaii	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	$83,000,000
	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay	$143,510,000
	Pacific Missile Range Facility Barking Sands	$235,730,000
Maine	Portsmouth Naval Shipyard	$1,042,000,000
Maryland	National Maritime Intelligence Center	$114,000,000
	Naval Support Facility Indian Head	$106,000,000
	United States Naval Academy Annapolis	$86,000,000
Nevada	Naval Air Station Fallon	$47,000,000
North Carolina	Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune	$48,280,000
Pennsylvania	Naval Support Activity Mechanicsburg	$88,000,000
Rhode Island	Naval Station Newport	$190,000,000
South Carolina	Joint Base Charleston	$357,900,000
Virginia	Marine Corps Base Quantico	$63,560,000
	Naval Station Norfolk	$1,582,490,000
Washington	Naval Air Station Whidbey Island	$202,000,000
	Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor	$245,700,000
Worldwide Unspecified	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	$129,620,000

(b) Outside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2203(a) and available for military construction projects outside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installation or location outside the United States, and in the amount, set forth in the following table:

**Navy: Outside the United States**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Japan	Marine Corps Base Camp Smedley D. Butler	$58,000,000

(a) Construction and acquisition.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2203(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may construct or acquire family housing units (including land acquisition and supporting facilities) at the installations or locations, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Navy and Marine Corps: Family Housing**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Japan	Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni	$11,230,000

(b) Improvements to military family housing units.—Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2203(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may improve existing military family housing units in an amount not to exceed $68,230,000.

(c) Planning and design.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2203(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may carry out architectural and engineering services and construction design activities with respect to the construction or improvement of family housing units in an amount not to exceed $3,806,000.

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2025, for military construction, land acquisition, facilities sustainment, and military family housing functions of the Department of the Navy, as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

(b) Limitation on total cost of construction projects.—Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out under sections 2201 and 2202 may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

SEC. 2204. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (division B of Public Law 117–81; 135 Stat. 2161), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in sections 2201 and 2202 of that Act (135 Stat. 2166, 2167) and extended by section 2207 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2221), shall remain in effect 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.

**Navy: Extension of 2022 Project Authorizations**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
California	Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton	CLB MEU Complex	$83,900,000
District of Columbia	Marine Barracks Washington	Family Housing Improvements	$10,415,000
Florida	Marine Corps Support Facility Blount Island	Lighterage and Small Craft Facility	$69,400,000
Hawaii	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe	Electrical Distribution Modernization	$64,500,000
South Carolina	Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort	Aircraft Maintenance Hangar	$122,600,000

SEC. 2205. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (division B of Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2970), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2201 of that Act (136 Stat. 2975), shall remain in effect 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.

**Navy: Extension of 2023 Project Authorizations**
State/Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Florida	Naval Air Station Jacksonville	Engine Test Cells Modifications	$100,570,000
Hawaii	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	Missile Magazines	$142,783,000
Nevada	Naval Air Station Fallon	F–35C Aircraft Maintenance Hangar	$111,566,000
North Carolina	Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point	CH–53K Gearbox Repair and Test Facility	$44,830,000
South Carolina	Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island	Recruit Barracks	$81,890,000
		Recruit Barracks	$85,040,000
Spain	Naval Station Rota	EDI: Missile Magazines	$92,323,000

(a) Inside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2303(a) and available for military construction projects inside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Air Force: Inside the United States**
State	Installation or Location	Amount
Arizona	Davis-Monthan Air Force Base	$174,000,000
	Luke Air Force Base	$45,000,000
California	Travis Air Force Base	$60,000,000
Florida	Cape Canaveral Space Force Station	$49,800,000
	Eglin Air Force Base	$166,000,000
	Hurlburt Field	$66,000,000
	MacDill Air Force Base	$74,000,000
	Tyndall Air Force Base	$48,000,000
Georgia	Moody Air Force Base	$49,500,000
	Robins Air Force Base	$28,000,000
Louisiana	Barksdale Air Force Base	$116,000,000
Maryland	Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling	$50,000,000
Massachusetts	Hanscom Air Force Base	$55,000,000
Mississippi	Columbus Air Force Base	$14,200,000
Missouri	Whiteman Air Force Base	$127,600,000
New Jersey	Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst	$23,000,000
New Mexico	Cannon Air Force Base	$169,000,000
	Kirtland Air Force Base	$233,000,000
North Carolina	Seymour Johnson Air Force Base	$95,000,000
Ohio	Wright-Patterson Air Force Base	$45,000,000
Oklahoma	Tinker Air Force Base	$497,000,000
South Dakota	Ellsworth Air Force Base	$378,000,000
Tennessee	Arnold Air Force	$17,500,000
Texas	Dyess Air Force Base	$90,800,000
	Goodfellow Air Force Base	$112,000,000
Utah	Hill Air Force Base	$250,000,000
Virginia	Joint Base Langley-Eustis	$49,000,000

(b) Outside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2303(a) and available for military construction projects outside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Air Force: Outside the United States**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Diego Garcia	Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia	$29,000,000
Germany	Ramstein Air Base	$44,000,000
Greenland	Pituffik Space Base	$32,000,000
Norway	Royal Norwegian Air Force Base Rygge	$72,000,000
United Kingdom	Royal Air Force Feltwell	$20,000,000
	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	$253,000,000

(a) Improvements to military family housing units.—Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2303(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air Force may improve existing military family housing units in an amount not to exceed $237,655,000.

(b) Planning and design.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2303(a) and available for military family housing functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air Force may carry out architectural and engineering services and construction design activities with respect to the construction or improvement of family housing units in an amount not to exceed $36,575,000.

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2025, for military construction, land acquisition, facilities sustainment, and military family housing functions of the Department of the Air Force, as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

(b) Limitation on total cost of construction projects.—Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out under sections 2301 and 2302 may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

SEC. 2304. Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2017 project at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public Law 114–328; 130 Stat. 2688), the authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2902 of that Act (130 Stat. 2743) and most recently extended by section 2304 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2224), shall remain in effect 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.

**Air Force: Extension of 2017 Project Authorization**
Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Germany	Spangdahlem Air Base	ERI: F/A–22 Low Observable/Comp Repair Fac	$12,000,000

SEC. 2305. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2019 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (division B of Public Law 115–232; 132 Stat. 2240), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2903 of that Act (132 Stat. 2287) and most recently extended by section 2306 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2225), shall remain in effect 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.

**Air Force: Extension of 2019 Project Authorization**
Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
United Kingdom	Royal Air Force Fairford	EDI: Construct DABS-FEV Storage	$87,000,000
		EDI: Munitions Holding Area	$19,000,000

SEC. 2306. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2020 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (division B of Public Law 116–92; 133 Stat. 1862), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in sections 2301(a) and 2912(a) of that Act (133 Stat. 1867, 1913), and extended by section 2307 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2226), shall remain in effect 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.

**Air Force: Extension of 2020 Project Authorization**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Florida	Tyndall Air Force Base	Deployment Center/Flight Line Dining/AAFES	$43,000,000
Georgia	Moody Air Force Base	41 RQS HH–60W Apron	$12,500,000

SEC. 2307. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (division B of Public Law 117–81; 135 Stat. 2161), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2301 of that Act (135 Stat. 2168) and extended by section 2309 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2227), shall remain in effect 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.

**Air Force: Extension of 2022 Project Authorization**
State/Counrty	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Massachusetts	Hanscom Air Force Base	NC3 Acquisitions Management Facility	$66,000,000
United Kingdom	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	F–35A Child Development Center	$24,000,000
		F–35A Munition Inspection Facility	$31,000,000
		F–35A Weapons Load Training Facility	$49,000,000

SEC. 2308. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (division B of Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2970), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2301 of that Act (136 Stat. 2978), shall remain in effect 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.

**Air Force: Extension of 2023 Project Authorization**
State/Counrty	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Florida	Patrick Space Force Base	Consolidated Communications Center	$97,000,000
Norway	Rygge Air Station	EDI: Base Perimeter Security Fence	$8,200,000
Oklahoma	Tinker Air Force Base	Facility and Land Acquisition (MROTC)	$30,000,000
Texas	Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph	Child Development Center	$29,000,000

SEC. 2309. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2025 project at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming.

SEC. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects.

(a) Inside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2403(a) and available for military construction projects inside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Defense Agencies: Inside the United States**
State	Installation or Location	Amount
Alabama	DLA Distribution Center Anniston	$32,000,000
California	Naval Base Coronado	$75,900,000
	Travis Air Force Base	$49,980,000
Florida	Homestead Air Reserve Base	$33,000,000
Georgia	Fort Benning	$127,375,000
Maryland	Fort Meade	$26,600,000
North Carolina	Fort Bragg	$275,000,000
	Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune	$289,000,000
Pennsylvania	DLA Distribution Center Susquehanna	$90,000,000
	Harrisburg Air National Guard Base	$13,400,000
Puerto Rico	Punta Borinquen	$155,000,000
Texas	NSA Texas	$500,000,000
Virginia	Pentagon	$34,000,000
Washington	Fairchild Air Force Base	$85,000,000
	Manchester Tank Farm	$71,000,000

(b) Outside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2403(a) and available for military construction projects outside the United States as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may acquire real property and carry out military construction projects for the installations or locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**Defense Agencies: Outside the United States**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Germany	United States Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	$16,700,000
United Kingdom	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	$397,500,000
	Royal Air Force Mildenhall	$45,000,000

SEC. 2402. Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program projects.

(a) Inside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2403(a) and available for energy conservation projects as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may carry out energy conservation projects under chapter 173 of title 10, United States Code, for the installations or locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**ERCIP Projects: Inside the United States**
State	Installation or Location	Amount
California	Armed Forces Reserve Center Mountain View	$20,600,000
	Travis Air Force Base	$25,120,000
Florida	Marine Corps Support Facility Blount Island	$30,500,000
Guam	Joint Region Marianas	$53,000,000
	Naval Base Guam	$63,010,000
Massachusetts	Cape Cod Space Force Station	$124,000,000
New Mexico	White Sands Missile Range	$38,500,000
North Carolina	Fort Bragg	$80,000,000
Texas	Camp Swift	$19,800,000
	Fort Hood	$34,500,000
Utah	Camp Williams	$28,500,000

(b) Outside the United States.—Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 2403(a) and available for energy conservation projects as specified in the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may carry out energy conservation projects under chapter 173 of title 10, United States Code, for the installations or locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

**ERCIP Projects: Outside the United States**
Country	Installation or Location	Amount
Germany	United States Army Garrison Ansbach	$73,000,000
Japan	Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni	$146,800,000

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2025, for military construction, land acquisition, facilities sustainment, and military family housing functions of the Department of Defense (other than the military departments), as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

(b) Limitation on total cost of construction projects.—Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out under sections 2401 and 2402 may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding table in section 4601.

SEC. 2404. Extension of authority to carry out fiscal year 2019 project at Iwakuni, Japan.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (division B of Public Law 115–232; 132 Stat. 2240), the authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in section 2401(b) of that Act (132 Stat. 2249) and most recently extended by section 2405 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2232), shall remain in effect 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.

**Defense Agencies: Extension of 2019 Project Authorization**
Country	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Japan	Iwakuni	Fuel Pier	$33,200,000

SEC. 2405. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2022 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (division B of Public Law 117–81; 135 Stat. 2161), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in sections 2401 and 2402 of that Act (135 Stat. 2173, 2174), shall remain in effect 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.

**Defense Agencies and ERCIP Projects: Extension of 2022 Project Authorizations**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Alabama	Fort Novosel	10 MW RICE Generator Plant and Microgrid Controls	$24,000,000
Georgia	Fort Benning	4.8 MW Generation and Microgrid	$17,593,000
	Fort Stewart	10 MW Generation Plant, with Microgrid Controls	$22,000,000
New York	Fort Drum	Wellfield Field Expansion Project	$27,000,000
North Carolina	Fort Bragg	Emergency Water System	$7,705,000
Ohio	Springfield-Beckley Municipal Airport	Base-Wide Microgrid With Natural Gas Generator, Photovoltaic, and Battery	$4,700,000
Tennessee	Memphis International Airport	PV Arrays and Battery Storage	$4,780,000

SEC. 2406. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (division B of Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2970), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in sections 2401(a) and 2402(a) of that Act (136 Stat. 2982, 2983), shall remain in effect 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.

**Defense Agencies and ERCIP Projects: Extension of 2023 Project Authorizations**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Original Authorized Amount
Alabama	Redstone Arsenal	1MSIC Advanced Analysis Facility Phase 2 (INC)	$151,000,000
California	Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center	Microgrid and Backup Power	$25,560,000
Florida	Naval Air Station Jacksonville	Facility Energy Operations Center Renovation	$2,400,000
Georgia	Fort Stewart-Hunter Army Airfield	Power Generation and Microgrid	$25,400,000
	Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay	SCADA Modernization	$11,200,000
Hawaii	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	Primary Electrical Distribution	$25,000,000
Kansas	Fort Riley	Power Generation and Microgrid	$25,780,000
Texas	Fort Cavazos	Power Generation and Microgrid	$31,500,000
	United States Army Reserve Center, Conroe	Power Generation and Microgrid	$9,600,000
Virginia	Dam Neck	SOF Operations Building Addition	$26,600,000

SEC. 2407. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2024 projects.

(a) Redstone Arsenal, Alabama.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (division B of Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 726) for Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, for construction of a ground test facility infrastructure project at that location, the Missile Defense Agency may renovate additional square footage and convert administrative space to classified space.

(1) MODIFICATIONS OF PROJECT AUTHORITY.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2402(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (division B of Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 727) for Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, Missouri, for construction of a microgrid and backup power, the Secretary of Defense may construct a microgrid and backup power, including the installation of liquid propane gas tanks and associated piping, foundations, pumps, saddles, propane vaporizers, and controls.

(A) PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.—The authorization table in section 2402(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (division B of Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 727) is amended in the item relating to Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, Missouri, by striking “$80,100,000” and inserting “$86,500,000”.

(B) FUNDING AUTHORIZATION.—The funding table in section 4601 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 911) is amended in the items relating to Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, Missouri, by striking “$80,100” and inserting “$86,500”.

SEC. 2408. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2025 projects.

(a) Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2402(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2229) for Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, for construction of a microgrid with electric vehicle charging infrastructure, the Secretary of the Air Force may construct a new power generation and microgrid facility, which shall be entitled “Power Generation and Microgrid”.

(b) Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey.—In the case of the authorization contained in the table in section 2402(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (division B of Public Law 118–159; 138 Stat. 2229) for Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, for construction of a microgrid with electric vehicle charging infrastructure, the Secretary of the Air Force may construct a new power generation and microgrid facility, which shall be entitled “Power Generation and Microgrid”.

**North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program**
Location	Installation or Location	Amount
Worldwide Unspecified	NATO Security Investment Program	$531,832,000

**Republic of Korea Funded Construction Projects**
Component	Installation or Location	Project	Amount
Army	Camp Humphreys	Access Control Point	$24,000,000
Army	Camp Humphreys	Runway	$180,000,000
Navy	Pohang AB	Replace Concrete Apron	$22,000,000
Navy	Yecheon Air Base	Replace Magazine Munitions Supply Area	$59,000,000
Air Force	Gimhae Air Base	Repair Contingency Hospital	$86,000,000
Air Force	Gwangju Air Base	Hydrant Fuel System	$57,000,000
Air Force	Osan AB	Aircraft Corrosion Control Facility Part 3	$25,000,000

**Republic of Poland Funded Construction Projects**
Component	Installation or Location	Project	Amount
Army	Drawsko Pomorskie Training Area (DPTA)	Information Systems Facility	$6,200,000
Army	Powdiz	Barracks & Dining Facility Phase 2	$199,000,000
Army	Powdiz	Rotary Wing Aircraft Maintenance Hangar	$91,000,000
Air Force	Lask AB	Communication Infrastructure	$18,000,000
Air Force	Wroclaw AB	Combined Aerial Port Facilities	$111,000,000
Air Force	Wroclaw AB	Contingency Beddown Area	$13,000,000
Air Force	Wroclaw AB	Hot Cargo Pad / Munition Handling / Holding Area	$44,000,000
Air Force	Wroclaw AB	Railhead and Rail Extension	$22,000,000

SEC. 2601. Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition projects.

**Army National Guard: Inside the United States**
State	Location	Amount
Guam	Joint Forces Headquarters - Guam	$55,000,000
Indiana	Shelbyville Armory	$55,000,000
Iowa	Waterloo Armory	$13,800,000
New Hampshire	Plymouth Training Center	$26,000,000
New York	Albany	$90,000,000
North Carolina	Salisbury Training Center	$69,000,000
Oregon	Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility Base	$16,000,000
South Dakota	Watertown Training Center	$28,000,000

**Army Reserve: Inside the United States**
State	Location	Amount
Alabama	Maxwell Gunter	$28,000,000
Alaska	Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson	$46,000,000
Illinois	Fort Sheridan	$36,000,000
Pennsylvania	New Castle Army Reserve Center	$30,000,000
Texas	Conroe Army Reserve Center	$12,000,000

SEC. 2603. Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land acquisition projects.

**Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve: Inside the United States**
State	Location	Amount
Texas	Naval Air Station Reserve Base Fort Worth	$106,870,000

SEC. 2604. Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition projects.

**Air National Guard: Inside the United States**
State	Location	Amount
Alaska	Eielson Air Force Base	$16,000,000
	Joint Base Elmendorf–Richardson	$46,000,000
Georgia	Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport	$38,400,000
Iowa	Sioux Gateway Airport	$148,000,000
Massachusetts	Otis Air National Guard Base	$31,000,000
Mississippi	Key Field Air National Guard Base	$19,000,000
New Hampshire	Pease Air National Guard Base	$16,000,000
New Jersey	Atlantic City International Airport	$68,000,000
Oregon	Klamath Falls Airport	$80,000,000
	Portland International Airport	$16,500,000
Utah	Salt Lake City International Airport	$145,000,000
Wisconsin	Volk Air National Guard Base	$8,400,000

SEC. 2605. Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects.

**Air Force Reserve: Inside the United States**
State	Location	Amount
New York	Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station	$54,000,000
South Carlina	Joint Base Charleston Air Reserve Base	$33,000,000
Texas	Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland	$18,000,000

SEC. 2607. Extension of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2023 projects.

(a) Extension.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (division B of Public Law 117–263; 136 Stat. 2970), the authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as provided in sections 2601, 2602, 2603 and 2604 of that Act (136 Stat. 2986, 2987), shall remain in effect 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.

**National Guard and Reserve: Extension of 2023 Project Authorizations**
State	Installation or Location	Project	Amount
Alaska	Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson	Aircraft Maintenance Hangar	$63,000,000
Arizona	Morris Air National Guard Base	Base Entry Complex	$12,000,000
	Tucson International Airport	Land Acquisition	$11,700,000
Arkansas	Camp Robinson	Automated Multipurpose Machine Gun Range	$9,500,000
Florida	Gainesville	National Guard Readiness Center	$21,000,000
	Perrine	Army Reserve Center/ AMSA	$46,000,000
Hawaii	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay	C–40 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar	$116,964,000
Indiana	Fort Wayne International Airport	Munitions Maintenance & Storage Complex	$16,500,000
Ohio	Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base	Small Arms Range	$8,000,000
Puerto Rico	Camp Santiago Joint Maneuver Training Center	Engineering/Housing Maintenance Shops (DPW)	$14,500,000
West Virginia	McLaughlin Air National Guard Base	C–130J Apron Expansion	$10,000,000

SEC. 2608. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2023 project at Tucson International Airport, Arizona.

SEC. 2701. Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and closure activities funded through Department of Defense Base Closure Account.

SEC. 2801. Requirement for the military departments to develop and annually update a 20-year infrastructure improvement plan.

(a) Submission.—Commencing as part of the annual budget submission of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 2027, and every five years thereafter, each Secretary of a military department shall include with the defense budget materials for that fiscal year each of the following:

(1) A summary of the major lines of effort, milestones, and specific goals of the Secretary concerned during the next 20 fiscal years relating to the improvement of infrastructure and facilities under the jurisdiction of that Secretary, including a detailed plan describing the objectives of that Secretary to manage and improve such infrastructure and facilities during that period, including utility systems (electric, water and wastewater systems, energy distribution systems, transportation, and communication networks) and all physical structures of a base or installation.

(2) A certification by that Secretary that both the budget for that fiscal year and the future-years defense program submitted to Congress in relation to such budget under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, provide for funding of planning, design, and construction at a level that is sufficient to meet the requirements specified in the plan under paragraph (1) on the schedule provided in that plan.

(3) An unaltered assessment by the service chief of the military department concerned with respect to the summary and plan under paragraph (1) and the certification under paragraph (2).

(b) Elements.—Each plan submitted by a Secretary of a military department under subsection (a)(1) shall include the following:

(1) With respect to the 20-year period covered by the plan, an identification of the major lines of effort, milestones, and specific goals of the Secretary over such period relating to the improvement of infrastructure and facilities under the jurisdiction of that Secretary.

(2) The estimated costs of necessary infrastructure and facility improvements and a description of how such costs would be addressed by the budget request of the Department of Defense and the future-years defense program submitted for such year.

(3) An assessment of how the military department is accurately accounting for the costs of sustaining facilities and addressing the identified necessary improvements of infrastructure and facilities as outlined in the plan.

(c) Incorporation of results-oriented management practices.—Each plan under subsection (a)(1) shall incorporate the leading results-oriented management practices, including—

SEC. 2802. Increase of maximum amount for restoration or replacement of damaged or destroyed facilities.

SEC. 2803. Reauthorization and modification of special design-build authority for military construction projects.

“(3) Any contract awarded under this subsection shall be considered to be a construction contract and shall be subject to the same oversight mechanisms to which construction contracts are subject under this title.”; and

(2) in paragraph (4), by striking “2008” each place it appears and inserting “2030”.

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.

(1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking “at least” and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting “at least two military construction projects”;

(2) in subsection (d), by striking “September 30, 2025” and inserting “September 30, 2029”;

(3) in subsection (e), by striking “January 1, 2025” and inserting “January 1, 2029”;

(4) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections (g) and (h), respectively;

“(f) Use of certain technologies.—In carrying out each project under the pilot program commencing on or after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, the Secretary concerned shall use not fewer than three technologies identified in the report published by the Comptroller General of the United States on February 11, 2025, and entitled ‘Science & Tech Spotlight: Sustainable Building Technologies’ (GAO–25–107931).”;

(6) in subsection (g)(1), as redesignated by paragraph (4), by striking “December 31, 2025” and inserting “December 31, 2030”; and

(7) in subsection (h), as so redesignated, in the first sentence, by inserting before the period the following: “that is identified in the report published by the Comptroller General of the United States on February 11, 2025, and entitled ‘Science & Tech Spotlight: Sustainable Building Technologies’ (GAO–25–107931)”.

SEC. 2805. Implementation of Comptroller General recommendations relating to information sharing to improve oversight of military construction.

(1) implement the recommendations of the Comptroller General of the United States contained in the report published by the Comptroller General in September 2024 and titled “Military Construction: Better Information Sharing Would Improve DOD's Oversight” (GAO–24–106499); or

(2) if the Secretary does not implement any such recommendation, submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report explaining why the Secretary has not implemented those recommendations.

SEC. 2806. Extension of requirement for contract for obligation and execution of design funds for military construction projects.

SEC. 2807. Extension of authorization of depot working capital funds for unspecified minor military construction.

SEC. 2808. Extension of authority for temporary expanded land acquisition for equine welfare.

(a) In general.—Section 2804(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 2805 note) is amended by striking “February 1, 2026” and inserting “August 1, 2026”.

(b) Briefing required.—Not later than February 20, 2026, the Secretary of the Army shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the use of the authority under section 2804(c) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 2805 note).

SEC. 2809. Prohibition on designation of military construction projects as part of military intelligence program.

SEC. 2810. Expansion of Defense Community Infrastructure Program to include installations of the Coast Guard.

(A) in paragraph (1)(B), in the matter preceding clause (i), by inserting “, and with respect to Coast Guard-related projects, the Secretary, with the concurrence of the Commandant of the Coast Guard,” after “The Secretary”; and

“(5) (A) In considering grants, agreements, or other funding under paragraph (1)(A) with respect to community infrastructure supportive of a military installation of the Coast Guard, the Secretary of Defense shall seek the concurrence of the Commandant of the Coast Guard with respect to assessing the selection and prioritization of the project concerned.

“(B) A grant made under this section shall be available to support any Coast Guard mission authorized under section 888 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 468).”; and

(2) in subsection (e)(1), by adding at the end the following new sentence: “For purposes of subsection (d), the term ‘military installation’ includes an installation of the Coast Guard under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security.”.

SEC. 2821. Improvements to annual reports of Department of Defense on waivers of privacy and configuration standards for covered military unaccompanied housing.

(2) in paragraph (5)(C), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

“(7) a summary of the analysis performed by each military department to identify covered military unaccompanied housing that requires such waivers, including a certification by the Secretary of each military department that the list of waivers for that military department is complete and identifies all permanent party unaccompanied housing that does not meet covered privacy and configuration standards or standards of the Department for health and safety;

“(8) an action plan to bring covered military unaccompanied housing that requires such waivers into compliance with the standards of the Department and a timeline for implementing the action plan;

“(9) information about costs associated with the remediation options for covered military unaccompanied housing that requires such waivers, including—

“(B) funding needs for projects as part of facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization; and

“(C) any resulting increases in the need for housing allowances for members of the armed forces that would otherwise be living in covered military unaccompanied housing; and

“(10) a description of the status of the response of the Department to open recommendations contained in the 2023 report by the Comptroller General of the United States entitled, ‘Military Barracks: Poor Living Conditions Undermine Quality of Life and Readiness’ (GAO–23–105797), including the status of each military department in issuing service standards that meet covered privacy and configuration standards and standards of the Department for health and safety for covered military unaccompanied housing.”.

SEC. 2822. Modification of Housing Requirements and Market Analysis to account for impact of civilians and contractors.

SEC. 2823. Authority for unaccompanied housing project under pilot authority for use of other transactions for installation or facility prototyping.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense may conduct an unaccompanied housing project under section 4022(i) of title 10, United States Code, that is not subject to the limits under paragraph (2) of such section.

(b) Use of authority.—The Secretary may use the authority under subsection (a) for not more than one project.

(c) Location.—The project conducted under subsection (a) shall be located at a joint base of the Department of Defense for medical training.

(d) Use of funds.—The aggregate value of all transactions entered into under the project conducted under subsection (a) may not exceed $500,000,000.

SEC. 2824. Elimination of indoor residential mold in housing of Department of Defense.

(A) IN GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, 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, shall conduct a comprehensive study on the health effects of indoor residential mold growth in military unaccompanied housing or other housing on military installations, using the most up-to-date scientific peer-reviewed medical literature.

(i) detailed information about harmful or toxigenic mold that may impact the military departments and individuals living on military installations, as well as any toxin or toxic compound such mold can produce;

(ii) the most accurate research-based methods of detecting harmful or toxigenic mold;

(iii) improved understanding of the different health symptomology that can result from exposure to mold in indoor residential environments on military installations, including military unaccompanied housing;

(iv) the ability to conduct and the cost of conducting ongoing surveillance of the prevalence of idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage in infants living on military installations; and

(v) longitudinal studies on the effects of indoor mold exposure in early childhood on the development of asthma and other respiratory illnesses of children living on military installations.

(A) INTERIM FINDINGS.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that contains the interim findings of the study conducted under paragraph (1).

(B) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a final report detailing the results of the study conducted under paragraph (1).

(b) Implementation actions.—The Secretary of Defense shall implement mitigation measures at military installations found to have hazardous mold conditions following the submission of the interim findings under subsection (a)(2)(A).

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, may develop model construction standards and techniques for preventing and controlling indoor residential mold in new residential properties on a military installation if existing facilities at the military installation are found to be inappropriately constructed for the environment.

(2) CONTENTS.—The model standards and techniques developed under paragraph (1) shall provide for geographic differences in construction types and materials, geology, weather, and other variables that may affect indoor residential mold levels in new buildings and on various military installations.

(3) CONSULTATION.—To the maximum extent possible, model standards and techniques shall be developed under paragraph (1) with the assistance of organizations involved in establishing national building construction standards and techniques.

(4) APPLICABILITY TO NEW CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION.—If the Secretary of Defense develops model construction standards and techniques under paragraph (1), not later than one year after deciding to develop such standards and techniques, the Secretary shall include such model standards and techniques as a requirement for residential rehabilitation or new construction projects conducted by the Department of Defense with amounts appropriated to the Department.

(d) Education for military health professionals.—The Secretary of Defense shall include education for military health professions on mold-related illness, including signs and symptoms of toxigenic mold exposure, in recurring training received by miliary health practitioners at such time and in such manner as the Secretary chooses.

(1) INDOOR RESIDENTIAL MOLD.—The term “indoor residential mold” means any form of multi-cellular fungi found in water-damaged indoor environments and building materials, including cladosporium, penicillium, alternaria, aspergillus, fusarium, trichoderma, memnoniella, mucor, stachybotrys chartarum, streptomyces, and epicoccumoften.

(2) MILITARY INSTALLATION.—The term “military installation” has the meaning given that term in section 2801(c) of title 10, United States Code.

(3) MILITARY UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING.—The term “military unaccompanied housing” has the meaning given that term in section 2871 of title 10, United States Code.

(4) TOXIGENIC MOLD.—The term “toxigenic mold” means any indoor mold growth that may be capable of producing a toxin or toxic compound, including mycotoxins and microbial volatile organic compounds, that can cause pulmonary, respiratory, neurological, gastrointestinal, or dermatological illnesses, or other major adverse health impacts, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Director of the National Institutes of Health, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

SEC. 2825. Requirement for disclosure of information relating to liability insurance and dispute resolutions relating to privatized military housing.

“(G) The level of liability insurance coverage maintained by the landlord for all such housing units.

“(H) The amount of any payments made to tenants by landlords relating to dispute resolutions.”.

SEC. 2826. Treatment of nondisclosure agreements with respect to privatized military housing.

(A) by striking “(1) A tenant or prospective tenant of a housing unit may not be required to sign” and inserting “A landlord may not request that a tenant, former tenant, or prospective tenant of a housing unit sign”; and

(B) in the first sentence, by inserting “or in connection with the provision of services related to the housing unit” before the period; and

SEC. 2831. Authorization to acquire through exchange or lease certain land used by the Armed Forces in Hawaii.

(1) EXCHANGE AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary of each military department may acquire through exchange, upon such terms and conditions as the Secretary concerned determines appropriate, all right, title, and interest in any land, or any portion thereof, that is, as of the date of the enactment of this Act—

(B) owned by the State of Hawaii and subject to an easement benefitting the military department concerned.

(2) LAND FOR EXCHANGE.—To acquire land under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned may—

(A) exchange right, title, and interest in land under the jurisdiction and control of the Secretary concerned, or under the jurisdiction and control of the Secretary of another military department with the consent of the Secretary concerned, located in the State of Hawaii; and

(B) convey such land and interests therein necessary to effect such an exchange.

(3) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The exact acreage and legal description of any land or interests in land to be exchanged under paragraph (1) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary concerned.

(4) STATUS OF LAND.—Land acquired through exchange by the Secretary concerned under paragraph (1) shall be administered by the Secretary concerned.

(A) EXCHANGES IN EXCESS OF EQUAL VALUE.—Notwithstanding section 2869 of title 10, United States Code, the fair market value of the land conveyed by the Secretary concerned under paragraph (2) may exceed the fair market value of the land acquired by the Secretary concerned under paragraph (1) if the Secretary concerned determines that it is in the public interest.

(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause (ii), if the fair market value of the land and interests in land to be acquired under paragraph (1), as determined by the Secretary concerned, is greater than fair market value of the land and interests in land to be conveyed under paragraph (2), the Secretary concerned may use funds made available to the Secretary concerned on or after the date of the enactment of this Act for military construction to provide payment or in-kind consideration to the State of Hawaii in the amount of the difference in value.

(ii) LIMITATION ON PAYMENT.—The amount of any payment or in-kind consideration provided under clause (i) may not exceed $2,500,000.

(iii) IN-KIND CONSIDERATION.—In-kind consideration provided under clause (i) may include services or provision of real property of the United States.

(1) LEASE AUTHORIZED.—If the Secretary concerned determines that exchange under subsection (a) is not appropriate or in the best interests of the military department concerned, the Secretary concerned may lease, upon such terms and conditions as the Secretary concerned determines appropriate, any land, or any portion thereof, that is, as of the date of the enactment of this Act—

(B) owned by the State of Hawaii and subject to an easement benefitting the military department concerned.

(2) DURATION OF LEASE.—A lease entered into under paragraph (1) may provide for a lease term of not more than 25 years, with options that extend the term to a total period of not more than 50 years.

(A) PAYMENT IN EXCESS OF FAIR MARKET RENTAL VALUE.—The Secretary concerned may make rental payments under a lease entered into under paragraph (1) that exceed fair market value of the land to be leased, as determined by the Secretary concerned, if the Secretary concerned determines that such payments are in the public interest.

(B) ADVANCE PAYMENT OF RENT.—A lease entered into under paragraph (1) may authorize the payment of rent in advance.

(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary concerned may provide for payment or in-kind consideration to the State of Hawaii as consideration for a lease entered into under paragraph (1).

(ii) IN-KIND CONSIDERATION.—In-kind consideration provided under clause (i) may include services or provision of real property of the United States.

(4) SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR COSTS FOR EARLY TERMINATION.—The costs associated with the early termination of a lease entered into under paragraph (1) may be paid from—

(B) authorizations available at the time the United States terminates the lease; or

(c) Exemption from screening requirements.—The authority to convey land and interests therein under this section is exempt from any screening process required under section 2696(b) of title 10, United States Code.

(d) Sunset.—The authority to enter into any agreement for lease or acquisition through exchange under this section, except for lease extensions, shall expire on December 31, 2031.

(a) In general.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the land withdrawals at Fort Greely and Fort Wainwright Training Ranges, Alaska, and McGregor Range, Fort Bliss, New Mexico, under subsections (c) and (d) of section 3011 of the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 (title XXX of Public Law 106–65; 113 Stat. 889).

(1) a description of the operational and training impacts should the land withdrawals described in subsection (a) not be renewed; and

(2) any requested changes to those land withdrawals that would require an Act of Congress.

(a) Modification to categories for assistance.—Section 2391(d)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking “, including selection” and all that follows through “of priority” and inserting “for each of the following categories”;

(2) in clause (i), by striking “military value” and all that follows through the period and inserting “the readiness of a military department or mission assurance at a military installation.”; and

(3) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iv) as clauses (iv) and (ii), respectively, and—

(b) Temporary priority and allocation of funds under program.—During the two-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall—

(1) give priority under the Defense Community Infrastructure Program under section 2391(d) of title 10, United States Code, to projects under subparagraph (B)(ii) of such section (as amended by subsection (a)), for which an application has been previously made for assistance under that program; and

(2) allocate not less than two-thirds of the amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for such program equally among projects under subparagraphs (B)(i) and (B)(ii) of such program (as amended by subsection (a)).

SEC. 2842. Designation of Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range at Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.

(a) Designation.—The Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site located at Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands shall after the date of the enactment of this Act be known and designated as the “Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range”.

(b) References.—Any reference in any law, regulation, map, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the site specified in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a reference to the Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range.

(c) Conforming repeal.—Section 2887 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (division B of Public Law 106–398; 114 Stat. 1654A–440) is repealed.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days after 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 a report containing a reassessment by the Secretary of each military department regarding the joint base facility management workforce of the Department of Defense.

(A) an assessment of the workload requirements of facility management offices with respect to the work required to maintain the facilities of jointly used installations in good working order;

(B) an assessment of the workforce levels needed to complete the workload identified under subparagraph (A);

(C) information on workforce gaps, if any, that exist between current facility management workforce levels and the workforce levels identified in subparagraph (B) and the reasons for the workforce gaps; and

(D) a strategy on how to address workforce gaps, including periodic reassessment of workforce levels and funding needs.

(b) Consolidated joint base instruction.—Not later than 120 days after 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 a report on the status of and reason for any delay in producing a draft Department of Defense instruction to establish policies for the management of jointly used military installations.

(c) Briefing on joint base funding to supported components.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on identifying the funding allocations among supported and supporting components for maintenance of facilities of jointly used military installations, and an assessment of any risk to mission readiness resulting from those funding levels.

SEC. 2844. Limitation on use of amounts for travel based on compliance with requirements related to minimum capital investment.

SEC. 2845. Extension of prohibition on joint use of Homestead Air Reserve Base with civil aviation.

SEC. 2846. Pilot program on procurement of utility services for installations of the Department of Defense through areawide contracts.

(a) Pilot program required.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of the Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program for the purposes of procuring utility services through an areawide contract with a public utility provider for any services that support energy resilience and mission readiness of an installation of the Department of Defense (in this section referred to as the “pilot program”).

(b) Duration.—The Secretary of Defense shall carry out the pilot program during the one-year period beginning on the date of the commencement of the pilot program.

(c) Deadline for contracts.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of each military department shall enter into at least one areawide contract under the pilot program.

(d) Public-private partnerships.—The Secretary shall carry out the pilot program by entering into one or more public-private partnerships through an areawide contract entered into under the pilot program.

(e) Competition.—The pilot program shall include the development of a justification and approval template and waiver in accordance with part 6.302 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation that is used by all acquisition commands of the military departments in carrying out the pilot program.

(f) Reporting requirement.—Not later than 90 days after the termination of the pilot program, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes—

(1) an analysis of the pilot program, including any efficiencies, benefits, and cost-savings associated with utilizing areawide contracts under the pilot program to procure utility services from a public utility provider; and

(2) proposed solutions, including recommended legislative text and modifications to the Federal Acquisition Regulation or policy guidance of the Department of Defense, to overcome any remaining legal and policy hurdles that the Department identifies as inhibiting adherence to and implementation of section 2811(b) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (division B of Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 2920 note).

(g) Definitions.—In this section, the terms “areawide contract”, “energy resilience”, and “utility service” have the meanings given those terms in section 2811(b)(3) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (division B of Public Law 118–31; 10 U.S.C. 2920 note).

SEC. 2847. Authorization for monetary contributions to the conveyees of utility systems for infrastructure improvements.

“(k) Improvement of conveyed utility system.— (1) In lieu of carrying out a military construction project for an infrastructure improvement that enhances the reliability, resilience, efficiency, physical security, or cybersecurity of a utility system conveyed under subsection (a), the Secretary concerned may use funds authorized and appropriated for the project to make a monetary contribution equal to the total amount for the completed project to the conveyee of the utility system to carry out the project using a contract for utility services entered into under subsection (d).

“(2) All right, title, and interest to infrastructure improvements constructed by the conveyee pursuant to paragraph (1) shall vest in the conveyee.

“(3) The Secretary concerned shall provide to the conveyee the necessary real property interests to access and use lands under the jurisdiction and control of the Secretary for construction of the project under paragraph (1) and for ongoing use, operations, and maintenance.

“(4) If the Secretary concerned exercises a repurchase option under a contract entered into under subsection (d) for a system conveyed under subsection (a), the Secretary shall receive an offset in the amount of the contribution to the conveyee under paragraph (1) against the payment made by the Secretary as consideration for the repurchase, except that the maximum offset may not exceed the full amount of the consideration for the repurchase.

“(5) The Secretary concerned may make a monetary contribution authorized by paragraph (1) without regard to the following provisions of law:

SEC. 2848. Prohibition on use of funds for development of Greenbury Point Conservation Area at Naval Support Activity Annapolis, Maryland.

(a) In general.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2026 may be used for any activity of the Department of Defense related to the construction of any project commencing on or after the date of the enactment of this Act at Greenbury Point Conservation Area at Naval Support Activity Annapolis, Maryland, that—

(3) is in violation of section 2855 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 766).

(b) Outside funds prohibited.—The Secretary of Defense may not use any funds from sources outside the Department of Defense to make improvements to 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.

“§ 307109. 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

“(a) Application of certain authority to Navy and Air Force military family housing.—The Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force, in satisfaction of requirements under this division, may apply the authority and standards contained in the documents titled ‘Department of the Army Program Comment for the Preservation of Pre-1919 Historic Army Housing, Associated Buildings and Structures, and Landscape Features’ (published on June 13, 2024) (89 Fed. Reg. 50350), ‘Department of the Army Program Comment for Inter-War Era Historic Housing, Associated Buildings and Structures, and Landscape Features (1919–1940)’ (published on October 13, 2020) (85 Fed. Reg. 64491), and ‘Department of the Army Program Comment for Vietnam War Era Historic Housing, Associated Buildings and Structures, and Landscape Features (1963–1975)’ (published on May 4, 2023) (88 Fed. Reg. 28573) to all military housing (including privatized military housing under subchapter IV of this chapter) constructed during the applicable periods.

“(b) Application of certain authority to Capehart and Wherry era Navy and Air Force military family housing.—The Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force may apply the authority and standards contained in the document titled ‘Program Comment for Capehart and Wherry Era Housing and Associated Structures and Landscape Features (1949–1962)’ (published on November 18, 2005) (70 Fed. Reg. 69959) to all military housing (including privatized military housing under subchapter IV of this chapter) constructed during the period beginning on January 1, 1941, and ending on December 31, 1948, located on a military installation under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy or the Secretary of the Air Force.

“(c) Temporary application of certain authority to Vietnam War era Navy and Air Force military housing.—During the period beginning on the date of the enactment of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 and ending on December 31, 2045, the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force, in satisfaction of requirements under this division, may apply the authority and standards contained in the document titled ‘Department of the Army Program Comment for Vietnam War Era Historic Housing, Associated Buildings and Structures, and Landscape Features (1963–1975)’ (published on May 4, 2023) (88 Fed. Reg. 28573) to all military housing (including privatized military housing under subchapter IV of this chapter) constructed after 1975 located on a military installation under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy or the Secretary of the Air Force.

“(d) Report.—As part of each report of the Navy or the Air Force required under section 3(c) of Executive Order 13287 (54 U.S.C. 306101 note), the Secretary of the Navy or the Secretary of the Air Force, as the case may be, shall submit to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a report on the implementation of this section.

“(e) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section may be construed to preclude or require the amendment of the documents of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment described in subsection (a) by the Secretary of the Army or the Chair of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.”.

(a) Authorization of appropriations.—Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2026 for the activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration in carrying out programs as specified in the funding table in section 4701.

(b) Authorization of new plant projects.—From funds referred to in subsection (a) that are available for carrying out plant projects, the Secretary of Energy may carry out new plant projects for the National Nuclear Security Administration as follows:

SEC. 3111. Organization and codification of provisions of law relating to atomic energy defense activities.

(a) In general.—Subpart A of part VI of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter:

“(1) The term ‘Administration’ means the National Nuclear Security Administration.

“(2) The term ‘Administrator’ means the Administrator for Nuclear Security.

“(3) The term ‘classified information’ means any information that has been determined pursuant to Executive Order No. 12333 of December 4, 1981 (50 U.S.C. 3001 note), Executive Order No. 12958 of April 17, 1995 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note), Executive Order No. 13526 of December 29, 2009 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note), or successor orders, to require protection against unauthorized disclosure and that is so designated.

“(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

“(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

“(5) The terms ‘defense nuclear facility’ and ‘Department of Energy defense nuclear facility’ have the meaning given the term ‘Department of Energy defense nuclear facility’ in section 318 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286g).

“(6) The term ‘nuclear security enterprise’ means the physical facilities, technology, and human capital of the national security laboratories and the nuclear weapons production facilities.

“(B) Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Livermore, California.

“(8) The term ‘Nuclear Weapons Council’ means the Nuclear Weapons Council established by section 179.

“(9) The term ‘nuclear weapons production facility’ means any of the following:

“(F) Any facility of the Department of Energy that the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Administrator and Congress, determines to be consistent with the mission of the Administration.

“(10) The term ‘Restricted Data’ has the meaning given such term in section 11 y. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014(y)).

“The provisions of Executive Order Numbered 12344, dated February 1, 1982, pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, shall remain in force until changed by law.

“(a) In general.—The Administrator shall establish a management structure for the nuclear security enterprise in accordance with the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.).

“(1) The Administrator shall establish a council to be known as the ‘National Nuclear Security Administration Council’. The Council may advise the Administrator on—

“(D) the development of priorities relating to the mission and operations of the Administration and the nuclear security enterprise; and

“(2) The Council shall be composed of the directors of the national security laboratories and the nuclear weapons production facilities.

“(3) The Council may provide the Administrator or the Secretary of Energy recommendations—

“(A) for improving the governance, management, effectiveness, and efficiency of the Administration; and

“(4) Not later than 60 days after the date on which any recommendation under paragraph (3) is received, the Administrator or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall respond to the Council with respect to whether such recommendation will be implemented and the reasoning for implementing or not implementing such recommendation.

“(c) Rule of construction.—This section may not be construed as affecting the authority of the Secretary of Energy, in carrying out national security programs, with respect to the management, planning, and oversight of the Administration or as affecting the delegation by the Secretary of authority to carry out such activities, as set forth under subsection (a) of section 4102 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2512) as it existed before the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 2169).

“§ 5613. Monitoring of industrial base for nuclear weapons components, subsystems, and materials

“(a) Designation of official.—Not later than March 1, 2021, the Administrator shall designate a senior official within the Administration to be responsible for monitoring the industrial base that supports the nuclear weapons components, subsystems, and materials of the Administration, including—

“(3) proactively identifying gaps or risks in specific areas relating to the industrial base.

“(b) Provision of resources.—The Administrator shall ensure that the official designated under subsection (a) is provided with resources sufficient to conduct the monitoring required by that subsection.

“(c) Consultations.—The Administrator, acting through the official designated under subsection (a), shall, to the extent practicable and beneficial, in conducting the monitoring required by that subsection, consult with—

“(1) officials of the Department of Defense who are members of the Nuclear Weapons Council established under section 179;

“(2) officials of the Department of Defense responsible for the defense industrial base; and

“(3) other components of the Department of Energy that rely on similar components, subsystems, or materials.

“(1) INITIAL BRIEFING.—Not later than April 1, 2021, the Administrator shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on the designation of the official required by subsection (a), including on—

“(B) the plan for providing that official with resources sufficient to conduct the monitoring required by subsection (a).

“(2) SUBSEQUENT BRIEFINGS.—Not later than April 1, 2022, and annually thereafter through 2024, the Administrator shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on activities carried out under this section that includes an assessment of the progress made by the official designated under subsection (a) in conducting the monitoring required by that subsection.

“(e) Reports.—The Administrator, acting through the official designated under subsection (a), shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, contemporaneously with each briefing required by subsection (d)(2), a report—

“(1) identifying actual or potential risks to or specific gaps in any element of the industrial base that supports the nuclear weapons components, subsystems, or materials of the Administration;

“(2) describing the actions the Administration is taking to further assess, characterize, and prioritize such risks and gaps;

“(3) describing mitigating actions, if any, the Administration has underway or planned to mitigate any such risks or gaps;

“(4) setting forth the anticipated timelines and resources needed for such mitigating actions; and

“(5) describing the nature of any coordination with or burden sharing by other departments or agencies of the Federal Government or the private sector to address such risks and gaps.

“§ 5614. Common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise

“(a) In general.—By not later than four years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328), the Administrator shall, in consultation with the National Nuclear Security Administration Council established by section 5612, complete, to the extent practicable, the implementation of a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise.

“(b) Elements.—The common financial reporting system implemented pursuant to subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(1) Common data reporting requirements for work performed using funds of the Administration, including reporting of financial data by standardized labor categories, labor hours, functional elements, and cost elements.

“(2) A common work breakdown structure for the Administration that aligns contractor work breakdown structures with the budget structure of the Administration.

“(3) Definitions and methodologies for identifying and reporting costs for programs of records and base capabilities within the Administration.

“(4) A capability to leverage, where appropriate, the Defense Cost Analysis Resource Center of the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation of the Department of Defense using historical costing data by the Administration.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 1, 2017, and annually thereafter, the Administrator shall, in consultation with the National Nuclear Security Administration Council, submit to the congressional defense committees a report on progress of the Administration toward implementing a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise as required by subsection (a).

“(A) A summary of activities, accomplishments, challenges, benefits, and costs related to the implementation of a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise during the year preceding the year in which such report is submitted.

“(B) A summary of planned activities in connection with the implementation of a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise in the year in which such report is submitted.

“(C) A description of any anticipated modifications to the schedule for implementing a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise, including an update on possible risks, challenges, and costs related to such implementation.

“(3) TERMINATION.—No report is required under this subsection after the completion of the implementation of a common financial reporting system for the nuclear security enterprise.

“§ 5615. Restriction on licensing requirement for certain defense activities and facilities

“None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by the Department of Energy National Security and Military Applications of Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1981 (Public Law 96–540; 94 Stat. 3197) or any other Act may be used for any purpose related to licensing of any defense activity or facility of the Department of Energy by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

“§ 5616. Establishment of Center for Security Technology, Analysis, Response, and Testing

“(a) Establishment.—The Administrator for Nuclear Security shall establish within the nuclear security enterprise a Center for Security Technology, Analysis, Response, and Testing.

“(b) Duties.—The center established under subsection (a) shall carry out the following:

“(1) Provide to the Administrator, the Chief of Defense Nuclear Security, and the management and operating contractors of the nuclear security enterprise a wide range of objective expertise on security technologies, systems, analysis, testing, and response forces.

“(2) Assist the Administrator in developing standards, requirements, analysis methods, and testing criteria with respect to security.

“(3) Collect, analyze, and distribute lessons learned with respect to security.

“(5) Promote professional development and training for security professionals.

“(6) Provide for advance and bulk procurement for security-related acquisitions that affect multiple facilities of the nuclear security enterprise.

“(7) Advocate for continual improvement and security excellence throughout the nuclear security enterprise.

“(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator, shall establish a stewardship program to ensure—

“(1) the preservation of the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and certification; and

“(2) that the nuclear weapons stockpile is safe, secure, and reliable without the use of underground nuclear weapons testing.

“(1) An increased level of effort for the construction of new facilities and the modernization of existing facilities with production and manufacturing capabilities that are necessary to support the deterrence of strategic attacks against the United States by maintaining and enhancing the performance, reliability, and security of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile, including—

“(B) production and manufacturing capabilities resident in the national security laboratories.

“(2) Support for advanced computational capabilities to enhance the simulation and modeling capabilities of the United States with respect to the performance over time of nuclear weapons.

“(3) Support for above-ground experimental programs, such as hydrotesting, high-energy lasers, inertial confinement fusion, plasma physics, and materials research.

“(4) Support for the modernization of facilities and projects that contribute to the experimental capabilities of the United States that support the sustainment and modernization of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile and the capabilities required to assess nuclear weapons effects.

“(5) Support for the use of, and experiments facilitated by, the advanced experimental facilities of the United States, including—

“(A) the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory;

“(B) the Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory;

“§ 5622. Portfolio management framework for National Nuclear Security Administration

“(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81), the Administrator shall—

“(1) in consultation with the Nuclear Weapons Council established under section 179, develop and implement a portfolio management framework for the nuclear security enterprise that—

“(A) defines the Administration’s portfolio of nuclear weapons stockpile and infrastructure maintenance and modernization programs;

“(B) establishes a portfolio governance structure, including portfolio-level selection criteria, prioritization criteria, and performance metrics;

“(C) outlines the approach of the Administration to managing that portfolio; and

“(D) incorporates the leading practices identified by the Comptroller General of the United States in the report titled “Nuclear Security Enterprise: NNSA Should Use Portfolio Management Leading Practices to Support Modernization Efforts” (GAO-21-398) and dated June 2021; and

“(2) complete an integrated, comprehensive assessment of the portfolio management capabilities required to execute the weapons activities portfolio of the Administration.

“(b) Briefing requirement.—Not later than June 1, 2022, the Administrator shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on—

“(1) the progress of the Administrator in developing the framework described in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) and completing the assessment required by paragraph (2) of that subsection; and

“(2) the plans of the Administrator for implementing the recommendations of the Comptroller General in the report referred to in paragraph (1)(D) of that subsection.

“(a) Requirement for criteria.—The Secretary of Energy shall develop clear and specific criteria for judging whether the science-based tools being used by the Department of Energy for determining the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile are performing in a manner that will provide an adequate degree of certainty that the stockpile is safe and reliable.

“(b) Coordination with Secretary of defense.—The Secretary of Energy, in developing the criteria required by subsection (a), shall coordinate with the Secretary of Defense.

“§ 5624. Nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship, management, and responsiveness plan

“(a) Plan requirement.—The Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and other appropriate officials of the departments and agencies of the Federal Government, shall develop and annually update a plan for sustaining the nuclear weapons stockpile. The plan shall cover, at a minimum, stockpile stewardship, stockpile management, stockpile responsiveness, stockpile surveillance, program direction, infrastructure modernization, human capital, and nuclear test readiness. The plan shall be consistent with the programmatic and technical requirements of the most recent annual Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum.

“(1) In accordance with subsection (c), not later than March 15 of each even-numbered year, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a summary of the plan developed under subsection (a).

“(2) In accordance with subsection (d), not later than March 15 of each odd-numbered year, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a detailed report on the plan developed under subsection (a).

“(3) The summaries and reports required by this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

“(c) Elements of biennial plan summary.—Each summary of the plan submitted under subsection (b)(1) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

“(1) A summary of the status of the nuclear weapons stockpile, including the number and age of warheads (including both active and inactive) for each warhead type.

“(2) A summary of the status, plans, budgets, and schedules for warhead life extension programs and any other programs to modify, update, or replace warhead types.

“(3) A summary of the methods and information used to determine that the nuclear weapons stockpile is safe and reliable, as well as the relationship of science-based tools to the collection and interpretation of such information.

“(4) A summary of the status of the nuclear security enterprise, including programs and plans for infrastructure modernization and retention of human capital, as well as associated budgets and schedules.

“(5) A summary of the status, plans, and budgets for carrying out the stockpile responsiveness program under section 5641.

“(6) A summary of the plan regarding the research and development, deployment, and lifecycle sustainment of technologies described in subsection (d)(7).

“(7) A summary of the assessment under subsection (d)(8) regarding the execution of programs with current and projected budgets and any associated risks.

“(8) Identification of any modifications or updates to the plan since the previous summary or detailed report was submitted under subsection (b).

“(d) Elements of biennial detailed report.—Each detailed report on the plan submitted under subsection (b)(2) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

“(1) With respect to stockpile stewardship, stockpile management, and stockpile responsiveness—

“(A) the status of the nuclear weapons stockpile, including the number and age of warheads (including both active and inactive) for each warhead type;

“(B) for each five-year period occurring during the period beginning on the date of the report and ending on the date that is 20 years after the date of the report—

“(i) the planned number of nuclear warheads (including active and inactive) for each warhead type in the nuclear weapons stockpile; and

“(ii) the past and projected future total lifecycle cost of each type of nuclear weapon;

“(C) the status, plans, budgets, and schedules for warhead life extension programs and any other programs to modify, update, or replace warhead types;

“(D) a description of the process by which the Administrator assesses the lifetimes, and requirements for life extension or replacement, of the nuclear and non-nuclear components of the warheads (including active and inactive warheads) in the nuclear weapons stockpile;

“(E) a description of the process used in recertifying the safety, security, and reliability of each warhead type in the nuclear weapons stockpile;

“(F) any concerns of the Administrator that would affect the ability of the Administrator to recertify the safety, security, or reliability of warheads in the nuclear weapons stockpile (including active and inactive warheads);

“(G) mechanisms to provide for the manufacture, maintenance, and modernization of each warhead type in the nuclear weapons stockpile, as needed;

“(H) mechanisms to expedite the collection of information necessary for carrying out the stockpile management program required by section 5626, including information relating to the aging of materials and components, new manufacturing techniques, and the replacement or substitution of materials;

“(I) mechanisms to ensure the appropriate assignment of roles and missions for each national security laboratory and nuclear weapons production facility, including mechanisms for allocation of workload, mechanisms to ensure the carrying out of appropriate modernization activities, and mechanisms to ensure the retention of skilled personnel;

“(J) mechanisms to ensure that each national security laboratory has full and complete access to all weapons data to enable a rigorous peer-review process to support the annual assessment of the condition of the nuclear weapons stockpile required under section 5627;

“(K) mechanisms for allocating funds for activities under the stockpile management program required by section 5626, including allocations of funds by weapon type and facility;

“(L) for each of the five fiscal years following the fiscal year in which the report is submitted, an identification of the funds needed to carry out the program required under section 5626;

“(M) the status, plans, activities, budgets, and schedules for carrying out the stockpile responsiveness program under section 5641;

“(N) for each of the five fiscal years following the fiscal year in which the report is submitted, an identification of the funds needed to carry out the program required under section 5641; and

“(O) as required, when assessing and developing prototype nuclear weapons of foreign countries, a report from the directors of the national security laboratories on the need and plan for such assessment and development that includes separate comments on the plan from the Secretary of Energy and the Director of National Intelligence.

“(A) a description of the information needed to determine that the nuclear weapons stockpile is safe and reliable;

“(B) for each science-based tool used to collect information described in subparagraph (A), the relationship between such tool and such information and the effectiveness of such tool in providing such information based on the criteria developed pursuant to section 5623(a); and

“(C) the criteria developed under section 5623(a) (including any updates to such criteria).

“(3) An assessment of the stockpile stewardship program under section 5621(a) by the Administrator, in consultation with the directors of the national security laboratories, which shall set forth—

“(ii) the strategies to address such challenges without the use of nuclear testing;

“(B) a strategy for using the science-based tools (including advanced simulation and computing capabilities) of each national security laboratory to ensure that the nuclear weapons stockpile is safe, secure, and reliable without the use of nuclear testing;

“(C) an assessment of the science-based tools (including advanced simulation and computing capabilities) of each national security laboratory that exist at the time of the assessment compared with the science-based tools expected to exist during the period covered by the future-years nuclear security program; and

“(D) an assessment of the core scientific and technical competencies required to achieve the objectives of the stockpile stewardship program and other weapons activities and weapons-related activities of the Administration, including—

“(i) the number of scientists, engineers, and technicians, by discipline, required to maintain such competencies; and

“(ii) a description of any shortage of such individuals that exists at the time of the assessment compared with any shortage expected to exist during the period covered by the future-years nuclear security program.

“(A) a description of the modernization and refurbishment measures the Administrator determines necessary to meet the requirements prescribed in—

“(i) the national security strategy of the United States as set forth in the most recent national security strategy report of the President under section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3043) if such strategy has been submitted as of the date of the plan;

“(ii) the most recent national defense strategy as of the date of the plan; and

“(B) a schedule for implementing the measures described under subparagraph (A) during the 10-year period following the date of the plan;

“(C) the estimated levels of annual funds the Administrator determines necessary to carry out the measures described under subparagraph (A), including a discussion of the criteria, evidence, and strategies on which such estimated levels of annual funds are based; and

“(I) the metrics (based on industry best practices) used by the Administrator to determine the infrastructure deferred maintenance and repair needs of the nuclear security enterprise; and

“(II) the percentage of replacement plant value being spent on maintenance and repair needs of the nuclear security enterprise; and

“(ii) an explanation of whether the annual spending on such needs complies with the recommendation of the National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that such spending be in an amount equal to four percent of the replacement plant value, and, if not, the reasons for such noncompliance and a plan for how the Administrator will ensure facilities of the nuclear security enterprise are being properly sustained.

“(A) an estimate of the period of time that would be necessary for the Administrator to conduct an underground test of a nuclear weapon once directed by the President to conduct such a test;

“(B) a description of the level of test readiness that the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, determines to be appropriate;

“(C) a list and description of the workforce skills and capabilities that are essential to carrying out an underground nuclear test at the Nevada National Security Site;

“(D) a list and description of the infrastructure and physical plants that are essential to carrying out an underground nuclear test at the Nevada National Security Site; and

“(E) an assessment of the readiness status of the skills and capabilities described in subparagraph (C) and the infrastructure and physical plants described in subparagraph (D).

“(6) A strategy for the integrated management of plutonium for stockpile and stockpile stewardship needs over a 20-year period that includes the following:

“(A) An assessment of the baseline science issues necessary to understand plutonium aging under static and dynamic conditions under manufactured and nonmanufactured plutonium geometries.

“(B) An assessment of scientific and testing instrumentation for plutonium at elemental and bulk conditions.

“(C) An assessment of manufacturing and handling technology for plutonium and plutonium components.

“(D) An assessment of computational models of plutonium performance under static and dynamic loading, including manufactured and nonmanufactured conditions.

“(E) An identification of any capability gaps with respect to the assessments described in subparagraphs (A) through (D).

“(F) An estimate of costs relating to the issues, instrumentation, technology, and models described in subparagraphs (A) through (D) over the period covered by the future-years nuclear security program under section 3253 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2453).

“(G) An estimate of the cost of eliminating the capability gaps identified under subparagraph (E) over the period covered by the future-years nuclear security program.

“(H) Such other items as the Administrator considers important for the integrated management of plutonium for stockpile and stockpile stewardship needs.

“(7) A plan for the research and development, deployment, and lifecycle sustainment of the technologies employed within the nuclear security enterprise to address physical and cyber security threats during the five fiscal years following the date of the report, together with—

“(A) for each site in the nuclear security enterprise, a description of the technologies deployed to address the physical and cybersecurity threats posed to that site;

“(B) for each site and for the nuclear security enterprise, the methods used by the Administration to establish priorities among investments in physical and cybersecurity technologies; and

“(C) a detailed description of how the funds identified for each program element specified pursuant to paragraph (1) in the budget for the Administration for each fiscal year during that five-fiscal-year period will help carry out that plan.

“(8) An assessment of whether the programs described by the report can be executed with current and projected budgets and any associated risks.

“(9) Identification of any modifications or updates to the plan since the previous summary or detailed report was submitted under subsection (b).

“(1) For each detailed report on the plan submitted under subsection (b)(2), the Nuclear Weapons Council shall conduct an assessment that includes the following:

“(i) whether the plan supports the requirements of the national security strategy of the United States referred to in subsection (d)(4)(A)(i), the most recent the national defense strategy, and the most recent Nuclear Posture Review;

“(ii) whether the modernization and refurbishment measures described under subparagraph (A) of subsection (d)(4) and the schedule described under subparagraph (B) of such subsection are adequate to support such requirements; and

“(iii) whether the plan supports the stockpile responsiveness program under section 5641 in a manner that meets the objectives of such program and an identification of any improvements that may be made to the plan to better carry out such program.

“(B) An analysis of whether the plan adequately addresses the requirements for infrastructure recapitalization of the facilities of the nuclear security enterprise.

“(C) If the Nuclear Weapons Council determines that the plan does not adequately support modernization and refurbishment requirements under subparagraph (A) or the nuclear security enterprise facilities infrastructure recapitalization requirements under subparagraph (B), a risk assessment with respect to—

“(i) supporting the annual certification of the nuclear weapons stockpile; and

“(ii) maintaining the long-term safety, security, and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile.

“(2) Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Administrator submits the plan under subsection (b)(2), the Nuclear Weapons Council shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report detailing the assessment required under paragraph (1).

“(1) The term ‘budget’, with respect to a fiscal year, means the budget for that fiscal year that is submitted to Congress by the President under section 1105(a) of title 31.

“(2) The term ‘future-years nuclear security program’ means the program required by section 3253 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2453).

“(3) The term ‘national defense strategy’ means the review of the defense programs and policies of the United States that is carried out every four years under section 113(g).

“(4) The term ‘nuclear security budget materials’, with respect to a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by the Administrator in support of the budget for that fiscal year.

“(5) The term ‘weapons activities’ means each activity within the budget category of weapons activities in the budget of the Administration.

“(6) The term ‘weapons-related activities’ means each activity under the Department of Energy that involves nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons technology, or fissile or radioactive materials, including activities related to—

“In fiscal year 2015 and subsequent fiscal years, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees (as defined in 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(16)) a report, on each major warhead refurbishment program that reaches the Phase 6.3 milestone, that provides an analysis of alternatives. Such report shall include—

“(1) a full description of alternatives considered prior to the award of Phase 6.3;

“(2) a comparison of the costs and benefits of each of those alternatives, to include an analysis of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and performance objectives against each alternative considered;

“(3) identification of the cost and risk of critical technology elements associated with each alternative, including technology maturity, integration risk, manufacturing feasibility, and demonstration needs;

“(4) identification of the cost and risk of additional capital asset and infrastructure capabilities required to support production and certification of each alternative;

“(5) a comparative analysis of the risks, costs, and scheduling needs for any military requirement intended to enhance warhead safety, security, or maintainability, including any requirement to consolidate and/or integrate warhead systems or mods as compared to at least one other feasible refurbishment alternative the Nuclear Weapons Council considers appropriate; and

“(6) a life-cycle cost estimate for the alternative selected that details the overall cost, scope, and schedule planning assumptions.

“(a) Program required.—The Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall carry out a program, in support of the stockpile stewardship program, to provide for the effective management, modernization, and replacement, as required, of the weapons in the nuclear weapons stockpile. The program shall have the following objectives:

“(1) To enhance the performance and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile of the United States.

“(2) To further reduce the likelihood of the resumption of underground nuclear weapons testing.

“(5) To reduce the risk of an accidental detonation of an element of the stockpile.

“(6) To reduce the risk of an element of the stockpile being used by a person or entity hostile to the United States, its vital interests, or its allies.

“(b) Program limitations.—In carrying out the stockpile management program under subsection (a), the Secretary of Energy shall ensure that—

“(1) any changes made to the stockpile shall be consistent with the objectives identified in subsection (a);

“(2) any changes made to the stockpile consistent with the objectives identified in subsection (a) are carried out in a cost effective manner; and

“(A) be well understood and certifiable without the need to resume underground nuclear weapons testing;

“(B) use the design, certification, and production expertise resident in the nuclear security enterprise to fulfill current mission requirements of the existing stockpile; and

“(C) develop future generations of design, certification, and production expertise in the nuclear security enterprise to support the fulfillment of mission requirements of the future stockpile.

“(c) Program budget.—In accordance with the requirements under section 5630, for each budget submitted by the President to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, the amounts requested for the program under this section shall be clearly identified in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of that budget.

“§ 5627. Annual assessments and reports to the President and Congress regarding the condition of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile

“(a) Annual assessments required.—For each nuclear weapon type in the stockpile of the United States, each official specified in subsection (b) on an annual basis shall, to the extent such official is directly responsible for the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness of that nuclear weapon type, complete an assessment of the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness (as the case may be) of that nuclear weapon type.

“(b) Covered officials.—The officials referred to in subsection (a) are the following:

“(c) Dual validation teams in support of assessments.—In support of the assessments required by subsection (a), the Administrator may establish teams, known as ‘dual validation teams’, to provide each national security laboratory responsible for weapons design with independent evaluations of the condition of each warhead for which such laboratory has lead responsibility. A dual validation team established by the Administrator shall—

“(1) be comprised of weapons experts from the laboratory that does not have lead responsibility for fielding the warhead being evaluated;

“(2) have access to all surveillance and underground test data for all stockpile systems for use in the independent evaluations;

“(d) Use of teams of experts for assessments.—The head of each national security laboratory shall establish and use one or more teams of experts, known as ‘red teams’, to assist in the assessments required by subsection (a). Each such team shall include experts from both of the other national security laboratories. Each such team for a national security laboratory shall—

“(1) review both the matters covered by the assessments under subsection (a) performed by the head of that laboratory and any independent evaluations conducted by a dual validation team under subsection (c);

“(3) submit the results of such review and challenge, together with the findings and recommendations of such team with respect to such review and challenge, to the head of that laboratory.

“(e) Report on assessments.—Not later than December 1 of each year, each official specified in subsection (b) shall submit to the Secretary concerned, and to the Nuclear Weapons Council, a report on the assessments that such official was required by subsection (a) to complete. The report shall include the following:

“(2) (A) Such official's determination as to whether or not one or more underground nuclear tests are necessary to resolve any issues identified in the assessments and, if so—

“(i) an identification of the specific underground nuclear tests that are necessary to resolve such issues; and

“(ii) a discussion of why options other than an underground nuclear test are not available or would not resolve such issues.

“(B) An identification of the specific underground nuclear tests which, while not necessary, might have value in resolving any such issues and a discussion of the anticipated value of conducting such tests.

“(C) Such official's determination as to the readiness of the United States to conduct the underground nuclear tests identified under subparagraphs (A)(i) and (B), if directed by the President to do so.

“(3) In the case of a report submitted by the head of a national security laboratory—

“(A) a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the science-based tools and methods, including with respect to cyber assurance, being used to determine the matters covered by the assessments;

“(B) a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the tools and methods employed by the manufacturing infrastructure required by section 5632 to identify and fix any inadequacy with respect to the matters covered by the assessments, and the confidence of the head in such tools and methods;

“(C) a concise summary of the findings and recommendations of any teams under subsection (d) that relate to the assessments, together with a discussion of those findings and recommendations;

“(D) a concise summary of the results of any independent evaluation conducted by a dual validation team under subsection (c); and

“(E) a concise summary of any significant finding investigations initiated or active during the previous year for which the head of the national security laboratory has full or partial responsibility.

“(4) In the case of a report submitted by the Commander of the United States Strategic Command—

“(A) a discussion of the relative merits of other nuclear weapon types (if any), or compensatory measures (if any) that could be taken, that could enable accomplishment of the missions of the nuclear weapon types to which the assessments relate, should such assessments identify any deficiency with respect to such nuclear weapon types;

“(B) a summary of all major assembly releases in place as of the date of the report for the active and inactive nuclear weapon stockpiles; and

“(C) the views of the Commander on the stockpile responsiveness program under section 5641, the activities conducted under such program, and any suggestions to improve such program.

“(5) An identification and discussion of any matter having an adverse effect on the capability of the official submitting the report to accurately determine the matters covered by the assessments.

“(1) Not later than February 1 of each year, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the President—

“(A) each report, without change, submitted to either Secretary under subsection (e) during the preceding year;

“(B) any comments that the Secretaries individually or jointly consider appropriate with respect to each such report;

“(C) the conclusions that the Secretaries individually or jointly reach as to the safety, reliability, performance, and military effectiveness of the nuclear weapons stockpile of the United States; and

“(D) any other information that the Secretaries individually or jointly consider appropriate.

“(2) Not later than March 15 of each year, the President shall forward to Congress the matters received by the President under paragraph (1) for that year, together with any comments the President considers appropriate.

“(3) If the President does not forward to Congress the matters required under paragraph (2) by the date required by such paragraph, the officials specified in subsection (b) shall provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees not later than March 30 on the report such officials submitted to the Secretary concerned under subsection (e).

“(g) Classified form.—Each submittal under subsection (f) shall be in classified form only, with the classification level required for each portion of such submittal marked appropriately.

“(h) Definition.—In this section, the term ‘Secretary concerned’ means—

“(1) the Secretary of Energy, with respect to matters concerning the Department of Energy; and

“(2) the Secretary of Defense, with respect to matters concerning the Department of Defense.

“§ 5628. Form of certifications regarding the safety or reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile

“Any certification submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Energy regarding confidence in the safety or reliability of a nuclear weapon type in the United States nuclear weapons stockpile shall be submitted in classified form only.

“(a) Establishment of program.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish and support a program to assure that the United States is in a position to maintain the reliability, safety, and continued deterrent effect of its stockpile of existing nuclear weapons designs in the event that a low-threshold or comprehensive ban on nuclear explosives testing is negotiated and ratified within the framework agreed to by the United States and the Russian Federation.

“(b) Purposes of program.—The purposes of the program under subsection (a) shall be the following:

“(1) To assure that the United States maintains a vigorous program of stockpile inspection and non-explosive testing so that, if a low-threshold or comprehensive test ban is entered into, the United States remains able to detect and identify potential problems in stockpile reliability and safety in existing designs of nuclear weapons.

“(2) To assure that the specific materials, components, processes, and personnel needed for the remanufacture of existing nuclear weapons or the substitution of alternative nuclear warheads are available to support such remanufacture or substitution if such action becomes necessary in order to satisfy reliability and safety requirements under a low-threshold or comprehensive test ban agreement.

“(3) To assure that a vigorous program of research in areas related to nuclear weapons science and engineering is supported so that, if a low-threshold or comprehensive test ban agreement is entered into, the United States is able to maintain a base of technical knowledge about nuclear weapons design and nuclear weapons effects.

“(c) Conduct of program.—The Secretary of Energy shall carry out the program provided for in subsection (a). The program shall be carried out with the participation of representatives of the Department of Defense, the nuclear weapons production facilities, and the national security laboratories.

“§ 5630. Requirements for specific request for new or modified nuclear weapons

“(1) In any fiscal year after fiscal year 2002 in which the Secretary of Energy plans to carry out activities described in paragraph (2) relating to the development of a new nuclear weapon or modified nuclear weapon beyond phase 2 or phase 6.2 (as the case may be) of the nuclear weapon acquisition process, the Secretary—

“(A) shall specifically request funds for such activities in the budget of the President for that fiscal year under section 1105(a) of title 31; and

“(B) may carry out such activities only if amounts are authorized to be appropriated for such activities by an Act of Congress consistent with section 660 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7270).

“(A) The conduct, or provision for conduct, of research and development for the production of a new nuclear weapon by the United States.

“(B) The conduct, or provision for conduct, of engineering or manufacturing to carry out the production of a new nuclear weapon by the United States.

“(C) The conduct, or provision for conduct, of research and development for the production of a modified nuclear weapon by the United States.

“(D) The conduct, or provision for conduct, of engineering or manufacturing to carry out the production of a modified nuclear weapon by the United States.

“(b) Budget request format.—In a request for funds under subsection (a), the Secretary shall include a dedicated line item for each activity described in subsection (a)(2) for a new nuclear weapon or modified nuclear weapon that is in phase 2 or higher or phase 6.2 or higher (as the case may be) of the nuclear weapon acquisition process.

“(c) Notification and briefing of noncovered activities.—In any fiscal year after fiscal year 2022, the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator, in conjunction with the annual submission of the budget of the President to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, shall notify the congressional defense committees of—

“(1) any activities described in subsection (a)(2) relating to the development of a new nuclear weapon or modified nuclear weapon that, during the calendar year prior to the budget submission, were carried out prior to phase 2 or phase 6.2 (as the case may be) of the nuclear weapon acquisition process; and

“(2) any plans to carry out, prior to phase 2 or phase 6.2 (as the case may be) of the nuclear weapon acquisition process, activities described in subsection (a)(2) relating to the development of a new nuclear weapon or modified nuclear weapon during the fiscal year covered by that budget.

“(1) The term ‘modified nuclear weapon’ means a nuclear weapon that contains a pit or canned subassembly, either of which—

“(B) is being modified in order to meet a military requirement that is other than the military requirements applicable to such nuclear weapon when first placed in the nuclear weapons stockpile.

“(2) The term ‘new nuclear weapon’ means a nuclear weapon that contains a pit or canned subassembly, either of which is neither—

“(a) Underground testing.—No underground test of nuclear weapons may be conducted by the United States after September 30, 1996, unless a foreign state conducts a nuclear test after this date, at which time the prohibition on United States nuclear testing is lifted.

“(b) Atmospheric testing.—None of the funds appropriated pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103–160; 107 Stat. 1547) or any other Act for any fiscal year may be available to maintain the capability of the United States to conduct atmospheric testing of a nuclear weapon.

“§ 5632. Manufacturing infrastructure for refabrication and certification of nuclear weapons stockpile

“(1) The Secretary of Energy shall carry out a program for purposes of establishing within the Government a manufacturing infrastructure that has the capabilities of meeting the following objectives:

“(B) To refabricate and certify weapon components and types in the enduring nuclear weapons stockpile, as necessary.

“(E) To supply sufficient tritium in support of nuclear weapons to ensure an upload hedge in the event circumstances require.

“(2) The purpose of the program carried out under paragraph (1) shall also be to develop manufacturing capabilities and capacities necessary to meet the requirements specified in the annual Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum.

“(b) Required capabilities.—The manufacturing infrastructure established under the program under subsection (a) shall include the following capabilities (modernized to attain the objectives referred to in that subsection):

“(1) The weapons assembly and high explosives manufacturing capabilities of the Pantex Plant.

“(2) The weapon secondary fabrication capabilities of the Y–12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

“(3) The capabilities of the Savannah River Site relating to tritium recycling and processing.

“(4) The fissile material component processing and fabrication capabilities of the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

“(5) The non-nuclear component capabilities of the Kansas City National Security Campus, Kansas City, Missouri.

“(a) Acceleration of manufacturing.—The Administrator shall require the nuclear security enterprise to accelerate the modernization of manufacturing processes for depleted uranium by 2030 so that the nuclear security enterprise—

“(1) demonstrates bulk cold hearth melting of depleted uranium alloys to augment existing capabilities on an operational basis for war reserve components;

“(2) manufactures, on a repeatable and ongoing basis, war reserve depleted uranium alloy components using net shape casting;

“(3) demonstrates, if possible, a production facility to conduct routine operations for manufacturing depleted uranium alloy components outside of the current perimeter security fencing of the Y-12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and

“(4) has available high purity depleted uranium for the production of war reserve components.

“(b) Annual briefing.—Not later than March 31, 2023, and annually thereafter through 2030, the Administrator shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on—

“(2) the cost of activities conducted under such subsection during the preceding fiscal year; and

“(3) the ability of the nuclear security enterprise to convert depleted uranium fluoride hexafluoride to depleted uranium tetrafluoride.

“§ 5634. Reports on critical difficulties at national security laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities

“(a) Reports by heads of laboratories and facilities.—In the event of a difficulty at a national security laboratory or a nuclear weapons production facility that has a significant bearing on confidence in the safety or reliability of a nuclear weapon or nuclear weapon type, the head of the laboratory or facility, as the case may be, shall submit to the Administrator a report on the difficulty. The head of the laboratory or facility shall submit the report as soon as practicable after discovery of the difficulty.

“(b) Transmittal by Administrator.—Not later than 10 days after receipt of a report under subsection (a), the Administrator shall transmit the report (together with the comments of the Administrator) to the congressional defense committees, to the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense, and to the President.

“(c) Inclusion of reports in annual stockpile assessment.—Any report submitted pursuant to subsection (a) shall also be submitted to the President and Congress with the matters required to be submitted under section 5627(f) for the year in which such report is submitted.

“§ 5635. Selected acquisition reports and independent cost estimates and reviews of certain programs and facilities

“(1) At the end of the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on each nuclear weapon system undergoing life extension and each major alteration project (as defined in section 5794(a)(2)) during the preceding fiscal year. The reports shall be known as Selected Acquisition Reports for the weapon system concerned.

“(2) The information contained in the Selected Acquisition Report for a fiscal year for a nuclear weapon system shall be the information contained in the Selected Acquisition Report for each fiscal-year quarter in that fiscal year for a major defense acquisition program under section 4351 or any successor system, expressed in terms of the nuclear weapon system.

“(1) The Secretary, acting through the Administrator, shall submit to the congressional defense committees and the Nuclear Weapons Council the following:

“(i) Each nuclear weapon system undergoing life extension at the completion of phase 6.2A or new weapon system at the completion of phase 2A, relating to design definition and cost study.

“(ii) Each nuclear weapon system undergoing life extension at the completion of phase 6.3 or new weapon system at the completion of phase 3, relating to development engineering.

“(iii) Each nuclear weapon system undergoing life extension at the completion of phase 6.4, relating to production engineering, and before the initiation of phase 6.5, relating to first production.

“(iv) Each new weapon system at the completion of phase 4, relating to production engineering, and before the initiation of phase 5, relating to first production.

“(v) Each new nuclear facility within the nuclear security enterprise that is estimated to cost more than $500,000,000 before such facility achieves critical decision 1 and before such facility achieves critical decision 2 in the acquisition process.

“(vi) Each nuclear weapons system undergoing a major alteration project (as defined in section 5794(a)(2)).

“(B) An independent cost review of each nuclear weapon system undergoing life extension at the completion of phase 6.2 or new weapon system at the completion of phase 2, relating to study of feasibility and down-select.

“(2) Each independent cost estimate and independent cost review under paragraph (1) shall include—

“(A) whether the cost baseline or the budget estimate for the period covered by the future-years nuclear security program has changed, and the rationale for any such change; and

“(B) any views of the Secretary or the Administrator regarding such estimate or review.

“(3) The Administrator shall review and consider the results of any independent cost estimate or independent cost review of a nuclear weapon system or a nuclear facility, as the case may be, under this subsection before entering the next phase of the development process of such system or the acquisition process of such facility.

“(4) Except as otherwise specified in paragraph (1), each independent cost estimate or independent cost review of a nuclear weapon system or a nuclear facility under this subsection shall be submitted not later than 30 days after the date on which—

“(A) in the case of a nuclear weapons system, such system completes a phase specified in such paragraph; or

“(B) in the case of a nuclear facility, such facility achieves critical decision 1 as specified in subparagraph (A)(v) of such paragraph.

“(5) Each independent cost estimate or independent cost review submitted under this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex if necessary.

“(c) Authority for further assessments.—Upon the request of the Administrator, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation and in consultation with the Administrator, may conduct an independent cost assessment of any initiative or program of the Administration that is estimated to cost more than $500,000,000.

“§ 5636. Advice to President and Congress regarding safety, security, and reliability of United States nuclear weapons stockpile

“(A) to maintain a safe, secure, effective, and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile; and

“(B) as long as other nations control or actively seek to acquire nuclear weapons, to retain a credible nuclear deterrent.

“(2) NUCLEAR WEAPONS STOCKPILE.—It is in the security interest of the United States to sustain the United States nuclear weapons stockpile through a program of stockpile stewardship, carried out at the national security laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities.

“(A) the United States should retain a triad of strategic nuclear forces sufficient to deter any future hostile foreign leadership with access to strategic nuclear forces from acting against the vital interests of the United States;

“(B) the United States should continue to maintain nuclear forces of sufficient size and capability to implement an effective and robust deterrent strategy; and

“(C) the advice of the persons required to provide the President and Congress with assurances of the safety, security, effectiveness, and reliability of the nuclear weapons force should be scientifically based, without regard for politics, and of the highest quality and integrity.

“(b) Advice and opinions regarding nuclear weapons stockpile.—In addition to a director of a national security laboratory or a nuclear weapons production facility under section 5634, any member of the Nuclear Weapons Council may also submit to the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, or the congressional defense committees advice or opinion regarding the safety, security, effectiveness, and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—No individual, including a representative of the President, may take any action against, or otherwise constrain, a director of a national security laboratory or a nuclear weapons production facility or a member of the Nuclear Weapons Council from presenting the professional views of the director or member, as the case may be, to the President, the National Security Council, or Congress regarding—

“(A) the safety, security, reliability, or credibility of the nuclear weapons stockpile and nuclear forces; or

“(B) the status of, and plans for, the capabilities and infrastructure that support and sustain the nuclear weapons stockpile and nuclear forces.

“(2) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in paragraph (1)(B) may be construed to affect the interagency budget process.

“(d) Representative of the President defined.—In this section, the term ‘representative of the President’ means the following:

“(1) Any official of the Department of Defense or the Department of Energy who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

“§ 5637. Notification of certain regulations that impact the National Nuclear Security Administration

“(a) In general.—If a director of a national security laboratory of the Administration determines that a Federal regulation could inhibit the ability of the Administrator to maintain the safety, security, or effectiveness of the nuclear weapons stockpile without engaging in explosive nuclear testing, such director, not later than 15 days after making such determination, shall submit to Congress a notification of such determination.

“(b) Form.—Each notification required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

“(a) Requirement.—Consistent with the requirements of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy shall ensure that the nuclear security enterprise—

“(b) Annual certification.—Not later than March 1, 2015, and each year thereafter through 2030, the Secretary of Energy shall certify to the congressional defense committees and the Secretary of Defense that the programs and budget of the Secretary of Energy will enable the nuclear security enterprise to meet the requirements under subsection (a).

“(c) Plan.—If the Secretary of Energy does not make a certification under subsection (b) by March 1 of any year in which a certification is required under that subsection, by not later than May 1 of such year, the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan to enable the nuclear security enterprise to meet the requirements under subsection (a). Such plan shall include identification of the resources of the Department of Energy that the Chairman determines should be redirected to support the plan to meet such requirements.

“(1) REQUIREMENT.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which a covered project achieves a critical decision milestone, the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management and the Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs shall jointly certify to the congressional defense committees that the operations, infrastructure, and workforce of such project are adequate to carry out the delivery and disposal of planned waste shipments relating to the plutonium enterprise, as outlined in the critical decision memoranda of the Department of Energy with respect to such project.

“(2) FAILURE TO CERTIFY.—If the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management and the Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs fail to make a certification under paragraph (1) by the date specified in such paragraph with respect to a covered project achieving a critical decision milestone, the Assistant Secretary and the Deputy Administrator shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees, by not later than 30 days after such date, a plan to ensure that the operations, infrastructure, and workforce of such project will be adequate to carry out the delivery and disposal of planned waste shipments described in such paragraph.

“(1) REQUIREMENT.—Not later than March 1 of each year during the period beginning on the date on which the first covered project achieves critical decision 2 in the acquisition process and ending on the date on which the second project achieves critical decision 4 and begins operations, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the planned production goals of both covered projects during the first 10 years of the operation of the projects.

“(A) the number of war reserve plutonium pits planned to be produced during each year, including the associated warhead type;

“(B) a description of risks and challenges to meeting the performance baseline for the covered projects, as approved in critical decision 2 in the acquisition process;

“(C) options available to the Administrator to balance scope, costs, and production requirements at the projects to decrease overall risk to the plutonium enterprise and enduring plutonium pit requirements; and

“(D) an explanation of any changes to the production goals or requirements as compared to the report submitted during the previous year.

“(f) Prohibition on ARIES expansion before achievement of 30 pit-per-year base capability.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Until the date on which the Administrator certifies to the congressional defense committees that the base capability to produce not less than 30 war reserve plutonium pits per year has been established at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Administrator may not—

“(A) carry out a project to expand the pit disassembly and processing capability of the spaces at PF–4 occupied by ARIES as of December 22, 2023; or

“(A) ongoing or planned small projects to sustain or improve the efficiency of plutonium oxide production, provided that such projects do not expand the spaces at PF–4 occupied by ARIES as of December 22, 2023;

“(B) the planning and design of an additional ARIES capability at a location other than PF–4; or

“(A) The term ‘ARIES’ means the Advanced Recovery and Integrated Extraction System method, developed and piloted at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, for disassembling surplus defense plutonium pits and converting the plutonium from such pits into plutonium oxide.

“(B) The term ‘PF–4’ means the Plutonium Facility at Technical Area 55 located at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.

“(g) Covered project defined.—In this subsection, the term ‘covered project’ means—

“(1) the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina (Project 21–D–511); or

“(2) the Plutonium Pit Production Project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico (Project 21–D–512).

“(h) Management of plutonium modernization program.—Not later than 570 days after December 22, 2023, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall ensure that the plutonium modernization program established by the Office of Defense Programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration, or any subsequently developed program designed to meet the requirements under subsection (a), is managed in accordance with the best practices for schedule development and cost estimating of the Government Accountability Office.

“§ 5639. Certification of completion of milestones with respect to plutonium pit aging

“(a) Requirement.—The Administrator shall complete the milestones on plutonium pit aging identified in the report entitled “Research Program Plan for Plutonium and Pit Aging”, published by the Administration in September 2021.

“(1) acting through the Defense Programs Advisory Committee, conduct biennial reviews during the period beginning not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act and ending December 31, 2030, regarding the progress achieved toward completing the milestones described in subsection (a); and

“(2) seek to enter into an arrangement with the private scientific advisory group known as JASON to conduct, not later than 2030, an assessment of plutonium pit aging.

“(c) Briefings.—During the period beginning not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act and ending December 31, 2030, the Administrator shall provide to the congressional defense committees biennial briefings on—

“(1) the progress achieved toward completing the milestones described in subsection (a); and

“(d) Certification of completion of milestones.—Not later than October 1, 2031, the Administrator shall—

“(1) certify to the congressional defense committees whether the milestones described in subsection (a) have been achieved; and

“(2) if the milestones have not been achieved, submit to such committees a report—

“(B) including, if the Administrator determines the Administration will not be able to meet one of such milestones, an explanation for that determination; and

“(C) specifying new dates for the completion of the milestones the Administrator anticipates the Administration will meet.

“§ 5640. Authorization of workforce development and training partnership programs within National Nuclear Security Administration

“(a) Authority.—The Administrator for Nuclear Security may authorize management and operating contractors at covered facilities to develop and implement workforce development and training partnership programs to further the education and training of employees or prospective employees of such management and operating contractors to meet the requirements of section 5638.

“(b) Capacity.—To carry out subsection (a), a management and operating contractor at a covered facility may provide funding through grants or other means to cover the costs of the development and implementation of a workforce development and training partnership program authorized under such subsection, including costs relating to curriculum development, hiring of teachers, procurement of equipment and machinery, use of facilities or other properties, and provision of scholarships and fellowships.

“(2) The term ‘prospective employee’ means an individual who has applied (or who, based on their field of study and experience, is likely to apply) for a position of employment with a management and operating contractor to support plutonium pit production at a covered facility.

“(a) Statement of policy.—It is the policy of the United States to identify, sustain, enhance, integrate, and continually exercise all capabilities required to conceptualize, study, design, develop, engineer, certify, produce, and deploy nuclear weapons to ensure the nuclear deterrent of the United States remains safe, secure, reliable, credible, and responsive.

“(b) Program required.—The Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall carry out a stockpile responsiveness program, along with the stockpile stewardship program under section 5621 and the stockpile management program under section 5626, to identify, sustain, enhance, integrate, and continually exercise all capabilities required to conceptualize, study, design, develop, engineer, certify, produce, and deploy nuclear weapons.

“(c) Objectives.—The program under subsection (b) shall have the following objectives:

“(1) Identify, sustain, enhance, integrate, and continually exercise all of the capabilities, infrastructure, tools, and technologies across the science, engineering, design, certification, and manufacturing cycle required to carry out all phases of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle process, with respect to both the nuclear security enterprise and relevant elements of the Department of Defense.

“(2) Identify, enhance, and transfer knowledge, skills, and direct experience with respect to all phases of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle process from one generation of nuclear weapon designers and engineers to the following generation.

“(3) Periodically demonstrate stockpile responsiveness throughout the range of capabilities as required, such as through the use of prototypes, flight testing, and development of plans for certification without the need for nuclear explosive testing.

“(4) Shorten design, certification, and manufacturing cycles and timelines to minimize the amount of time and costs leading to an engineering prototype and production.

“(5) Continually exercise processes for the integration and coordination of all relevant elements and processes of the Administration and the Department of Defense required to ensure stockpile responsiveness.

“(6) The retention of the ability, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to assess and develop prototype nuclear weapons of foreign countries if needed to meet intelligence requirements and, if necessary, to conduct no-yield testing of those prototypes.

“(d) Joint nuclear weapons life cycle process defined.—In this section, the term ‘joint nuclear weapons life cycle process’ means the process developed and maintained by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy for the development, production, maintenance, and retirement of nuclear weapons.

“§ 5642. Long-term plan for meeting national security requirements for unencumbered uranium

“(a) In general.—Not later than December 31 of each odd-numbered year through 2031, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for meeting national security requirements for unencumbered uranium through 2070.

“(b) Plan requirements.—The plan required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(1) An inventory of unencumbered uranium (other than depleted uranium), by program source and enrichment level, that, as of the date of the plan, is allocated to national security requirements.

“(2) An inventory of unencumbered uranium (other than depleted uranium), by program source and enrichment level, that, as of the date of the plan, is not allocated to national security requirements but could be allocated to such requirements.

“(3) An identification of national security requirements for unencumbered uranium through 2070, by program source and enrichment level.

“(4) An assessment of current and projected unencumbered uranium production by private industry in the United States that could support future defense requirements.

“(5) A description of any shortfall in obtaining unencumbered uranium to meet national security requirements and an assessment of whether that shortfall could be mitigated through the blending down of uranium that is of a higher enrichment level.

“(6) An inventory of unencumbered depleted uranium, an assessment of the portion of that uranium that could be allocated to national security requirements through re-enrichment, and an estimate of the costs of re-enriching that uranium.

“(7) A description of the swap and barter agreements involving unencumbered uranium needed to meet national security requirements that are in effect on the date of the plan.

“(A) when additional enrichment of uranium will be required to meet national security requirements; and

“(B) the options the Secretary is considering to meet such requirements, including an estimated cost and timeline for each option and a description of any changes to policy or law that the Secretary determines would be required for each option.

“(9) An assessment of how options to provide additional enriched uranium to meet national security requirements could, as an additional benefit, contribute to the establishment of a sustained domestic enrichment capacity and allow the commercial sector of the United States to reduce reliance on importing uranium from adversary countries.

“(c) Form of plan.—The plan required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

“(d) Comptroller general briefing.—Not later than 180 days after the date on which the congressional defense committees receive each plan under subsection (a), the Comptroller General of the United States shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate a briefing that includes an assessment of the plan.

“(1) The term ‘depleted’, with respect to uranium, means that the uranium is depleted in uranium-235 compared with natural uranium.

“(2) The term ‘unencumbered’, with respect to uranium, means that the United States has no obligation to foreign governments to use the uranium for only peaceful purposes.

“§ 5643. Plan for domestic enrichment capability to satisfy Department of Defense uranium requirements

“(a) Report.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31), the Administrator shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report that contains a plan to establish a domestic enrichment capability sufficient to meet defense requirements for enriched uranium. Such plan shall include—

“(1) a description of defense requirements for enriched uranium expected to be necessary between the date of the enactment of this Act and 2060 to meet the requirements of the Department of Defense, including quantities, material assay, and the dates by which new enrichment is required;

“(2) key milestones, steps, and policy decisions required to achieve the domestic uranium enrichment capability;

“(4) a funding profile, broken down by project and sub-project, for obtaining such capability;

“(5) a description of any changes in the requirement of the Department of Defense for highly enriched uranium due to AUKUS; and

“(6) any other elements or information the Administrator determines appropriate.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than February 1 of each year after the year during which the report required by subsection (a) is submitted until the date specified in paragraph (2), the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a certification that—

“(A) the Administration is in compliance with the plan and milestones contained in the report; or

“(B) the Administration is not in compliance with such plan or milestones, together with—

“(2) TERMINATION DATE.—No report shall be required under paragraph (1) after the date on which the Administrator certifies to the congressional defense committees that the final key milestone under the plan has been met.

“(c) Form of reports.—The report under subsection (a) and each annual certification under subsection (b) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

“(1) The Administrator shall ensure that shipments described in paragraph (2) incorporate surety technologies relating to transportation and shipping developed by the Integrated Surety Architecture program of the Administration.

“(2) A shipment described in this paragraph is an over-the-road shipment of the Administration that involves any nuclear weapon planned to be in the active stockpile after 2025.

“(1) The Administrator, in coordination with the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council, shall ensure that each program described in paragraph (2) incorporates integrated designs compatible with the Integrated Surety Architecture program.

“(2) A program described in this subsection is a program of the Administration that is a warhead development program, a life extension program, or a warhead major alteration program.

“(1) If, on a case-by-case basis, the Administrator determines that a shipment under subsection (a) will not incorporate some or all of the surety technologies described in such subsection, or that a program under subsection (b) will not incorporate some or all of the integrated designs described in such subsection, the Administrator shall submit such determination to the congressional defense committees, including the results of an analysis conducted pursuant to paragraph (2).

“(2) Each determination made under paragraph (1) shall be based on a documented, system risk analysis that considers security risk reduction, operational impacts, and technical risk.

“(d) Termination.—The requirements of subsections (a) and (b) shall terminate on December 31, 2029.

“(1) PHASE 1.—Upon receiving a concept definition study under phase 1 of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle for the W93 nuclear weapon, the Nuclear Weapons Council shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the following:

“(B) A description of the stockpile-to-target sequence requirements of the weapon.

“(C) An initial assessment of the requirements a W93 nuclear weapon program is likely to generate for the nuclear security enterprise, including—

“(D) A preliminary description of other significant requirements for a W93 nuclear weapon program, including—

“(iv) any unique safety and surety requirements that could increase design complexity or cost estimate uncertainty.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 15 days after the date on which the Nuclear Weapons Council approves phase 2 of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle for the W93 nuclear weapon, the Administrator shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on a plan to implement a process of independent peer review or review by a board of experts, or both, with respect to—

“(B) REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESS.—The Administrator shall ensure that the process required by subparagraph (A)—

“(I) all relevant capabilities of the Federal Government, the defense industrial base, and institutions of higher education; and

“(b) Certifications and reports at phase 3.—Not later than 15 days after the date on which the Nuclear Weapons Council approves phase 3 of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle for the W93 nuclear weapon—

“(1) the administrator shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing that includes certifications that—

“(A) phases 1 through 5 of the joint nuclear weapons life cycle for the weapon will employ, at a minimum, the same best practices and will provide Congress with the same level of programmatic insight as exists under the phase 6.X process for life extension programs; and

“(B) the proposed design for the weapon can be carried out within estimated schedule and cost objectives; and

“(2) the Commander of the United States Strategic Command shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report containing, or provide to such committees a briefing on, the requirements for weapon quantity and composition by type for the sub-surface ballistic nuclear (SSBN) force, including such requirements planned for the 15-year period following the date of the report or briefing, as the case may be, including any planned life extensions, retirements, or alterations.

“(c) Waivers.—Subsections (a) and (b) may be waived during a period of war declared by Congress after January 1, 2021.

“(d) Joint nuclear weapons life cycle defined.—In this section, the term ‘joint nuclear weapons life cycle’ has the meaning given that term in section 5641.

“§ 5646. Earned value management and technology readiness levels for life extension programs

“(a) Review of contractor earned value management systems.—The Administrator shall enter into an arrangement with an independent entity under which that entity shall—

“(1) review and validate whether the earned value management systems of contractors of the Administration for life extension programs meet the earned value management national standard; and

“(2) conduct periodic surveillance reviews of such systems to ensure that such systems maintain compliance with that standard through program completion.

“(1) establish specific benchmarks for technology readiness levels of critical technologies for life extension programs at key decision points; and

“(2) ensure that critical technologies meet such benchmarks at such decision points.

“(c) Applicability.—This section shall apply to programs that, as of January 1, 2021, have not entered phase 3 of the nuclear weapons acquisition process or phase 6.3 of a nuclear weapons life extension program.

“(d) Definition.—In this section, the term ‘earned value management national standard’ means the most recent version of the EIA-748 Earned Value Management System Standard published by the National Defense Industrial Association.

“(a) Establishment of program.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish a tritium production program that is capable of meeting the tritium requirements of the United States for nuclear weapons.

“(b) Location of tritium production facility.—The Secretary shall locate any new tritium production facility of the Department of Energy at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina.

“(c) In-reactor tests.—The Secretary may perform in-reactor tests of tritium target rods as part of the activities carried out under the commercial light water reactor program.

“(a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b), the following activities shall be carried out at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina:

“(2) All activities regarding tritium formerly carried out at the Mound Plant, Ohio.

“(b) Exception.—The following activities may be carried out at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico:

“(2) Work on tritium in support of the defense inertial confinement fusion program.

“(3) Provision of technical assistance to the Savannah River Site regarding the weapons surveillance program.

“The Secretary of Energy shall carry out activities at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina, to—

“(1) modernize and consolidate the facilities for recycling tritium from weapons; and

“(2) provide a modern tritium extraction facility so as to ensure that such facilities have a capacity to recycle tritium from weapons that is adequate to meet the requirements for tritium for weapons specified in the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum.

“The Secretary of Energy may conduct programs designed to improve the protection, control, and accountability of fissile materials in Russia.

“§ 5662. Completion of material protection, control, and accounting activities in the Russian Federation

“(a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b) or specifically authorized by Congress, international material protection, control, and accounting activities in the Russian Federation shall be completed not later than fiscal year 2018.

“(b) Exception.—The limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply to international material protection, control, and accounting activities in the Russian Federation associated with the Agreement Concerning the Management and Disposition of Plutonium Designated as No Longer Required for Defense Purposes and Related Cooperation, signed at Moscow and Washington August 29 and September 1, 2000, and entered into force July 13, 2011 (TIAS 11–713.1), between the United States and the Russian Federation.

“(1) Not later than February 1, 2003, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a plan for the construction and operation of the MOX facility at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina.

“(A) a schedule for construction and operations so as to achieve, as of January 1, 2012, and thereafter, the MOX production objective, and to produce 1 metric ton of mixed-oxide fuel by December 31, 2012; and

“(B) a schedule of operations of the MOX facility designed so that 34 metric tons of defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials at the Savannah River Site will be processed into mixed-oxide fuel by January 1, 2019.

“(3) (A) Not later than February 15 each year, beginning in 2004 and continuing through 2024, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the implementation of the plan required by paragraph (1).

“(B) Each report under subparagraph (A) for years before 2010 shall include—

“(i) an assessment of compliance with the schedules included with the plan under paragraph (2); and

“(ii) a certification by the Secretary whether or not the MOX production objective can be met by January 2012.

“(ii) assess progress toward meeting the obligations of the United States under the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement.

“(D) Each report under subparagraph (A) for years after 2019 shall also include an assessment of compliance with the MOX production objective and, if not in compliance, the plan of the Secretary for achieving one of the following:

“(ii) Removal of all remaining defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials from the State of South Carolina.

“(1) If a report under subsection (a)(3) indicates that construction or operation of the MOX facility is behind the applicable schedule under subsection (g) by 12 months or more, the Secretary shall submit to Congress, not later than August 15 of the year in which such report is submitted, a plan for corrective actions to be implemented by the Secretary to ensure that the MOX facility project is capable of meeting the MOX production objective.

“(2) If a plan is submitted under paragraph (1) in any year after 2008, the plan shall include corrective actions to be implemented by the Secretary to ensure that the MOX production objective is met.

“(3) Any plan for corrective actions under paragraph (1) or (2) shall include established milestones under such plan for achieving compliance with the MOX production objective.

“(4) If, before January 1, 2012, the Secretary determines that there is a substantial and material risk that the MOX production objective will not be achieved by 2012 because of a failure to achieve milestones set forth in the most recent corrective action plan under this subsection, the Secretary shall suspend further transfers of defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials to be processed by the MOX facility until such risk is addressed and the Secretary certifies that the MOX production objective can be met by 2012.

“(5) If, after January 1, 2014, the Secretary determines that the MOX production objective has not been achieved because of a failure to achieve milestones set forth in the most recent corrective action plan under this subsection, the Secretary shall suspend further transfers of defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials to be processed by the MOX facility until the Secretary certifies that the MOX production objective can be met.

“(6) (A) Upon making a determination under paragraph (4) or (5), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the options for removing from the State of South Carolina an amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials equal to the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials transferred to the State of South Carolina after April 15, 2002.

“(B) Each report under subparagraph (A) shall include an analysis of each option set forth in the report, including the cost and schedule for implementation of such option, and any requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) relating to consideration or selection of such option.

“(C) Upon submittal of a report under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall commence any analysis that may be required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 in order to select among the options set forth in the report.

“(c) Contingent requirement for removal of plutonium and materials from savannah river site.—If the MOX production objective is not achieved as of January 1, 2014, the Secretary shall, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and other applicable laws, remove from the State of South Carolina, for storage or disposal elsewhere—

“(1) not later than January 1, 2016, not less than 1 metric ton of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials; and

“(2) not later than January 1, 2022, an amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials equal to the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials transferred to the Savannah River Site between April 15, 2002, and January 1, 2022, but not processed by the MOX facility.

“(1) If the MOX production objective is not achieved as of January 1, 2016, the Secretary shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, pay to the State of South Carolina each year beginning on or after that date through 2021 for economic and impact assistance an amount equal to $1,000,000 per day, not to exceed $100,000,000 per year, until the later of—

“(A) the date on which the MOX production objective is achieved in such year; or

“(B) the date on which the Secretary has removed from the State of South Carolina in such year at least 1 metric ton of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials.

“(2) (A) If, as of January 1, 2022, the MOX facility has not processed mixed-oxide fuel from defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials in the amount of not less than—

the Secretary shall, from funds available to the Secretary, pay to the State of South Carolina for economic and impact assistance an amount equal to $1,000,000 per day, not to exceed $100,000,000 per year, until the removal by the Secretary from the State of South Carolina of an amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials equal to the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials transferred to the Savannah River Site between April 15, 2002, and January 1, 2022, but not processed by the MOX facility.

“(B) Nothing in this paragraph may be construed to terminate, supersede, or otherwise affect any other requirements of this section.

“(3) If the State of South Carolina obtains an injunction that prohibits the Department of Energy from taking any action necessary for the Department to meet any deadline specified by this subsection, that deadline shall be extended for a period of time equal to the period of time during which the injunction is in effect.

“(e) Failure to complete planned disposition program.—If less than 34 metric tons of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials have been processed by the MOX facility by October 1, 2026, the Secretary shall, not later than December 1, 2026, and on a biennial basis thereafter, submit to Congress a plan for—

“(1) completing the processing of 34 metric tons of defense plutonium and defense plutonium material by the MOX facility; or

“(2) removing from the State of South Carolina an amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials equal to the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials transferred to the Savannah River Site after April 15, 2002, but not processed by the MOX facility.

“(f) Removal of mixed-oxide fuel upon completion of operations of MOX facility.—If, one year after the date on which operation of the MOX facility permanently ceases, any mixed-oxide fuel remains at the Savannah River Site, the Secretary shall submit to Congress—

“(1) a report on when such fuel will be transferred for use in commercial nuclear reactors; or

“(g) Baseline.—Not later than December 31, 2006, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the construction and operation of the MOX facility that includes a schedule for revising the requirements of this section during fiscal year 2007 to conform with the schedule established by the Secretary for the MOX facility, which shall be based on estimated funding levels for the fiscal year.

“(1) MOX PRODUCTION OBJECTIVE.—The term ‘MOX production objective’ means production at the MOX facility of mixed-oxide fuel from defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials at an average rate equivalent to not less than one metric ton of mixed-oxide fuel per year. The average rate shall be determined by measuring production at the MOX facility from the date the facility is declared operational to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission through the date of assessment.

“(2) MOX FACILITY.—The term ‘MOX facility’ means the mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina.

“(3) DEFENSE PLUTONIUM; DEFENSE PLUTONIUM MATERIALS.—The terms ‘defense plutonium’ and ‘defense plutonium materials’ mean weapons-usable plutonium.

“§ 5664. Disposition of surplus defense plutonium at Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina

“(a) Consultation required.—The Secretary of Energy shall consult with the Governor of the State of South Carolina regarding any decisions or plans of the Secretary related to the disposition of surplus defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials located at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina.

“(b) Notice required.—For each shipment of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials to the Savannah River Site, the Secretary shall, not less than 30 days before the commencement of such shipment, submit to the congressional defense committees a report providing notice of such shipment.

“(c) Plan for disposition.—The Secretary shall prepare a plan for disposal of the surplus defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials currently located at the Savannah River Site and for disposal of defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials to be shipped to the Savannah River Site in the future. The plan shall include the following:

“(3) With respect to the facilities for such disposal that are required by the Department of Energy's Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement dated January 14, 1997—

“(A) a statement of the cost of construction and operation of such facilities;

“(B) a schedule for the expeditious construction of such facilities, including milestones; and

“(4) A specification of the means by which all such defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials will be removed in a timely manner from the Savannah River Site for storage or disposal elsewhere.

“(d) Plan for alternative disposition.—If the Secretary determines not to proceed at the Savannah River Site with construction of the plutonium immobilization plant, or with the mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility, the Secretary shall prepare a plan that identifies a disposition path for all defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials that would otherwise have been disposed of at such plant or such facility, as applicable.

“(e) Submission of plans.—Not later than February 1, 2002, the Secretary shall submit to Congress the plan required by subsection (c) (and the plan prepared under subsection (d), if applicable).

“(f) Limitation on plutonium shipments.—If the Secretary does not submit to Congress the plan required by subsection (c) (and the plan prepared under subsection (d), if applicable) by February 1, 2002, the Secretary shall be prohibited from shipping defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials to the Savannah River Site during the period beginning on February 1, 2002, and ending on the date on which such plans are submitted to Congress.

“(g) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section may be construed to prohibit or limit the Secretary from shipping defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials to sites other than the Savannah River Site during the period referred to in subsection (f) or any other period.

“(h) Annual report on funding for fissile materials disposition activities.—The Secretary shall include with the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Energy budget for each fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) a report setting forth the extent to which amounts requested for the Department for such fiscal year for fissile materials disposition activities will enable the Department to meet commitments for the disposition of surplus defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials located at the Savannah River Site, and for any other fissile materials disposition activities, in such fiscal year.

“§ 5665. Acceleration of removal or security of fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide

“(1) It is the sense of Congress that the security, including the rapid removal or secure storage, of high-risk, proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide should be a top priority among the activities to achieve the national security of the United States.

“(2) It is the sense of Congress that the President may establish in the Department of Energy a task force to be known as the Task Force on Nuclear Materials to carry out the program authorized by subsection (b).

“(b) Program authorized.—The Secretary of Energy may carry out a program to undertake an accelerated, comprehensive worldwide effort to mitigate the threats posed by high-risk, proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment located at sites potentially vulnerable to theft or diversion.

“(1) Activities under the program under subsection (b) may include the following:

“(A) Accelerated efforts to secure, remove, or eliminate proliferation-attractive fissile materials or radiological materials in research reactors, other reactors, and other facilities worldwide.

“(B) Arrangements for the secure shipment of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment to other countries willing to accept such materials and equipment, or to the United States if such countries cannot be identified, and the provision of secure storage or disposition of such materials and equipment following shipment.

“(C) The transportation of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment from sites identified as proliferation risks to secure facilities in other countries or in the United States.

“(D) The processing and packaging of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment in accordance with required standards for transport, storage, and disposition.

“(E) The provision of interim security upgrades for vulnerable, proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment pending their removal from their current sites.

“(F) The utilization of funds to upgrade security and accounting at sites where proliferation-attractive fissile materials or radiological materials will remain for an extended period of time in order to ensure that such materials are secure against plausible potential threats and will remain so in the future.

“(G) The management of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment at secure facilities.

“(H) Actions to ensure that security, including security upgrades at sites and facilities for the storage or disposition of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment, continues to function as intended.

“(I) The provision of technical support to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), other countries, and other entities to facilitate removal of, and security upgrades to facilities that contain, proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment worldwide.

“(J) The development of alternative fuels and irradiation targets based on low-enriched uranium to convert research or other reactors fueled by highly-enriched uranium to such alternative fuels, as well as the conversion of reactors and irradiation targets employing highly-enriched uranium to employment of such alternative fuels and targets.

“(K) Accelerated actions for the blend down of highly-enriched uranium to low-enriched uranium.

“(L) The provision of assistance in the closure and decommissioning of sites identified as presenting risks of proliferation of proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment.

“(i) assist in the placement of employees displaced as a result of actions pursuant to the program in enterprises not representing a proliferation threat; and

“(ii) convert (including through the use of alternative technologies) sites identified as presenting risks of proliferation regarding proliferation-attractive fissile materials, radiological materials, and related equipment to purposes not representing a proliferation threat to the extent necessary to eliminate the proliferation threat.

“(2) The Secretary of Energy shall, in coordination with the Secretary of State, carry out the program in consultation with, and with the assistance of, appropriate departments, agencies, and other entities of the United States Government.

“(3) The Secretary of Energy shall, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, carry out activities under the program in collaboration with such foreign governments, non-governmental organizations, and other international entities as the Secretary of Energy considers appropriate for the program.

“(d) Funding.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy for defense nuclear nonproliferation activities shall be available for purposes of the program under this section.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Energy may, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, enter into one or more agreements with any person (including a foreign government, international organization, or multinational entity) that the Secretary of Energy considers appropriate under which the person contributes funds for purposes of the programs described in paragraph (2).

“(2) PROGRAMS COVERED.—The programs described in this paragraph are any programs within the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation of the National Nuclear Security Administration.

“(3) RETENTION AND USE OF AMOUNTS.—Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, the Secretary of Energy may retain and use amounts contributed under an agreement under paragraph (1) for purposes of the programs described in paragraph (2). Amounts so contributed shall be retained in a separate fund established in the Treasury for such purposes and shall be available for use without further appropriation and without fiscal year limitation.

“(4) RETURN OF AMOUNTS NOT USED WITHIN 5 YEARS.—If an amount contributed under an agreement under paragraph (1) is not used under this subsection within 5 years after it was contributed, the Secretary of Energy shall return that amount to the person who contributed it.

“(5) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than October 31 of each year, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the receipt and use of amounts under this subsection during the preceding fiscal year. Each report for a fiscal year shall set forth—

“(A) a statement of any amounts received under this subsection, including, for each such amount, the value of the contribution and the person who contributed it;

“(B) a statement of any amounts used under this subsection, including, for each such amount, the purposes for which the amount was used; and

“(C) a statement of the amounts retained but not used under this subsection, including, for each such amount, the purposes (if known) for which the Secretary intends to use the amount.

“(1) The term ‘fissile materials’ means plutonium, highly-enriched uranium, or other material capable of sustaining an explosive nuclear chain reaction, including irradiated items containing such materials if the radiation field from such items is not sufficient to prevent the theft or misuse of such items.

“(2) The term ‘radiological materials’ includes Americium-241, Californium-252, Cesium-137, Cobalt-60, Iridium-192, Plutonium-238, Radium-226, Strontium-90, Curium-244, and irradiated items containing such materials, or other materials designated by the Secretary of Energy for purposes of this paragraph.

“(3) The term ‘related equipment’ includes equipment useful for enrichment of uranium in the isotope 235 and for extraction of fissile materials from irradiated fuel rods and other equipment designated by the Secretary of Energy for purposes of this section.

“(4) The term ‘highly-enriched uranium’ means uranium enriched to or above 20 percent in the isotope 235.

“(5) The term ‘low-enriched uranium’ means uranium enriched below 20 percent in the isotope 235.

“(6) The term ‘proliferation-attractive’, in the case of fissile materials and radiological materials, means quantities and types of such materials that are determined by the Secretary of Energy to present a significant risk to the national security of the United States if diverted to a use relating to proliferation.

“(7) The term ‘alternative technologies’ means technologies, such as accelerator-based equipment, that do not use radiological materials.

“(a) Goal.—The Administrator shall ensure that the goal of the covered programs is eliminating the use of blood irradiation devices in the United States that rely on cesium chloride by December 31, 2027.

“(b) Implementation.—To meet the goal specified by subsection (a), the Administrator shall carry out the covered programs in a manner that—

“(2) allows for the United States, subject to the review of the Administrator, to pay up to 50 percent of the per-device cost of replacing blood irradiation devices covered by the programs;

“(3) allows for the United States to pay up to 100 percent of the cost of removing and disposing of cesium sources retired from service by the programs; and

“(4) replaces such devices with x-ray irradiation devices or other devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration that provide significant threat reduction as compared to cesium chloride irradiators.

“(c) Duration.—The Administrator shall carry out the covered programs until December 31, 2027.

“(d) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232), the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the covered programs, including—

“(1) identification of each cesium chloride blood irradiation device in the United States, including the number, general location, and user type;

“(3) a methodology for prioritizing replacement of such devices that takes into account irradiator age and prior material security initiatives;

“(4) in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Food and Drug Administration, a strategy identifying any legislative, regulatory, or other measures necessary to constrain the introduction of new cesium chloride blood irradiation devices;

“(5) identification of the annual funds required to meet the goal established by subsection (a); and

“(6) a description of the disposal path for cesium chloride sources under the covered programs.

“(e) Assessment.—The Administrator shall submit an assessment to the appropriate congressional committees by September 20, 2023, of the results of the actions on the covered programs under this section, including—

“(2) the life-cycle costs of the programs, including personnel training, maintenance, and replacement costs for new irradiation devices;

“(4) an analysis of the effectiveness of the new irradiation devices' technology; and

“(5) a forecast of whether the Administrator will meet the goal established in subsection (a).

“(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—

“(A) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives; and

“(B) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.

“(2) COVERED PROGRAMS.—The term ‘covered programs’ means the following programs of the Office of Radiological Security of the National Nuclear Security Administration:

“The Secretary of Energy may, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, enter into agreements with countries or international organizations to conduct data collection and analysis to determine accurately and in a timely manner the source of any components of, or fissile material used or attempted to be used in, a nuclear device or weapon.

“§ 5668. International agreements on information on radioactive materials

“(1) to acquire for the materials information program of the Department of Energy validated information on the physical characteristics of radioactive material produced, used, or stored at various locations, in order to facilitate the ability to determine accurately and in a timely manner the source of any components of, or fissile material used or attempted to be used in, a nuclear device or weapon; and

“(2) to obtain access to information described in paragraph (1) in the event of—

“(B) the interdiction or discovery of a nuclear device or weapon or nuclear material.

“(a) Plan required.—The Administrator shall develop and annually update a five-year management plan for activities associated with the defense nuclear nonproliferation programs of the Administration to prevent and counter the proliferation of materials, technology, equipment, and expertise related to nuclear and radiological weapons in order to minimize and address the risk of nuclear terrorism and the proliferation of such weapons.

“(1) Not later than March 15 of each even-numbered year, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a summary of the plan developed under subsection (a).

“(2) Not later than March 15 of each odd-numbered year, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a detailed report on the plan developed under subsection (a).

“(3) Each summary submitted under paragraph (1) and each report submitted under paragraph (2) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex if necessary.

“(c) Elements.—The plan required by subsection (a) shall include, with respect to each defense nuclear nonproliferation program of the Administration, the following:

“(1) A description of the policy context in which the program operates, including—

“(A) a list of relevant laws, policy directives issued by the President, and international agreements; and

“(B) nuclear nonproliferation activities carried out by other Federal agencies.

“(2) A description of the objectives and priorities of the program during the year preceding the submission of the summary required by paragraph (1) of subsection (b) or the report required by paragraph (2) of that subsection, as the case may be.

“(3) A description of the activities carried out under the program during that year.

“(4) A description of the accomplishments and challenges of the program during that year, based on an assessment of metrics and objectives previously established to determine the effectiveness of the program.

“(5) A description of any gaps that remain that were not or could not be addressed by the program during that year.

“(6) An identification and explanation of uncommitted or uncosted balances for the program, as of the date of the submission of the summary required by paragraph (1) of subsection (b) or the report required by paragraph (2) of that subsection, as the case may be, that are greater than the acceptable carryover thresholds, as determined by the Secretary of Energy.

“(7) An identification of funds for the program received through contributions from or cost-sharing agreements with foreign governments consistent with section 5665(e) during the year preceding the submission of the summary required by paragraph (1) of subsection (b) or the report required by paragraph (2) of that subsection, as the case may be, and an explanation of such contributions and agreements.

“(8) A description and assessment of activities carried out under the program during that year that were coordinated with other elements of the Department of Energy, with the Department of Defense, and with other Federal agencies, to maximize efficiency and avoid redundancies.

“(9) Plans for activities of the program during the five-year period beginning on the date on which the summary required by paragraph (1) of subsection (b) or the report required by paragraph (2) of that subsection, as the case may be, is submitted, including activities with respect to the following:

“(A) Preventing nuclear and radiological proliferation and terrorism, including through—

“(i) material management and minimization, particularly with respect to removing or minimizing the use of highly enriched uranium, plutonium, and radiological materials worldwide (and identifying the countries in which such materials are located), efforts to dispose of surplus material, converting reactors from highly enriched uranium to low-enriched uranium (and identifying the countries in which such reactors are located);

“(ii) global nuclear material security, including securing highly enriched uranium, plutonium, and radiological materials worldwide (and identifying the countries in which such materials are located), and providing radiation detection capabilities at foreign ports and borders;

“(iii) nonproliferation and arms control, including nuclear verification and safeguards;

“(iv) defense nuclear research and development, including a description of activities related to developing and improving technology to detect the proliferation and detonation of nuclear weapons, verifying compliance of foreign countries with commitments under treaties and agreements relating to nuclear weapons, and detecting the diversion of nuclear materials (including safeguards technology); and

“(v) nonproliferation construction programs, including activities associated with Department of Energy Order 413.1 (relating to program management controls).

“(C) Responding to nuclear and radiological proliferation and terrorism, including through—

“(10) A threat assessment, carried out by the intelligence community (as defined in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4))), with respect to the risk of nuclear and radiological proliferation and terrorism and a description of how each activity carried out under the program will counter the threat during the five-year period beginning on the date on which the summary required by paragraph (1) of subsection (b) or the report required by paragraph (2) of that subsection, as the case may be, is submitted and, as appropriate, in the longer term.

“(12) An identification of metrics and objectives for determining the effectiveness of each activity carried out under the program during that five-year period.

“(13) A description of the activities to be carried out under the program during that five-year period and a description of how the program will be prioritized relative to other defense nuclear nonproliferation programs of the Administration during that five-year period to address the highest priority risks and requirements, as informed by the threat assessment carried out under paragraph (10).

“(14) A description and assessment of activities to be carried out under the program during that five-year period that will be coordinated with other elements of the Department of Energy, with the Department of Defense, and with other Federal agencies, to maximize efficiency and avoid redundancies.

“(15) A summary of the technologies and capabilities documented under section 5670(a).

“§ 5670. Information relating to certain defense nuclear nonproliferation programs

“(a) Technologies and capabilities.—The Administrator shall document, for efforts that are not focused on basic research, the technologies and capabilities of the defense nuclear nonproliferation research and development program that—

“(1) In assessing projects under the defense nuclear nonproliferation research and development program or the defense nuclear nonproliferation and arms control program, the Administrator shall compare the status of each such project, including with respect to the final results of such project, to the baseline targets and goals established in the initial project plan of such project.

“(2) The Administrator may carry out paragraph (1) using a common template or such other means as the Administrator determines appropriate.

“§ 5671. Annual Selected Acquisition Reports on certain hardware relating to defense nuclear nonproliferation

“(1) IN GENERAL.—At the end of each fiscal year, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on each covered hardware project. The reports shall be known as Selected Acquisition Reports for the covered hardware project concerned.

“(2) MATTERS INCLUDED.—The information contained in the Selected Acquisition Report for a fiscal year for a covered hardware project shall be the information contained in the Selected Acquisition Report for such fiscal year for a major defense acquisition program under section 4351 or any successor system, expressed in terms of the covered hardware project.

“(b) Covered hardware project defined.—In this section, the term ‘covered hardware project’ means a project carried out under the defense nuclear nonproliferation research and development program that—

“(1) is focused on the production and deployment of hardware, including with respect to the development and deployment of satellites or satellite payloads; and

“(2) exceeds $500,000,000 in total program cost over the course of five years.

“(a) Establishment.—There is hereby established in the Treasury of the United States for the Department of Energy an account to be known as the ‘Defense Environmental Cleanup Account’ (hereafter in this section referred to as the ‘Account’).

“(b) Amounts in account.—All sums appropriated to the Department of Energy for defense environmental cleanup at defense nuclear facilities shall be credited to the Account. Such appropriations shall be authorized annually by law. To the extent provided in appropriations Acts, amounts in the Account shall remain available until expended.

“§ 5682. Classification of defense environmental cleanup as capital asset projects or operations activities

“The Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, in consultation with other appropriate officials of the Department of Energy, shall establish requirements for the classification of defense environmental cleanup projects as capital asset projects or operations activities.

“§ 5683. Requirement to develop future use plans for defense environmental cleanup

“(a) Authority to develop future use plans.—The Secretary of Energy may develop future use plans for any defense nuclear facility at which defense environmental cleanup activities are occurring.

“(b) Requirement to develop future use plans.—The Secretary shall develop a future use plan for each of the following defense nuclear facilities:

“(1) At each defense nuclear facility for which the Secretary of Energy intends or is required to develop a future use plan under this section and for which no citizen advisory board has been established, the Secretary shall establish a citizen advisory board.

“(2) The Secretary may authorize the manager of a defense nuclear facility for which a future use plan is developed under this section (or, if there is no such manager, an appropriate official of the Department of Energy designated by the Secretary) to pay routine administrative expenses of a citizen advisory board established for that facility. Such payments shall be made from funds available to the Secretary for defense environmental cleanup activities necessary for national security programs.

“(d) Requirement to consult with citizen advisory board.—In developing a future use plan under this section with respect to a defense nuclear facility, the Secretary of Energy shall consult with a citizen advisory board established pursuant to subsection (c) or a similar advisory board already in existence as of September 23, 1996, for such facility, affected local governments (including any local future use redevelopment authorities), and other appropriate State agencies.

“(e) 50-year planning period.—A future use plan developed under this section shall cover a period of at least 50 years.

“(f) Report.—Not later than 60 days after completing development of a final plan for a site listed in subsection (b), the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a report on the plan. The report shall describe the plan and contain such findings and recommendations with respect to the site as the Secretary considers appropriate.

“(1) Nothing in this section, or in a future use plan developed under this section with respect to a defense nuclear facility, shall be construed as requiring any modification to a future use plan with respect to a defense nuclear facility that was developed before September 23, 1996.

“(2) Nothing in this section may be construed to affect statutory requirements for a defense environmental cleanup activity or project or to modify or otherwise affect applicable statutory or regulatory defense environmental cleanup requirements, including substantive standards intended to protect public health and the environment, nor shall anything in this section be construed to preempt or impair any local land use planning or zoning authority or State authority.

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress each year, at or about the same time that the President's budget is submitted to Congress for a fiscal year under section 1105(a) of title 31, a future-years defense environmental cleanup plan that—

“(1) reflects the estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations included in that budget for the Department of Energy for defense environmental cleanup; and

“(2) covers a period that includes the fiscal year for which that budget is submitted and not less than the four succeeding fiscal years.

“(b) Elements.—Each future-years defense environmental cleanup plan required by subsection (a) shall contain the following:

“(1) A detailed description of the projects and activities relating to defense environmental cleanup to be carried out during the period covered by the plan at the sites specified in subsection (c) and with respect to the activities specified in subsection (d).

“(2) A statement of proposed budget authority, estimated expenditures, and proposed appropriations necessary to support such projects and activities.

“(A) A statement of each milestone included in an enforceable agreement governing cleanup and waste remediation for that site for each fiscal year covered by the plan.

“(B) For each such milestone, a statement with respect to whether each such milestone will be met in each such fiscal year.

“(C) For any milestone that will not be met, an explanation of why the milestone will not be met and the date by which the milestone is expected to be met.

“(D) For any milestone that has been missed, renegotiated, or postponed, a statement of the current milestone, the original milestone, and any interim milestones.

“(c) Sites specified.—The sites specified in this subsection are the following:

“(d) Activities specified.—The activities specified in this subsection are the following:

“(5) Federal contributions to the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund established under section 1801 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2297g).

“§ 5685. Accelerated schedule for defense environmental cleanup activities

“(a) Accelerated cleanup.—The Secretary of Energy shall accelerate the schedule for defense environmental cleanup activities and disposition projects for a site at a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility if the Secretary determines that such an accelerated schedule will accelerate the recapitalization, modernization, or replacement of National Nuclear Security Administration facilities supporting the nuclear weapons stockpile, achieve meaningful, long-term cost savings to the Federal Government, or could substantially accelerate the release of land for local reuse without undermining national security objectives.

“(b) Consideration of factors.—In making a determination under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the following:

“(1) The extent to which accelerated cleanup schedules can contribute to a more rapid modernization of National Nuclear Security Administration facilities.

“(c) Savings provision.—Nothing in this section may be construed to affect a specific statutory requirement for a specific defense environmental cleanup activity or project or to modify or otherwise affect applicable statutory or regulatory defense environmental cleanup requirements, including substantive standards intended to protect public health and the environment.

“(a) Establishment of program.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish and carry out a program of research for the development of technologies useful for—

“(1) the reduction of environmental hazards and contamination resulting from defense waste; and

“(1) The term ‘defense waste’ means waste, including radioactive waste, resulting primarily from atomic energy defense activities of the Department of Energy.

“(2) The term ‘inactive defense waste disposal site’ means any site (including any facility) under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary of Energy which is used for the disposal of defense waste and is closed to the disposal of additional defense waste, including any site that is subject to decontamination and decommissioning.

“(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary may establish a program, to be known as the ‘Incremental Technology Development Program’, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the defense environmental cleanup processes of the Office.

“(A) IMPROVEMENTS.—In carrying out the Incremental Technology Development Program, the Secretary shall focus on the continuous improvement of new or available technologies, including—

“(ii) remote sensing and wireless communication to reduce manpower and laboratory efforts;

“(B) OTHER AREAS.—The Secretary may include in the Incremental Technology Development Program mission-relevant development, demonstration, and deployment activities unrelated to the focus areas described in subparagraph (A).

“(A) DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION.—In carrying out the Incremental Technology Development Program, the Secretary shall ensure that site offices of the Office conduct technology development, demonstration, testing, permitting, and deployment of new and emerging technologies to establish a sound technical basis for the selection of technologies for defense environmental cleanup or infrastructure operations.

“(B) COLLABORATION REQUIRED.—The Secretary shall collaborate, to the extent practicable, with the heads of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, the National Laboratories, other Federal laboratories, appropriate State regulators and agencies, and the Department of Labor in the development, demonstration, testing, permitting, and deployment of new technologies under the Incremental Technology Development Program.

“(A) AUTHORITY.—In carrying out the Incremental Technology Development Program, the Secretary may enter into agreements with nongovernmental entities for technology development, demonstration, testing, permitting, and deployment projects to improve technologies in accordance with paragraph (2).

“(B) SELECTION.—The Secretary shall select projects under subparagraph (A) through a rigorous process that involves—

“(ii) a review process that, if practicable, is conducted in an independent manner consistent with Department guidance on selecting and funding public-private partnerships.

“(C) COST-SHARING.—The Federal share of the costs of the development, demonstration, testing, permitting, and deployment of new technologies carried out under this paragraph shall be not more than 70 percent.

“(D) BRIEFING.—Not later than 120 days before the date on which the Secretary enters into the first agreement under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the process of selecting and funding efforts within the Incremental Technology Development Program, including with respect to the plans of the Secretary to ensure a scientifically rigorous process that minimizes potential conflicts of interest.

“(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the ‘High-Impact Technology Development Program’, under which the Secretary shall enter into agreements with nongovernmental entities for projects that pursue technologies that, with respect to the mission—

“(2) AREAS OF FOCUS.—The Secretary may include as areas of focus for a project carried out under the High-Impact Technology Development Program the following:

“(A) Developing and demonstrating improved methods for source and plume characterization and monitoring, with an emphasis on—

“(ii) the use of indicator species analyses with advanced contaminant transport models to enable better understanding of contaminant migration.

“(B) Developing and determining the limits of performance for remediation technologies and integrated remedial systems that prevent migration of contaminants, including by producing associated guidance and design manuals for technologies that could be widely used across the complex.

“(C) Demonstrating advanced monitoring approaches that use multiple lines of evidence for monitoring long-term performance of—

“(D) Developing and demonstrating methods to characterize the physical and chemical attributes of waste that control behavior, with an emphasis on—

“(ii) methods to determine radio-nuclide, heavy metals, and organic constituents.

“(E) Demonstrating the technical basis for determining when enhanced or natural attenuation is an appropriate approach for remediation of complex sites.

“(F) Developing and demonstrating innovative methods to achieve real-time and, if practicable, in situ characterization data for tank waste and process streams that could be useful for all phases of the waste management program, including improving the accuracy and representativeness of characterization data for residual waste in tanks and ancillary equipment.

“(G) Adapting existing waste treatment technologies or demonstrating new waste treatment technologies at the pilot plant scale using real wastes or realistic surrogates—

“(ii) to ensure compliance with waste treatment standards and other applicable requirements under Federal and State law and any existing agreements or consent decrees to which the Department is a party; and

“(iii) to enable successful deployment at full-scale and in support of operations.

“(i) are accepted by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department, and the scientific community;

“(ii) can be used to measure long-term waste form performance under realistic disposal environments;

“(iv) reduce the need for extensive, time-consuming, and costly analyses on every batch of waste prior to disposal.

“(I) Developing and demonstrating direct stabilization technologies to provide waste forms for disposing of elemental mercury.

“(J) Developing and demonstrating innovative and effective retrieval methods for removal of waste residual materials from tanks and ancillary equipment, including mobile retrieval equipment or methods capable of immediately removing waste from leaking tanks, and connecting pipelines.

“(A) SELECTION.—The Secretary shall select projects to be carried out under the High-Impact Technology Development Program through a rigorous process that involves—

“(ii) a review process that, if practicable, is conducted in an independent manner consistent with Department guidance on selecting and funding public-private partnerships.

“(B) BRIEFING.—Not later than 120 days before the date on which the Secretary enters into the first agreement under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the process of selecting and funding efforts within the High-Impact Technology Development Program, including with respect to the plans of the Secretary to ensure a scientifically rigorous process that minimizes potential conflicts of interest.

“(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the ‘Environmental Management University Program’, to—

“(A) engage faculty, post-doctoral fellows or researchers, and graduate students of institutions of higher education on subjects relating to the mission to show a clear path for students for employment within the environmental management enterprise;

“(B) provide institutions of higher education and the Department access to advances in engineering and science;

“(C) clearly identify to institutions of higher education the tools necessary to enter into the environmental management field professionally; and

“(D) encourage current employees of the Department to pursue advanced degrees.

“(2) AREAS OF FOCUS.—The Secretary may include as areas of focus for a grant made under the Environmental Management University Program the following:

“(C) Developing innovative materials, with an emphasis on nanomaterials or biomaterials, that could enable sequestration of challenging hazardous or radioactive constituents such as technetium and iodine.

“(D) Elucidating and exploiting complex speciation and reactivity far from equilibrium.

“(E) Understanding and controlling chemical and physical processes at interfaces.

“(H) Predicting and understanding subsurface system behavior and response to perturbations.

“(3) INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH GRANTS.—In carrying out the Environmental Management University Program, the Secretary may make individual research grants to faculty, post-doctoral fellows or researchers, and graduate students of institutions of higher education for three-year research projects, with an option for an extension of one additional two-year period.

“(4) GRANTS FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATIONS.—In carrying out the Environmental Management University Program, the Secretary may make research grants for strategic partnerships among scientists, faculty, post-doctoral fellows or researchers, and graduate students of institutions of higher education for three-year research projects.

“(5) HIRING OF UNDERGRADUATES.—In carrying out the Environmental Management University Program, the Secretary may establish a summer internship program for undergraduates of institutions of higher education to work on projects relating to environmental management.

“(6) WORKSHOPS.—In carrying out the Environmental Management University Program, the Secretary may hold workshops with the Office of Environmental Management, the Office of Science, and members of academia and industry concerning environmental management challenges and solutions.

“(1) The term ‘complex’ means all sites managed in whole or in part by the Office.

“(3) The term ‘institution of higher education’ has the meaning given the term in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)).

“(5) The term ‘National Laboratory’ has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801).

“(6) The term ‘Office’ means the Office of Environmental Management of the Department.

“(7) The term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.

“Each year, at the same time the President submits to Congress the budget for a fiscal year (pursuant to section 1105 of title 31), the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a report on how the defense environmental cleanup funds of the Department of Energy were expended during the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year during which the budget is submitted. The report shall include details on expenditures by operations office, installation, budget category, and activity. The report also shall include any schedule changes or modifications to planned activities for the fiscal year in which the budget is submitted.

“§ 5689. Public participation in planning for defense environmental cleanup

“ The Secretary of Energy shall consult with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Attorney General, Governors and attorneys general of affected States, appropriate representatives of affected Indian tribes, and interested members of the public in any planning conducted by the Secretary for defense environmental cleanup activities at Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities.

“§ 5690. Policy of Department of Energy regarding future defense environmental management matters

“(1) Commencing not later than October 1, 2005, the Secretary of Energy shall have in effect a policy for carrying out future defense environmental management matters of the Department of Energy. The policy shall specify each officer within the Department with responsibilities for carrying out that policy and, for each such officer, the nature and extent of those responsibilities.

“(2) In paragraph (1), the term ‘future defense environmental management matter’ means any environmental cleanup project, decontamination and decommissioning project, waste management project, or related activity that arises out of the activities of the Department in carrying out programs necessary for national security and is to be commenced after November 24, 2003. However, such term does not include any such project or activity the responsibility for which has been assigned, as of November 24, 2003, to the Environmental Management program of the Department.

“(b) Reflection in budget.—For fiscal year 2006 and each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary shall ensure that the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Energy budget for such fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) reflect the policy required by subsection (a).

“(c) Consultation.—The Secretary shall carry out this section in consultation with the Administrator for Nuclear Security and the Under Secretary of Energy for Energy, Science, and Environment.

“(d) Report.—The Secretary shall include with the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Energy budget for fiscal year 2005 (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) a report on the policy that the Secretary plans to have in effect under subsection (a) as of October 1, 2005. The report shall specify the officers and responsibilities referred to in subsection (a).

“§ 5691. Estimation of costs of meeting defense environmental cleanup milestones required by consent orders

“The Secretary of Energy shall include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Energy budget for each fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) a report on the cost, for that fiscal year and the four fiscal years following that fiscal year, of meeting milestones required by a consent order at each defense nuclear facility at which defense environmental cleanup activities are occurring. The report shall include, for each such facility—

“(1) a specification of the cost of meeting such milestones during that fiscal year; and

“(2) an estimate of the cost of meeting such milestones during the four fiscal years following that fiscal year.

“ Each year, at the same time that the Department of Energy submits its annual financial report under section 3516 of title 31, the Secretary of Energy shall make available to the public a statement of environmental liabilities, as calculated for the most recent audited financial statement of the Department under section 3515 of that title, for each defense nuclear facility at which defense environmental cleanup activities are occurring.

“§ 5701. Reports in connection with permanent closures of Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities

“(a) Training and job placement services plan.—Not later than 120 days before a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility permanently ceases all production and processing operations, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report containing a discussion of the training and job placement services needed to enable the employees at such facility to obtain employment in the defense environmental cleanup activities at such facility. The discussion shall include the actions that should be taken by the contractor operating and managing such facility to provide retraining and job placement services to employees of such contractor.

“(b) Closure report.—Upon the permanent cessation of production operations at a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a report containing—

“(2) budget quality data indicating the cost of defense environmental cleanup activities at the facility; and

“(a) In general.—Notwithstanding the provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.), the requirements of section 202 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5842), and other laws that define classes of radioactive waste, with respect to material stored at a Department of Energy site at which activities are regulated by a covered State pursuant to approved closure plans or permits issued by the State, the term ‘high-level radioactive waste’ does not include radioactive waste resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel that the Secretary of Energy (in this section referred to as the ‘Secretary’), in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (in this section referred to as the ‘Commission’), determines—

“(1) does not require permanent isolation in a deep geologic repository for spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste;

“(2) has had highly radioactive radionuclides removed to the maximum extent practical; and

“(3) (A) does not exceed concentration limits for Class C low-level waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, and will be disposed of—

“(i) in compliance with the performance objectives set out in subpart C of part 61 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations; and

“(ii) pursuant to a State-approved closure plan or State-issued permit, authority for the approval or issuance of which is conferred on the State outside of this section; or

“(B) exceeds concentration limits for Class C low-level waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, but will be disposed of-

“(i) in compliance with the performance objectives set out in subpart C of part 61 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations;

“(ii) pursuant to a State-approved closure plan or State-issued permit, authority for the approval or issuance of which is conferred on the State outside of this section; and

“(iii) pursuant to plans developed by the Secretary in consultation with the Commission.

“(b) Monitoring by Nuclear Regulatory Commission.— (1) The Commission shall, in coordination with the covered State, monitor disposal actions taken by the Department of Energy pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (a)(3) for the purpose of assessing compliance with the performance objectives set out in subpart C of part 61 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

“(2) If the Commission considers any disposal actions taken by the Department of Energy pursuant to those subparagraphs to be not in compliance with those performance objectives, the Commission shall, as soon as practicable after discovery of the noncompliant conditions, inform the Department of Energy, the covered State, and the following congressional committees:

“(A) The Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

“(B) The Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.

“(3) For fiscal year 2005, the Secretary shall, from amounts available for defense site acceleration completion, reimburse the Commission for all expenses, including salaries, that the Commission incurs as a result of performance under subsection (a) and this subsection for fiscal year 2005. The Department of Energy and the Commission may enter into an interagency agreement that specifies the method of reimbursement. Amounts received by the Commission for performance under subsection (a) and this subsection may be retained and used for salaries and expenses associated with those activities, notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, and shall remain available until expended.

“(4) For fiscal years after 2005, the Commission shall include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Commission budget for that fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) the amounts required, not offset by revenues, for performance under subsection (a) and this subsection.

“(c) Inapplicability to certain materials.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to any material otherwise covered by that subsection that is transported from the covered State.

“(d) Covered States.—For purposes of this section, the following States are covered States:

“(e) Construction.— (1) Nothing in this section shall impair, alter, or modify the full implementation of any Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order or other applicable consent decree for a Department of Energy site.

“(2) Nothing in this section establishes any precedent or is binding on the State of Washington, the State of Oregon, or any other State not covered by subsection (d) for the management, storage, treatment, and disposition of radioactive and hazardous materials.

“(3) Nothing in this section amends the definition of 'transuranic waste' or regulations for repository disposal of transuranic waste pursuant to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act (Public Law 102–579; 106 Stat. 4777) or part 191 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.

“(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect in any way the obligations of the Department of Energy to comply with section 5664.

“(5) Nothing in this section amends the West Valley Demonstration Act (Public Law 96–368; 42 U.S.C. 2021a note).

“(f) Judicial review.—Judicial review shall be available in accordance with chapter 7 of title 5, for the following:

“(1) Any determination made by the Secretary or any other agency action taken by the Secretary pursuant to this section.

“(2) Any failure of the Commission to carry out its responsibilities under subsection (b).

“Funds appropriated by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108–199; 118 Stat. 3), or any other Act thereafter, may not be obligated to pay, on behalf of the United States or a contractor or subcontractor of the United States, to post a bond or fulfill any other financial responsibility requirement relating to closure or post-closure care and monitoring of Sandia National Laboratories and properties held or managed by Sandia National Laboratories prior to implementation of closure or post-closure monitoring. The State of New Mexico or any other entity may not enforce against the United States or a contractor or subcontractor of the United States, in this year or any other fiscal year, a requirement to post bond or any other financial responsibility requirement relating to closure or postclosure care and monitoring of Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico and properties held or managed by Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.

“§ 5704. Plan for deactivation and decommissioning of nonoperational defense nuclear facilities

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall, every four years beginning in 2025, develop and subsequently carry out a plan for the activities of the Department of Energy relating to the deactivation and decommissioning of nonoperational defense nuclear facilities.

“(b) Elements.—The plan required by subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(1) A list of nonoperational defense nuclear facilities, prioritized for deactivation and decommissioning based on the potential to reduce risks to human health, property, or the environment and to maximize cost savings.

“(2) An assessment of the life cycle costs of each nonoperational defense nuclear facility during the period beginning on the date on which the plan is submitted under subsection (d) and ending on the earlier of—

“(A) the date that is 25 years after the date on which the plan is submitted; or

“(3) An estimate of the cost and time needed to deactivate and decommission each nonoperational defense nuclear facility.

“(4) A schedule for when the Office of Environmental Management will accept each nonoperational defense nuclear facility for deactivation and decommissioning.

“(A) accelerating the cleanup of nonoperational defense nuclear facilities; or

“(c) Plan for transfer of responsibility for certain facilities.—The Secretary shall, during 2025, develop and subsequently carry out a plan under which the Administrator shall transfer, by March 31, 2029, to the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management the responsibility for decontaminating and decommissioning facilities of the Administration that the Secretary determines are nonoperational as of September 30, 2024.

“(d) Submission to Congress.—Not later than March 31, 2025, and every four years thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that includes—

“(2) a description of the deactivation and decommissioning actions expected to be taken during the following fiscal year pursuant to the plan;

“(3) in the case of the report submitted during 2025, the plan required by subsection (c); and

“(4) a description of the deactivation and decommissioning actions taken at each nonoperational defense nuclear facility during the period following the date on which the previous report required by this section was submitted.

“(e) Termination.—The requirements of this section shall terminate after the submission to the appropriate congressional committees of the report required by subsection (d) to be submitted not later than March 31, 2033.

“(B) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives.

“(A) the present and future costs of all resources and associated cost elements required to develop, produce, deploy, or sustain the facility; and

“(B) the present and future costs to deactivate, decommission, and deconstruct the facility.

“(3) The term ‘nonoperational defense nuclear facility’ means a production facility or utilization facility (as those terms are defined in section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014)) under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary of Energy and operated for national security purposes that is no longer needed for the mission of the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration.

“(a) Identification and monitoring of tanks.—Not later than February 3, 1991, the Secretary of Energy shall identify which single-shelled or double-shelled high-level nuclear waste tanks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Richland, Washington, may have a serious potential for release of high-level waste due to uncontrolled increases in temperature or pressure. After completing such identification, the Secretary shall determine whether continuous monitoring is being carried out to detect a release or excessive temperature or pressure at each tank so identified. If such monitoring is not being carried out, as soon as practicable the Secretary shall install such monitoring, but only if a type of monitoring that does not itself increase the danger of a release can be installed.

“(b) Action plans.—Not later than March 5, 1991, the Secretary of Energy shall develop action plans to respond to excessive temperature or pressure or a release from any tank identified under subsection (a).

“(c) Prohibition.—Beginning March 5, 1991, no additional high-level nuclear waste (except for small amounts removed and returned to a tank for analysis) may be added to a tank identified under subsection (a) unless the Secretary determines that no safer alternative than adding such waste to the tank currently exists or that the tank does not pose a serious potential for release of high-level nuclear waste.

“(a) Establishment of Office of River Protection.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish an office at the Hanford Reservation, Richland, Washington, to be known as the ‘Office of River Protection’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Office’).

“(1) The Office shall be headed by a senior official of the Department of Energy, who shall report to the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management.

“(2) The head of the Office shall be responsible for managing all aspects of the River Protection Project, Richland, Washington, including Hanford Tank Farm operations and the Waste Treatment Plant.

“(3) (A) The Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management shall delegate in writing responsibility for the management of the River Protection Project, Richland, Washington, to the head of the Office.

“(B) Such delegation shall include, at a minimum, authorities for contracting, financial management, safety, and general program management that are equivalent to the authorities of managers of other operations offices of the Department of Energy.

“(C) The head of the Office shall, to the maximum extent possible, coordinate all activities of the Office with the manager of the Richland Operations Office of the Department of Energy.

“(c) Department responsibilities.—The Secretary shall provide the head of the Office with the resources and personnel necessary to carry out the responsibilities specified in subsection (b)(2).

“(d) Notification.—The Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives written notification detailing any changes in the roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships that involve the Office.

“(e) Termination.—The Office shall terminate on September 30, 2024. The Office may be extended beyond that date if the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management determines in writing that termination would disrupt effective management of the Hanford Tank Farm operations.

“ The tank waste remediation system environmental project, Richland, Washington, including all programs relating to the retrieval and treatment of tank waste at the site at Hanford, Washington, under the management of the Office of River Protection, shall be known and designated as the ‘River Protection Project’. Any reference to that project in any law, regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United States shall be considered to be a reference to the River Protection Project.

“§ 5714. Notification regarding air release of radioactive or hazardous material

“If the Secretary of Energy (or a designee of the Secretary) is notified of an improper release into the air of radioactive or hazardous material above applicable statutory or regulatory limits that resulted from waste generated by atomic energy defense activities at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Richland, Washington, the Secretary (or designee of the Secretary) shall—

“(1) not later than two business days after being notified of the release, notify the congressional defense committees of the release; and

“(2) not later than seven business days after being notified of the release, provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on the status of the release, including—

“(B) preliminary plans to address and remediate the release, including associated costs and timelines.

“§ 5721. Accelerated schedule for isolating high-level nuclear waste at the Defense Waste Processing Facility, Savannah River Site

“The Secretary of Energy shall accelerate the schedule for the isolation of high-level nuclear waste in glass canisters at the Defense Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina, if the Secretary determines that the acceleration of such schedule—

“(2) could accelerate the removal and isolation of high-level nuclear waste from long-term storage tanks at the site.

“The Secretary of Energy shall develop and implement a multi-year plan for the clean-up of nuclear waste at the Savannah River Site that results, or has resulted, from the following:

“(2) The processing, treating, packaging, and disposal of Department of Energy domestic and foreign spent nuclear fuel rods at the site.

“§ 5723. Continuation of processing, treatment, and disposal of legacy nuclear materials

“ The Secretary of Energy shall continue operations and maintain a high state of readiness at the H–canyon facility at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, and shall provide technical staff necessary to operate and so maintain such facility.

“§ 5731. Prohibition on international inspections of Department of Energy facilities unless protection of restricted data is certified

“The Secretary of Energy may not allow an inspection of a national security laboratory or nuclear weapons production facility by the International Atomic Energy Agency until the Secretary certifies to Congress that no Restricted Data will be revealed during such inspection.

“§ 5732. Restrictions on access to national security laboratories by foreign visitors from sensitive countries

“(a) Background review required.—The Secretary of Energy and the Administrator may not admit to any facility described in paragraph (3) of subsection (c) other than areas accessible to the general public any individual who is a citizen or agent of a covered foreign nation or a nation on the current sensitive countries list unless the Secretary or Administrator first completes a background review with respect to that individual.

“(b) Sense of Congress regarding background reviews.—It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Energy, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of National Intelligence should ensure that background reviews carried out under this section are completed in not more than 15 days.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to an individual who is a citizen or agent of a covered foreign nation, the Secretary and the Administrator may not, except as provided in paragraph (2), admit such individual to any areas not accessible to the general public within a facility described in paragraph (3).

“(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary, acting through the Administrator, may waive the prohibition under paragraph (1) with respect to an individual who is a citizen or agent of a covered foreign nation if, not later than 30 days prior to admitting such individual to a facility described in such paragraph, the Secretary certifies to Congress that—

“(A) the admittance of such individual to the facility is in the national security interests of the United States;

“(B) no classified or restricted data will be revealed to such individual in connection with the admittance of such individual to the facility;

“(C) the Secretary or Administrator has consulted with the heads of other relevant departments or agencies of the United States Government to mitigate risks associated with the admittance of such individual; and

“(D) the background review completed to subsection (a) with respect to such individual did not uncover any previously unreported affiliation with military or intelligence organizations associated with a covered foreign nation.

“(3) FACILITIES DESCRIBED.—A facility described in this paragraph is a facility, or any portion thereof, that directly supports the mission, functions, and operations of the Administration (as described in this chapter) and is located on—

“(C) a site that directly supports the protection, development, sustainment, or disposal of technologies or materials related to the provision of nuclear propulsion for United States naval vessels.

“(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The prohibition under paragraph (1) shall take effect on April 15, 2025.

“(d) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or otherwise affect the authority of the Secretary or the Administrator to—

“(B) an individual involved in an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection (as defined in the ‘Agreement between the United States and the IAEA for the Application of Safeguards in the U.S.’); or

“(C) an individual involved in information exchanges in support of activities of the United States with respect to nonproliferation, counterproliferation, and counterterrorism, in accordance with international treaties or other legally-binding agreements or instruments to which the United States is a party; or

“(2) admit any individual to a facility, or any portion thereof, that is not directly associated with or directly funded to perform the mission, functions, and operations of the Administration (as described in this chapter).

“(1) The term ‘background review’, commonly known as an indices check, means a review of information provided by the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding personal background, including information relating to any history of criminal activity or to any evidence of espionage.

“(3) The term ‘sensitive countries list’ means the list prescribed by the Secretary of Energy known as the Department of Energy List of Sensitive Countries.

“§ 5733. Background investigations of certain personnel at Department of Energy facilities

“The Secretary of Energy shall ensure that an investigation meeting the requirements of section 145 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2165) is made for each Department of Energy employee, or contractor employee, at a national security laboratory or nuclear weapons production facility who—

“(1) carries out duties or responsibilities in or around a location where Restricted Data is present; or

“(2) has or may have regular access to a location where Restricted Data is present.

“(a) New counterintelligence polygraph program required.—The Secretary of Energy shall carry out, under regulations prescribed under this section, a new counterintelligence polygraph program for the Department of Energy. The purpose of the new program is to minimize the potential for release or disclosure of classified data, materials, or information.

“(1) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations for the new counterintelligence polygraph program required by subsection (a) in accordance with the provisions of subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5 (commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedures Act).

“(2) In prescribing regulations for the new program, the Secretary shall take into account the results of the Polygraph Review.

“(3) Not later than six months after obtaining the results of the Polygraph Review, the Secretary shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for the new program.

“(4) In the event of a counterintelligence investigation, the regulations prescribed under paragraph (1) may ensure that the persons subject to the counterintelligence polygraph program required by subsection (a) include any person who is—

“(A) a national of the United States (as such term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)) and also a national of a foreign state; and

“(c) Polygraph Review defined.—In this section, the term ‘Polygraph Review’ means the review of the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph of the National Academy of Sciences.

“§ 5735. Notice to congressional committees of certain security and counterintelligence failures within atomic energy defense programs

“(a) Required notification.—The Secretary of Energy shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a notification of each significant atomic energy defense intelligence loss. Any such notification shall be provided only after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as appropriate.

“(b) Significant atomic energy defense intelligence losses.—In this section, the term ‘significant atomic energy defense intelligence loss’ means any national security or counterintelligence failure or compromise of classified information at a facility of the Department of Energy or operated by a contractor of the Department that the Secretary considers likely to cause significant harm or damage to the national security interests of the United States.

“(c) Manner of notification.—Notification of a significant atomic energy defense intelligence loss under subsection (a) shall be provided, in accordance with the procedures established pursuant to subsection (d), not later than 30 days after the date on which the Department of Energy determines that the loss has taken place.

“(d) Procedures.—The Secretary of Energy and the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives shall each establish such procedures as may be necessary to protect from unauthorized disclosure classified information, information relating to intelligence sources and methods, and sensitive law enforcement information that is submitted to those committees pursuant to this section and that are otherwise necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.

“(1) Nothing in this section shall be construed as authority to withhold any information from the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives on the grounds that providing the information to those committees would constitute the unauthorized disclosure of classified information, information relating to intelligence sources and methods, or sensitive law enforcement information.

“(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to modify or supersede any other requirement to report information on intelligence activities to Congress, including the requirement under section 501 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3091) for the President to ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully informed of the intelligence activities of the United States and for those committees to notify promptly other congressional committees of any matter relating to intelligence activities requiring the attention of those committees.

“§ 5736. Annual report and certification on status of security of atomic energy defense facilities

“(1) Not later than September 30 of each even-numbered year, the Administrator shall submit to the Secretary of Energy—

“(A) a report detailing the status of security at facilities holding Category I and II quantities of special nuclear material that are administered by the Administration; and

“(B) written certification that such facilities are secure and that the security measures at such facilities meet the security standards and requirements of the Administration and the Department of Energy.

“(2) If the Administrator is unable to make the certification described in paragraph (1)(B) with respect to a facility, the Administrator shall submit to the Secretary with the matters required by paragraph (1) a corrective action plan for the facility describing—

“(A) the deficiency that resulted in the Administrator being unable to make the certification;

“(3) Not later than December 1 of each even-numbered year, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees the unaltered report, certification, and any corrective action plans submitted by the Administrator under paragraphs (1) and (2) together with any comments of the Secretary.

“(b) Report and certification on atomic energy defense facilities not administered by the Administration.—

“(1) Not later than December 1 of each even-numbered year, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees—

“(A) a report detailing the status of the security of atomic energy defense facilities holding Category I and II quantities of special nuclear material that are not administered by the Administration; and

“(B) written certification that such facilities are secure and that the security measures at such facilities meet the security standards and requirements of the Department of Energy.

“(2) If the Secretary is unable to make the certification described in paragraph (1)(B) with respect to a facility, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees, together with the matters required by paragraph (1), a corrective action plan describing—

“(A) the deficiency that resulted in the Secretary being unable to make the certification;

“§ 5737. Protection of certain nuclear facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft

“(a) Authority.—Notwithstanding any provision of title 18, the Secretary of Energy may take such actions described in subsection (b)(1) that are necessary to mitigate the threat (as defined by the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation) that an unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft poses to the safety or security of a covered facility or asset.

“(A) Detect, identify, monitor, and track the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft, without prior consent, including by means of intercept or other access of a wire, oral, or electronic communication used to control the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.

“(B) Warn the operator of the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft, including by passive or active, and direct or indirect physical, electronic, radio, and electromagnetic means.

“(C) Disrupt control of the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft, without prior consent, including by disabling the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft by intercepting, interfering, or causing interference with wire, oral, electronic, or radio communications used to control the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.

“(D) Seize or exercise control of the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.

“(E) Seize or otherwise confiscate the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.

“(F) Use reasonable force to disable, damage, or destroy the unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.

“(2) The Secretary of Energy shall develop the actions described in paragraph (1) in coordination with the Secretary of Transportation.

“(c) Forfeiture.—Any unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft described in subsection (a) that is seized by the Secretary of Energy is subject to forfeiture to the United States.

“(d) Regulations.—The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Transportation may prescribe regulations and shall issue guidance in the respective areas of each Secretary to carry out this section.

“(1) The term ‘covered facility or asset’ means any facility or asset that is—

“(B) located in the United States (including the territories and possessions of the United States); and

“(C) owned by the United States or contracted to the United States, to store or use special nuclear material.

“(2) The terms ‘unmanned aircraft’ and ‘unmanned aircraft system’ have the meanings given those terms in section 331 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112–95; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note).

“§ 5738. Reporting on penetrations of networks of contractors and subcontractors

“(a) Procedures for reporting penetrations.—The Administrator shall establish procedures that require each contractor and subcontractor to report to the Chief Information Officer when a covered network of the contractor or subcontractor that meets the criteria established pursuant to subsection (b) is successfully penetrated.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall, in consultation with the officials specified in paragraph (2), establish criteria for covered networks to be subject to the procedures for reporting penetrations under subsection (a).

“(2) OFFICIALS SPECIFIED.—The officials specified in this paragraph are the following officials of the Administration:

“(D) Any other official of the Administration the Administrator considers necessary.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The procedures established pursuant to subsection (a) shall require each contractor or subcontractor to submit to the Chief Information Officer a report on each successful penetration of a covered network of the contractor or subcontractor that meets the criteria established pursuant to subsection (b) not later than 60 days after the discovery of the successful penetration.

“(B) ELEMENTS.—Subject to subparagraph (C), each report required by subparagraph (A) with respect to a successful penetration of a covered network of a contractor or subcontractor shall include the following:

“(ii) A sample of the malicious software, if discovered and isolated by the contractor or subcontractor, involved in such penetration.

“(iii) A summary of information created by or for the Administration in connection with any program of the Administration that has been potentially compromised as a result of such penetration.

“(C) AVOIDANCE OF DELAYS IN REPORTING.—If a contractor or subcontractor is not able to obtain all of the information required by subparagraph (B) to be included in a report required by subparagraph (A) by the date that is 60 days after the discovery of a successful penetration of a covered network of the contractor or subcontractor, the contractor or subcontractor shall—

“(ii) provide to the Chief Information Officer the additional information required by subparagraph (B) as the information becomes available.

“(2) ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT AND INFORMATION BY ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL.—Concurrent with the establishment of the procedures pursuant to subsection (a), the Administrator shall establish procedures to be used if information owned by the Administration was in use during or at risk as a result of the successful penetration of a covered network—

“(i) in the case of a penetration of a covered network of a management and operating contractor, enhance the access of personnel of the Administration to Government-owned equipment and information; and

“(ii) in the case of a penetration of a covered network of a contractor or subcontractor that is not a management and operating contractor, facilitate the access of personnel of the Administration to the equipment and information of the contractor or subcontractor; and

“(i) include mechanisms for personnel of the Administration to, upon request, obtain access to equipment or information of a contractor or subcontractor necessary to conduct forensic analysis in addition to any analysis conducted by the contractor or subcontractor;

“(ii) provide that a contractor or subcontractor is only required to provide access to equipment or information as described in clause (i) to determine whether information created by or for the Administration in connection with any program of the Administration was successfully exfiltrated from a network of the contractor or subcontractor and, if so, what information was exfiltrated; and

“(iii) provide for the reasonable protection of trade secrets, commercial or financial information, and information that can be used to identify a specific person.

“(3) DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.—The procedures established pursuant to subsection (a) shall allow for limiting the dissemination of information obtained or derived through such procedures so that such information may be disseminated only to entities—

“(B) that may be called upon to assist in the diagnosis, detection, or mitigation of cyber incidents;

“(D) for national security purposes, including cyber situational awareness and defense purposes.

“(1) CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER.—The term ‘Chief Information Officer’ means the Associate Administrator for Information Management and Chief Information Officer of the Administration.

“(2) CONTRACTOR.—The term ‘contractor’ means a private entity that has entered into a contract or contractual action of any kind with the Administration to furnish supplies, equipment, materials, or services of any kind.

“(3) COVERED NETWORK.—The term ‘covered network’ includes any network or information system that accesses, receives, or stores—

“(B) sensitive unclassified information germane to any program of the Administration, as determined by the Administrator.

“(4) SUBCONTRACTOR.—The term ‘subcontractor’ means a private entity that has entered into a contract or contractual action with a contractor or another subcontractor to furnish supplies, equipment, materials, or services of any kind in connection with another contract in support of any program of the Administration.

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall ensure that, before a document of the Department of Energy that contains national security information is released or declassified, such document is reviewed to determine whether it contains Restricted Data.

“(b) Limitation on declassification.—The Secretary may not implement the automatic declassification provisions of Executive Order No. 13526 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note) if the Secretary determines that such implementation could result in the automatic declassification and release of documents containing Restricted Data.

“§ 5742. Protection against inadvertent release of restricted data and formerly restricted data

“(a) Plan for protection against release.—The Secretary of Energy and the Archivist of the United States shall, after consultation with the members of the National Security Council and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies, develop a plan to prevent the inadvertent release of records containing Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data during the automatic declassification of records under Executive Order No. 13526 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note).

“(b) Plan elements.—The plan under subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(1) The actions to be taken in order to ensure that records subject to Executive Order No. 13526 are reviewed on a page-by-page basis for Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data unless they have been determined to be highly unlikely to contain Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data.

“(2) The criteria and process by which documents are determined to be highly unlikely to contain Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data.

“(3) The actions to be taken in order to ensure proper training, supervision, and evaluation of personnel engaged in declassification under that Executive order so that such personnel recognize Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data.

“(4) The extent to which automated declassification technologies will be used under that Executive order to protect Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data from inadvertent release.

“(5) Procedures for periodic review and evaluation by the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office of the National Archives and Records Administration, of compliance by Federal agencies with the plan.

“(6) Procedures for resolving disagreements among Federal agencies regarding declassification procedures and decisions under the plan.

“(7) The funding, personnel, and other resources required to carry out the plan.

“(1) Effective on October 17, 1998, and except as provided in paragraph (3), a record referred to in subsection (a) may not be declassified unless the agency having custody of the record reviews the record on a page-by-page basis to ensure that the record does not contain Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data.

“(2) Any record determined as a result of a review under paragraph (1) to contain Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data may not be declassified until the Secretary of Energy, in conjunction with the head of the agency having custody of the record, determines that the document is suitable for declassification.

“(3) After the date occurring 60 days after the submission of the plan required by subsection (a) to the committees referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (d), the requirement under paragraph (1) to review a record on a page-by-page basis shall not apply in the case of a record determined, under the actions specified in the plan pursuant to subsection (b)(1), to be a record that is highly unlikely to contain Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data.

“(d) Submission of plan.—The Secretary of Energy shall submit the plan required under subsection (a) to the following:

“(1) The Secretary of Energy shall submit to the committees and Assistant to the President specified in subsection (d) a report on inadvertent releases of Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data under Executive Order No. 12958 that occurred before October 17, 1998.

“(2) The Secretary of Energy shall, in each even-numbered year beginning in 2010, submit to the committees and Assistant to the President specified in subsection (d) a report identifying any inadvertent releases of Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data under Executive Order No. 13526 discovered in the two-year period preceding the submittal of the report.

“§ 5743. Supplement to plan for declassification of restricted data and formerly restricted data

“(a) Supplement to plan.—The Secretary of Energy and the Archivist of the United States shall, after consultation with the members of the National Security Council and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies, develop a supplement to the plan required under subsection (a) of section 5742.

“(b) Contents of supplement.—The supplement shall provide for the application of that plan (including in particular the element of the plan required by section 5742(b)(1)) to all records subject to Executive Order No. 12958 that were determined before October 17, 1998, to be suitable for declassification.

“(c) Limitation on declassification of records.—All records referred to in subsection (b) shall be treated, for purposes of subsection (c) of section 5742, in the same manner as records referred to in subsection (a) of such section.

“(d) Submission of supplement.—The Secretary of Energy shall submit the supplement required under subsection (a) to the recipients of the plan referred to in subsection (d) of section 5742.

“§ 5744. Protection of classified information during laboratory-to-laboratory exchanges

“(a) Provision of training.—The Secretary of Energy shall ensure that all Department of Energy employees and Department of Energy contractor employees participating in laboratory-to-laboratory cooperative exchange activities are fully trained in matters relating to the protection of classified information and to potential espionage and counterintelligence threats.

“(1) The Secretary shall establish a pool of Department employees and Department contractor employees who are specially trained to counter threats of espionage and intelligence-gathering by foreign nationals against Department employees and Department contractor employees who travel abroad for laboratory-to-laboratory exchange activities or other cooperative exchange activities on behalf of the Department.

“(2) The Director of Intelligence and Counterintelligence of the Department of Energy may assign at least one employee from the pool established under paragraph (1) to accompany a group of Department employees or Department contractor employees who travel to any nation designated to be a sensitive country for laboratory-to-laboratory exchange activities or other cooperative exchange activities on behalf of the Department.

“§ 5745. Identification in budget materials of amounts for declassification activities and limitation on expenditures for such activities

“(a) Amounts for declassification of records.—The Secretary of Energy shall include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Energy budget for any fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31) specific identification, as a budgetary line item, of the amounts required to carry out programmed activities during that fiscal year to declassify records pursuant to Executive Order No. 13526 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note), or any successor Executive order, or to comply with any statutory requirement to declassify Government records.

“(b) Certification required with respect to automatic declassification of records.—No records of the Department of Energy that have not as of October 5, 1999, been reviewed for declassification shall be subject to automatic declassification unless the Secretary of Energy certifies to Congress that such declassification would not harm the national security.

“§ 5751. Authority for appointment of certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel

“(1) Notwithstanding any provision of title 5 governing appointments in the competitive service and General Schedule classification and pay rates, the Secretary of Energy may—

“(A) establish and set the rates of pay for not more than 200 positions in the Department of Energy for scientific, engineering, and technical personnel whose duties will relate to safety at defense nuclear facilities of the Department; and

“(2) The rate of pay for a position established under paragraph (1) may not exceed the rate of pay payable for level III of the Executive Schedule under section 5314 of title 5.

“(3) To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall appoint persons under paragraph (1)(B) to the positions established under paragraph (1)(A) in accordance with the merit system principles set forth in section 2301 of such title.

“(1) The Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management under which agreement the Director shall periodically evaluate the use of the authority set forth in subsection (a)(1). The Secretary shall reimburse the Director for evaluations conducted by the Director pursuant to the agreement. Any such reimbursement shall be credited to the revolving fund referred to in section 1304(e) of title 5.

“(2) If the Director determines as a result of such evaluation that the Secretary of Energy is not appointing persons to positions under such authority in a manner consistent with the merit system principles set forth in section 2301 of title 5 or is setting rates of pay at levels that are not appropriate for the qualifications and experience of the persons appointed and the duties of the positions involved, the Director shall notify the Secretary and Congress of that determination.

“(3) Upon receipt of a notification under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall—

“(A) take appropriate actions to appoint persons to positions under such authority in a manner consistent with such principles or to set rates of pay at levels that are appropriate for the qualifications and experience of the persons appointed and the duties of the positions involved; or

“(1) The authority provided under subsection (a)(1) shall terminate on September 30, 2026.

“(2) An employee may not be separated from employment with the Department of Energy or receive a reduction in pay by reason of the termination of authority under paragraph (1).

“(a) Program required.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish a program to ensure that covered individuals may not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for making protected disclosures.

“(b) Covered individuals.—For purposes of this section, a covered individual is an individual who is an employee of the Department of Energy, or of a contractor of the Department, who is engaged in the defense activities of the Department.

“(c) Protected disclosures.—For purposes of this section, a protected disclosure is a disclosure—

“(1) made by a covered individual who takes appropriate steps to protect the security of the information in accordance with guidance provided under this section;

“(3) of classified or other information that the covered individual reasonably believes to provide direct and specific evidence of any of the following:

“(d) Persons and entities to which disclosures may be made.—A person or entity specified in this subsection is any of the following:

“(1) A member of a committee of Congress having primary responsibility for oversight of the department, agency, or element of the Government to which the disclosed information relates.

“(2) An employee of Congress who is a staff member of such a committee and has an appropriate security clearance for access to information of the type disclosed.

“(5) Any other element of the Government designated by the Secretary as authorized to receive information of the type disclosed.

“(e) Official capacity of persons to whom information is disclosed.—A member of, or an employee of Congress who is a staff member of, a committee of Congress specified in subsection (d) who receives a protected disclosure under this section does so in that member or employee's official capacity as such a member or employee.

“(f) Assistance and guidance.—The Secretary, acting through the Inspector General of the Department of Energy, shall provide assistance and guidance to each covered individual who seeks to make a protected disclosure under this section. Such assistance and guidance shall include the following:

“(1) Identifying the persons or entities under subsection (d) to which that disclosure may be made.

“(2) Advising that individual regarding the steps to be taken to protect the security of the information to be disclosed.

“(3) Taking appropriate actions to protect the identity of that individual throughout that disclosure.

“(4) Taking appropriate actions to coordinate that disclosure with any other Federal agency or agencies that originated the information.

“(g) Regulations.—The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to ensure the security of any information disclosed under this section.

“(h) Notification to covered individuals.—The Secretary shall notify each covered individual of the following:

“(3) That the individual has a responsibility to obtain that assistance and guidance before seeking to make a protected disclosure.

“(i) Complaint by covered individuals.—If a covered individual believes that that individual has been discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for making a protected disclosure under this section, the individual may submit a complaint relating to such matter to the Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals of the Department of Energy.

“(1) For each complaint submitted under subsection (i), the Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals shall—

“(B) if the Director determines the complaint is not frivolous, conduct an investigation of the complaint.

“(2) The Director shall submit a report on each investigation undertaken under paragraph (1)(B) to—

“(A) the individual who submitted the complaint on which the investigation is based;

“(1) Whenever the Secretary determines that a covered individual has been discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for making a protected disclosure under this section, the Secretary shall—

“(A) in the case of a Department employee, take appropriate actions to abate the action; or

“(B) in the case of a contractor employee, order the contractor concerned to take appropriate actions to abate the action.

“(2) (A) If a contractor fails to comply with an order issued under paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary may file an action for enforcement of the order in the appropriate United States district court.

“(B) In any action brought under subparagraph (A), the court may grant appropriate relief, including injunctive relief and compensatory and exemplary damages.

“(l) Relationship to other laws.—The protections provided by this section are independent of, and not subject to any limitations that may be provided in, the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (Public Law 101–12; 103 Stat. 16) or any other law that may provide protection for disclosures of information by employees of the Department of Energy or of a contractor of the Department.

“(1) Not later than 30 days after the commencement of each fiscal year, the Director shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the investigations undertaken under subsection (j)(1)(B) during the preceding fiscal year, including a summary of the results of each such investigation.

“(2) A report under paragraph (1) may not identify or otherwise provide any information about an individual submitting a complaint under this section without the consent of the individual.

“§ 5753. Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities workforce restructuring plan

“(a) In general.—Upon determination that a change in the workforce at a defense nuclear facility is necessary, the Secretary of Energy shall develop a plan for restructuring the workforce for the defense nuclear facility that takes into account—

“(2) the plan for the nuclear weapons stockpile that is the most recently prepared plan at the time of the development of the plan referred to in this subsection.

“(1) In developing a plan referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Labor, appropriate representatives of local and national collective-bargaining units of individuals employed at Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities, appropriate representatives of departments and agencies of State and local governments, appropriate representatives of State and local institutions of higher education, and appropriate representatives of community groups in communities affected by the restructuring plan.

“(2) The Secretary shall determine appropriate representatives of the units, governments, institutions, and groups referred to in paragraph (1).

“(c) Objectives.—In preparing the plan required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall be guided by the following objectives:

“(1) Changes in the workforce at a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility—

“(B) should be made only after the provision of notice of such changes not later than 120 days before the commencement of such changes to such employees and the communities in which such facilities are located; and

“(C) should be accomplished, when possible, through the use of retraining, early retirement, attrition, and other options that minimize layoffs.

“(2) Employees whose employment in positions at such facilities is terminated shall, to the extent practicable, receive preference in any hiring of the Department of Energy (consistent with applicable employment seniority plans or practices of the Department of Energy and with section 3152 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101–189; 103 Stat. 1682)).

“(3) Employees shall, to the extent practicable, be retrained for work in environmental restoration and waste management activities at such facilities or other facilities of the Department of Energy.

“(4) The Department of Energy should provide relocation assistance to employees who are transferred to other Department of Energy facilities as a result of the plan.

“(5) The Department of Energy should assist terminated employees in obtaining appropriate retraining, education, and reemployment assistance (including employment placement assistance).

“(6) The Department of Energy should provide local impact assistance to communities that are affected by the restructuring plan and coordinate the provision of such assistance with—

“(A) programs carried out by the Secretary of Labor under title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3111 et seq.);

“(B) programs carried out pursuant to the Defense Economic Adjustment, Diversification, Conversion, and Stabilization Act of 1990 (division D of Public Law 101–510; 10 U.S.C. 2391 note); and

“(C) programs carried out by the Department of Commerce pursuant to title II of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3141 et seq.).

“(d) Implementation.—The Secretary shall, subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, work on an ongoing basis with representatives of the Department of Labor, workforce bargaining units, and States and local communities in carrying out a plan required under subsection (a).

“(1) The Secretary shall submit to Congress a plan referred to in subsection (a) with respect to a defense nuclear facility within 90 days after the date on which a notice of changes described in subsection (c)(1)(B) is provided to employees of the facility, or 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is later.

“(2) In addition to the plans submitted under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to Congress every six months a report setting forth a description of, and the amount or value of, all local impact assistance provided during the preceding six months under subsection (c)(6).

“(f) Department of Energy defense nuclear facility defined.—In this section, the term ‘Department of Energy defense nuclear facility’ means—

“(1) a production facility or utilization facility (as those terms are defined in section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014)) that is under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary and that is operated for national security purposes (including the tritium loading facility at Savannah River, South Carolina, and the 236 H facility at Savannah River, South Carolina), but the term does not include any facility that does not conduct atomic energy defense activities and does not include any facility or activity covered by Executive Order Number 12344, dated February 1, 1982, pertaining to the naval nuclear propulsion program;

“(2) a nuclear waste storage or disposal facility that is under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary;

“(3) a testing and assembly facility that is under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary and that is operated for national security purposes (including the Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, and the Pantex facility, Texas);

“(4) an atomic weapons research facility that is under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary (including Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, and Sandia National Laboratories); or

“(B) was under the control or jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, the Atomic Energy Commission, or the Energy Research and Development Administration; and

“§ 5754. Authority to provide certificate of commendation to Department of Energy and contractor employees for exemplary service in stockpile stewardship and security

“(a) Authority to present certificate of commendation.—The Secretary of Energy may present a certificate of commendation to any current or former employee of the Department of Energy, and any current or former employee of a Department contractor, whose service to the Department in matters relating to stockpile stewardship and security assisted the Department in furthering the national security interests of the United States.

“(b) Certificate.—The certificate of commendation presented to a current or former employee under subsection (a) shall include an appropriate citation of the service of the current or former employee described in that subsection, including a citation for dedication, intellect, and sacrifice in furthering the national security interests of the United States by maintaining a strong, safe, and viable United States nuclear deterrent during the cold war or thereafter.

“(c) Department of Energy defined.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘Department of Energy’ includes any predecessor agency of the Department of Energy.

“(a) Establishment of training program.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish and implement a management training program for personnel of the Department of Energy involved in the management of atomic energy defense activities.

“(b) Training provisions.—The training program shall at a minimum include instruction in the following areas:

“(1) Department of Energy policy and procedures for management and operation of atomic energy defense facilities.

“(3) Federal and State environmental laws and requirements for compliance with such environmental laws, including timely compliance with reporting requirements in such laws.

“(4) The establishment of program milestones and methods to evaluate success in meeting such milestones.

“(6) Procedures for reviewing and applying innovative technology to defense environmental cleanup.

“(1) As part of the stockpile stewardship program established pursuant to section 5621, the Secretary of Energy shall conduct a stockpile stewardship recruitment and training program at the national security laboratories.

“(2) The recruitment and training program shall be conducted in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Nuclear Weapons Council established by section 179 and the directors of the laboratories referred to in paragraph (1).

“(b) Support of dual-use programs.—As part of the recruitment and training program, the directors of the national security laboratories may employ undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows to carry out research sponsored by such laboratories for military or nonmilitary dual-use programs related to nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship.

“(c) Establishment of retiree corps.—As part of the training and recruitment program, the Secretary, in coordination with the directors of the national security laboratories, shall establish for the laboratories a retiree corps of retired scientists who have expertise in research and development of nuclear weapons. The directors may employ the retired scientists on a part-time basis to provide appropriate assistance on nuclear weapons issues, to contribute relevant information to be archived, and to help to provide training to other scientists.

“§ 5763. Fellowship program for development of skills critical to the nuclear security enterprise

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall conduct a fellowship program for the development of skills critical to the ongoing mission of the nuclear security enterprise. Under the fellowship program, the Secretary shall provide educational assistance and research assistance to eligible individuals to facilitate the development by such individuals of skills critical to maintaining the ongoing mission of the nuclear security enterprise.

“(b) Eligible individuals.—Individuals eligible for participation in the fellowship program are United States citizens who are either of the following:

“(1) Students pursuing graduate degrees in fields of science or engineering that are related to nuclear weapons engineering or to the science and technology base of the Department of Energy.

“(c) Covered facilities.—The Secretary shall carry out the fellowship program at or in connection with the national security laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities.

“(d) Administration.—The Secretary shall carry out the fellowship program at a facility referred to in subsection (c) through the stockpile manager of the facility.

“(e) Allocation of funds.—The Secretary shall, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Defense Programs, allocate funds available for the fellowship program under subsection (f) among the facilities referred to in subsection (c). The Secretary shall make the allocation after evaluating an assessment by the weapons program director of each such facility of the personnel and critical skills necessary at the facility for carrying out the ongoing mission of the facility.

“(1) The Secretary may allow an individual to participate in the program only if the individual signs an agreement described in paragraph (2).

“(2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) shall be in writing, shall be signed by the participant, and shall include the participant's agreement to serve, after completion of the course of study for which the assistance was provided, as a full-time employee in a position in the nuclear security enterprise for a period of time to be established by the Secretary of Energy of not less than one year, if such a position is offered to the participant.

“(1) The Secretary of Energy is authorized to award grants to organizations referred to in paragraph (2) in order for such organizations—

“(A) to provide training and education to persons who are or may be engaged in hazardous substance response or emergency response at Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities; and

“(2) (A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary is authorized to award grants under paragraph (1) to non-profit organizations that have demonstrated (as determined by the Secretary) capabilities in-

“(i) implementing and conducting effective training and education programs relating to the general health and safety of workers; and

“(ii) identifying, and involving in training, groups of workers whose duties include hazardous substance response or emergency response.

“(B) The Secretary shall give preference in the award of grants under this section to employee organizations and joint labor-management training programs that are grant recipients under section 126(g) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 9660a).

“(3) An organization awarded a grant under paragraph (1) shall carry out training, education, or curricula development pursuant to Department of Energy orders relating to employee safety training, including orders numbered 5480.4 and 5480.11.

“(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary shall assess civil penalties against any contractor of the Department of Energy who (as determined by the Secretary)—

“(A) employs individuals who are engaged in hazardous substance response or emergency response at Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities; and

“(B) fails (i) to provide for the training of such individuals to carry out such hazardous substance response or emergency response, or (ii) to certify to the Department of Energy that such employees are adequately trained for such response pursuant to orders issued by the Department of Energy relating to employee safety training (including orders numbered 5480.4 and 5480.11).

“(2) Civil penalties assessed under this subsection may not exceed $5,000 for each day in which a failure referred to in paragraph (1)(B) occurs.

“(c) Regulations.—The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry out this section.

“(d) Definitions.—For the purposes of this section, the term ‘hazardous substance’ includes radioactive waste and mixed radioactive and hazardous waste.

“(1) officials of the Department of Energy who are responsible for independent oversight of matters relating to nuclear safety at defense nuclear facilities and enforcement of nuclear safety standards at such facilities maintain independence from officials who are engaged in, or who are advising persons who are engaged in, management of such facilities;

“(2) the independent, internal oversight functions carried out by the Department include activities relating to—

“(B) the assessment of the effectiveness of Department program offices in carrying out programs relating to the environment, safety, health, and security at defense nuclear facilities;

“(ii) provide a clear analysis of the extent to which line programs governing defense nuclear facilities meet applicable goals for the environment, safety, health, and security at such facilities; and

“(D) the development of clear performance standards to be used in assessing the adequacy of the programs referred to in subparagraph (C)(ii);

“(3) the Department has a system for bringing issues relating to nuclear safety at defense nuclear facilities to the attention of the officials of the Department (including the Secretary of Energy) who have authority to resolve such issues in an adequate and timely manner; and

“(4) an adequate number of qualified personnel of the Department are assigned to oversee matters relating to nuclear safety at defense nuclear facilities and enforce nuclear safety standards at such facilities.

“§ 5773. Program to monitor department of energy workers exposed to hazardous and radioactive substances

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish and carry out a program for the identification and on-going medical evaluation of current and former Department of Energy employees who are subject to significant health risks as a result of the exposure of such employees to hazardous or radioactive substances during such employment.

“(1) The Secretary shall, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, issue regulations under which the Secretary shall implement the program. Such regulations shall, to the extent practicable, provide for a process to—

“(A) identify the hazardous substances and radioactive substances to which current and former Department of Energy employees may have been exposed as a result of such employment;

“(B) identify employees referred to in subparagraph (A) who received a level of exposure identified under paragraph (2)(B);

“(C) determine the appropriate number, scope, and frequency of medical evaluations and laboratory tests to be provided to employees who have received a level of exposure identified under paragraph (2)(B) to permit the Secretary to evaluate fully the extent, nature, and medical consequences of such exposure;

“(D) make available the evaluations and tests referred to in subparagraph (C) to the employees referred to in such subparagraph;

“(E) ensure that privacy is maintained with respect to medical information that personally identifies any such employee; and

“(2) (A) In determining the most appropriate means of carrying out the activities referred to in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Health and Human Services under the agreement referred to in subsection (c).

“(B) The Secretary of Health and Human Services, with the assistance of the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and the Secretary of Labor shall identify the levels of exposure to the substances referred to in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) that present employees referred to in such subparagraph with significant health risks under Federal and State occupational, health, and safety standards.

“(3) In prescribing the guidelines referred to in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with representatives of the following entities:

“(D) Any labor organization or other collective bargaining agent authorized to act on the behalf of employees of a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility.

“(4) The Secretary shall provide for each employee identified under paragraph (1)(B) and provided with any medical examination or test under paragraph (1) to be notified by the appropriate medical personnel of the identification and the results of any such examination or test. Each notification under this paragraph shall be provided in a form that is readily understandable by the employee.

“(5) The Secretary shall collect and assemble information relating to the examinations and tests carried out under paragraph (1).

“(6) The Secretary shall commence carrying out the program described in this subsection not later than October 23, 1993.

“(c) Agreement with Secretary of Health and Human Services.—Not later than April 23, 1993, the Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the Secretary of Health and Human Services relating to the establishment and conduct of the program required and regulations issued under this section.

“(1) The term ‘Department of Energy defense nuclear facility’ has the meaning given that term in section 5753(f).

“(2) The term ‘Department of Energy employee’ means any employee of the Department of Energy employed at a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility, including any employee of a contractor or subcontractor of the Department of Energy employed at such a facility.

“§ 5774. Programs for persons who may have been exposed to radiation released from Hanford Nuclear Reservation

“(a) Funding.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy under title XXXI of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101–510), the Secretary of Energy shall make available $3,000,000 to the State of Washington, $1,000,000 to the State of Oregon, and $1,000,000 to the State of Idaho. Such funds shall be used to develop and implement programs for the benefit of persons who may have been exposed to radiation released from the Department of Energy Hanford Nuclear Reservation (Richland, Washington) between the years 1944 and 1972.

“(b) Programs.—The programs to be developed by the States may include only the following activities:

“(1) Preparing and distributing information on the health effects of radiation to health care professionals, and to persons who may have been exposed to radiation.

“(2) Developing and implementing mechanisms for referring persons who may have been exposed to radiation to health care professionals with expertise in the health effects of radiation.

“(3) Evaluating and, if feasible, implementing, registration and monitoring of persons who may have been exposed to radiation released from the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

“(1) The States of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho shall jointly develop a single plan for implementing this section.

“(2) Not later than May 5, 1991, such States shall submit to the Secretary of Energy and Congress a copy of the plan developed under paragraph (1).

“(3) Not later than May 5, 1992, such States shall submit to the Secretary of Energy and Congress a single report on the implementation of the plan developed under paragraph (1).

“(4) In developing and implementing the plan, such States shall consult with persons carrying out current radiation dose and epidemiological research programs (including the Hanford Thyroid Disease Study of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project of the Department of Energy), and may not cause substantial damage to such research programs.

“(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a person may not disclose to the public the following:

“(A) Any information obtained through a program that identifies a person who may have been exposed to radiation released from the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

“(B) Any information obtained through a program that identifies a person participating in any of the programs developed under this section.

“(C) The name, address, and telephone number of a person requesting information referred to in subsection (b)(1).

“(D) The name, address, and telephone number of a person who has been referred to a health care professional under subsection (b)(2).

“(E) The name, address, and telephone number of a person who has been registered and monitored pursuant to subsection (b)(3).

“(F) Information that identifies the person from whom information referred to in this paragraph was obtained under a program or any other third party involved with, or identified by, any such information so obtained.

“(G) Any other personal or medical information that identifies a person or party referred to in subparagraphs (A) through (F).

“(H) Such other information or categories of information as the chief officers of the health departments of the States of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho jointly designate as information covered by this subsection.

“(2) Information referred to in paragraph (1) may be disclosed to the public if the person identified by the information, or the legal representative of that person, has consented in writing to the disclosure.

“(3) The States of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho shall establish uniform procedures for carrying out this subsection, including procedures governing the following:

“(D) Enforcement of the prohibition provided in paragraph (1) on the disclosure of information described in that paragraph.

“§ 5775. Use of probabilistic risk assessment to ensure nuclear safety of facilities of the Administration and the Office of Environmental Management

“(a) Nuclear safety at NNSA and DOE facilities.—The Administrator and the Secretary of Energy shall ensure that the methods for assessing, certifying, and overseeing nuclear safety at the facilities specified in subsection (c) use national and international standards and nuclear industry best practices, including probabilistic or quantitative risk assessment if sufficient data exist.

“(b) Adequate protection.—The use of probabilistic or quantitative risk assessment under subsection (a) shall be to support, rather than replace, the requirement under section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2232) that the utilization or production of special nuclear material will be in accordance with the common defense and security and will provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public.

“(1) to the Administrator with respect to the national security laboratories and the nuclear weapons production facilities; and

“(2) to the Secretary of Energy with respect to defense nuclear facilities of the Office of Environmental Management of the Department of Energy.

“(a) Notification.—The Secretary of Energy or the Administrator, as the case may be, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a notification of a nuclear criticality incident resulting from a covered program that results in an injury or fatality or results in the shutdown, or partial shutdown, of a covered facility by not later than 15 days after the date of such incident.

“(b) Elements of notification.—Each notification submitted under subsection (a) shall include the following:

“(2) In the case of a criticality incident, whether the incident caused a facility, or part of a facility, to be shut down.

“(3) The effect, if any, on the mission of the Administration or the Office of Environmental Management of the Department of Energy.

“(1) The Secretary shall maintain a record of incidents described in paragraph (2).

“(2) An incident described in this paragraph is any of the following incidents resulting from a covered program:

“(A) A nuclear criticality incident that results in an injury or fatality or results in the shutdown, or partial shutdown, of a covered facility.

“(B) A non-nuclear incident that results in serious bodily injury or fatality at a covered facility.

“(d) Cooperation.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary and the Administrator shall ensure that each management and operating contractor of a covered facility cooperates in a timely manner.

“(B) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.

“(B) a facility conducting activities for the defense environmental cleanup program of the Office of Environmental Management of the Department of Energy.

“(B) defense environmental cleanup programs of the Office of Environmental Management of the Department of Energy.

“(1) The term ‘DOE national security authorization’ means an authorization of appropriations for activities of the Department of Energy in carrying out programs necessary for national security.

“(2) (A) Except as provided by subparagraph (B), the term ‘minor construction threshold’ means $30,000,000.

“(B) The Administrator may calculate the amount specified in subparagraph (A) based on fiscal year 2022 constant dollars if the Administrator-

“(i) submits to the congressional defense committees a report on the method used by the Administrator to calculate the adjustment;

“(a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b) and in sections 5791 and 5792 of this title, the Secretary of Energy may not use amounts appropriated pursuant to a DOE national security authorization for a program—

“(A) 115 percent of the amount authorized for that program by that authorization for that fiscal year; or

“(B) $5,000,000 more than the amount authorized for that program by that authorization for that fiscal year; or

“(b) Exception where notice-and-wait given.—An action described in subsection (a) may be taken if—

“(1) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a report referred to in subsection (c) with respect to such action; and

“(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which such committees receive the report.

“(c) Report.—The report referred to in this subsection is a report containing a full and complete statement of the action proposed to be taken and the facts and circumstances relied upon in support of the proposed action.

“(d) Computation of days.—In the computation of the 30-day period under subsection (b), there shall be excluded any day on which either House of Congress is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain.

“(1) TOTAL AMOUNT OBLIGATED.—In no event may the total amount of funds obligated pursuant to a DOE national security authorization for a fiscal year exceed the total amount authorized to be appropriated by that authorization for that fiscal year.

“(2) PROHIBITED ITEMS.—Funds appropriated pursuant to a DOE national security authorization may not be used for an item for which Congress has specifically denied funds.

“(a) Authority.—Using operation and maintenance funds or facilities and infrastructure funds authorized by a DOE national security authorization, the Secretary of Energy may carry out minor construction projects.

“(b) Annual report.—The Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees on an annual basis a report on each exercise of the authority in subsection (a) during the preceding fiscal year. Each report shall provide a brief description of each minor construction project covered by the report. The report shall include with respect to each project the following:

“(1) The estimated original total project cost and the estimated original date of completion.

“(3) The current estimated total project cost and estimated date of completion.

“(c) Cost variation reports to congressional committees.—If, at any time during the construction of any minor construction project authorized by a DOE national security authorization, the estimated cost of the project is revised and the revised cost of the project exceeds the minor construction threshold, the Secretary shall immediately submit to the congressional defense committees a report explaining the reasons for the cost variation.

“(d) Notification required for certain projects.—Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary may not start a minor construction project with a total estimated cost of more than $5,000,000 until—

“(1) the Secretary notifies the congressional defense committees of such project and total estimated cost; and

“(2) a period of 15 days has elapsed after the date on which such notification is received.

“(e) Minor construction project defined.—In this section, the term ‘minor construction project’ means any plant project not specifically authorized by law for which the approved total estimated cost does not exceed the minor construction threshold.

“ Plant or construction projects for which amounts are made available under this and subsequent appropriation Acts with a current estimated cost of less than $10,000,000 are considered for purposes of section 5783 as a plant project for which the approved total estimated cost does not exceed the minor construction threshold and for purposes of section 5785 as a construction project with a current estimated cost of less than a minor construction threshold.

“(a) Construction cost ceiling.—Except as provided in subsection (b), construction on a construction project which is in support of national security programs of the Department of Energy and was authorized by a DOE national security authorization may not be started, and additional obligations in connection with the project above the total estimated cost may not be incurred, whenever the current estimated cost of the construction project exceeds by more than 25 percent the higher of—

“(2) the amount of the total estimated cost for the project as shown in the most recent budget justification data submitted to Congress.

“(b) Exception where notice-and-wait given.—An action described in subsection (a) may be taken if—

“(1) the Secretary of Energy has submitted to the congressional defense committees a report on the actions and the circumstances making such action necessary; and

“(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which the report is received by the committees.

“(c) Computation of days.—In the computation of the 30-day period under subsection (b), there shall be excluded any day on which either House of Congress is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain.

“(d) Exception for minor projects.—Subsection (a) does not apply to a construction project with a current estimated cost of less than the minor construction threshold.

“(a) Transfer to other Federal agencies.—The Secretary of Energy may transfer funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE national security authorization to other Federal agencies for the performance of work for which the funds were authorized. Funds so transferred may be merged with and be available for the same purposes and for the same time period as the authorizations of the Federal agency to which the amounts are transferred.

“(1) TRANSFERS PERMITTED.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of Energy may transfer funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE national security authorization to any other DOE national security authorization. Amounts of authorizations so transferred may be merged with and be available for the same purposes and for the same period as the authorization to which the amounts are transferred.

“(2) MAXIMUM AMOUNTS.—Not more than 5 percent of any such authorization may be transferred to another authorization under paragraph (1). No such authorization may be increased or decreased by more than 5 percent by a transfer under such paragraph.

“(c) Limitations.—The authority provided by this subsection to transfer authorizations—

“(1) may be used only to provide funds for items relating to activities necessary for national security programs that have a higher priority than the items from which the funds are transferred; and

“(2) may not be used to provide funds for an item for which Congress has specifically denied funds.

“(d) Notice to Congress.—The Secretary of Energy shall promptly notify the congressional defense committees of any transfer of funds to or from any DOE national security authorization.

“(1) REQUIREMENT.—Subject to paragraph (2) and except as provided in paragraph (3), before submitting to Congress a request for funds for a construction project that is in support of a national security program of the Department of Energy, the Secretary of Energy shall complete a conceptual design for that project.

“(2) REQUESTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FUNDS.—If the estimated cost of completing a conceptual design for a construction project exceeds $5,000,000, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a request for funds for the conceptual design before submitting a request for funds for the construction project.

“(3) EXCEPTIONS.—The requirement in paragraph (1) does not apply to a request for funds—

“(A) for a construction project the total estimated cost of which is less than the minor construction threshold; or

“(B) for emergency planning, design, and construction activities under section 5788.

“(1) AUTHORITY.— Within the amounts authorized by a DOE national security authorization, the Secretary may carry out construction design (including architectural and engineering services) in connection with any proposed construction project if the total estimated cost for such design does not exceed $5,000,000.

“(2) LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.—If the total estimated cost for construction design in connection with any construction project exceeds $5,000,000, funds for that design must be specifically authorized by law.

“§ 5788. Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities

“(a) Authority.—The Secretary of Energy may use any funds available to the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE national security authorization, including funds authorized to be appropriated for advance planning, engineering, and construction design, and for plant projects, to perform planning, design, and construction activities for any Department of Energy national security program construction project that, as determined by the Secretary, must proceed expeditiously in order to protect public health and safety, to meet the needs of national defense, or to protect property.

“(b) Limitation.—The Secretary may not exercise the authority under subsection (a) in the case of a construction project until the Secretary has submitted to the congressional defense committees a report on the activities that the Secretary intends to carry out under this section and the circumstances making those activities necessary.

“(c) Specific authority.—The requirement of section 5787(b)(2) does not apply to emergency planning, design, and construction activities conducted under this section.

“ In carrying out programs necessary for national security, the authority of the Secretary of Energy to carry out plant projects includes authority for maintenance, restoration, planning, construction, acquisition, modification of facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in prior years, and land acquisition related thereto.

“(a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b), amounts appropriated pursuant to a DOE national security authorization for operation and maintenance or for plant projects may, when so specified in an appropriations Act, remain available until expended.

“(b) Exception for program direction funds.—Amounts appropriated for program direction pursuant to a DOE national security authorization for a fiscal year shall remain available to be obligated only until the end of that fiscal year.

“(a) Transfer authority for defense environmental cleanup funds.—The Secretary of Energy shall provide the manager of each field office of the Department of Energy with the authority to transfer defense environmental cleanup funds from a program or project under the jurisdiction of that office to another such program or project.

“(1) NUMBER OF TRANSFERS.—Not more than one transfer may be made to or from any program or project under subsection (a) in a fiscal year.

“(2) AMOUNTS TRANSFERRED.—The amount transferred to or from a program or project in any one transfer under subsection (a) may not exceed $5,000,000.

“(3) DETERMINATION REQUIRED.—A transfer may not be carried out by a manager of a field office under subsection (a) unless the manager determines that the transfer is necessary—

“(B) to assure the most efficient use of defense environmental cleanup funds at the field office.

“(4) IMPERMISSIBLE USES.—Funds transferred pursuant to subsection (a) may not be used for an item for which Congress has specifically denied funds or for a new program or project that has not been authorized by Congress.

“(c) Exemption from reprogramming requirements.—The requirements of section 5782 shall not apply to transfers of funds pursuant to subsection (a).

“(d) Notification.—The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, shall notify Congress of any transfer of funds pursuant to subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such transfer occurs.

“(1) The term ‘program or project’ means, with respect to a field office of the Department of Energy, a program or project that is for defense environmental cleanup activities necessary for national security programs of the Department, that is being carried out by that office, and for which defense environmental cleanup funds have been authorized and appropriated.

“(2) The term ‘defense environmental cleanup funds’ means funds appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to an authorization for carrying out defense environmental cleanup activities necessary for national security programs.

“(a) Transfer authority for weapons activities funds.—The Secretary of Energy shall provide the manager of each field office of the Department of Energy with the authority to transfer weapons activities funds from a program or project under the jurisdiction of that office to another such program or project.

“(1) NUMBER OF TRANSFERS.—Not more than one transfer may be made to or from any program or project under subsection (a) in a fiscal year.

“(2) AMOUNTS TRANSFERRED.—The amount transferred to or from a program or project in any one transfer under subsection (a) may not exceed $5,000,000.

“(3) DETERMINATION REQUIRED.—A transfer may not be carried out by a manager of a field office under subsection (a) unless the manager determines that the transfer—

“(4) LIMITATION.—A transfer may not be carried out by a manager of a field office under subsection (a) to cover a cost overrun or scheduling delay for any program or project.

“(5) IMPERMISSIBLE USES.—Funds transferred pursuant to subsection (a) may not be used for an item for which Congress has specifically denied funds or for a new program or project that has not been authorized by Congress.

“(c) Exemption from reprogramming requirements.—The requirements of section 5782 shall not apply to transfers of funds pursuant to subsection (a).

“(d) Notification.—The Secretary, acting through the Administrator, shall notify Congress of any transfer of funds pursuant to subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such transfer occurs.

“(1) The term ‘program or project’ means, with respect to a field office of the Department of Energy, a program or project that is for weapons activities necessary for national security programs of the Department, that is being carried out by that office, and for which weapons activities funds have been authorized and appropriated.

“(2) The term ‘weapons activities funds’ means funds appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to an authorization for carrying out weapons activities necessary for national security programs.

“§ 5793. Funds available for all national security programs of the Department of Energy

“ Subject to the provisions of appropriation Acts and section 5782, amounts appropriated pursuant to a DOE national security authorization for management and support activities and for general plant projects are available for use, when necessary, in connection with all national security programs of the Department of Energy.

“§ 5794. Notification of cost overruns for certain Department of Energy projects

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall establish a cost and schedule baseline for each nuclear stockpile life extension or new nuclear weapon program project of the Administration. In addition to the requirement under subparagraph (B), the cost and schedule baseline of a nuclear stockpile life extension or new nuclear weapon program project established under this subparagraph shall be the cost and schedule as described in the first Selected Acquisition Report submitted under section 5635(a) for the project.

“(B) PER UNIT COST.—The cost baseline developed under subparagraph (A) shall include, with respect to each stockpile life extension or new nuclear weapon program project, an estimated cost for each warhead in the project.

“(C) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES.—Not later than 30 days after establishing a cost and schedule baseline under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall submit the cost and schedule baseline to the congressional defense committees.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall establish a cost and schedule baseline for each major alteration project.

“(B) PER UNIT COST.—The cost baseline developed under subparagraph (A) shall include, with respect to each major alteration project, an estimated cost for each warhead in the project.

“(D) MAJOR ALTERATION PROJECT DEFINED.—In this paragraph, the term "major alteration project" means a nuclear weapon system alteration project of the Administration the cost of which exceeds $800,000,000.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish a cost and schedule baseline under the project management protocols of the Department of Energy for each construction project that is—

“(ii) carried out by the Department using funds authorized to be appropriated for a fiscal year pursuant to a DOE national security authorization.

“(B) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES.—Not later than 30 days after establishing a cost and schedule baseline under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall submit the cost and schedule baseline to the congressional defense committees.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a cost and schedule baseline under the project management protocols of the Department of Energy for each defense environmental cleanup project that is—

“(b) Notification of costs exceeding baseline.—The Administrator or the Secretary, as applicable, shall notify the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after determining that—

“(1) the total cost for a project referred to in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of subsection (a) will exceed an amount that is equal to 125 percent of the cost baseline established under subsection (a) for that project; and

“(2) in the case of a stockpile life extension or new nuclear weapon program project referred to in subsection (a)(1) or a major alteration project referred to in subsection (a)(2), the cost for any warhead in the project will exceed an amount that is equal to 150 percent of the cost baseline established under subsection (a)(1)(B) or (a)(2)(B), as applicable, for each warhead in that project.

“(c) Notification of determination with respect to termination or continuation of projects and root cause analyses.—Not later than 90 days after submitting a notification under subsection (b) with respect to a project, the Administrator or the Secretary, as applicable, shall—

“(1) notify the congressional defense committees with respect to whether the project will be terminated or continued;

“(2) if the project will be continued, certify to the congressional defense committees that—

“(A) a revised cost and schedule baseline has been established for the project and, in the case of a stockpile life extension or new nuclear weapon program project referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (a)(1) or a major alteration project referred to in subsection (a)(2), a revised estimate of the cost for each warhead in the project has been made;

“(B) the continuation of the project is necessary to the mission of the Department of Energy and there is no alternative to the project that would meet the requirements of that mission; and

“(C) a management structure is in place adequate to manage and control the cost and schedule of the project; and

“(3) submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment of the root cause or causes of the growth in the total cost of the project, including the contribution of any shortcomings in cost, schedule, or performance of the program, including the role, if any, of—

“(D) unanticipated design, engineering, manufacturing, or technology integration issues arising during program performance;

“(G) poor performance by personnel of the Federal Government or contractor personnel responsible for program management; or

“(d) Applicability of requirements to revised cost and schedule baselines.—A revised cost and schedule baseline established under subsection (c) shall—

“(1) be submitted to the congressional defense committees with the certification submitted under subsection (c)(2); and

“(2) be subject to the notification requirements of subsections (b) and (c) in the same manner and to the same extent as a cost and schedule baseline established under subsection (a).

“§ 5795. Life-cycle cost estimates of certain atomic energy defense capital assets

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy shall ensure that an independent life-cycle cost estimate under Department of Energy Order 413.3B (relating to program management and project management for the acquisition of capital assets), or a successor order, of each capital asset described in subsection (b) is conducted before the asset achieves critical decision 2 in the acquisition process.

“(b) Capital assets described.—A capital asset described in this subsection is an atomic energy defense capital asset—

“(2) the purpose of which is to perform a limited-life, single-purpose mission.

“(c) Independent defined.—For purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘independent’, with respect to a life-cycle cost estimate of a capital asset, means that the life-cycle cost estimate is prepared by an organization independent of the project sponsor, using the same detailed technical and procurement information as the sponsor, to determine if the life-cycle cost estimate of the sponsor is accurate and reasonable.

“§ 5796. Use of best practices for capital asset projects and nuclear weapon life extension programs

“(a) Analyses of alternatives.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 129 Stat. 726), the Secretary of Energy, in coordination with the Administrator, shall ensure that analyses of alternatives are conducted (including through contractors, as appropriate) in accordance with best practices for capital asset projects and life extension programs of the Administration and capital asset projects relating to defense environmental management.

“(b) Cost estimates.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of such Act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Administrator, shall develop cost estimates in accordance with cost estimating best practices for capital asset projects and life extension programs of the Administration and capital asset projects relating to defense environmental management.

“(c) Revisions to departmental project management order and nuclear weapon life extension requirements.—As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of such Act, but not later than two years after such date of enactment, the Secretary shall revise—

“(1) the capital asset project management order of the Department of Energy to require the use of best practices for preparing cost estimates and for conducting analyses of alternatives for Administration and defense environmental management capital asset projects; and

“(2) the nuclear weapon life extension program procedures of the Department to require the use of best practices for preparing cost estimates and conducting analyses of alternatives for Administration life extension programs.

“(a) Post-critical decision 2 changes.—After the date on which a plant project specifically authorized by law and carried out under Department of Energy Order 413.3B (relating to program management and project management for the acquisition of capital assets), or a successor order, achieves critical decision 2, the Administrator may not change the requirements for such project if such change increases the cost of such project by more than the lesser of $5,000,000 or 15 percent, unless—

“(A) a certification that the Administrator, without delegation, authorizes such proposed change; and

“(B) a cost-benefit and risk analysis of such proposed change, including with respect to—

“(i) the effects of such proposed change on the project cost and schedule; and

“(ii) any mission risks and operational risks from making such change or not making such change; and

“(b) Review and approval.—The Administrator shall ensure that critical decision packages are timely reviewed and either approved or disapproved.

“(a) Annual report or certification.—Not later than 10 days after the date on which the budget of the President for a fiscal year is submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, the Administrator shall submit to the Secretary of Energy and the congressional defense committees either—

“(2) if the Administrator determines that there are no unfunded priorities to include in such a report, a certification and explanation by the Administrator, without delegation, of the determination.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Each report under subsection (a)(1) shall specify, for each unfunded priority covered by the report, the following:

“(A) A summary description of that priority, including the objectives to be achieved or the risk to be mitigated if that priority is funded (whether in whole or in part).

“(B) The additional amount of funds recommended in connection with the objectives or risk mitigation under subparagraph (A).

“(2) PRIORITIZATION OF PRIORITIES.—Each report under subsection (a)(1) shall present the unfunded priorities covered by the report in order of urgency of priority.

“(c) Unfunded priority defined.—In this section, the term ‘unfunded priority’, in the case of a fiscal year, means a program, activity, or mission requirement that—

“(1) is not funded in the budget of the President for that fiscal year as submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31;

“(2) is necessary to address a requirement associated with the mission of the Administration; and

“(3) would have been recommended for funding through the budget referred to in paragraph (1) by the Administrator—

“(A) if additional resources were available for the budget to fund the program, activity, or mission requirement; or

“(B) in the case of a program, activity, or mission requirement that emerged after the budget was formulated, if the program, activity, or mission requirement had emerged before the budget was formulated.

“(a) Review of adequacy of administration budget by Nuclear Weapons Council.—

“(1) TRANSMISSION TO COUNCIL.—The Secretary of Energy shall transmit to the Nuclear Weapons Council (in this section referred to as the ‘Council’) a copy of the proposed budget request of the Administration for each fiscal year before that budget request is submitted to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget in relation to the preparation of the budget of the President to be submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31.

“(2) REVIEW.—The Council shall review each budget request transmitted to the Council under paragraph (1) in accordance with section 179(f).

“(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Council submits to the Secretary of Energy a written description under section 179(f)(2)(B)(i) with respect to the budget request of the Administration for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall include as an appendix to the budget request submitted to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget—

“(B) TRANSMISSION TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary of Energy shall transmit to Congress, with the budget justification materials submitted in support of the Department of Energy budget for a fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31), a copy of the appendix described in subparagraph (A).

“(b) Review and certification of Department of Energy budget by Nuclear Weapons Council.—At the time the Secretary of Energy submits the budget request of the Department of Energy for that fiscal year to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget in relation to the preparation of the budget of the President, the Secretary shall transmit a copy of the budget request of the Department to the Council.

“§ 5800. Improvements to cost estimates informing analyses of alternatives

“(a) Requirement for analyses of alternatives.—The Administrator shall ensure that any cost estimate used in an analysis of alternatives for a project carried out using funds authorized by a DOE national security authorization is designed to fully satisfy the requirements outlined in the mission needs statement approved at critical decision 0 in the acquisition process, as set forth in Department of Energy Order 413.3B (relating to program management and project management for the acquisition of capital assets) or a successor order.

“(b) Use of project engineering and design funds.—In the case of a project the total estimated cost of which exceeds $500,000,000 and that has not reached critical decision 1 in the acquisition process, the Administrator may use funds authorized by a DOE national security authorization for project engineering and design to begin the development of a conceptual design to facilitate the development of a cost estimate for the project during the analysis of alternatives for the project if—

“(A) determines that such use of funds would improve the quality of the cost estimate for the project; and

“(2) a period of 15 days has elapsed after the date on which such committees receive the notification.

“§ 5801. Restriction on use of funds to pay penalties under environmental laws

“(a) Restriction.—Funds appropriated to the Department of Energy for the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program or the nuclear weapons programs or other atomic energy defense activities of the Department of Energy may not be used to pay a penalty, fine, or forfeiture in regard to a defense activity or facility of the Department of Energy due to a failure to comply with any environmental requirement.

“(b) Exception.—Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an environmental requirement if—

“(1) the President fails to request funds for compliance with the environmental requirement; or

“(2) Congress has appropriated funds for such purpose (and such funds have not been sequestered, deferred, or rescinded) and the Secretary of Energy fails to use the funds for such purpose.

“§ 5802. Restriction on use of funds to pay penalties under Clean Air Act

“None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by the Department of Energy National Security and Military Applications of Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1981 (Public Law 96–540; 94 Stat. 3197) or any other Act may be used to pay any penalty, fine, forfeiture, or settlement resulting from a failure to comply with the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) with respect to any defense activity of the Department of Energy if—

“(1) the Secretary finds that compliance is physically impossible within the time prescribed for compliance; or

“(2) the President has specifically requested appropriations for compliance and Congress has failed to appropriate funds for such purpose.

“§ 5811. Reports on financial balances for atomic energy defense activities

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Concurrent with the submission of the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for a fiscal year (submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31), the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the financial balances for each atomic energy defense program.

“(2) PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION.—In each report required by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall—

“(A) present information on the financial balances for each atomic energy defense program at the budget control levels used in the report accompanying the most current Act appropriating funds for energy and water development; and

“(B) present financial balances in connection with funding under recurring DOE national security authorizations (as defined in section 5781) separately from balances in connection with funding under any other provision of law.

“(B) set forth the information required by those paragraphs in summary form and by fiscal year.

“(2) PART 1.—The first part of the report required by subsection (a) shall set forth, for each atomic energy defense program, the following information, as of the end of the most recently completed fiscal year:

“(A) The balance of any unobligated funds and an explanation for why those funds are unobligated.

“(F) The amount of any balance of uncosted funds that is over or under that threshold and, in the case of a balance over that threshold, an explanation for why the balance is over that threshold.

“(I) The amount of any balance of unencumbered, uncosted funds that is over or under the threshold described in subparagraph (E) and, in the case of a balance over that threshold, an explanation for why the balance is over that threshold.

“(3) PART 2.—The second part of the report required by subsection (a) shall set forth, for each atomic energy defense program, the following information:

“(A) The balance of any unobligated funds, as of the end of the first quarter of the current fiscal year.

“(B) The total balance of uncosted funds, as of the end of the first quarter of the current fiscal year.

“(1) COSTED.—The term ‘costed’, with respect to funds, means the funds have been obligated to a contract and goods or services have been received from the contractor in exchange for the funds.

“(2) ENCUMBERED.—The term ‘encumbered’, with respect to funds, means the funds have been obligated to a contract and are being held for a specific known purpose by the contractor.

“(3) UNCOSTED.—The term ‘uncosted’, with respect to funds, means the funds have been obligated to a contract and goods or services have not been received from the contractor in exchange for the funds.

“(4) UNENCUMBERED.—The term ‘unencumbered’, with respect to funds, means the funds have been obligated to a contract and are not being held for a specific known purpose by the contractor.

“(5) THRESHOLD.—The term ‘threshold’ means a benchmark over which a balance carried over at the end of a fiscal year should be given greater scrutiny by Congress.

“(6) TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE TO COST.—The term ‘total funds available to cost’ means the sum of—

“§ 5812. Independent acquisition project reviews of capital assets acquisition projects

“(a) Reviews.—The appropriate head shall ensure that an independent entity conducts reviews of each capital assets acquisition project as the project moves toward the approval of each of critical decision 0, critical decision 1, and critical decision 2 in the acquisition process.

“(b) Pre-critical decision 1 reviews.—In addition to any other matters, with respect to each review of a capital assets acquisition project under subsection (a) that has not reached critical decision 1 approval in the acquisition process, such review shall include—

“(1) a review using best practices of the analysis of alternatives for the project; and

“(2) identification of any deficiencies in such analysis of alternatives for the appropriate head to address.

“(c) Independent entities.—The appropriate head shall ensure that each review of a capital assets acquisition project under subsection (a) is conducted by an independent entity with the appropriate expertise with respect to the project and the stage in the acquisition process of the project.

“(1) The term ‘acquisition process’ means the acquisition process for a project, as defined in Department of Energy Order 413.3B (relating to project management and project management for the acquisition of capital assets), or a successor order.

“(A) the Administrator, with respect to capital assets acquisition projects of the Administration; and

“(B) the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, with respect to capital assets acquisition projects of the Office of Environmental Management.

“(B) that is covered by Department of Energy Order 413.3B, or a successor order, for the acquisition of capital assets for atomic energy defense activities.

“(a) In general.—The following costs are not allowable under a covered contract:

“(1) Costs of entertainment, including amusement, diversion, and social activities and any costs directly associated with such costs (such as tickets to shows or sports events, meals, lodging, rentals, transportation, and gratuities).

“(2) Costs incurred to influence (directly or indirectly) legislative action on any matter pending before Congress or a State legislature.

“(3) Costs incurred in defense of any civil or criminal fraud proceeding or similar proceeding (including filing of any false certification) brought by the United States where the contractor is found liable or has pleaded nolo contendere to a charge of fraud or similar proceeding (including filing of false certification).

“(4) Payments of fines and penalties resulting from violations of, or failure to comply with, Federal, State, local, or foreign laws and regulations, except when incurred as a result of compliance with specific terms and conditions of the contract or specific written instructions from the contracting officer authorizing in advance such payments in accordance with applicable regulations of the Secretary of Energy.

“(5) Costs of membership in any social, dining, or country club or organization.

“(9) Costs of promotional items and memorabilia, including models, gifts, and souvenirs.

“(10) Costs for travel by commercial aircraft or by travel by other than common carrier that is not necessary for the performance of the contract and the cost of which exceeds the amount of the standard commercial fare.

“(b) Regulations; costs of information provided to Congress or State legislatures and related costs.—

“(1) Not later than 150 days after November 8, 1985, the Secretary of Energy shall prescribe regulations to implement this section. Such regulations may establish appropriate definitions, exclusions, limitations, and qualifications. Such regulations shall be published in accordance with section 1707 of title 41.

“(2) In any regulations implementing subsection (a)(2), the Secretary may not treat as not allowable (by reason of such subsection) the following costs of a contractor:

“(A) Costs of providing to Congress or a State legislature, in response to a request from Congress or a State legislature, information of a factual, technical, or scientific nature, or advice of experts, with respect to topics directly related to the performance of the contract.

“(B) Costs for transportation, lodging, or meals incurred for the purpose of providing such information or advice.

“(c) Covered contract defined.—In this section, the term‘covered contract’ means a contract for an amount more than $100,000 entered into by the Secretary of Energy obligating funds appropriated for national security programs of the Department of Energy.

“(d) Effective date.—Subsection (a) shall apply with respect to costs incurred under a covered contract on or after 30 days after the regulations required by subsection (b) are issued.

“§ 5822. Prohibition and report on bonuses to contractors operating defense nuclear facilities

“(a) Prohibition.—The Secretary of Energy may not provide any bonuses, award fees, or other form of performance- or production-based awards to a contractor operating a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility unless, in evaluating the performance or production under the contract, the Secretary considers the contractor's compliance with all applicable environmental, safety, and health statutes, regulations, and practices for determining both the size of, and the contractor's qualification for, such bonus, award fee, or other award. The prohibition in this subsection applies with respect to contracts entered into, or contract options exercised, after November 29, 1989.

“(b) Regulations.—The Secretary of Energy shall promulgate regulations to implement subsection (a) not later than March 1, 1990.

“§ 5823. Assessments of emergency preparedness of defense nuclear facilities

“ The Secretary of Energy shall include, in each award-fee evaluation conducted under section 16.401 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations, of a management and operating contract for a Department of Energy defense nuclear facility in 2016 or any even-numbered year thereafter, an assessment of the adequacy of the emergency preparedness of that facility, including an assessment of the seniority level of management and operating contractor employees that participate in emergency preparedness exercises at that facility.

“§ 5824. Contractor liability for injury or loss of property arising out of atomic weapons testing programs

“(a) Short title.—This section may be cited as the ‘Atomic Energy Testing Liability Act’.

“(1) REMEDY.—The remedy against the United States provided by sections 1346(b) and 2672 of title 28, or by chapter 309 or 311 of title 46, as appropriate, for injury, loss of property, personal injury, or death shall apply to any civil action for injury, loss of property, personal injury, or death due to exposure to radiation based on acts or omissions by a contractor in carrying out an atomic weapons testing program under a contract with the United States.

“(2) EXCLUSIVITY.—The remedies referred to in paragraph (1) shall be exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding for the purpose of determining civil liability arising from any act or omission of the contractor without regard to when the act or omission occurred. The employees of a contractor referred to in paragraph (1) shall be considered to be employees of the Federal Government, as provided in section 2671 of title 28, for the purposes of any such civil action or proceeding; and the civil action or proceeding shall proceed in the same manner as any action against the United States filed pursuant to section 1346(b) of such title and shall be subject to the limitations and exceptions applicable to those actions.

“(c) Procedure.—A contractor against whom a civil action or proceeding described in subsection (b) is brought shall promptly deliver all processes served upon that contractor to the Attorney General of the United States. Upon certification by the Attorney General that the suit against the contractor is within the provisions of subsection (b), a civil action or proceeding commenced in a State court shall be removed without bond at any time before trial by the Attorney General to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending and the proceedings shall be deemed a tort action brought against the United States under the provisions of section 1346(b), 2401(b), or 2402, or sections 2671 through 2680 of title 28. For purposes of removal, the certification by the Attorney General under this subsection establishes contractor status conclusively.

“(d) Actions covered.—The provisions of this section shall apply to any action, within the provisions of subsection (b), which is pending on November 5, 1990, or commenced on or after such date. Notwithstanding section 2401(b) of title 28, if a civil action or proceeding to which this section applies is pending on November 5, 1990, and is dismissed because the plaintiff in such action or proceeding did not file an administrative claim as required by section 2672 of that title, the plaintiff in that action or proceeding shall have 30 days from the date of the dismissal or two years from the date upon which the claim accrued, whichever is later, to file an administrative claim, and any claim or subsequent civil action or proceeding shall thereafter be subject to the provisions of section 2401(b) of title 28.

“(e) Contractor defined.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘contractor’ includes a contractor or cost reimbursement subcontractor of any tier participating in the conduct of the United States atomic weapons testing program for the Department of Energy (or its predecessor agencies, including the Manhattan Engineer District, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Energy Research and Development Administration). Such term also includes facilities which conduct or have conducted research concerning health effects of ionizing radiation in connection with the testing under contract with the Department of Energy (or any of its predecessor agencies).

“§ 5825. Notice-and-wait requirement applicable to certain third-party financing arrangements

“(a) Notice-and-wait requirement.—The Secretary of Energy may not enter into an arrangement described in subsection (b) until 30 days after the date on which the Secretary notifies the congressional defense committees in writing of the proposed arrangement.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), an arrangement referred to in subsection (a) is any alternative financing arrangement, third-party financing arrangement, public-private partnership, privatization arrangement, private capital arrangement, or other financing arrangement that—

“(A) is entered into in connection with a project conducted using funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy to carry out programs necessary for national security; and

“(B) involves a contractor or Federal agency obtaining and charging to the Department of Energy as an allowable cost under a contract the use of office space, facilities, or other real property assets with a value of at least $5,000,000.

“(2) EXCEPTION.—An arrangement referred to in subsection (a) does not include an arrangement that—

“(A) involves the Department of Energy or a contractor acquiring or entering into a capital lease for office space, facilities, or other real property assets; or

“(B) is entered into in connection with a capital improvement project undertaken as part of an energy savings performance contract under section 801 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8287).

“§ 5826. Publication of contractor performance evaluations leading to award fees

“(a) In general.—The Administrator shall take appropriate actions to make available to the public, to the maximum extent practicable, contractor performance evaluations conducted by the Administration of management and operating contractors of the nuclear security enterprise that results in the award of an award fee to the contractor concerned.

“(b) Format.—Performance evaluations shall be made public under this section in a common format that facilitates comparisons of performance evaluations between and among similar management and operating contracts.

“(2) notwithstanding any other provision of law, limit, in whole or in part, the disclosure of information relating to the basis for carrying out a covered procurement action or special exclusion action.

“(b) Requirements.—The Secretary may exercise the authority under subsection (a) only after—

“(1) obtaining a risk assessment that demonstrates that there is a significant supply chain risk to a covered system;

“(2) making a determination in writing, in unclassified or classified form, that—

“(A) the use of the authority under subsection (a) is necessary to protect national security by reducing supply chain risk;

“(B) less restrictive measures are not reasonably available to reduce the supply chain risk; and

“(C) in a case in which the Secretary plans to limit disclosure of information under subsection (a)(2), the risk to national security of the disclosure of the information outweighs the risk of not disclosing the information; and

“(3) submitting to the appropriate congressional committees, not later than seven days after the date on which the Secretary makes the determination under paragraph (2), a notice of such determination, in classified or unclassified form, that includes—

“(C) a summary of the basis for the determination, including a discussion of less restrictive measures that were considered and why such measures were not reasonably available to reduce supply chain risk.

“(c) Notifications.—If the Secretary has exercised the authority under subsection (a), the Secretary shall—

“(1) notify appropriate parties of the covered procurement action or special exclusion action and the basis for the action only to the extent necessary to carry out the covered procurement action or special exclusion action;

“(2) notify other Federal agencies responsible for procurement that may be subject to the same or similar supply chain risk, in a manner and to the extent consistent with the requirements of national security; and

“(3) ensure the confidentiality of any notifications under paragraph (1) or (2).

“(d) Limitation of review.—No action taken by the Secretary under the authority under subsection (a) shall be subject to review in any Federal court.

“(e) Delegation of authority.—The Secretary may delegate the authority under this section to—

“(2) in the case of any other component of the Department of Energy, the Senior Procurement Executive of the Department.

“(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—

“(B) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives.

“(2) COVERED ITEM OF SUPPLY.—The term ‘covered item of supply’ means an item—

“(B) the loss of integrity of which could result in a supply chain risk for a covered system.

“(3) COVERED PROCUREMENT.—The term ‘covered procurement’ means the following:

“(A) A source selection for a covered system or a covered item of supply involving either a performance specification, as described in subsection (a)(3)(B) of section 3306 of title 41, or an evaluation factor, as described in subsection (b)(1) of such section, relating to supply chain risk.

“(B) The consideration of proposals for and issuance of a task or delivery order for a covered system or a covered item of supply, as provided in section 4106(d)(3) of title 41, where the task or delivery order contract concerned includes a contract clause establishing a requirement relating to supply chain risk.

“(C) Any contract action involving a contract for a covered system or a covered item of supply if the contract includes a clause establishing requirements relating to supply chain risk.

“(4) COVERED PROCUREMENT ACTION.—The term ‘covered procurement action’ means, with respect to an action that occurs in the course of conducting a covered procurement, any of the following:

“(A) The exclusion of a source that fails to meet qualification requirements established pursuant to section 3311 of title 41 for the purpose of reducing supply chain risk in the acquisition of covered systems.

“(B) The exclusion of a source that fails to achieve an acceptable rating with regard to an evaluation factor providing for the consideration of supply chain risk in the evaluation of proposals for the award of a contract or the issuance of a task or delivery order.

“(C) The withholding of consent for a contractor to subcontract with a particular source or the direction to a contractor for a covered system to exclude a particular source from consideration for a subcontract under the contract.

“(A) National security systems (as defined in section 3552(b) of title 44) and components of such systems.

“(C) Items associated with the design, development, production, and maintenance of nuclear weapons or components of nuclear weapons.

“(E) Items associated with the design and development of nonproliferation and counterproliferation programs and systems.

“(6) SPECIAL EXCLUSION ACTION.—The term ‘special exclusion action’ means an action to prohibit, for a period not to exceed two years, the award of any contracts or subcontracts by the Administration or any other component of the Department of Energy related to any covered system to a source the Secretary determines to represent a supply chain risk.

“(7) SUPPLY CHAIN RISK.—The term ‘supply chain risk’ means the risk that an adversary may sabotage, maliciously introduce unwanted function, or otherwise subvert the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of a covered system or covered item of supply so as to surveil, deny, disrupt, or otherwise degrade the function, use, or operation of the system or item of supply.

“(g) Termination.—The authority under this section shall terminate on December 31, 2028.

“§ 5828. Cost-benefit analyses for competition of management and operating contracts

“(a) Briefings on requests for proposals.—Not later than 7 days after issuing a request for proposals for a contract to manage and operate a facility of the Administration, the Administrator shall brief the congressional defense committees on the preliminary assessment of the Administrator of the costs and benefits of the competition for the contract, including a preliminary assessment of the matters described in subsection (c) with respect to the contract.

“(b) Reports after transition to new contracts.—If the Administrator awards a new contract to manage and operate a facility of the Administration, the Administrator shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the matters described in subsection (c) with respect to the contract by not later than 30 days after the completion of the period required to transition to the contract.

“(c) Matters described.—The matters described in this subsection, with respect to a contract, are the following:

“(1) A clear and complete description of the cost savings the Administrator expects to result from the competition for the contract over the life of the contract, including associated analyses, assumptions, and information sources used to determine such expected cost savings.

“(2) A description of any key limitations or uncertainties that could affect such costs savings, including costs savings that are anticipated but not fully known.

“(3) The costs of the competition for the contract, including the immediate costs of conducting the competition, the costs of the transition to the contract from the previous contract, and any increased costs over the life of the contract.

“(4) A description of any disruptions or delays in mission activities or deliverables resulting from the competition for the contract.

“(5) A clear and complete description of the benefits expected by the Administrator with respect to mission performance or operations resulting from the competition.

“(6) How the competition for the contract complied with the Federal Acquisition Regulation regarding Federally funded research and development centers, if applicable.

“(7) The factors considered and processes used by the Administrator to determine—

“(B) which activities at the facility should be covered under the contract rather than under a different contract.

“(8) With respect to the matters included under paragraphs (1) through (7), a detailed description of the analyses conducted by the Administrator to reach the conclusions presented in the report, including any assumptions, limitations, and uncertainties relating to such conclusions.

“(d) Information quality.—Each briefing required by subsection (a) and report required by subsection (b) shall be prepared in accordance with—

“(1) the information quality guidelines of the Department of Energy that are relevant to the clear and complete presentation of the matters described in subsection (c); and

“(2) best practices of the Government Accountability Office and relevant industries for cost estimating, if appropriate.

“(1) DETERMINATION.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall determine, in consultation with the congressional defense committees, whether to conduct an initial review, a comprehensive review, or both, of a report required by subsection (b).

“(2) INITIAL REVIEW.—The Comptroller General shall provide any initial review of a report required by subsection (b) as a briefing to the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after that report is submitted to the congressional defense committees.

“(A) SUBMISSION.—The Comptroller General shall submit any comprehensive review of a report required by subsection (b) to the congressional defense committees not later than 3 years after that report is submitted to the congressional defense committees.

“(B) ELEMENTS.—A comprehensive review of a report required by subsection (b) shall include an assessment, based on the most current information available, of the following:

“(i) The actual cost savings achieved compared to cost savings estimated under subsection (c)(1), and any increased costs incurred under the contract that were unexpected or uncertain at the time the contract was awarded.

“(ii) Any disruptions or delays in mission activities or deliverables resulting from the competition for the contract compared to the disruptions and delays estimated under subsection (c)(4).

“(iii) Whether expected benefits of the competition with respect to mission performance or operations have been achieved.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The requirements for briefings under subsection (a) and reports under subsection (b) shall apply with respect to requests for proposals issued or contracts awarded, as applicable, by the Administrator during fiscal years 2019 through 2032.

“(2) NAVAL REACTORS.—The requirements for briefings under subsection (a) and reports under subsection (b) shall not apply with respect to a management and operations contract for a Naval Reactor facility.

“(a) Authority.—Government-owned, contractor-operated laboratories that are funded out of funds available to the Department of Energy for national security programs are authorized to carry out laboratory-directed research and development.

“(b) Regulations.—The Secretary of Energy shall prescribe regulations for the conduct of laboratory-directed research and development at such laboratories.

“(c) Funding.—Of the funds provided by the Department of Energy to a national security laboratory for national security activities, the Secretary shall provide a specific amount, of not less than 5 percent and not more than 7 percent of such funds, to be used by the laboratory for laboratory-directed research and development.

“(d) Laboratory-directed research and development defined.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘laboratory-directed research and development’ means research and development work of a creative and innovative nature which, under the regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (b), is selected by the director of a laboratory for the purpose of maintaining the vitality of the laboratory in defense-related scientific disciplines.

“ Of the funds made available by the Department of Energy for activities at government-owned, contractor-operated laboratories funded in this Act or subsequent Energy and Water Development Appropriations Acts, the Secretary may authorize a specific amount, not to exceed 8 percent of such funds, to be used by such laboratories for laboratory directed research and development: Provided, That the Secretary may also authorize a specific amount not to exceed 4 percent of such funds, to be used by the plant manager of a covered nuclear weapons production plant or the manager of the Nevada Site Office for plant or site directed research and development: Provided further, That notwithstanding Department of Energy order 413.2A, dated January 8, 2001, beginning in fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, all DOE laboratories may be eligible for laboratory directed research and development funding.

“Notwithstanding section 307 of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111–85; 123 Stat. 2845), of the funds made available by the Department of Energy for activities at Government-owned, contractor-operated laboratories funded in the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014 (div. D of Pub. L. 113–76) or any subsequent Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for any fiscal year, the Secretary may authorize a specific amount, not to exceed 6 percent of such funds, to be used by such laboratories for laboratory directed research and development.

“ Of the funds authorized by the Secretary of Energy for laboratory directed research and development, no individual program, project, or activity funded by this or any subsequent Act making appropriations for Energy and Water Development for any fiscal year may be charged more than the statutory maximum authorized for such activities: Provided, That this section shall take effect not earlier than October 1, 2015.

“§ 5835. Limitations on use of funds for laboratory directed research and development purposes

“(a) Limitation on use of weapons activities funds.—No funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Energy in any fiscal year after fiscal year 1997 for weapons activities may be obligated or expended for activities under the Department of Energy Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program, or under any Department of Energy technology transfer program or cooperative research and development agreement, unless such activities support the national security mission of the Department of Energy.

“(b) Limitation on use of certain other funds.—No funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Energy in any fiscal year after fiscal year 1997 for defense environmental cleanup may be obligated or expended for activities under the Department of Energy Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program, or under any Department of Energy technology transfer program or cooperative research and development agreement, unless such activities support the defense environmental cleanup mission of the Department of Energy.

“(c) Limitation on use of funds for overhead.—A national security laboratory may not use funds made available under section 5831(c) to cover the costs of general and administrative overhead for the laboratory.

“§ 5836. Report on use of funds for certain research and development purposes

“(a) Report required.—Not later than February 1 each year, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the funds expended during the preceding fiscal year on activities under the Department of Energy Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program. The purpose of the report is to permit an assessment of the extent to which such activities support the national security mission of the Department of Energy.

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The report required by subsection (a) shall include, with respect to plant-directed research and development, the following:

“(A) A financial accounting of expenditures for such research and development, disaggregated by nuclear weapons production facility.

“(B) A breakdown of the percentage of research and development conducted by each such facility that is plant-directed research and development.

“(C) An explanation of how each such facility plans to increase the availability and utilization of funds for plant-directed research and development.

“(2) PLANT-DIRECTED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘plant-directed research and development’ means research and development selected by the director of a nuclear weapons production facility.

“(c) Preparation of report.—Each report shall be prepared by the officials responsible for Federal oversight of the funds expended on activities under the program.

“(d) Criteria used in preparation of report.—Each report shall set forth the criteria utilized by the officials preparing the report in determining whether or not the activities reviewed by such officials support the national security mission of the Department.

“§ 5837. Critical technology partnerships and cooperative research and development centers

“(a) Partnerships.—For the purpose of facilitating the transfer of technology, the Secretary of Energy shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that research on and development of dual-use critical technology carried out through atomic energy defense activities is conducted through cooperative research and development agreements, or other arrangements, that involve laboratories of the Department of Energy and other entities.

“(1) Subject to the availability of appropriations provided for such purpose, the Administrator shall establish a cooperative research and development center described in paragraph (2) at each national security laboratory.

“(2) A cooperative research and development center described in this paragraph is a center to foster collaborative scientific research, technology development, and the appropriate transfer of research and technology to users in addition to the national security laboratories.

“(3) In establishing a cooperative research and development center under this subsection, the Administrator—

“(A) shall enter into cooperative research and development agreements with governmental, public, academic, or private entities; and

“(B) may enter into a contract with respect to constructing, purchasing, managing, or leasing buildings or other facilities.

“(A) that is critical to atomic energy defense activities, as determined by the Secretary of Energy;

“(2) The term ‘cooperative research and development agreement’ has the meaning given that term by section 12(d) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(d)).

“(A) firms, or a consortium of firms, that are eligible to participate in a partnership or other arrangement with a laboratory of the Department of Energy, as determined in accordance with applicable law and regulations; or

“(B) firms, or a consortium of firms, described in subparagraph (A) in combination with one or more of the following:

“(ii) Departments and agencies of the Federal Government other than the Department of Energy.

“(iv) Any other persons or entities that may be eligible and appropriate, as determined in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

“(4) The term ‘atomic energy defense activities’ does not include activities covered by Executive Order No. 12344, dated February 1, 1982, pertaining to the Naval nuclear propulsion program.

“(1) The maintenance of scientific and engineering competence in the United States is vital to long-term national security and the defense and national security missions of the Department of Energy.

“(2) Engaging the universities and colleges of the Nation in research on long-range problems of vital national security interest will be critical to solving the technology challenges faced within the defense and national security programs of the Department of Energy in the next century.

“(3) Enhancing collaboration among the national laboratories, universities and colleges, and industry will contribute significantly to the performance of these Department of Energy missions.

“(b) Program.—The Secretary of Energy shall establish a university program at a location that can develop the most effective collaboration among national laboratories, universities and colleges, and industry in support of scientific and engineering advancement in key Department of Energy defense and national security program areas.

“§ 5839. Limitation on establishing an enduring bioassurance program within the administration

“(a) In general.—The Administrator may not establish, administer, manage, or facilitate a program within the Administration for the purposes of executing an enduring national security research and development effort to broaden the role of the Department of Energy in national biodefense.

“(b) Rule of construction.—The limitation described in subsection (a) shall not be interpreted—

“(1) to prohibit the establishment of a bioassurance program for the purpose of executing enduring national security research and development in any component of the Department of Energy other than the Administration or in any other Federal agency; or

“(2) to impede the use of resources of the Administration, including resources provided by a national security laboratory or a nuclear weapons production facility site, to support the execution of a bioassurance program, if such support is provided—

“(A) on a cost-reimbursable basis to an entity that is not a component of the Department of Energy; and

“(B) in a manner that does not interfere with mission of such laboratory or facility.

“§ 5841. Transfers of real property at certain Department of Energy facilities

“(1) The Secretary of Energy shall prescribe regulations for the transfer by sale or lease of real property at Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities for the purpose of permitting the economic development of the property.

“(2) The Secretary may not transfer real property under the regulations prescribed under paragraph (1) until—

“(A) the Secretary submits a notification of the proposed transfer to the congressional defense committees; and

“(B) a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date on which the notification is submitted.

“(1) Except as provided in paragraph (3) and subject to subsection (c), in the sale or lease of real property pursuant to the regulations prescribed under subsection (a), the Secretary may hold harmless and indemnify a person or entity described in paragraph (2) against any claim for injury to person or property that results from the release or threatened release of a hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant as a result of Department of Energy activities at the defense nuclear facility on which the real property is located. Before entering into any agreement for such a sale or lease, the Secretary shall notify the person or entity that the Secretary has authority to provide indemnification to the person or entity under this subsection. The Secretary shall include in any agreement for such a sale or lease a provision stating whether indemnification is or is not provided.

“(A) Any State that acquires ownership or control of real property of a defense nuclear facility.

“(B) Any political subdivision of a State that acquires such ownership or control.

“(D) Any successor, assignee, transferee, lender, or lessee of a person or entity described in subparagraphs (A) through (C).

“(3) To the extent the persons and entities described in paragraph (2) contributed to any such release or threatened release, paragraph (1) shall not apply.

“(1) No indemnification on a claim for injury may be provided under this section unless the person or entity making a request for the indemnification—

“(A) notifies the Secretary in writing within two years after such claim accrues;

“(B) furnishes to the Secretary copies of pertinent papers received by the person or entity;

“(D) provides, upon request by the Secretary, access to the records and personnel of the person or entity for purposes of defending or settling the claim; and

“(E) begins action within six months after the date of mailing, by certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial of the claim by the Secretary.

“(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(A), the date on which a claim accrues is the date on which the person asserting the claim knew (or reasonably should have known) that the injury to person or property referred to in subsection (b)(1) was caused or contributed to by the release or threatened release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant as a result of Department of Energy activities at the defense nuclear facility on which the real property is located.

“(1) In any case in which the Secretary determines that the Secretary may be required to indemnify a person or entity under this section for any claim for injury to person or property referred to in subsection (b)(1), the Secretary may settle or defend the claim on behalf of that person or entity.

“(2) In any case described in paragraph (1), if the person or entity that the Secretary may be required to indemnify does not allow the Secretary to settle or defend the claim, the person or entity may not be indemnified with respect to that claim under this section.

“(e) Relationship to other law.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as affecting or modifying in any way section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)).

“(f) Definitions.—In this section, the terms ‘hazardous substance’, ‘release’, and ‘pollutant or contaminant’ have the meanings provided by section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601).

“§ 5842. Engineering and manufacturing research, development, and demonstration by managers of certain nuclear weapons production facilities

“(a) Authority for programs at nuclear weapons productions facilities.—The Administrator shall authorize the head of each nuclear weapons production facility to establish an Engineering and Manufacturing Research, Development, and Demonstration Program under this section.

“(b) Projects and activities.—The projects and activities carried out through the program at a nuclear weapons production facility under this section shall support innovative or high-risk design and manufacturing concepts and technologies with potentially high payoff for the nuclear security enterprise. Those projects and activities may include—

“(2) development of innovative agile manufacturing techniques and processes; and

“(3) training, recruitment, or retention of essential personnel in critical engineering and manufacturing disciplines.

“The Administrator may authorize the manager of a covered nuclear weapons research, development, testing or production facility to engage in research, development, and demonstration activities with respect to the engineering and manufacturing capabilities at such facility in order to maintain and enhance such capabilities at such facility: Provided, That of the amount allocated to a covered nuclear weapons facility each fiscal year from amounts available to the Department of Energy for such fiscal year for national security programs, not more than an amount equal to 2 percent of such amount may be used for these activities: Provided further, That for purposes of this section, the term ‘covered nuclear weapons facility’ means the following:

“§ 5844. Pilot program relating to use of proceeds of disposal or utilization of certain department of energy assets

“(a) Purpose.—The purpose of this section is to encourage the Secretary of Energy to dispose of or otherwise utilize certain assets of the Department of Energy by making available to the Secretary the proceeds of such disposal or utilization for purposes of defraying the costs of such disposal or utilization.

“(1) Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, the Secretary may retain from the proceeds of the sale, lease, or disposal of an asset under subsection (c) an amount equal to the cost of the sale, lease, or disposal of the asset. The Secretary shall utilize amounts retained under this paragraph to defray the cost of the sale, lease, or disposal.

“(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the cost of a sale, lease, or disposal shall include—

“(B) the cost of recovering or preparing the asset concerned for the sale, lease, or disposal; and

“(c) Covered transactions.—Subsection (b) applies to the following transactions:

“(1) The sale of heavy water at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina, that is under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(2) The sale of precious metals that are under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(3) The lease of buildings and other facilities located at the Hanford Reservation, Washington, that are under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(4) The lease of buildings and other facilities located at the Savannah River Site that are under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(5) The disposal of equipment and other personal property located at the Rocky Flats Defense Environmental Technology Site, Colorado, that is under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(6) The disposal of materials at the National Electronics Recycling Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee that are under the jurisdiction of the Defense Environmental Management Program.

“(d) Applicability of disposal authority.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the application of subchapter II of chapter 5 and section 549 of title 40 to the disposal of equipment and other personal property covered by this section.

“(a) In general.—The Secretary of Energy may establish a program to permit the establishment of energy parks on former defense nuclear facilities.

“(b) Objectives.—The objectives for establishing energy parks pursuant to subsection (a) are the following:

“(1) To provide locations to carry out a broad range of projects relating to the development and deployment of energy technologies and related advanced manufacturing technologies.

“(2) To provide locations for the implementation of pilot programs and demonstration projects for new and developing energy technologies and related advanced manufacturing technologies.

“(3) To set a national example for the development and deployment of energy technologies and related advanced manufacturing technologies in a manner that will promote energy security, energy sector employment, and energy independence.

“(4) To create a business environment that encourages collaboration and interaction between the public and private sectors.

“(c) Consultation.—In establishing an energy park pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with—

“(1) the local government with jurisdiction over the land on which the energy park will be located;

“(3) any community reuse organization recognized by the Secretary at the former defense nuclear facility on which the energy park will be located.

“(d) Report required.—Not later than 120 days after January 7, 2011, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the implementation of the program under subsection (a). The report shall include such recommendations for additional legislative actions as the Secretary considers appropriate to facilitate the development of energy parks on former defense nuclear facilities.

“(e) Defense nuclear facility defined.—In this section, the term ‘defense nuclear facility’ has the meaning given the term ‘Department of Energy defense nuclear facility’ in section 318 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286g).

“(a) Authority.—If and to the extent that the Administrator deems it appropriate to further mission activities under section 3211 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401), a passenger carrier may be used to provide transportation services to contractor employees between the covered facility of the contractor employee and a mass transit facility in accordance with any applicable transportation plan adopted by the Administrator pursuant to this section.

“(i) provide Management and Operating contractors at covered facilities the opportunity to, on a voluntary basis, submit, through the cognizant contracting officer of the applicable covered facility, a plan to provide transportation services described in subsection (a) for contractor employees at the covered facility; and

“(B) may approve each such plan if the requirements described in clauses (i) through (iv) of paragraph (2)(B) are satisfied.

“(A) may include proposals for parking facilities, road improvements, real property acquisition, passenger carrier services, and commuting cost deferment payments to contractor employees; and

“(i) a description of how the use of passenger carriers will facilitate the mission of the covered facility;

“(ii) a description of how the plan will be economical and advantageous to the Federal Government;

“(iii) a summary of the benefits that will be provided under the plan and how costs will be monitored; and

“(iv) a description of how the plan will alleviate traffic congestion, reduce commuting times, and improve recruitment and retention of contractor employees.

“(3) The Administrator may delegate to the Senior Procurement Executive of the Administration the approval of any plan submitted under this subsection.

“(c) Reimbursement.—The Administration may reimburse a contractor for the costs of transportation services incurred pursuant to a plan approved under subsection (b) using funds appropriated to the Administration.

“(d) Implementation.—In carrying out a plan approved under subsection (b), the Administrator, to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with sound budget policy, shall—

“(1) require the use of alternative fuel vehicles to provide transportation services;

“(2) ensure funds spent for this plan further the mission activities of the Administration under section 3211 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401); and

“(3) ensure that the time during which a contractor employee uses transportation services shall not be included for purposes of calculating the hours of work for such contractor employee.

“(1) The term ‘contractor employee’ means an employee of a Management and Operating contractor or subcontractor employee at any tier.

“(2) The term ‘covered facility’ means any facility of the Administration that directly supports the mission of the Administration under section 3211 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401).

“(3) The term ‘Management and Operating contractor’ means a management and operating contractor that manages a covered facility.

“(4) The term ‘passenger carrier’ means a passenger motor vehicle, aircraft, boat, ship, train, or other similar means of transportation that is owned, leased, or provided pursuant to contract or subcontract by the Federal Government or through a contractor of the Administration.

“§ 5851. Payment of costs of operation and maintenance of infrastructure at Nevada National Security Site

“ Notwithstanding any other provision of law and effective as of September 30, 1996, the costs associated with operating and maintaining the infrastructure at the Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, with respect to any activities initiated at the site after that date by the Department of Defense pursuant to a work-for-others agreement may be paid for from funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for activities at the Nevada National Security Site.

“(a) Program.—The Administrator shall carry out a program under which the Administrator establishes a policy research consortium of institutions of higher education and nonprofit entities in support of implementing and innovating the defense nuclear policy programs of the Administration. The Administrator shall establish and carry out such program in a manner similar to the program established under section 5838.

“(b) Purposes.—The purposes of the consortium under subsection (a) are as follows:

“(1) To shape the formulation and application of policy through the conduct of research and analysis regarding defense nuclear policy programs.

“(2) To maintain open-source databases on issues relevant to understanding defense nuclear nonproliferation, arms control, nuclear deterrence, foreign nuclear programs, and nuclear security.

“(3) To facilitate the collaboration of research centers of excellence relating to defense nuclear policy to better distribute expertise to specific issues and scenarios regarding such threats.

“(1) SUPPORT.—The Administrator shall ensure that the consortium established under subsection (a) provides support to individuals described in paragraph (2) through the use of nongovernmental fellowships, scholarships, research internships, workshops, short courses, summer schools, and research grants.

“(2) INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED.—The individuals described in this paragraph are graduate students, academics, and policy specialists, who are focused on policy innovation related to—

“(F) educating and training the next generation of defense nuclear policy experts.”.

(1) Division D of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (50 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.).

(2) Sections 3116 and 3141 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (50 U.S.C. 2515, 2512 note).

(3) Sections 308 and 311 of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (50 U.S.C. 2523c, 2791b).

(4) Section 3132 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (50 U.S.C. 2589).

(5) Section 306 of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012 (50 U.S.C. 2743a).

(6) Section 308 of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 (50 U.S.C. 2791a).

(7) Section 3124 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (50 U.S.C. 2814).

(8) Sections 3113 and 3123 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 50 U.S.C. 2512 note, 2581 note).

(11) Section 3121, 3124, and 3126 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 50 U.S.C. 2532 note, 2538a note).

(12) Section 3125 of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 50 U.S.C. 2538 note).

(14) Section 3122 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘Buck’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 50 U.S.C. 2565 note).

(15) Section 3141 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 50 U.S.C. 2569 note).

(16) Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375; 50 U.S.C. 2601 note).

(17) Section 127 of the Miscellaneous Appropriations and Offsets Act, 2004 (division H of Public 108–199; 50 U.S.C. 2601 note).

(19) Section 309 of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014 (division D of Public Law 113–76; 50 U.S.C. 2791a note).

(i) in subsection (d)(13), by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601”; and

(I) in paragraph (2), by striking “section 4717 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2757)” at each place it appears and inserting “section 5799”; and

(II) in paragraph (3), by striking “section 4219(a) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2538a(a))” and inserting “section 5638”;

(B) in section 499a(e), by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601”.

(A) Section 809(b)(2) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 10 U.S.C. 4351 note) is amended by striking “sections 4217 and 4311 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2537, 2577)” and inserting “sections 5635 and 5671 of title 10, United States Code”.

(B) Section 1635(c)(2) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (Public Law 118–159; 10 U.S.C. 4811 note) is amended by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(C) Section 3111(b)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 50 U.S.C. 2402 note) is amended by striking “section 4002(6) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501(6))” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(D) Section 3116(a)(3) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 131 Stat. 1888) is amended by striking “section 4101 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2511)” and inserting “section 5611 of title 10, United States Code”.

(E) Section 3113 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 50 U.S.C. 2512 note) is amended—

(i) in subsection (a), by striking “section 4102(b) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2512(b))” and inserting “section 5612 of title 10, United States Code”; and

(ii) in subsection (d), by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(F) Section 3137(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 50 U.S.C. 2512 note) is amended by striking “section 4002(6) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501(6))” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(G) Section 3121(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 50 U.S.C. 2521 note) is amended by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(H) Section 3129 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 50 U.S.C. 2521 note) is amended—

(i) in subsection (a), by striking “section 4201 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2521)” and inserting “section 5621 of title 10, United States Code,”; and

(ii) in subsection (e), by striking “section 4203 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2523)” and inserting “section 5624 of title 10, United States Code,”.

(I) Section 3116(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108–136; 50 U.S.C. 2529 note) is amended by striking “section 4209(a) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2529(a))” and inserting “section 5630 of title 10, United States Code”.

(J) Section 3121(c) of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 50 U.S.C. 2532 note) is amended by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

(K) Section 3126 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 50 U.S.C. 2538a note) is amended by striking “section 4219 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2538a)” and inserting “section 5638 of title 10, United States Code”.

(L) Section 3116(e)(4) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108–375; 50 U.S.C. 2602 note) is amended by striking “section 4306A of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2567)” and inserting “section 5664 of title 10, United States Code”.

(M) Section 3121 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 50 U.S.C. 2652 note) is amended—

(i) by striking “section 4502(a) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2652(a))” each place it appears and inserting “section 5732(a) of title 10, United States Code”; and

(ii) in subsection (f)(2), by striking “section 4002 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501)” and inserting “section 5601 of title 10, United States Code”.

“(1) OVERALL CAPACITY.—Consistent with the requirements of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy shall ensure that the nuclear security enterprise—

“(F) during 2032 and subsequent years, produces no fewer than 80 war reserve plutonium pits.

“(2) SITE SPECIFIC FULL PRODUCTION RATE TARGETS.—In meeting the annual production rate requirement under paragraph (1)(F), the Secretary of Energy shall ensure that—

“(A) no fewer than 30 war reserve plutonium pits are produced annually at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico;

“(B) no fewer than 50 war reserve plutonium pits are produced annually at the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility, Aiken, South Carolina; and

“(C) total annual production quantities exceeding 80 war reserve plutonium pits are allocated to each site as necessary to meet Department of Defense requirements.”; and

SEC. 3113. National Nuclear Security Administration Rapid Capabilities Development Office.

(a) Repeal.—Section 4220 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2538b) is repealed.

(b) Assistant Deputy Administrator for Rapid Capabilities Development.—National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end of subtitle A the following new section:

“(1) IN GENERAL.—There is established in the Administration an Office of Rapid Capabilities Development (referred to in this section as the ‘Office’), which shall be led by an Assistant Deputy Administrator for Rapid Capabilities Development (referred to in this section as the ‘Assistant Deputy Administrator’).

“(A) SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE.—The position of the Assistant Deputy Administrator shall be a Senior Executive Service position (as defined in section 3132(a) of title 5, United States Code).

“(B) DUTIES.—The Assistant Deputy Administrator shall report to the Board established under subsection (c).

“(b) Mission.—The primary objective of the Office shall be to expedite the development and fielding of technologies and weapon systems in support of United States strategic deterrence requirements, as determined by the President or the Secretary of Defense. In achieving this objective, the office shall—

“(1) leverage defense-wide and Administration technology development efforts and existing capabilities to achieve improved deterrence and operational effects;

“(2) provide integration and technical support to Department of Defense, the Administration, or other activities of the United States Government;

“(3) identify and pursue opportunities to accelerate operationally-focused capabilities through advanced prototyping; and

“(4) explore innovative, cost-effective material and non-material solutions to defeat rapidly-evolving nuclear and radiological threats.

“(1) COMPOSITION.—The Office shall be governed by a Board of Directors of (referred to in this section as the ‘Board’), which shall be composed of the following members:

“(B) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense Policy and Programs.

“(A) OPERATIONS.—The Board shall operate on a consensus basis and issue taskings directly to the Assistant Deputy Administrator as necessary to achieve the mission objectives outlined in subsection (b).

“(i) SUBMISSIONS FROM THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR.—The Assistant Deputy Administrator may submit research and development proposals for Board consideration if such proposals support the mission objectives outlined in subsection (b).

“(II) proposals on behalf of organizations that are not members of the Board if such proposals support the mission objectives outlined in subsection (b).

“(d) Staff.—The Administrator shall ensure that the Assistant Deputy Administrator has sufficient numbers of personnel with competence in technical, programmatic, and other appropriate matters necessary to carry out the functions required by this section.

“(e) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to obviate or otherwise alter the requirements for the development of new or modified nuclear weapons outlined by section 4209 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2529).

“(1) ADMINISTRATION.—The term ‘Administration’, with respect to any authority, duty, or responsibility provided by this section, does not include the Office of Naval Reactors.

“(2) PROTOTYPING.—The term ‘prototyping’ means the development of any physical or virtual model used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of a technology, process, concept, end item, or system.”.

SEC. 3114. Review and assessment of the National Nuclear Security Administration Enterprise Blueprint.

(a) Review and assessment.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Nuclear Weapons Council shall initiate within the Nuclear Weapons Council a review of the Enterprise Blueprint and assess—

(1) the adequacy of the projected future infrastructure to meet anticipated Department of Defense requirements; and

(2) the feasibility of executing the Enterprise Blueprint for a period of 25 years beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Report.—Not later than June 1, 2026, the Chair of the Nuclear Weapons Council, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on—

(2) any recommended modifications to the infrastructure recapitalization plans or future capabilities described in the Enterprise Blueprint necessary to meet future Department of Defense requirements; and

(c) Form.—The report required by subsection (b) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(1) NUCLEAR WEAPONS COUNCIL.—The term “Nuclear Weapons Council” means the council established by section 179 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) ENTERPRISE BLUEPRINT.—The term “Enterprise Blueprint” means the document entitled “NNSA Enterprise Blueprint”, published in October 2024 by the Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

SEC. 3115. Notification of cost overruns for certain Department of Energy projects.

(A) in paragraph (1)(A), in the first sentence, by inserting “prior to entry into Phase 6.3 or Phase 3, as appropriate” after “Administration”; and

(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting “prior to entry into Phase 6.3” after “project”; and

(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and

“(B) the results of the review conducted by the Director of Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation are consistent with section 3221(d)(1)(F) of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2411(d)(1)(F)).”.

SEC. 3116. Protection of certain nuclear facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft.

“(C) (i) owned by or contracted to the National Nuclear Security Administration, including any facility that stores or uses special nuclear material; or

“(ii) a national security laboratory or nuclear weapons production facility.”.

SEC. 3117. Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.

SEC. 3118. Appropriate scoping of artificial intelligence research within the National Nuclear Security Administration.

(a) In general.—Subtitle B of title XLVIII of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2791 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following section:

“SEC. 4816. Appropriate scoping of artificial intelligence research within the Administration.

“(a) In general.—Funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2026, or any subsequent fiscal year, for the Administration for the purposes of conducting research and development of artificial intelligence technologies, executing a program to develop or manage the application of such technologies, or developing, acquiring, or sustaining any associated computing hardware or supporting infrastructure may only be used to support the nuclear security missions of the Administration.

“(b) Rule of construction.—The limitation described in subsection (a) shall not be interpreted—

“(1) to prohibit the establishment of an enduring national security artificial intelligence research and development program in any component of the Department of Energy other than the Administration or in any other Federal agency; or

“(2) to impede the use of resources of the Administration, including resources provided by a national security laboratory or a nuclear weapons production facility site, to support the execution of an enduring national security artificial intelligence research and development program or activity, if such support is provided—

“(A) on a full cost recovery basis, including any associated infrastructure or utility costs, to an entity that is not a component of the Department of Energy; and

“(B) in a manner that does not interfere with the nuclear security mission of such laboratory or facility.”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of contents for the Atomic Energy Defense Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 4815 the following new item:

SEC. 3122. Office of Environmental Management program-wide performance metrics for reducing risk.

(a) In general.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall—

(1) develop and implement program performance metrics for the Office of Environmental Management (referred to in this section as the “Office”), in addition to the program performance metrics identified in the plan published by the Office of Environmental Management entitled “EM Program Plan 2022”; and

(2) revise the program performance metrics identified in the “EM Program Plan 2022” in accordance with the requirements of subsection (b).

(b) Required elements.—The program performance metrics described in subsection (a) shall incorporate the following elements:

(A) align with the goals and mission of the Department of Energy (referred to in this section as the “Department”) and the Office;

(B) link to the other metrics developed or revised under subsection (a) and any other existing performance metrics of the Department and the Office; and

(2) CLARITY.—Each metric shall be clear and the name and definition of such metric shall be consistent with the methodology used to calculate the metric.

(4) OBJECTIVE.—Each metric shall be reasonably free from significant bias or manipulation.

(5) RELIABLE.—Each metric shall produce the same result under similar conditions.

(6) CORE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES.—The metrics shall cover the activities that the Office is expected to perform to support its mission.

(7) LIMITED OVERLAP.—Each metric shall provide new information beyond any information provided by other metrics.

(8) BALANCE.—The metrics shall ensure that various priorities of the Office are covered.

(9) EFFECTIVENESS.—Each metric shall incorporate an effectiveness measure, such as quality, timeliness, and cost of service.

(1) give first priority to addressing any issues posing an immediate risk to human health or the environment;

(2) give second priority, as appropriate, to addressing issues based on achieving the highest risk reduction benefit per radioactive or hazardous content removed; and

(3) measure the amount of radioactivity or hazardous content removed, as determined by—

(1) IN GENERAL.—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) for each fiscal year covered by such report.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each report shall identify the cost per curie, rad, or rem of radioactivity and cost per pound of hazardous content removed program-wide, by site, and by mission area.

SEC. 3123. Office of Environmental Management integrated radioactive waste disposal planning and optimization.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall develop a complex-wide analysis to identify optimal disposal pathways and schedules for defense radioactive waste produced by the Department of Energy and its predecessor agencies and managed by the Office of Environmental Management.

(A) incorporate modeling to identify optimal disposal pathways and schedules that could be achieved—

(B) identify strategic alternatives to radioactive waste disposal plans and schedules.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 15 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall develop an integrated, nationwide radioactive waste disposal plan.

(A) include, to the maximum extent practicable, optimal radioactive waste disposal pathways and schedules identified through the analysis conducted pursuant to subsection (a);

(B) identify specific opportunities for further optimization of radioactive waste disposal pathways and schedules that might be achieved through changes in regulatory constraints;

(D) incorporate feedback from key stakeholders, including Federal and State regulators and operators of radioactive waste disposal facilities.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall establish a forum for Federal and State agencies that regulate radioactive waste cleanup and disposal activities by the Office of Environmental Management.

(2) PURPOSE.—The forum established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall holistically negotiate regulatory and other changes that could allow the Department of Energy to implement opportunities for optimal radioactive waste disposal identified pursuant to subsection (b).

(d) Reporting.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the results of the optimization analysis required by subsection (a), the nationwide disposal plan required by subsection (b), and the initial activities of the forum established pursuant to subsection (c).

(1) COMPLEX.—The term “complex” means the set of sites across the United States where radioactive waste cleanup and disposal activities are managed by the Office of Environmental Management.

(2) INTEGRATED.—The term “integrated” means inclusive of all radioactive waste across the complex.

(3) OPTIMAL.—The term “optimal” means the best possible outcome, such as the lowest cost or highest profit, while following specific rules and limitations.

(4) REGULATORY CONSTRAINTS.—The term “regulatory constraints” means requirements included in regulations or agreements with regulators that affect decisions regarding radioactive waste disposal pathways and schedules by the Office of Environmental Management that could reasonably be the subject of negotiation with Federal or State regulatory agencies.

SEC. 3124. Report on future activities and resources for the delivery of specialized infrastructure.

(a) In general.—Not later than February 15, 2026, and annually thereafter until February 15, 2046, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on future activities and resources for the delivery of specialized infrastructure with demands across the nuclear stockpile, global security, and naval nuclear propulsion missions, which shall include the following:

(1) An assessment of infrastructure investments necessary in the 5 fiscal years following the fiscal year of the report, including—

(D) an explanation of the targeted needs addressed by such infrastructure investments; and

(E) a summary of progress made towards achieving such infrastructure investments.

(2) For fiscal year 2027 and each subsequent fiscal year, an explanation of any changes in cost estimates and schedules for the projects listed in the assessment required by paragraph (1) for the prior fiscal year.

(3) An assessment of infrastructure investments necessary in the 6 to 15 fiscal years following the fiscal year of the report, including—

(B) an explanation of the targeted needs addressed by such infrastructure investments.

(4) For fiscal year 2027 and each subsequent fiscal year, an explanation of any changes in cost estimates and schedules for the projects listed in the assessment required by paragraph (3) for the prior fiscal year.

(5) An assessment of the infrastructure investments necessary in the 16 to 25 fiscal years following the fiscal year of the report, including an explanation of the targeted needs such infrastructure investments are addressing.

(6) For fiscal year 2027 and each subsequent fiscal year, an explanation of any changes in cost estimates and schedules for the projects listed in the assessment required by paragraph (5) for the prior fiscal year.

(b) Form.—Each report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(1) ADMINISTRATION.—The term “Administration” means the National Nuclear Security Administration.

(2) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and

(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

(3) SPECIALIZED INFRASTRUCTURE.—The term “specialized infrastructure” means any facility—

(A) that supports the nuclear stockpile mission, including capabilities to handle and process—

(C) that supports naval spent fuel management, nuclear material testing and examination, and functional nuclear laboratory consolidation for naval nuclear propulsion.

(a) In general.—Whenever a funding table in this division specifies a dollar amount authorized for a project, program, or activity, the obligation and expenditure of the specified dollar amount for the project, program, or activity is hereby authorized, subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Merit-based decisions.—A decision to commit, obligate, or expend funds with or to a specific entity on the basis of a dollar amount authorized pursuant to subsection (a) shall—

(1) be based on merit-based selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of sections 3201 and 4024 of title 10, United States Code, or on competitive procedures; and

(c) Relationship to transfer and programming authority.—An amount specified in the funding tables in this division may be transferred or reprogrammed under a transfer or reprogramming authority provided by another provision of this Act or by other law. The transfer or reprogramming of an amount specified in such funding tables shall not count against a ceiling on such transfers or reprogrammings under section 1001 of this Act or any other provision of law, unless such transfer or reprogramming would move funds between appropriation accounts.

(d) Applicability to classified annex.—This section applies to any classified annex that accompanies this Act.

(e) Oral or written communications.—No oral or written communication concerning any amount specified in the funding tables in this division shall supersede the requirements of this section.

SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT (In Thousands of Dollars)
Line	Item	FY 2026 Request	Senate Authorized
	AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY
	FIXED WING
6	HADES PLATFORM, PAYLOADS/PED, AND INTEGRATION	26,850	26,850
	ROTARY
9	AH–64 APACHE BLOCK IIIA REMAN	1,669	1,669
13	UH–60 BLACKHAWK M MODEL (MYP)	732,060	732,060
17	CH–47 HELICOPTER	618,798	618,798
18	CH–47 HELICOPTER	61,421	61,421
	MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT
27	AH–64 MODS	125,236	125,236
28	SCALABLE CONTROL INTERFACE (SCI)	1,257	1,257
29	CH–47 CARGO HELICOPTER MODS (MYP)	17,709	17,709
34	UTILITY HELICOPTER MODS	33,659	33,659
36	NETWORK AND MISSION PLAN	40,472	40,472
37	COMMS, NAV SURVEILLANCE	11,566	11,566
39	AVIATION ASSURED PNT	49,475	49,475
40	GATM ROLLUP	4,651	4,651
	GROUND SUPPORT AVIONICS
45	AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY EQUIPMENT	129,167	129,167
47	CMWS	38,419	38,419
48	COMMON INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM)	225,647	225,647
	OTHER SUPPORT
50	COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT	29,489	29,489
52	AIRCREW INTEGRATED SYSTEMS	14,986	14,986
53	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL	24,213	24,213
54	LAUNCHER, 2.75 ROCKET	1,611	1,611
	AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
57	SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS	726,034	741,034
	Flammable Solids UAS Applications		[15,000]
58	FUTURE UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (UAS) FAMILY	118,459	118,459
59	GRAY EAGLE MODIFICATIONS	12,351	12,351
	TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY	3,045,199	3,060,199

	MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY
	SURFACE-TO-AIR MISSILE SYSTEM
2	LOWER TIER AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE (AMD) SEN	637,473	1,250,473
	Procure additional 4x LTAMDS—misaligned budget request		[613,000]
4	M-SHORAD—PROCUREMENT	679,114	679,114
6	MSE MISSILE	945,905	1,485,525
	PAC–3 MSE missile recerts—misaligned budget request		[366,000]
	Patriot Mods: AMMPS/DEX		[173,620]
9	PRECISION STRIKE MISSILE (PRSM)	160,846	480,946
	Max PrSM Inc 1 procurement (+254 missiles)—misaligned budget request		[320,100]
11	INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION CAPABILITY INC 2–I	830,579	1,018,579
	IFPC Inc 2 AIM 9X missile production to 432x AUR—misaligned budget request		[188,000]
12	MID-RANGE CAPABILITY (MRC)	82,407	179,407
	Hypersonics Rocket Motor Cost Reduction Initiative		[42,000]
	Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) (USA, USN)		[55,000]
	AIR-TO-SURFACE MISSILE SYSTEM
15	JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MSLS (JAGM)	84,667	84,667
17	LONG-RANGE HYPERSONIC WEAPON	353,415	353,415
	ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT MISSILE SYS
18	JAVELIN (AAWS-M) SYSTEM SUMMARY	329,205	329,205
19	TOW 2 SYSTEM SUMMARY	11,731	11,731
20	GUIDED MLRS ROCKET (GMLRS)	1,125,071	1,125,071
21	GUIDED MLRS ROCKET (GMLRS)	43,156	43,156
22	MLRS REDUCED RANGE PRACTICE ROCKETS (RRPR)	32,339	32,339
23	HIGH MOBILITY ARTILLERY ROCKET SYSTEM (HIMARS	61,503	61,503
	MODIFICATIONS
29	PATRIOT MODS	757,800	757,800
32	STINGER MODS	428,935	450,935
	Qualification of Stinger additional SRMs		[22,000]
35	MLRS MODS	243,470	243,470
36	HIMARS MODIFICATIONS	54,005	54,005
	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
38	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	6,651	6,651
	SUPPORT EQUIPMENT & FACILITIES
40	AIR DEFENSE TARGETS	12,801	12,801
	AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
44	LAUNCHED EFFECTS FAMILY	67,816	67,816
	TOTAL MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY	6,948,889	8,728,609

	PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY
	TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
2	ARMORED MULTI PUPOSE VEHICLE (AMPV)	554,678	554,678
4	ASSAULT BREACHER VEHICLE (ABV)	4,079	4,079
5	M10 BOOKER	64,919	64,919
	MODIFICATION OF TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
8	STRYKER UPGRADE	135,816	135,816
9	BRADLEY FIRE SUPPORT TEAM (BFIST) VEHICLE	4,684	4,684
10	BRADLEY PROGRAM (MOD)	157,183	157,183
11	M109 FOV MODIFICATIONS	82,537	82,537
12	PALADIN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT (PIM)	250,238	250,238
13	IMPROVED RECOVERY VEHICLE (M88 HERCULES)	155,540	155,540
17	JOINT ASSAULT BRIDGE	132,637	132,637
19	ABRAMS UPGRADE PROGRAM	740,528	740,528
21	VEHICLE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (VPS)	107,833	107,833
	WEAPONS & OTHER COMBAT VEHICLES
24	PERSONAL DEFENSE WEAPON (ROLL)	1,002	1,002
25	M240 MEDIUM MACHINE GUN (7.62MM)	5	5
27	MACHINE GUN, CAL .50 M2 ROLL	4	4
28	MORTAR SYSTEMS	5,807	5,807
29	LOCATION & AZIMUTH DETERMINATION SYSTEM (LADS	9,477	9,477
31	PRECISION SNIPER RIFLE	1,853	1,853
34	NEXT GENERATION SQUAD WEAPON	365,155	365,155
36	HANDGUN	7	7
	MOD OF WEAPONS AND OTHER COMBAT VEH
38	M777 MODS	2,429	2,429
42	SNIPER RIFLES MODIFICATIONS	19	19
43	M119 MODIFICATIONS	4,642	4,642
	SUPPORT EQUIPMENT & FACILITIES
46	ITEMS LESS THAN $5.0M (WOCV-WTCV)	469	19,469
	Procurement of six additional Robotic Combat Vehicles (RCVs)		[19,000]
47	PRODUCTION BASE SUPPORT (WOCV-WTCV)	104,993	104,993
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY	2,886,534	2,905,534

	PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY
	SMALL/MEDIUM CAL AMMUNITION
1	CTG, 5.56MM, ALL TYPES	128,283	128,283
2	CTG, 7.62MM, ALL TYPES	62,157	62,157
3	NEXT GENERATION SQUAD WEAPON AMMUNITION	426,177	426,177
4	CTG, HANDGUN, ALL TYPES	7,750	7,750
5	CTG, .50 CAL, ALL TYPES	78,199	78,199
6	CTG, 20MM, ALL TYPES	25,773	25,773
7	CTG, 25MM, ALL TYPES	22,324	22,324
8	CTG, 30MM, ALL TYPES	100,392	100,392
9	CTG, 40MM, ALL TYPES	131,432	131,432
11	CTG, 50MM, ALL TYPES	42,131	42,131
	MORTAR AMMUNITION
12	60MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES	38,114	38,114
13	81MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES	41,786	41,786
14	120MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES	123,144	123,144
	TANK AMMUNITION
15	CARTRIDGES, TANK, 105MM AND 120MM, ALL TYPES	440,152	440,152
	ARTILLERY AMMUNITION
16	ARTILLERY CARTRIDGES, 75MM & 105MM, ALL TYPES	80,780	80,780
17	ARTILLERY PROJECTILE, 155MM, ALL TYPES	218,877	218,877
19	PRECISION ARTILLERY MUNITIONS	28,995	28,995
20	ARTILLERY PROPELLANTS, FUZES AND PRIMERS, ALL	168,737	168,737
	MINES
21	MINES & CLEARING CHARGERS, ALL TYPES	42,748	42,748
22	CLOSE TERRAIN SHAPING OBSTACLE	7,860	7,860
	ROCKETS
24	SHOULDER LAUNCHED MUNITIONS, ALL TYPES	46,089	46,089
25	ROCKET, HYDRA 70, ALL TYPES	34,836	34,836
	OTHER AMMUNITION
26	CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES	12,543	12,543
27	DEMOLITION MUNITIONS, ALL TYPES	21,409	21,409
28	GRENADES, ALL TYPES	56,530	56,530
29	SIGNALS, ALL TYPES	36,846	36,846
30	SIMULATORS, ALL TYPES	10,821	10,821
	MISCELLANEOUS
32	AMMO COMPONENTS, ALL TYPES	4,084	4,084
34	ITEMS LESS THEN $5 MILLION (AMMO)	16,799	16,799
35	AMMUNITION PECULIAR EQUIPMENT	16,219	16,219
36	FIRST DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION (AMMO)	18,600	18,600
37	CLOSEOUT LIABILITIES	102	102
	PRODUCTION BASE SUPPORT
40	INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES	1,084,611	1,334,611
	Modernization of organic industrial base		[250,000]
41	CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS DEMILITARIZATION	155,050	155,050
42	ARMS INITIATIVE	3,885	3,885
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY	3,734,235	3,984,235

	OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY
	TACTICAL VEHICLES
2	FAMILY OF SEMITRAILERS	132,793	132,793
6	GROUND MOBILITY VEHICLES (GMV)	308,620	308,620
9	JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE FAMILY OF VEHICL	45,840	79,840
	Infantry Squad Vehicle Procurement		[34,000]
10	TRUCK, DUMP, 20T (CCE)	17,000	30,506
	Heavy Dump Trucks		[13,506]
11	FAMILY OF MEDIUM TACTICAL VEH (FMTV)	85,490	85,490
12	FAMILY OF COLD WEATHER ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE (C	38,001	38,001
13	FIRETRUCKS & ASSOCIATED FIREFIGHTING EQUIP	39,761	39,761
14	FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL VEHICLES (FHTV)	202,009	202,009
19	TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE PROTECTION KITS	2,660	2,660
20	MODIFICATION OF IN SVC EQUIP	98,728	98,728
	NON-TACTICAL VEHICLES
23	NONTACTICAL VEHICLES, OTHER	8,462	8,462
	COMM—JOINT COMMUNICATIONS
29	TACTICAL NETWORK COMMUNICATION	866,347	866,347
31	JCSE EQUIPMENT (USRDECOM)	5,389	5,389
	COMM—SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
32	SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS	114,770	114,770
36	DEFENSE ENTERPRISE WIDEBAND SATCOM SYSTEMS	65,591	65,591
39	ASSURED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION AND TIMING	212,469	212,469
	COMM—COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS
46	HANDHELD MANPACK SMALL FORM FIT (HMS)	478,435	478,435
48	ARMY LINK 16 SYSTEMS	133,836	133,836
51	UNIFIED COMMAND SUITE	20,010	20,010
52	COTS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT	207,402	207,402
54	ARMY COMMUNICATIONS & ELECTRONICS	110,678	110,678
	COMM—INTELLIGENCE COMM
56	CI AUTOMATION ARCHITECTURE-INTEL	15,290	15,290
58	MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE	108,655	108,655
	INFORMATION SECURITY
60	INFORMATION SYSTEM SECURITY PROGRAM-ISSP	826	826
61	COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY (COMSEC)	125,970	125,970
66	BIOMETRIC ENABLING CAPABILITY (BEC)	65	65
	COMM—BASE COMMUNICATIONS
70	INFORMATION SYSTEMS	209,378	209,378
72	BASE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION	50,177	50,177
74	INSTALLATION INFO INFRASTRUCTURE MOD PROGRAM	439,373	439,373
	ELECT EQUIP—TACT INT REL ACT (TIARA)
78	TITAN	236,314	236,314
81	COLLECTION CAPABILITY	2,935	2,935
83	DCGS-A-INTEL	1,087	1,087
85	TROJAN	37,968	58,568
	AFRICOM: CRAM capabilities		[20,600]
86	MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP (INTEL SPT)	20,598	134,376
	AN/TPQ–53 Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar		[113,778]
	ELECT EQUIP—ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW)
91	AIR VIGILANCE (AV)	9,731	9,731
93	FAMILY OF PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE CAP.	15,382	115,382
	CENTCOM: aerostat sensors		[100,000]
94	COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/SECURITY COUNTERMEASURES	8,283	8,283
	ELECT EQUIP—TACTICAL SURV. (TAC SURV)
96	SENTINEL MODS	462,010	462,010
97	NIGHT VISION DEVICES	211,056	211,056
98	SMALL TACTICAL OPTICAL RIFLE MOUNTED MLRF	2,111	2,111
99	BASE EXPEDITIARY TARGETING AND SURV SYS	1,801	1,801
100	INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION FAMILY OF SYSTEMS	27,881	27,881
101	FAMILY OF WEAPON SIGHTS (FWS)	103,607	103,607
102	ENHANCED PORTABLE INDUCTIVE ARTILLERY FUZE SE	10,456	10,456
104	FORWARD LOOKING INFRARED (IFLIR)	60,765	60,765
106	JOINT BATTLE COMMAND—PLATFORM (JBC-P)	165,395	165,395
107	JOINT EFFECTS TARGETING SYSTEM (JETS)	48,715	48,715
109	COMPUTER BALLISTICS: LHMBC XM32	6,325	6,325
110	MORTAR FIRE CONTROL SYSTEM	3,657	3,657
111	MORTAR FIRE CONTROL SYSTEMS MODIFICATIONS	3,262	3,262
112	COUNTERFIRE RADARS	40,526	40,526
	ELECT EQUIP—TACTICAL C2 SYSTEMS
113	ARMY COMMAND POST INTEGRATED INFRASTRUCTURE (	723,187	723,187
114	FIRE SUPPORT C2 FAMILY	3,389	3,389
115	AIR & MSL DEFENSE PLANNING & CONTROL SYS	33,103	33,103
116	IAMD BATTLE COMMAND SYSTEM	546,480	546,480
117	AIAMD FAMILY OF SYSTEMS (FOS) COMPONENTS	31,016	31,016
118	LIFE CYCLE SOFTWARE SUPPORT (LCSS)	5,175	5,175
119	NETWORK MANAGEMENT INITIALIZATION AND SERVICE	244,403	244,403
124	MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIPMENT (ENFIRE)	16,595	16,595
	ELECT EQUIP—AUTOMATION
125	ARMY TRAINING MODERNIZATION	8,262	8,262
126	AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING EQUIP	93,804	93,804
129	HIGH PERF COMPUTING MOD PGM (HPCMP)	74,708	74,708
130	CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM	468	468
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	1,546	1,546
	CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE EQUIPMENT
138	BASE DEFENSE SYSTEMS (BDS)	143	143
139	CBRN DEFENSE	69,739	69,739
	BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
142	TACTICAL BRIDGE, FLOAT-RIBBON	69,863	69,863
	ENGINEER (NON-CONSTRUCTION) EQUIPMENT
150	ROBOTICS AND APPLIQUE SYSTEMS	509	509
151	RENDER SAFE SETS KITS OUTFITS	14,184	14,184
	COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
153	HEATERS AND ECU'S	14,288	14,288
156	GROUND SOLDIER SYSTEM	178,850	178,850
157	MOBILE SOLDIER POWER	15,729	15,729
159	FIELD FEEDING EQUIPMENT	4,500	4,500
160	CARGO AERIAL DEL & PERSONNEL PARACHUTE SYSTEM	61,224	61,224
161	FAMILY OF ENGR COMBAT AND CONSTRUCTION SETS	0	37,615
	Hydraulic Excavator (HYEX)		[7,980]
	TRACTOR FULL TRACKED, MED T–9 (Medium Dozer)		[29,635]
	PETROLEUM EQUIPMENT
164	DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS, PETROLEUM & WATER	96,020	96,020
	MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
165	COMBAT SUPPORT MEDICAL	99,567	99,567
	MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
166	MOBILE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS	63,311	63,311
	CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
169	CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT	92,299	92,299
	RAIL FLOAT CONTAINERIZATION EQUIPMENT
179	ARMY WATERCRAFT ESP	57,342	57,342
180	MANEUVER SUPPORT VESSEL (MSV)	33,949	158,949
	MSV-L 2x ships per year		[125,000]
181	ITEMS LESS THAN $5.0M (FLOAT/RAIL)	18,217	18,217
	GENERATORS
182	GENERATORS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIP	89,073	89,073
	MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT
184	FAMILY OF FORKLIFTS	12,576	45,777
	Family of All Terrain Cranes		[15,000]
	Type 1 Crane/Mobility		[18,201]
	TRAINING EQUIPMENT
185	COMBAT TRAINING CENTERS SUPPORT	49,025	49,025
186	TRAINING DEVICES, NONSYSTEM	189,306	189,306
187	SYNTHETIC TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (STE)	166,402	166,402
189	GAMING TECHNOLOGY IN SUPPORT OF ARMY TRAINING	7,320	7,320
	TEST MEASURE AND DIG EQUIPMENT (TMD)
191	INTEGRATED FAMILY OF TEST EQUIPMENT (IFTE)	38,784	38,784
193	TEST EQUIPMENT MODERNIZATION (TEMOD)	51,119	51,119
	OTHER SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
195	PHYSICAL SECURITY SYSTEMS (OPA3)	136,315	136,315
196	BASE LEVEL COMMON EQUIPMENT	19,452	19,452
197	MODIFICATION OF IN-SVC EQUIPMENT (OPA–3)	31,452	31,452
198	BUILDING, PRE-FAB, RELOCATABLE	10,490	10,490
200	SPECIAL EQUIPMENT FOR TEST AND EVALUATION	93,777	93,777
	OPA2
205	INITIAL SPARES—C&E	7,254	7,254
	AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
207	COUNTER-SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM (C-SUAS)	306,568	306,568
208	ELECTRONIC WARFARE	24,547	24,547
209	ELECTRONIC WARFARE AGILE	54,427	54,427
210	SOLDIER BORNE SENSOR	21,919	21,919
	TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY	9,605,566	10,083,266

	AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY
	COMBAT AIRCRAFT
2	F/A–18E/F (FIGHTER) HORNET	50,607	50,607
4	JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER CV	1,951,629	1,951,629
5	JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER CV	401,596	401,596
6	JSF STOVL	1,787,313	1,787,313
7	JSF STOVL	113,744	113,744
8	CH–53K (HEAVY LIFT)	1,707,601	2,259,601
	USMC (+4) CH–53K		[552,000]
9	CH–53K (HEAVY LIFT)	335,352	335,352
10	V–22 (MEDIUM LIFT)	47,196	47,196
12	H–1 UPGRADES (UH–1Y/AH–1Z)	8,305	8,305
14	P–8A POSEIDON	13,631	13,631
15	E–2D ADV HAWKEYE	1,503,556	3,556
	E–2D cancelation		[–1,500,000]
	OTHER AIRCRAFT
23	KC–130J	18,017	18,017
27	MQ–4 TRITON	133,139	133,139
31	MQ–25	407,046	407,046
32	MQ–25	52,191	52,191
34	MARINE GROUP 5 UAS	15,162	15,162
36	OTHER SUPPORT AIRCRAFT	19,812	19,812
	MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT
39	F–18 A-D UNIQUE	53,809	53,809
40	F–18E/F AND EA–18G MODERNIZATION AND SUSTAINM	576,229	576,229
41	MARINE GROUP 5 UAS SERIES	143,695	143,695
42	AEA SYSTEMS	25,848	25,848
44	INFRARED SEARCH AND TRACK (IRST)	175,351	175,351
45	ADVERSARY	21,535	21,535
46	F–18 SERIES	756,967	756,967
47	H–53 SERIES	69,227	69,227
48	MH–60 SERIES	115,545	115,545
49	H–1 SERIES	149,405	149,405
51	E–2 SERIES	143,772	143,772
52	TRAINER A/C SERIES	12,151	12,151
54	C–130 SERIES	144,017	144,017
55	FEWSG	5	5
56	CARGO/TRANSPORT A/C SERIES	7,526	7,526
57	E–6 SERIES	163,737	163,737
58	EXECUTIVE HELICOPTERS SERIES	66,645	66,645
60	T–45 SERIES	173,433	173,433
61	POWER PLANT CHANGES	18,707	18,707
62	JPATS SERIES	21,330	21,330
64	COMMON ECM EQUIPMENT	91,553	91,553
65	COMMON AVIONICS CHANGES	161,376	161,376
66	COMMON DEFENSIVE WEAPON SYSTEM	8,926	8,926
67	ID SYSTEMS	3,011	3,011
68	P–8 SERIES	320,130	320,130
69	MAGTF EW FOR AVIATION	22,356	22,356
71	V–22 (TILT/ROTOR ACFT) OSPREY	319,145	319,145
72	NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ)	439,493	439,493
73	F–35 STOVL SERIES	364,774	364,774
74	F–35 CV SERIES	180,533	180,533
75	QRC	24,893	24,893
76	MQ–4 SERIES	180,463	180,463
	AIRCRAFT SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
84	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	2,562,627	2,562,627
	AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIP & FACILITIES
85	COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT	584,561	584,561
86	AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES	112,513	112,513
87	WAR CONSUMABLES	45,153	45,153
88	OTHER PRODUCTION CHARGES	70,770	70,770
89	SPECIAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	130,993	130,993
	TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY	17,028,101	16,080,101

	WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY
	MODIFICATION OF MISSILES
2	TRIDENT II MODS	2,582,029	2,582,029
	STRATEGIC MISSILES
6	TOMAHAWK	12,593	205,593
	TLAM supplier base stabilization—turbofans		[193,000]
	TACTICAL MISSILES
7	AMRAAM	69,913	763,913
	AMRAAM: maximize procurement		[694,000]
8	SIDEWINDER	84,713	84,713
9	JOINT ADVANCE TACTICAL MISSILE (JATM)	301,858	301,858
10	STANDARD MISSILE	187,420	249,420
	SM–6 procurement—misaligned budget request (+11 AURs)		[62,000]
12	SMALL DIAMETER BOBOMBMB II	86,255	86,255
13	RAM	122,372	122,372
15	JOINT AIR GROUND MISSILE (JAGM)	74,152	74,152
17	AERIAL TARGETS	182,704	182,704
19	OTHER MISSILE SUPPORT	3,490	3,490
20	LRASM	243,217	401,217
	LRASM supplier base Navy production to 160 per year		[68,000]
	LRASM: procurement +20 AURs to 120		[90,000]
21	NAVAL STRIKE MISSILE (NSM)	32,238	32,238
22	NAVAL STRIKE MISSILE (NSM)	3,059	3,059
	MODIFICATION OF MISSILES
25	TOMAHAWK MODS	6,283	41,283
	TLAM procurement increase		[35,000]
26	ESSM	503,381	503,381
28	AARGM-ER	261,041	261,041
29	AARGM-ER	24,284	24,284
31	STANDARD MISSILES MODS	32,127	32,127
	SUPPORT EQUIPMENT & FACILITIES
32	WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES	127,222	527,222
	Navy munitions		[400,000]
	ORDNANCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
36	ORDNANCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	37,059	37,059
	TORPEDOES AND RELATED EQUIP
39	SSTD	4,789	4,789
40	MK–48 TORPEDO	7,081	7,081
42	ASW TARGETS	38,386	38,386
	MOD OF TORPEDOES AND RELATED EQUIP
43	MK–54 TORPEDO MODS	1,692	1,692
44	MK–48 TORPEDO ADCAP MODS	31,479	31,479
45	MARITIME MINES	0	75,000
	Enhanced Joint Direct Attack Missile (JDAM) (USN)		[75,000]
	SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
46	TORPEDO SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	161,218	161,218
47	ASW RANGE SUPPORT	4,328	4,328
	DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION
48	FIRST DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION	5,346	5,346
	GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
51	SMALL ARMS AND WEAPONS	9,987	9,987
	MODIFICATION OF GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
52	CIWS MODS	8,122	8,122
53	COAST GUARD WEAPONS	44,455	44,455
54	GUN MUNT MODS	83,969	83,969
55	LCS MODULE WEAPONS	2,200	2,200
56	AIRBORNE MINE NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEMS	14,413	14,413
	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
61	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	202,425	202,425
	TOTAL WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY	5,597,300	7,214,300

	PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
	NAVY AMMUNITION
1	GENERAL PURPOSE BOMBS	30,915	30,915
2	JDAM	61,119	61,119
3	AIRBORNE ROCKETS, ALL TYPES	87,797	87,797
4	MACHINE GUN AMMUNITION	17,645	17,645
5	PRACTICE BOMBS	45,049	45,049
6	CARTRIDGES & CART ACTUATED DEVICES	74,535	74,535
7	AIR EXPENDABLE COUNTERMEASURES	98,437	98,437
8	JATOS	6,373	6,373
9	5 INCH/54 GUN AMMUNITION	24,864	24,864
10	INTERMEDIATE CALIBER GUN AMMUNITION	40,175	40,175
11	OTHER SHIP GUN AMMUNITION	43,763	43,763
12	SMALL ARMS & LANDING PARTY AMMO	49,493	49,493
13	PYROTECHNIC AND DEMOLITION	9,644	9,644
15	AMMUNITION LESS THAN $5 MILLION	1,723	1,723
16	EXPEDITIONARY LOITERING MUNITIONS	0	64,000
	Expeditionary Loitering Munitions		[64,000]
	MARINE CORPS AMMUNITION
18	MORTARS	141,135	141,135
19	DIRECT SUPPORT MUNITIONS	26,729	26,729
20	INFANTRY WEAPONS AMMUNITION	180,867	180,867
21	COMBAT SUPPORT MUNITIONS	12,936	12,936
22	AMMO MODERNIZATION	18,467	18,467
23	ARTILLERY MUNITIONS	147,473	147,473
24	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	15,891	15,891
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC	1,135,030	1,199,030

	SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY
	FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE SHIPS
1	COLUMBIA CLASS SUBMARINE	3,928,828	3,928,828
2	COLUMBIA CLASS SUBMARINE	5,065,766	5,065,766
	OTHER WARSHIPS
5	CARRIER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM	1,046,700	1,046,700
6	CARRIER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM	612,038	612,038
7	CVN–81	1,622,935	1,622,935
8	VIRGINIA CLASS SUBMARINE	816,705	2,016,705
	Virginia class submarine		[1,200,000]
9	VIRGINIA CLASS SUBMARINE	3,126,816	3,126,816
10	CVN REFUELING OVERHAULS	1,779,011	1,779,011
12	DDG 1000	52,358	52,358
13	DDG–51	10,773	6,335,173
	DDG–51		[5,400,000]
	Wage and quality of life enhancements for conventional surface shipbuilding, private ship repair, and public shipyards		[924,400]
14	DDG–51	0	1,350,000
	DDG–51 Advance Procurement		[900,000]
	Large Surface Combatant Shipyard Infrastructure and Industrial Base		[450,000]
	AUXILIARIES, CRAFT AND PRIOR YR PROGRAM COST
31	TAO FLEET OILER	8,346	8,346
34	TAGOS SURTASS SHIPS	612,205	612,205
41	OUTFITTING	863,846	886,846
	Outfitting		[23,000]
43	SERVICE CRAFT	34,602	174,602
	YRBM procurement		[140,000]
48	AUXILIARY VESSELS (USED SEALIFT)	45,000	648,000
	Auxiliary Personnel Lighter		[78,000]
	Used Sealift Vessels for the Ready Reserve Force (RRF)		[525,000]
49	COMPLETION OF PY SHIPBUILDING PROGRAMS	1,214,295	1,691,295
	Completion of prior year shipbuilding—misaligned budget request		[477,000]
	TOTAL SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY	20,840,224	30,957,624

	OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY
	SHIP PROPULSION EQUIPMENT
1	SURFACE POWER EQUIPMENT	9,978	9,978
	GENERATORS
2	SURFACE COMBATANT HM&E	62,004	71,004
	Mixed-Oxidant Electrolytic Disinfectant Generator		[9,000]
	NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT
3	OTHER NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT	96,945	96,945
	OTHER SHIPBOARD EQUIPMENT
4	SUB PERISCOPE, IMAGING AND SUPT EQUIP PROG	135,863	277,863
	Sub periscope, imaging and supt equip—misaligned budget request		[142,000]
5	DDG MOD	686,787	997,787
	DDG Mod		[311,000]
6	FIREFIGHTING EQUIPMENT	36,488	36,488
7	COMMAND AND CONTROL SWITCHBOARD	2,417	2,417
8	LHA/LHD MIDLIFE	86,884	123,884
	LHA/LHD Midlife		[37,000]
9	LCC 19/20 EXTENDED SERVICE LIFE PROGRAM	19,276	19,276
10	POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT	22,477	22,477
11	SUBMARINE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	383,062	383,062
12	VIRGINIA CLASS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	52,039	52,039
13	LCS CLASS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	2,551	2,551
14	SUBMARINE BATTERIES	28,169	28,169
15	LPD CLASS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	101,042	126,042
	LPD Class Support Equipment		[25,000]
16	DDG 1000 CLASS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	115,267	115,267
17	STRATEGIC PLATFORM SUPPORT EQUIP	38,039	38,039
19	DSSP EQUIPMENT	5,849	5,849
22	UNDERWATER EOD EQUIPMENT	22,355	22,355
23	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	11,691	86,691
	Misaligned budget request		[75,000]
24	CHEMICAL WARFARE DETECTORS	2,607	2,607
	REACTOR PLANT EQUIPMENT
26	SHIP MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND MODERNIZATION	2,392,620	2,392,620
28	REACTOR COMPONENTS	399,603	474,603
	Navy budget request errata to restore funding for reactor plant components		[75,000]
	OCEAN ENGINEERING
29	DIVING AND SALVAGE EQUIPMENT	7,842	7,842
	SMALL BOATS
31	STANDARD BOATS	51,546	118,546
	40-foot Patrol Boat		[67,000]
	PRODUCTION FACILITIES EQUIPMENT
32	OPERATING FORCES IPE	208,998	208,998
	OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
33	LCS COMMON MISSION MODULES EQUIPMENT	38,880	38,880
34	LCS MCM MISSION MODULE	91,372	91,372
36	LCS SUW MISSION MODULES	3,790	3,790
37	LCS IN-SERVICE MODERNIZATION	203,442	203,442
38	SMALL & MEDIUM UUV	54,854	54,854
	LOGISTIC SUPPORT
40	LSD MIDLIFE & MODERNIZATION	4,079	4,079
	SHIP SONARS
43	AN/SQQ–89 SURF ASW COMBAT SYSTEM	144,425	144,425
44	SSN ACOUSTIC EQUIPMENT	498,597	498,597
	ASW ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
46	SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC WARFARE SYSTEM	56,482	56,482
47	SSTD	14,915	14,915
48	FIXED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM	352,312	352,312
49	SURTASS	31,169	31,169
	ELECTRONIC WARFARE EQUIPMENT
50	AN/SLQ–32	461,380	461,380
	RECONNAISSANCE EQUIPMENT
51	SHIPBOARD IW EXPLOIT	379,908	379,908
52	MARITIME BATTLESPACE AWARENESS	13,008	13,008
	OTHER SHIP ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
53	COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY	26,648	26,648
54	NAVAL TACTICAL COMMAND SUPPORT SYSTEM (NTCSS)	7,972	7,972
55	ATDLS	58,739	58,739
56	NAVY COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (NCCS)	3,489	3,489
57	MINESWEEPING SYSTEM REPLACEMENT	16,426	22,426
	Dual-Modality Vehicle Mine Countermeasures		[6,000]
59	NAVSTAR GPS RECEIVERS (SPACE)	45,701	45,701
60	AMERICAN FORCES RADIO AND TV SERVICE	304	304
	AVIATION ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
62	ASHORE ATC EQUIPMENT	97,262	97,262
63	AFLOAT ATC EQUIPMENT	72,104	72,104
64	ID SYSTEMS	52,171	52,171
65	JOINT PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEM (	5,105	5,105
66	NAVAL MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS	60,058	60,058
	OTHER SHORE ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
68	TACTICAL/MOBILE C4I SYSTEMS	64,901	64,901
69	INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE AND RECONAISSANCE (ISR)	12,112	12,112
70	CANES	534,324	534,324
71	RADIAC	31,289	31,289
72	CANES-INTELL	46,281	46,281
73	GPETE	33,395	33,395
74	MASF	13,205	13,205
75	INTEG COMBAT SYSTEM TEST FACILITY	11,493	11,493
76	EMI CONTROL INSTRUMENTATION	3,687	3,687
78	IN-SERVICE RADARS AND SENSORS	249,656	249,656
	SHIPBOARD COMMUNICATIONS
79	BATTLE FORCE TACTICAL NETWORK	106,583	106,583
80	SHIPBOARD TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS	20,900	20,900
81	SHIP COMMUNICATIONS AUTOMATION	162,075	162,075
82	COMMUNICATIONS ITEMS UNDER $5M	11,138	11,138
	SUBMARINE COMMUNICATIONS
83	SUBMARINE BROADCAST SUPPORT	113,115	113,115
84	SUBMARINE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT	84,584	84,584
	SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
85	SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS	62,943	62,943
86	NAVY MULTIBAND TERMINAL (NMT)	63,433	63,433
87	MOBILE ADVANCED EHF TERMINAL (MAT)	220,453	220,453
	SHORE COMMUNICATIONS
88	JOINT COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT ELEMENT (JCSE)	3,389	3,389
	CRYPTOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT
89	INFO SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM (ISSP)	191,239	191,239
90	MIO INTEL EXPLOITATION TEAM	1,122	1,122
	CRYPTOLOGIC EQUIPMENT
91	CRYPTOLOGIC COMMUNICATIONS EQUIP	7,841	7,841
	OTHER ELECTRONIC SUPPORT
109	COAST GUARD EQUIPMENT	61,512	61,512
	SONOBUOYS
112	SONOBUOYS—ALL TYPES	249,908	249,908
	AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
113	MINOTAUR	5,191	5,191
114	WEAPONS RANGE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	123,435	123,435
115	AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	91,284	91,284
116	ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR (AAG)	4,484	4,484
117	ELECTROMAGNETIC AIRCRAFT LAUNCH SYSTEM (EMALS	16,294	16,294
118	METEOROLOGICAL EQUIPMENT	13,806	13,806
119	AIRBORNE MCM	9,643	9,643
121	AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	111,334	111,334
122	UMCS-UNMAN CARRIER AVIATION(UCA)MISSION CNTRL	189,553	189,553
	SHIP GUN SYSTEM EQUIPMENT
125	SHIP GUN SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT	7,358	7,358
	SHIP MISSILE SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
126	HARPOON SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	209	209
127	SHIP MISSILE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	455,822	455,822
128	TOMAHAWK SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	107,709	107,709
	FBM SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
129	CPS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	67,264	67,264
130	STRATEGIC MISSILE SYSTEMS EQUIP	491,179	491,179
	ASW SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
131	SSN COMBAT CONTROL SYSTEM	102,954	102,954
132	ASW SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	25,721	25,721
	OTHER ORDNANCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
133	EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL EQUIP	24,822	24,822
134	DIRECTED ENERGY SYSTEMS	2,976	2,976
135	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	3,635	3,635
	OTHER EXPENDABLE ORDNANCE
136	ANTI-SHIP MISSIL DECOY SYSTEM	19,129	89,129
	ASCM decoy systems—misaligned budget request		[70,000]
137	SUBMARINE TRAINING DEVICE MODS	77,889	77,889
138	SURFACE TRAINING EQUIPMENT	186,085	186,085
	CIVIL ENGINEERING SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
141	PASSENGER CARRYING VEHICLES	3,825	3,825
142	GENERAL PURPOSE TRUCKS	5,489	5,489
143	CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE EQUIP	102,592	102,592
144	FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT	27,675	27,675
145	TACTICAL VEHICLES	37,262	37,262
146	AMPHIBIOUS EQUIPMENT	38,073	38,073
147	POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT	4,009	4,009
148	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	127,086	127,086
149	PHYSICAL SECURITY VEHICLES	1,297	1,297
	SUPPLY SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
151	SUPPLY EQUIPMENT	38,838	38,838
152	FIRST DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION	6,203	6,203
153	SPECIAL PURPOSE SUPPLY SYSTEMS	643,618	643,618
	TRAINING DEVICES
155	TRAINING SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	3,480	3,480
156	TRAINING AND EDUCATION EQUIPMENT	75,048	75,048
	COMMAND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
157	COMMAND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	34,249	34,249
158	MEDICAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	12,256	12,256
160	NAVAL MIP SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	8,810	8,810
161	OPERATING FORCES SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	16,567	16,567
162	C4ISR EQUIPMENT	36,945	36,945
163	ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	42,860	42,860
164	PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT	166,577	166,577
165	ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	42,363	42,363
	OTHER
170	NEXT GENERATION ENTERPRISE SERVICE	185,755	185,755
171	CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES	5,446	19,986
	Information Security Cyber Security Chain Risk Management Program		[14,540]
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	41,991	41,991
	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
176	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	585,865	585,865
	TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY	14,569,524	15,401,064

	PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS
	TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
1	AAV7A1 PIP	21	21
2	AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT VEHICLE FAMILY OF VEHICLES	790,789	790,789
3	LAV PIP	764	764
	ARTILLERY AND OTHER WEAPONS
4	155MM LIGHTWEIGHT TOWED HOWITZER	3	3
5	ARTILLERY WEAPONS SYSTEM	221,897	221,897
6	WEAPONS AND COMBAT VEHICLES UNDER $5 MILLION	13,401	13,401
	GUIDED MISSILES
11	NAVAL STRIKE MISSILE (NSM)	143,711	143,711
12	NAVAL STRIKE MISSILE (NSM)	20,930	20,930
13	GROUND BASED AIR DEFENSE	620,220	620,220
14	ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE-JAVELIN	32,576	32,576
15	FAMILY ANTI-ARMOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS (FOAAWS)	107	107
16	ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE-TOW	2,173	2,173
17	GUIDED MLRS ROCKET (GMLRS)	61,490	61,490
	COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS
21	COMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (C	68,589	68,589
	REPAIR AND TEST EQUIPMENT
22	REPAIR AND TEST EQUIPMENT	61,264	61,264
	OTHER SUPPORT (TEL)
23	MODIFICATION KITS	1,108	1,108
	COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (NON-TEL)
24	ITEMS UNDER $5 MILLION (COMM & ELEC)	202,679	202,679
25	AIR OPERATIONS C2 SYSTEMS	15,784	15,784
	RADAR + EQUIPMENT (NON-TEL)
27	GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED RADAR (G/ATOR)	79,542	190,742
	USMC (+2) G/ATOR Radar Systems		[111,200]
	INTELL/COMM EQUIPMENT (NON-TEL)
29	ELECTRO MAGNETIC SPECTRUM OPERATIONS (EMSO)	35,396	35,396
30	GCSS-MC	3,303	3,303
31	FIRE SUPPORT SYSTEM	116,304	116,304
32	INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	67,690	85,390
	Marine Littoral Regiment Organic Find, Fix, and Track (F2T)		[17,700]
34	UNMANNED AIR SYSTEMS (INTEL)	14,991	14,991
35	DCGS-MC	42,946	42,946
36	UAS PAYLOADS	12,232	12,232
	OTHER SUPPORT (NON-TEL)
40	MARINE CORPS ENTERPRISE NETWORK (MCEN)	205,710	205,710
41	COMMON COMPUTER RESOURCES	21,064	21,064
42	COMMAND POST SYSTEMS	50,549	50,549
43	RADIO SYSTEMS	209,444	209,444
44	COMM SWITCHING & CONTROL SYSTEMS	100,712	100,712
45	COMM & ELEC INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT	16,163	16,163
46	CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES	14,541	14,541
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	2,145	2,145
	ADMINISTRATIVE VEHICLES
51	COMMERCIAL CARGO VEHICLES	24,699	24,699
	TACTICAL VEHICLES
52	MOTOR TRANSPORT MODIFICATIONS	16,472	16,472
53	JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE	81,893	249,893
	USMC JLTV procurement (+224)		[168,000]
	ENGINEER AND OTHER EQUIPMENT
58	TACTICAL FUEL SYSTEMS	33,611	33,611
59	POWER EQUIPMENT ASSORTED	24,558	24,558
60	AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	9,049	59,049
	ALPV procurement		[50,000]
61	EOD SYSTEMS	21,069	21,069
	MATERIALS HANDLING EQUIPMENT
62	PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT	52,394	52,394
	GENERAL PROPERTY
63	FIELD MEDICAL EQUIPMENT	58,768	58,768
64	TRAINING DEVICES	63,133	63,133
65	FAMILY OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT	33,644	33,644
66	ULTRA-LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE (ULTV)	7,836	7,836
	OTHER SUPPORT
67	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	35,920	35,920
	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
70	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	40,828	40,828
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS	3,754,112	4,101,012

	AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
	STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE
1	B–21 RAIDER	2,590,116	2,590,116
2	B–21 RAIDER	862,000	862,000
	TACTICAL FORCES
3	F–35	3,555,503	4,545,000
	Procure 10x F–35As		[989,497]
4	F–35	531,241	531,241
8	LC–130	0	300,000
	LC–130		[300,000]
9	JOINT SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT	17,985	35,970
	TACTICAL AIRLIFT
12	KC–46A MDAP	2,799,633	2,799,633
	UPT TRAINERS
17	ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING T–7A	362,083	362,083
	HELICOPTERS
19	MH–139A	4,478	4,478
20	COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER	107,500	107,500
	MISSION SUPPORT AIRCRAFT
24	CIVIL AIR PATROL A/C	3,131	3,131
	OTHER AIRCRAFT
26	TARGET DRONES	34,224	34,224
34	RQ–20B PUMA	11,437	11,437
	STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
36	B–2A	76,906	76,906
37	B–1B	73,893	73,893
38	B–52	223,827	223,827
39	LARGE AIRCRAFT INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES	35,165	35,165
	TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
41	COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT MODS	15,048	15,048
42	E–11 BACN/HAG	28,797	28,797
43	F–15	120,044	120,044
45	F–16 MODIFICATIONS	448,116	448,116
46	F–22A	977,526	977,526
47	F–35 MODIFICATIONS	380,337	380,337
48	F–15 EPAW	252,607	252,607
50	KC–46A MDAP	19,344	19,344
	AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
51	C–5	34,939	34,939
52	C–17A	9,853	9,853
56	OSA-EA MODIFICATIONS	87,515	87,515
	TRAINER AIRCRAFT
57	GLIDER MODS	159	159
58	T–6	247,814	247,814
59	T–1	137	152,137
	Common ASE		[152,000]
60	T–38	85,381	85,381
	OTHER AIRCRAFT
68	C–130	144,041	144,041
70	C–135	124,368	124,368
73	CVR (CONNON ULF RECEIVER) INC 2	79,859	79,859
74	RC–135	231,001	231,001
75	E–3	17,291	17,291
76	E–4	45,232	45,232
80	H–1	17,899	17,899
81	MH–139A MOD	4,992	4,992
82	H–60	1,749	1,749
83	HH60W MODIFICATIONS	9,150	9,150
85	HC/MC–130 MODIFICATIONS	365,086	365,086
86	OTHER AIRCRAFT	263,902	263,902
88	MQ–9 MODS	100,923	100,923
90	SENIOR LEADER C3 SYSTEM—AIRCRAFT	24,414	24,414
91	CV–22 MODS	78,713	78,713
	AIRCRAFT SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
94	INITIAL SPARES/REPAIR PARTS	973,535	973,535
	COMMON SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
99	AIRCRAFT REPLACEMENT SUPPORT EQUIP	156,776	156,776
	POST PRODUCTION SUPPORT
103	B–2B	18,969	18,969
104	B–52	111	111
106	C–17A	2,672	2,672
111	F–15	5,112	5,112
114	F–16 POST PRODUCTION SUPPORT	18,402	18,402
116	HC/MC–130 POST PROD	17,986	17,986
117	JOINT SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT POST PRODUCTION SUPPORT	28,524	57,048
	INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS
122	INDUSTRIAL RESPONSIVENESS	19,998	19,998
	WAR CONSUMABLES
123	WAR CONSUMABLES	26,323	26,323
	OTHER PRODUCTION CHARGES
124	OTHER PRODUCTION CHARGES	940,190	940,190
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	16,006	222,006
	Acceleration of Air Force program		[206,000]
	TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE	17,776,472	19,423,969

	MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
	MISSILE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT—BALLISTIC
1	MISSILE REPLACEMENT EQ-BALLISTIC	35,116	35,116
2	MISSILE REPLACEMENT EQ-BALLISTIC	2,166	2,166
5	LONG RANGE STAND-OFF WEAPON	192,409	192,409
6	LONG RANGE STAND-OFF WEAPON	250,300	250,300
7	REPLAC EQUIP & WAR CONSUMABLES	12,436	12,436
8	ADVANCED PRECISION KILL WEAPON SYSTEM (APKWS) MISSILE	13,428	13,428
9	AGM–183A AIR-LAUNCHED RAPID RESPONSE WEAPON	387,055	669,055
11	JOINT AIR-SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE	328,081	650,081
	Joint Air to Surface Stand-Off Missile (JASSM) (USAF)		[322,000]
13	JOINT ADVANCED TACTICAL MISSILE	368,593	368,593
15	LRASM0	294,401	294,401
17	SIDEWINDER (AIM–9X)	100,352	100,352
18	AMRAAM	365,125	365,125
21	SMALL DIAMETER BOMB	41,510	191,510
	GLSDB procurement		[150,000]
22	SMALL DIAMETER BOMB II	307,743	307,743
23	STAND-IN ATTACK WEAPON (SIAW)	185,324	185,324
	INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
24	INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS/POL PREVENTION	917	917
	CLASS IV
25	ICBM FUZE MOD	119,376	119,376
27	MM III MODIFICATIONS	14,604	14,604
29	AIR LAUNCH CRUISE MISSILE (ALCM)	41,393	41,393
	MISSILE SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
30	MSL SPRS/REPAIR PARTS (INITAL)	5,824	5,824
31	MSL SPRS/REPAIR PARTS (REPLEN)	108,249	358,249
	Air Force munitions—misaligned budget request		[250,000]
	SPECIAL PROGRAMS
33	SPECIAL UPDATE PROGRAMS	221,199	221,199
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	828,275	828,275
	TOTAL MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE	4,223,876	5,227,876

	PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE
	CARTRIDGES
3	CARTRIDGES	126,077	126,077
	BOMBS
5	GENERAL PURPOSE BOMBS	189,097	189,097
6	MASSIVE ORDNANCE PENETRATOR (MOP)	6,813	6,813
7	JOINT DIRECT ATTACK MUNITION	126,389	126,389
9	B61–12 TRAINER	7,668	7,668
	OTHER ITEMS
10	CAD/PAD	58,454	58,454
11	EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (EOD)	7,297	7,297
12	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	636	636
14	FIRST DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION	2,955	2,955
15	ITEMS LESS THAN $5,000,000	5,571	5,571
	FLARES
17	EXPENDABLE COUNTERMEASURES	101,540	101,540
	FUZES
18	FUZES	125,721	125,721
	SMALL ARMS
19	SMALL ARMS	26,260	26,260
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE	784,478	784,478

	PROCUREMENT, SPACE FORCE
	SPACE PROCUREMENT, SF
2	AF SATELLITE COMM SYSTEM	68,238	68,238
4	COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS	2,027	2,027
6	EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM (ESS)	64,996	64,996
7	FAMILY OF BEYOND LINE-OF-SIGHT TERMINALS	15,404	15,404
10	GENERAL INFORMATION TECH—SPACE	1,835	1,835
11	GPSIII FOLLOW ON	109,944	109,944
12	GPS III SPACE SEGMENT	29,274	29,274
13	GLOBAL POSTIONING (SPACE)	870	870
17	SPACEBORNE EQUIP (COMSEC)	84,044	84,044
18	MILSATCOM	36,447	36,447
20	SPECIAL SPACE ACTIVITIES	482,653	482,653
21	MOBILE USER OBJECTIVE SYSTEM	48,977	48,977
22	NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE LAUNCH	1,466,963	1,466,963
24	PTES HUB	29,949	29,949
26	SPACE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LAUNCH	648,446	648,446
27	SPACE DIGITAL INTEGRATED NETWORK (SDIN)	4,984	4,984
29	SPACE MODS	115,498	115,498
30	SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM SPACE	64,321	64,321
31	WIDEBAND SATCOM OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS	92,380	92,380
	SPARES
32	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	938	938
	NON-TACTICAL VEHICLES
33	USSF VEHICLES	5,000	5,000
	SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
35	POWER CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT	20,449	20,449
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT, SPACE FORCE	3,393,637	3,393,637

	OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
	PASSENGER CARRYING VEHICLES
2	PASSENGER CARRYING VEHICLES	5,557	5,557
	CARGO AND UTILITY VEHICLES
3	MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLE	3,938	3,938
4	CAP VEHICLES	1,175	1,175
5	CARGO AND UTILITY VEHICLES	56,940	56,940
	SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES
6	JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE	62,202	62,202
7	SECURITY AND TACTICAL VEHICLES	129	129
8	SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES	68,242	68,242
	FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT
9	FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH RESCUE VEHICLES	58,416	58,416
	MATERIALS HANDLING EQUIPMENT
10	MATERIALS HANDLING VEHICLES	18,552	18,552
	BASE MAINTENANCE SUPPORT
11	RUNWAY SNOW REMOV AND CLEANING EQU	11,045	11,045
12	BASE MAINTENANCE SUPPORT VEHICLES	25,291	25,291
	COMM SECURITY EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
15	COMSEC EQUIPMENT	169,363	169,363
	INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS
17	INTERNATIONAL INTEL TECH & ARCHITECTURES	5,833	5,833
18	INTELLIGENCE TRAINING EQUIPMENT	5,273	5,273
19	INTELLIGENCE COMM EQUIPMENT	42,257	42,257
	ELECTRONICS PROGRAMS
20	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL & LANDING SYS	26,390	26,390
21	NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM	11,810	11,810
22	BATTLE CONTROL SYSTEM—FIXED	16,592	16,592
23	THEATER AIR CONTROL SYS IMPROVEMEN	27,650	27,650
24	3D EXPEDITIONARY LONG-RANGE RADAR	103,226	103,226
25	WEATHER OBSERVATION FORECAST	31,516	31,516
26	STRATEGIC COMMAND AND CONTROL	82,912	82,912
27	CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN COMPLEX	22,021	22,021
28	MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS	18,722	18,722
31	STRATEGIC MISSION PLANNING & EXECUTION SYSTEM	6,383	6,383
	SPCL COMM-ELECTRONICS PROJECTS
32	GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	172,085	172,085
34	AF GLOBAL COMMAND & CONTROL SYS	1,947	1,947
36	MOBILITY COMMAND AND CONTROL	11,648	11,648
37	AIR FORCE PHYSICAL SECURITY SYSTEM	294,747	294,747
38	COMBAT TRAINING RANGES	231,987	231,987
39	MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY COMM N	94,995	94,995
40	WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE (WAS)	29,617	29,617
41	C3 COUNTERMEASURES	116,410	116,410
44	DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACCOUNTING & MGT SYS	698	698
46	THEATER BATTLE MGT C2 SYSTEM	442	442
47	AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS CENTER (AOC)	22,785	22,785
	AIR FORCE COMMUNICATIONS
50	BASE INFORMATION TRANSPT INFRAST (BITI) WIRED	79,091	79,091
51	AFNET	282,907	282,907
52	JOINT COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT ELEMENT (JCSE)	5,930	5,930
53	USCENTCOM	14,919	14,919
54	USSTRATCOM	4,788	4,788
55	USSPACECOM	32,633	32,633
	ORGANIZATION AND BASE
56	TACTICAL C-E EQUIPMENT	143,829	143,829
59	RADIO EQUIPMENT	50,730	50,730
61	BASE COMM INFRASTRUCTURE	67,015	67,015
	MODIFICATIONS
62	COMM ELECT MODS	76,034	76,034
	PERSONAL SAFETY & RESCUE EQUIP
63	PERSONAL SAFETY AND RESCUE EQUIPMENT	81,782	81,782
	DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS HANDLING EQ
64	POWER CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT	13,711	13,711
65	MECHANIZED MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIP	21,143	21,143
	BASE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
66	BASE PROCURED EQUIPMENT	90,654	90,654
67	ENGINEERING AND EOD EQUIPMENT	253,799	353,799
	Regional Base Cluster Prepositioning (RBCP)		[100,000]
68	MOBILITY EQUIPMENT	95,584	95,584
69	FUELS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (FSE)	34,794	34,794
70	BASE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	59,431	59,431
	SPECIAL SUPPORT PROJECTS
72	DARP RC135	30,136	30,136
73	DCGS-AF	87,044	87,044
77	SPECIAL UPDATE PROGRAM	1,178,397	1,178,397
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	26,920,092	27,138,092
	Acceleration of Air Force program		[218,000]
	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
80	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS (CYBER)	1,075	1,075
81	SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS	20,330	20,330
	TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE	31,504,644	31,822,644

	PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DCSA
38	MAJOR EQUIPMENT	2,230	2,230
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DHRA
59	PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION	3,797	3,797
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DISA
16	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY	6,254	6,254
17	TELEPORT PROGRAM	112,517	112,517
19	ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION	23,673	23,673
20	DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEM NETWORK	252,370	277,370
	Defense Information System Network (DISN)—Service Delivery Nodes		[25,000]
21	WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATION AGENCY	125,292	125,292
22	SENIOR LEADERSHIP ENTERPRISE	175,264	175,264
23	JOINT REGIONAL SECURITY STACKS (JRSS)	1,496	33,570
	Army Modernization—JRSS		[32,074]
24	JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER	54,186	54,186
25	FOURTH ESTATE NETWORK OPTIMIZATION (4ENO)	75,386	75,386
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DLA
37	MAJOR EQUIPMENT	79,251	79,251
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DMACT
70	MAJOR EQUIPMENT	7,258	7,258
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DODEA
68	AUTOMATION/EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT & LOGISTICS	0	5,000
	Blast Overpressure Analysis and Mitigation		[5,000]
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DPAA
4	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DPAA	475	475
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY
62	VEHICLES	911	911
63	OTHER MAJOR EQUIPMENT	12,023	12,023
65	DTRA CYBER ACTIVITIES	1,800	1,800
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY
44	THAAD	523,125	673,125
	Maximize THAAD Talon production line (+12–16 AURs)—misaligned budget request		[150,000]
46	AEGIS BMD	0	400,000
	Maximize SM–3 IB production line		[400,000]
48	BMDS AN/TPY–2 RADARS	36,530	36,530
49	SM–3 IIAS	444,835	444,835
50	ARROW 3 UPPER TIER SYSTEMS	100,000	100,000
51	SHORT RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (SRBMD)	40,000	40,000
52	DEFENSE OF GUAM PROCUREMENT	11,351	11,351
56	IRON DOME	60,000	60,000
58	AEGIS BMD HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE	17,211	17,211
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, OSD
5	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, OSD	164,900	164,900
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, TJS
42	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, TJS	33,090	33,090
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, WHS
15	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, WHS	403	403
	MAJOR EQUIPMENT, USCYBERCOM
71	CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS	73,358	73,358
	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
9999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	1,129,183	1,129,183
	AVIATION PROGRAMS
91	ARMED OVERWATCH/TARGETING	156,606	156,606
95	ROTARY WING UPGRADES AND SUSTAINMENT	189,059	189,059
96	UNMANNED ISR	6,858	6,858
97	NON-STANDARD AVIATION	7,849	17,849
	Non-Standard Aviation—Sea Planes		[10,000]
98	U–28	2,031	2,031
99	MH–47 CHINOOK	156,934	156,934
100	CV–22 MODIFICATION	19,692	19,692
101	MQ–9 UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE	12,890	12,890
102	PRECISION STRIKE PACKAGE	61,595	61,595
103	AC/MC–130J	236,312	236,312
	AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
106	ORDNANCE ITEMS <$5M	116,972	116,972
	OTHER PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS
107	INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS	227,073	227,073
108	DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE SYSTEMS	2,824	2,824
109	OTHER ITEMS <$5M	95,685	95,685
110	COMBATANT CRAFT SYSTEMS	0	9,600
	Combatant Craft Assault		[9,600]
111	SPECIAL PROGRAMS	30,418	30,418
112	TACTICAL VEHICLES	54,100	54,100
113	WARRIOR SYSTEMS <$5M	303,991	303,991
114	COMBAT MISSION REQUIREMENTS	4,985	4,985
116	OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS INTELLIGENCE	21,339	21,339
117	OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS	352,100	352,100
	CBDP
120	CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL SITUATIONAL AWARENESS	208,051	208,051
121	CB PROTECTION & HAZARD MITIGATION	213,330	213,330
	TOTAL PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE	6,048,863	6,680,537

	TOTAL PROCUREMENT	152,876,684	171,048,115

SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION(In Thousands of Dollars)
Line	ProgramElement	Item	FY 2026 Request	Senate Authorized
		RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY
		BASIC RESEARCH
1	0601102A	DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES	237,678	237,678
2	0601103A	UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES	78,947	78,947
3	0601104A	UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH CENTERS	69,391	69,391
4	0601121A	CYBER COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH ALLIANCE	5,463	5,463
5	0601275A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE BASIC RESEARCH	88,053	88,053
6	0601601A	ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND MACHINE LEARNING BASIC RESEARCH	7,012	7,012
		SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH	486,544	486,544

		APPLIED RESEARCH
7	0602002A	ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT-APPLIED RESEARCH	9,455	9,455
8	0602134A	COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT ADVANCED STUDIES	6,174	6,174
9	0602135A	COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS) APPLIED RESEARCH	12,618	12,618
10	0602141A	LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY	97,157	107,157
		Advanced Materials and Manufacturing for Hypersonics (AMMH)		[10,000]
12	0602143A	SOLDIER LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY	72,670	110,670
		Army Pathfinder Airborne		[5,000]
		Decrease Soldier load and power burden		[8,000]
		Enhancing Energy Technologies in Cold Regions		[15,000]
		Pathfinder–-Air Assault		[10,000]
13	0602144A	GROUND TECHNOLOGY	56,342	69,342
		Earth Sciences Polar Proving Ground & Training Program		[5,000]
		Engineered Roadway Repair Materials for Effective Maneuver of Military Assets		[5,000]
		Geotechnical Intelligence and Terrain Analytics Network for Arctic Maneuverability		[3,000]
14	0602145A	NEXT GENERATION COMBAT VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY	71,547	90,547
		Platform anti-idle and mobility technology		[15,000]
		Standardized Army Battery		[4,000]
15	0602146A	NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY	56,529	56,529
16	0602147A	LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES TECHNOLOGY	25,744	32,744
		Novel Printed Armament Components for Distributed Operations		[7,000]
17	0602148A	FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT TECHNOLOGY	20,420	20,420
18	0602150A	AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY	25,992	30,992
		Counter-UAS Testing and Research Center (CTRC)		[5,000]
19	0602180A	ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND MACHINE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES	13,745	13,745
21	0602182A	C3I APPLIED RESEARCH	22,317	22,317
22	0602183A	AIR PLATFORM APPLIED RESEARCH	53,305	63,305
		Shape-shifting Drones Powered by Mechanical Intelligence		[10,000]
23	0602184A	SOLDIER APPLIED RESEARCH	27,597	27,597
24	0602213A	C3I APPLIED CYBER	4,716	4,716
25	0602275A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH	45,415	45,415
26	0602276A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER APPLIED RESEARCH	17,102	17,102
27	0602345A	UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED EFFECTS APPLIED RESEARCH	18,408	18,408
28	0602386A	BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR MATERIALS—APPLIED RESEARCH	8,209	8,209
30	0602785A	MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/TRAINING TECHNOLOGY	17,191	17,191
31	0602787A	MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY	143,293	143,293
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	34,599	34,599
		SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH	860,545	962,545

		ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
32	0603002A	MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	1,860	1,860
33	0603007A	MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND TRAINING ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	13,559	13,559
34	0603025A	ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND DEMONSTRATION	19,679	19,679
35	0603040A	ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND MACHINE LEARNING ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES	20,487	32,487
		Multi-Domain Kill Chain Automation		[12,000]
36	0603041A	ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	10,560	10,560
37	0603042A	C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	15,028	15,028
38	0603043A	AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	41,266	41,266
39	0603044A	SOLDIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	18,143	18,143
40	0603116A	LETHALITY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	13,232	13,232
42	0603118A	SOLDIER LETHALITY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	95,186	100,186
		Aerial Delivery of Fire Suppression		[5,000]
43	0603119A	GROUND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	30,507	46,507
		Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory		[5,000]
		Fuel Cell Multi-Modular Use		[5,000]
		Improvements in Mobility Modeling		[6,000]
44	0603134A	COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT SIMULATION	15,692	15,692
45	0603135A	COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED-AERIAL SYSTEMS (C-SUAS) ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	7,773	7,773
46	0603275A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	83,922	83,922
47	0603276A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	15,254	15,254
48	0603345A	UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED EFFECTS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	13,898	13,898
49	0603386A	BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR MATERIALS—ADVANCED RESEARCH	24,683	29,683
		NCSEB Recommendation—AI-Ready Biological Data		[5,000]
50	0603457A	C3I CYBER ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	3,329	3,329
51	0603461A	HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING MODERNIZATION PROGRAM	241,855	291,855
		High Performance Computing Modernization Program		[50,000]
52	0603462A	NEXT GENERATION COMBAT VEHICLE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	141,301	148,301
		Acceleration of leap ahead systems for ground vehicles		[7,000]
53	0603463A	NETWORK C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	78,539	88,539
		Geophysical Littoral Autonomous Detection and Exploitation II (GLADE II)		[5,000]
		Network C3I Advanced Technology		[5,000]
54	0603464A	LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	162,236	162,236
55	0603465A	FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	66,686	66,686
56	0603466A	AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	23,330	33,330
		Material Improvements for Electric Motors		[10,000]
58	0603920A	HUMANITARIAN DEMINING	9,349	9,349
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	72,837	72,837
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	1,240,191	1,355,191

		ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
60	0603305A	ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS INTEGRATION	8,141	8,141
61	0603308A	ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS INTEGRATION	83,080	83,080
63	0603619A	LANDMINE WARFARE AND BARRIER—ADV DEV	41,516	41,516
64	0603639A	TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER AMMUNITION	85,472	90,472
		Large caliber automated ammunition resupply		[5,000]
65	0603645A	ARMORED SYSTEM MODERNIZATION—ADV DEV	22,645	22,645
66	0603747A	SOLDIER SUPPORT AND SURVIVABILITY	4,033	4,033
67	0603766A	TACTICAL ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM—ADV DEV	107,525	107,525
68	0603774A	NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	5,153	5,153
69	0603779A	ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY—DEM/VAL	11,343	11,343
70	0603790A	NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT	5,031	5,031
72	0603804A	LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT—ADV DEV	15,435	15,435
73	0603807A	MEDICAL SYSTEMS—ADV DEV	1,000	1,000
74	0603827A	SOLDIER SYSTEMS—ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	41,856	41,856
75	0604017A	ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT	35,082	35,082
76	0604019A	EXPANDED MISSION AREA MISSILE (EMAM)	178,137	178,137
78	0604035A	LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) SATELLITE CAPABILITY	17,063	17,063
79	0604036A	MULTI-DOMAIN SENSING SYSTEM (MDSS) ADV DEV	239,813	239,813
80	0604037A	TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING ACCESS NODE (TITAN) ADV DEV	3,092	3,092
81	0604100A	ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES	9,865	9,865
85	0604114A	LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR	196,448	196,448
86	0604115A	TECHNOLOGY MATURATION INITIATIVES	267,619	277,619
		Short Pulse Laser Directed Energy Demonstration		[10,000]
87	0604117A	MANEUVER—SHORT RANGE AIR DEFENSE (M-SHORAD)	238,247	238,247
89	0604120A	ASSURED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION AND TIMING (PNT)	8,686	8,686
90	0604121A	SYNTHETIC TRAINING ENVIRONMENT REFINING & PROTOTYPING	240,899	240,899
91	0604134A	COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING	5,491	5,491
92	0604135A	STRATEGIC MID-RANGE FIRES	231,401	231,401
93	0604182A	HYPERSONICS	25,000	38,000
		Emerging Hypersonic Capabilities (USA, USN)		[13,000]
95	0604403A	FUTURE INTERCEPTOR	8,019	8,019
97	0604531A	COUNTER—SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	45,281	45,281
99	0604541A	UNIFIED NETWORK TRANSPORT	29,191	29,191
100	0305251A	CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT	5,605	5,605
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	203,746	203,746
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES	2,420,915	2,448,915

		SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION
101	0604201A	AIRCRAFT AVIONICS	2,696	2,696
102	0604270A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT	9,153	9,153
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 VEHICLES	47,064	47,064
110	0604645A	ARMORED SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION (ASM)—ENG DEV	16,593	16,593
111	0604710A	NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS—ENG DEV	351,274	351,274
112	0604713A	COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, AND EQUIPMENT	5,654	5,654
113	0604715A	NON-SYSTEM TRAINING DEVICES—ENG DEV	19,063	19,063
114	0604741A	AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, CONTROL AND INTELLIGENCE—ENG DEV	13,892	13,892
115	0604742A	CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	7,790	7,790
116	0604746A	AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT	9,512	9,512
117	0604760A	DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE SIMULATIONS (DIS)—ENG DEV	7,724	7,724
118	0604798A	BRIGADE ANALYSIS, INTEGRATION AND EVALUATION	24,318	24,318
119	0604802A	WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS—ENG DEV	150,344	150,344
120	0604804A	LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT—ENG DEV	50,194	50,194
121	0604805A	COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS—ENG DEV	63,725	63,725
122	0604807A	MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE EQUIPMENT—ENG DEV	6,252	6,252
123	0604808A	LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER—ENG DEV	9,862	9,862
124	0604818A	ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & CONTROL HARDWARE & SOFTWARE	430,895	430,895
125	0604820A	RADAR DEVELOPMENT	53,226	53,226
127	0604827A	SOLDIER SYSTEMS—WARRIOR DEM/VAL	4,137	4,137
128	0604852A	SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS—EMD	76,903	76,903
129	0604854A	ARTILLERY SYSTEMS—EMD	80,862	80,862
130	0605013A	INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	125,701	125,701
131	0605018A	INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A)	164,600	164,600
132	0605030A	JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK CENTER (JTNC)	20,954	20,954
133	0605031A	JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK (JTN)	41,696	41,696
134	0605035A	COMMON INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM)	10,789	10,789
135	0605036A	COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (CWMD)	13,322	13,322
136	0605037A	EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND DETAINEE PROCESSING	4,619	4,619
137	0605038A	NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR SUITE	13,459	13,459
138	0605041A	DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL DEVELOPMENT	3,611	3,611
139	0605042A	TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER)	3,222	3,222
140	0605047A	CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM	8,101	8,101
142	0605051A	AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY DEVELOPMENT	44,182	52,182
		Advances in surface-to-air missile technologies		[8,000]
143	0605052A	INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION CAPABILITY INC 2—BLOCK 1	248,659	248,659
144	0605053A	GROUND ROBOTICS	227,038	227,038
145	0605054A	EMERGING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES	57,546	95,546
		Operationalize anti-idle ground vehicles		[38,000]
146	0605144A	NEXT GENERATION LOAD DEVICE—MEDIUM	24,492	24,492
147	0605148A	TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING ACCESS NODE (TITAN) EMD	44,273	44,273
152	0605224A	MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE	34,844	39,844
		DeepFake and AI-synthesized Image Detection		[5,000]
154	0605232A	HYPERSONICS EMD	513,027	513,027
155	0605233A	ACCESSIONS INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (AIE)	32,710	32,710
156	0605235A	STRATEGIC MID-RANGE CAPABILITY	186,304	188,394
		Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) (USA, USN)		[2,090]
157	0605236A	INTEGRATED TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS	22,732	22,732
158	0605241A	FUTURE LONG RANGE ASSAULT AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENT	1,248,544	1,248,544
160	0605244A	JOINT REDUCED RANGE ROCKET (JR3)	28,893	28,893
163	0605457A	ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD)	146,056	146,056
164	0605531A	COUNTER—SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS SYS DEV & DEMONSTRATION	55,196	55,196
166	0605625A	MANNED GROUND VEHICLE	386,393	386,393
167	0605766A	NATIONAL CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION (MIP)	16,913	16,913
168	0605812A	JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE (JLTV) ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT PHASE (EMD)	2,664	2,664
169	0605830A	AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT	930	930
170	0303032A	TROJAN—RH12	3,920	3,920
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	117,428	117,428
		SUBTOTAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	5,378,817	5,431,907

		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
173	0604256A	THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT	74,767	74,767
174	0604258A	TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	16,004	16,004
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	832,058
		Cost to Complete, Family Housing Replacement Construction, Kwajalein Atoll		[14,000]
		Facilities Sustainment for Kwajalein Operational Facilities		[8,775]
		Kwajalein Catchments / Solar		[20,000]
		Kwajalein Deferred Maintenance Backlog Reduction		[100,000]
		Kwajalein Palm Barracks Repair		[16,000]
		Kwajalein Redundant Cooling for Power Plants		[15,000]
		Kwajalein Repair Roi DAAF Aprons & Taxiways		[176,000]
		Kwajalein Repair Roi Dining Facility		[7,000]
		Kwajalein Repair Rotary and Fixed Wing Hangars		[40,000]
		Kwajalein Roi Water Distribution System Repair		[9,000]
		Kwajalein Sewer Lift Station Power Loop		[6,000]
		Kwajalein Vehicle Maintenance Facility Repair		[22,000]
		Kwajalein Water Distribution System Repair		[19,000]
178	0605326A	CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION PROGRAM	58,606	58,606
180	0605601A	ARMY TEST RANGES AND FACILITIES	425,108	425,108
181	0605602A	ARMY TECHNICAL TEST INSTRUMENTATION AND TARGETS	69,328	69,328
182	0605604A	SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY ANALYSIS	31,306	31,306
183	0605606A	AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION	1,887	1,887
184	0605706A	MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS	19,100	19,100
185	0605709A	EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN ITEMS	6,277	6,277
186	0605712A	SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL TESTING	63,637	63,637
187	0605716A	ARMY EVALUATION CENTER	62,343	62,343
188	0605718A	ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD COLLABORATION & INTEG	11,825	11,825
189	0605801A	PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES	54,172	54,172
190	0605803A	TECHNICAL INFORMATION ACTIVITIES	26,592	26,592
191	0605805A	MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION, EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY	44,465	44,465
192	0605857A	ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT	2,857	2,857
193	0605898A	ARMY DIRECT REPORT HEADQUARTERS—R&D - MHA	53,436	53,436
194	0606002A	RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TEST SITE	72,302	80,302
		Multi-level security modernization		[8,000]
195	0606003A	COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN INTEL MODERNIZATION	5,660	5,660
196	0606118A	AIAMD SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT & INTEGRATION	358,854	358,854
197	0606942A	ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS CYBER VULNERABILITIES	6,354	6,354
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	1,956,082	2,416,857

		OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
199	0603778A	MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	14,639	34,639
		GLSDB HIMARS integration work		[20,000]
200	0605024A	ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT	6,449	6,449
201	0607101A	COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (CWMD) PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT	115	115
202	0607131A	WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS	13,687	13,687
203	0607136A	BLACKHAWK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	23,998	23,998
204	0607137A	CHINOOK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	10,859	10,859
208	0607145A	APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT	44,371	44,371
209	0607148A	AN/TPQ–53 COUNTERFIRE TARGET ACQUISITION RADAR SYSTEM	43,054	43,054
210	0607150A	INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT	13,129	13,129
215	0607665A	FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS	1,594	1,594
216	0607865A	PATRIOT PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT	183,763	183,763
217	0203728A	JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP OPERATION COORDINATION SYSTEM (JADOCS)	8,424	8,424
218	0203735A	COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS	744,085	744,085
219	0203743A	155MM SELF-PROPELLED HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS	107,826	107,826
220	0203752A	AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	237	237
221	0203758A	DIGITIZATION	1,013	1,013
222	0203801A	MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	1,338	1,338
225	0205778A	GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS)	33,307	33,307
230	0303140A	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM	15,040	15,040
232	0303142A	SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT (SPACE)	35,720	35,720
235	0305179A	INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE (IBS)	6,653	6,653
236	0305219A	MQ–1 GRAY EAGLE UAV	3,444	3,444
237	0708045A	END ITEM INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES	67,002	67,002
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	46,872	46,872
		SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	1,426,619	1,446,619

		SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS
238	0608041A	DEFENSIVE CYBER—SOFTWARE PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT	89,238	91,238
		Army Cyber/NETCOM – AI Enabled Network Visibility and Security Controls		[2,000]
		SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS	89,238	91,238

		AGILE RDTE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
239	0609135A	COUNTER UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (UAS) AGILE DEVELOPMENT	143,618	143,618
240	0609277A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE AGILE DEVELOPMENT	127,081	127,081
241	0609278A	ELECTRONIC WARFARE AGILE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	59,202	59,202
242	0609345A	UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED EFFECTS AGILE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	187,473	187,473
243	0609346A	UAS LAUNCHED EFFECTS AGILE DEVELOPMENT	172,898	172,898
		SUBTOTAL AGILE RDTE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT	690,272	690,272

		TOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY	14,549,223	15,330,088

		RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY
		BASIC RESEARCH
1	0601103N	UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES	67,306	72,306
		Artificial Intelligence Maritime Maneuvering (AIMM) 2.0		[5,000]
2	0601153N	DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES	511,163	526,263
		NCSEB Recommendation—AI-Ready Biological Data		[5,000]
		Precision interferometer at Lowell Observatory		[10,100]
		SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH	578,469	598,569

		APPLIED RESEARCH
3	0602114N	POWER PROJECTION APPLIED RESEARCH	30,635	30,635
4	0602123N	FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED RESEARCH	125,699	149,699
		Advanced Circuit Breaker		[12,000]
		Battery vulnerability		[2,000]
		Multi-Material Flexible Automated Manufacturing		[5,000]
		Sea-Launched Aerial Drones		[5,000]
5	0602131M	MARINE CORPS LANDING FORCE TECHNOLOGY	45,697	52,697
		Unmanned Logistics Solutions		[7,000]
6	0602235N	COMMON PICTURE APPLIED RESEARCH	55,246	55,246
7	0602236N	WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT APPLIED RESEARCH	74,264	79,264
		On-Demand IV Fluids for Expeditionary Medicine		[5,000]
8	0602271N	ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS APPLIED RESEARCH	79,929	84,929
		Future Radio Frequency Digital Array Technology Development and Demonstration		[5,000]
9	0602435N	OCEAN WARFIGHTING ENVIRONMENT APPLIED RESEARCH	81,270	81,270
10	0602651M	JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS APPLIED RESEARCH	7,300	7,300
11	0602747N	UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH	64,335	64,335
12	0602750N	FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES APPLIED RESEARCH	279,815	279,815
13	0602782N	MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH	29,081	29,081
15	0602861N	SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT—ONR FIELD ACTIVITIES	81,423	81,423
		SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH	954,694	995,694

		ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
16	0603123N	FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	43,527	43,527
17	0603271N	ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	8,644	8,644
18	0603273N	SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS	121,618	121,618
19	0603640M	USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION (ATD)	309,711	322,711
		Autonomous Amphibious Robotic Vehicle Development and Integration		[8,000]
		Low-Cost Tactical Hypersonic Long-Range Precision Fires		[5,000]
20	0603651M	JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	6,561	6,561
21	0603673N	FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	455,851	455,851
22	0603680N	MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	63,903	63,903
23	0603729N	WARFIGHTER PROTECTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	7,653	7,653
24	0603758N	NAVY WARFIGHTING EXPERIMENTS AND DEMONSTRATIONS	81,923	81,923
25	0603782N	MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY WARFARE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	2,075	2,075
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	1,101,466	1,114,466

		ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
27	0603128N	UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM	28,388	28,388
29	0603207N	AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL APPLICATIONS	35,870	35,870
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 RECONNAISSANCE	2,241	2,241
34	0603382N	ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY	2,083	0
		Excess to need		[–2,083]
35	0603502N	SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER MINE COUNTERMEASURES	32,359	32,359
36	0603506N	SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO DEFENSE	11,832	11,832
37	0603512N	CARRIER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	8,361	8,361
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 DEVELOPMENT	162,651	162,651
45	0603563N	SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED DESIGN	59,218	59,218
46	0603564N	SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & FEASIBILITY STUDIES	96,022	96,022
47	0603570N	ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS	383,831	449,831
		Advanced Nuclear Power Systems		[66,000]
48	0603573N	ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY SYSTEMS	101,136	101,136
49	0603576N	CHALK EAGLE	156,686	156,686
50	0603581N	LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS)	10,203	203
		Excess to Need		[–10,000]
51	0603582N	COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION	19,643	19,643
52	0603595N	OHIO REPLACEMENT	273,265	283,265
		Rapid Realization of Composites for Wet Submarine Application		[10,000]
53	0603596N	LCS MISSION MODULES	39,258	29,258
		Mine Countermeasure (MCM) Mission Package		[–10,000]
54	0603597N	AUTOMATED TEST AND RE-TEST (ATRT)	9,862	9,862
55	0603598N	ATRT ENTERPRISE RAPID CAPABILITY	20,000	20,000
56	0603599N	FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT	84,199	84,199
57	0603609N	CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS	10,877	10,877
58	0603635M	MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM	278,261	278,261
59	0603654N	JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT	43,657	43,657
60	0603713N	OCEAN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	9,647	9,647
61	0603721N	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION	22,829	22,829
62	0603724N	NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM	46,577	69,577
		LOCNESS: derisking DEW/advanced sensors on DDGx		[11,000]
		Safety certification and USMC support for soldier/ground vehicle auxilliary power		[12,000]
63	0603725N	FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT	10,925	10,925
64	0603734N	CHALK CORAL	414,282	414,282
65	0603739N	NAVY LOGISTIC PRODUCTIVITY	1,016	1,016
66	0603746N	RETRACT MAPLE	647,914	732,464
		Joint Warfighting Critical Munitions		[84,550]
67	0603748N	LINK PLUMERIA	376,672	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 DEVELOPMENT	5,234	5,234
71	0603795N	LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY	1,056	1,056
72	0603851M	JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS TESTING	9,832	9,832
73	0603860N	JOINT PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEMS—DEM/VAL	41,978	41,978
76	0604025M	RAPID DEFENSE EXPERIMENTATION RESERVE (RDER)	99	99
77	0604027N	DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE	151,271	151,271
78	0604028N	SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLES	4,855	4,855
79	0604029N	UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE CORE TECHNOLOGIES	47,106	47,106
82	0604112N	GERALD R. FORD CLASS NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER (CVN 78—80)	112,704	112,704
83	0604127N	SURFACE MINE COUNTERMEASURES	18,504	18,504
84	0604272N	TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES (TADIRCM)	14,387	14,387
85	0604286N	NAVY ADVANCED MANUFACTURING	10,585	10,585
86	0604289M	NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS	2,722	2,722
87	0604292N	FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT (MARITIME STRIKE)	7,125	7,125
88	0604295M	MARINE AVIATION DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION	38,873	38,873
89	0604320M	RAPID TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE	16,316	16,316
90	0604454N	LX (R)	26,709	26,709
91	0604536N	ADVANCED UNDERSEA PROTOTYPING	143,943	143,943
92	0604636N	COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (C-UAS)	16,689	16,689
93	0604659N	PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM	110,072	235,072
		Emerging Hypersonic Capabilities (USA, USN)		[25,000]
		Navy MACE		[100,000]
94	0604707N	SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE (SEW) ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING SUPPORT	6,866	6,866
95	0604786N	OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE WARFARE WEAPON DEVELOPMENT	225,773	285,773
		LRASM MADCAP C–3 development acceleration		[60,000]
97	0605513N	UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE ENABLING CAPABILITIES	3,712	3,712
98	0605514M	GROUND BASED ANTI-SHIP MISSILE	29,004	29,004
100	0605518N	CONVENTIONAL PROMPT STRIKE (CPS)	798,337	798,337
101	0105519N	NUCLEAR-ARMED SEA-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE (SLCM-N) SUPPORT	0	320,000
		Restoration of full funding for Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile		[320,000]
102	0207147M	COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT	58,000	58,000
103	0303260N	DEFENSE MILITARY DECEPTION INITIATIVE	1,980	1,980
104	0303354N	ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT—MIP	3,864	3,864
105	0304240M	ADVANCED TACTICAL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM	2,822	2,822
106	0304270N	ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT—MIP	1,278	1,278
107	0304797N	UNDERSEA ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / MACHINE LEARNING (AI/ML)	29,308	29,308
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES	7,454,345	8,620,812

		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 UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT	64,838	64,838
116	0604230N	WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM	15,778	15,778
117	0604231N	COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS	64,547	64,547
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 DEVELOPMENT	44,297	44,297
123	0604269N	EA–18	184,921	184,921
124	0604270N	ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT	185,606	185,606
125	0604273M	EXECUTIVE HELO DEVELOPMENT	74,980	74,980
126	0604274N	NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ)	64,167	64,167
127	0604280N	JOINT TACTICAL RADIO SYSTEM—NAVY (JTRS-NAVY)	289,345	289,345
128	0604282N	NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ) INCREMENT II	228,256	228,256
129	0604307N	SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING	432,981	432,981
130	0604329N	SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)	23,836	23,836
131	0604366N	STANDARD MISSILE IMPROVEMENTS	412,964	412,964
132	0604373N	AIRBORNE MCM	8,372	8,372
133	0604378N	NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE CONTROL—COUNTER AIR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING	39,878	39,878
135	0604501N	ADVANCED ABOVE WATER SENSORS	67,881	67,881
136	0604503N	SUBMARINE SWFTS MODERNIZATION	204,158	204,158
137	0604504N	AIR CONTROL	23,930	23,930
138	0604512N	SHIPBOARD AVIATION SYSTEMS	33,704	33,704
139	0604516N	SHIP SURVIVABILITY	4,364	4,364
141	0604522N	AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM	74,937	74,937
142	0604530N	ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR (AAG)	32,037	32,037
143	0604558N	NEW DESIGN SSN	247,293	247,293
145	0604567N	SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ LIVE FIRE T&E	28,400	28,400
146	0604574N	NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER RESOURCES	3,552	3,552
147	0604601N	MINE DEVELOPMENT	130	79,430
		Enhanced Joint Direct Attack Missile (JDAM) (USN)		[50,000]
		Quickstrike Extended Range (QS-ER) (USN)		[29,300]
148	0604610N	LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO DEVELOPMENT	12,565	12,565
149	0604654N	JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT	8,740	8,740
150	0604657M	USMC GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS—ENG DEV	17,377	17,377
151	0604703N	PERSONNEL, TRAINING, SIMULATION, AND HUMAN FACTORS	6,703	6,703
152	0604727N	JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON SYSTEMS	895	895
153	0604755N	SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT & CONTROL)	167,711	167,711
154	0604756N	SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: HARD KILL)	145,007	145,007
155	0604757N	SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW)	232,368	232,368
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 DEVELOPMENT	16,000	16,000
161	0605013N	INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	192,784	192,784
162	0605024N	ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT	3,428	3,428
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 (SSC)	7,267	7,267
168	0605285N	NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER	74,320	74,320
170	0605414N	UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION (UCA)	305,487	305,487
171	0605450M	JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE (JAGM)	59,077	59,077
172	0605500N	MULTI-MISSION MARITIME AIRCRAFT (MMA)	41,129	41,129
173	0605504N	MULTI-MISSION MARITIME (MMA) INCREMENT III	103,397	103,397
174	0605516N	LONG RANGE FIRES	138,443	138,443
175	0605611M	MARINE CORPS ASSAULT VEHICLES SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION	44,644	44,644
176	0605813M	JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION	6,984	6,984
177	0204202N	DESTROYERS GUIDED MISSILE (DDG–1000)	58,817	58,817
178	0301377N	COUNTERING ADVANCED CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS (CACW)	16,906	16,906
179	0302315N	NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT	23,818	23,818
183	0304785N	ISR & INFO OPERATIONS	170,567	170,567
185	0306250M	CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	11,936	11,936
		SUBTOTAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	7,431,995	7,511,295

		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
186	0604256N	THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT	25,133	25,133
187	0604258N	TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	14,191	24,191
		Secure power: high value target protection		[10,000]
188	0604759N	MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT	61,946	61,946
189	0605152N	STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT—NAVY	3,596	3,596
190	0605154N	CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES	31,695	31,695
193	0605853N	MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT	133,538	133,538
194	0605856N	STRATEGIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT	3,709	3,709
195	0605863N	RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT SUPPORT	151,479	151,479
196	0605864N	TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT	463,725	463,725
197	0605865N	OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION CAPABILITY	30,880	30,880
198	0605866N	NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT	22,563	22,563
199	0605867N	SEW SURVEILLANCE/RECONAISSANCE SUPPORT	7,325	7,325
200	0605873M	MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE SUPPORT	28,816	28,816
201	0605898N	MANAGEMENT HQ—R&D	42,751	42,751
202	0606295M	MARINE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT	4,732	4,732
203	0606355N	WARFARE INNOVATION MANAGEMENT	37,551	37,551
204	0305327N	INSIDER THREAT	2,653	2,653
205	0902498N	MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS (DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES)	2,041	2,041
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	1,068,324	1,078,324

		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 WEAPONS SYSTEMS	56,140	56,140
211	0607658N	COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY (CEC)	136,436	136,436
212	0101221N	STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS SYSTEM SUPPORT	807,099	807,099
213	0101224N	SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	63,252	68,252
		Strategic Weapon System shipboard navigation system modernization		[5,000]
214	0101226N	SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT	56,401	56,401
215	0101402N	NAVY STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS	52,404	52,404
216	0204136N	F/A–18 SQUADRONS	369,863	369,863
218	0204229N	TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK MISSION PLANNING CENTER (TMPC)	151,177	151,177
219	0204311N	INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM	71,800	71,800
220	0204313N	SHIP-TOWED ARRAY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS	1,990	1,990
222	0204460M	GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED RADAR (G/ATOR)	32,045	32,045
223	0204571N	CONSOLIDATED TRAINING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	199,067	199,067
224	0204575N	ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) READINESS SUPPORT	115,834	115,834
225	0205601N	ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE IMPROVEMENT	33,659	33,659
227	0205632N	MK–48 ADCAP	84,338	84,338
228	0205633N	AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS	127,421	137,321
		Autonomous airfield FOD sweeping systems		[9,900]
229	0205675N	OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS	209,200	209,200
230	0206313M	MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS	125,488	134,488
		Hydrogen Fuel Cell for small-UAS		[5,000]
		Integrated Contested Logistics Communications		[4,000]
231	0206335M	COMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (CAC2S)	17,813	17,813
232	0206623M	MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS	70,139	70,139
233	0206624M	MARINE CORPS COMBAT SERVICES SUPPORT	20,419	20,419
234	0206625M	USMC INTELLIGENCE/ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS	34,289	34,289
236	0207161N	TACTICAL AIM MISSILES	34,650	34,650
237	0207163N	ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM)	26,286	26,286
238	0208043N	PLANNING AND DECISION AID SYSTEM (PDAS)	3,572	3,572
242	0303138N	AFLOAT NETWORKS	70,742	70,742
243	0303140N	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM	64,147	64,147
244	0305192N	MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES	3,311	3,311
247	0305208M	DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE SYSTEMS	61,238	61,238
248	0305220N	MQ–4C TRITON	14,421	14,421
250	0305232M	RQ–11 UAV	1,063	1,063
252	0305241N	MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR DEVELOPMENT	41,414	41,414
253	0305242M	UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP)	9,157	9,157
255	0305421N	MQ–4C TRITON MODERNIZATION	361,943	361,943
256	0307577N	INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA (IMD)	803	803
257	0308601N	MODELING AND SIMULATION SUPPORT	12,389	12,389
258	0702207N	DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF)	23,372	23,372
259	0708730N	MARITIME TECHNOLOGY (MARITECH)	3,600	3,600
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	2,554,769	2,578,769
		Acceleration of Navy program		[24,000]
		SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	7,092,895	7,140,795

		SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS
260	0608013N	RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION—SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM	13,341	13,341
261	0608231N	MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND AND CONTROL (MTC2)—SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM	12,520	12,520
		SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS	25,861	25,861

		TOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY	25,708,049	27,085,816

		RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF
		BASIC RESEARCH
1	0601102F	DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES	302,716	302,716
2	0601103F	UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES	94,121	94,121
		SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH	396,837	396,837

		APPLIED RESEARCH
3	0602020F	FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES APPLIED RESEARCH	78,214	78,214
4	0602022F	UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED RESEARCH CENTER (UARC)—TACTICAL AUTONOMY	6,294	6,294
5	0602102F	MATERIALS	147,422	167,422
		Advanced materials science for manufacturing research		[10,000]
		Metals Affordability Iniatitive		[5,000]
		NCSEB Recommendation—AI-Ready Biological Data		[5,000]
7	0602202F	HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS APPLIED RESEARCH	133,928	133,928
8	0602203F	AEROSPACE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGIES	321,059	321,059
9	0602204F	AEROSPACE SENSORS	199,120	199,120
11	0602298F	SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT— MAJOR HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES	10,813	10,813
12	0602336F	NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS TECH EXPLORATION	4,969	4,969
13	0602602F	CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS	125,102	125,102
14	0602605F	DIRECTED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY	92,331	92,331
15	0602788F	DOMINANT INFORMATION SCIENCES AND METHODS	187,036	217,036
		Agile, Assured, and Autonomous Battle Management Network and Readiness Accelerator (3A-BMN)		[5,000]
		Dependable AI for National Security		[15,000]
		Distributed Quantum Networking Testbed and Quantum Cloud Computing Environment		[10,000]
		SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH	1,306,288	1,356,288

		ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
16	0603032F	FUTURE AF INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY DEMOS	268,754	268,754
17	0603112F	ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR WEAPON SYSTEMS	31,021	31,021
18	0603199F	SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (S&T)	12,915	12,915
19	0603203F	ADVANCED AEROSPACE SENSORS	69,652	69,652
20	0603211F	AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/DEMO	102,125	102,125
23	0603273F	SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR NUCLEAR RE-ENTRY SYSTEMS	128,407	148,407
		S&T for Nuclear Reentry Systems—Resonating Fiber Optic Gyroscopes		[20,000]
25	0603456F	HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	19,790	19,790
26	0603601F	CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY	99,263	99,263
27	0603605F	ADVANCED WAEPONS TECHNOLOGY	4,434	4,434
28	0603680F	MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	38,891	42,891
		Additive Manufacturing for Engineer Components		[4,000]
29	0603788F	BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	30,812	30,812
30	0604776F	DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION ENTERPRISE R&D	28,316	28,316
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	834,380	858,380

		ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
32	0603260F	INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	3,901	3,901
33	0603742F	COMBAT IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY	25,172	25,172
34	0603790F	NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT	4,595	4,595
35	0603851F	INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILE—DEM/VAL	90,096	90,096
36	0604001F	NC3 ADVANCED CONCEPTS	15,910	15,910
37	0604003F	ADVANCED BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ABMS)	1,040,475	1,040,475
39	0604005F	NC3 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPING	67,081	67,081
40	0604007F	E–7	199,676	899,676
		E–7 continued development and procurement		[700,000]
41	0604009F	AFWERX	18,499	18,499
42	0604010F	NEXT GENERATION ADAPTIVE PROPULSION	330,270	330,270
43	0604015F	LONG RANGE STRIKE—BOMBER	2,347,225	2,347,225
47	0604183F	HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING—HYPERSONIC ATTACK CRUISE MISSILE (HACM)	802,810	802,810
49	0604257F	ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND SENSORS AND SENSORS	40,779	40,779
52	0604317F	TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER	3,558	3,558
53	0604327F	HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM (HDBTDS) PROGRAM	144,143	144,143
54	0604336F	NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS PROTOTYPING	56,926	56,926
55	0604414F	CYBER RESILIENCY OF WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS	46,148	46,148
56	0604609F	REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS & CONCEPT MATURATION	22,754	22,754
57	0604668F	JOINT TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (JTMS)	129,626	129,626
58	0604776F	DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION ENTERPRISE R&D	4,996	4,996
59	0604858F	TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM	134,833	155,833
		Blended Wing Body—Next Generation Aircraft		[21,000]
60	0604860F	OPERATIONAL ENERGY AND INSTALLATION RESILIENCE	49,460	115,460
		Operational energy program increase		[56,000]
		XR (AR/VR) plus mission execution tools		[10,000]
61	0605057F	NEXT GENERATION AIR-REFUELING SYSTEM	12,960	12,960
63	0606004F	NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT	1,097	6,097
		Wing-level additive manufacturing		[5,000]
64	0606005F	DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OFFICE	15,997	30,997
		Adaptive Threat Modeling Lab		[15,000]
65	0207110F	F–47	0	500,000
		F–47—misaligned budget request		[500,000]
66	0207147F	COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT	111,365	789,365
		CCA—misaligned budget request		[678,000]
67	0207179F	AUTONOMOUS COLLABORATIVE PLATFORMS	62,019	62,019
68	0207420F	COMBAT IDENTIFICATION	1,713	1,713
71	0207455F	THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG-RANGE RADAR (3DELRR)	17,344	17,344
72	0207522F	AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS (ABADS)	15,785	15,785
73	0207606F	JOINT SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT (JSE)	260,667	260,667
74	0208030F	WAR RESERVE MATERIEL—AMMUNITION	9,865	9,865
75	0303010F	AF ISR DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE	24,817	24,817
76	0305236F	COMMON DATA LINK EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA)	32,511	32,511
77	0305601F	MISSION PARTNER ENVIRONMENTS	14,956	14,956
78	0701200F	ENTERPRISE SELECT CLASS II	1,000	1,000
79	0708051F	RAPID SUSTAINMENT MODERNIZATION (RSM)	32,666	101,666
		B–21 Additive Manufacturing		[40,000]
		Engine wash, data analysis, mission execution excellence program		[29,000]
80	0808736F	SPECIAL VICTIM ACCOUNTABILITY AND INVESTIGATION	1,997	1,997
81	0808737F	INTEGRATED PRIMARY PREVENTION	5,167	5,167
82	0901410F	CONTRACTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM	29,277	29,277
83	1206415F	U.S. SPACE COMMAND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT	36,913	36,913
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES	6,267,049	8,321,049

		SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION
84	0604200F	FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS	36,125	36,125
85	0604201F	PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND IMPROVEMENTS	125,663	125,663
86	0604222F	NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT	79,312	79,312
87	0604270F	ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT	17,013	17,013
88	0604281F	TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS ENTERPRISE	77,170	77,170
89	0604287F	PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT	10,589	10,589
90	0604288F	SURVIVABLE AIRBORNE OPERATIONS CENTER (SAOC)	1,826,328	1,826,328
91	0604602F	ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT	7,253	7,253
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 WEAPON	606,955	755,955
		Conventional Variant Advance Planning		[8,000]
		Long Range Standoff Weapon Acceleration		[141,000]
97	0604933F	ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION	3,252	3,252
100	0605056F	OPEN ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT	44,150	44,150
101	0605223F	ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING	172,378	172,378
103	0605238F	GROUND BASED STRATEGIC DETERRENT EMD	2,647,563	4,647,563
		Restoration of full funding for Sentinel ICBM program EMD		[2,000,000]
104	0605296F	MICROELECTRONICS SECURE ENCLAVE	104,990	104,990
106	0207039F	COGNITIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE	44,267	44,267
107	0207110F	F–47	2,579,362	2,579,362
109	0207279F	ISOLATED PERSONNEL SURVIVABILITY AND RECOVERY	99,248	99,248
110	0207328F	STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON	255,336	255,336
111	0207407F	ELECTROMAGNETIC BATTLE MANAGEMENT (EMBM)	20,439	20,439
112	0207701F	FULL COMBAT MISSION TRAINING	12,898	12,898
114	0303008F	SATURN	4,985	4,985
117	0305155F	THEATER NUCLEAR WEAPON STORAGE & SECURITY SYSTEM	19,875	19,875
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 DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	9,765,328	11,914,328

		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
125	0604256F	THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT	41,125	41,125
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 & EVALUATION	13,872	13,872
130	0605807F	TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT	1,098,871	1,098,871
133	0605829F	ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER, NETWORK, & BUS SYS	435,918	435,918
134	0605831F	ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY INTEGRATION	1,153,165	1,153,165
136	0605833F	ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR SYSTEMS	368,881	368,881
137	0605898F	MANAGEMENT HQ—R&D	5,960	5,960
138	0605976F	FACILITIES RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION—TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT	217,761	217,761
139	0605978F	FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT—TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT	91,969	91,969
140	0606017F	REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND MATURATION	28,157	28,157
141	0606398F	MANAGEMENT HQ—T&E	7,417	7,417
142	0208201F	OFFENSIVE SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (SUAS)	4,985	4,985
143	0303255F	COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATION, AND COMPUTERS (C4)—STRATCOM	15,662	65,662
		C4 STRATCOM		[20,000]
		NC3 network sensor demonstration		[15,000]
		NC3 REACH		[15,000]
144	0308602F	ENTEPRISE INFORMATION SERVICES (EIS)	101,779	101,779
145	0702806F	ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	22,670	22,670
146	0804776F	ADVANCED DISTRIBUTED LEARNING	1,698	1,698
148	1001004F	INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES	4,430	4,430
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	3,803,640	3,853,640

		OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
149	0604233F	SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE FLIGHT TRAINING	66,200	66,200
150	0604283F	BATTLE MGMT COM & CTRL SENSOR DEVELOPMENT	17,353	17,353
153	0604840F	F–35 C2D2	1,182,094	1,182,094
154	0605018F	AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS)	64,050	64,050
155	0605024F	ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE AGENCY	62,965	62,965
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 MISSILE (ALCM)	555	555
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 COMMUNICATION	24,081	24,081
166	0101318F	SERVICE SUPPORT TO STRATCOM—GLOBAL STRIKE	6,928	6,928
167	0101328F	ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES	259,605	259,605
169	0102110F	MH–139A	5,982	5,982
170	0102326F	REGION/SECTOR OPERATION CONROL CENTER MODERNIZATION PROGRAM	726	726
171	0102417F	OVER-THE-HORIZON BACKSCATTER RADAR	132,097	132,097
172	0202834F	VEHICLES AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT—GENERAL	744	744
173	0205219F	MQ–9 UAV	26,689	26,689
174	0205671F	JOINT COUNTER RCIED ELECTRONIC WARFARE	3,424	3,424
176	0207133F	F–16 SQUADRONS	216,638	366,638
		F–16 Open Systems Environment/BLOS Systems		[75,000]
		IVEWS development for F–16		[75,000]
177	0207134F	F–15E SQUADRONS	233,018	413,018
		F–15 Global Lighting/Eagle Tether		[180,000]
178	0207136F	MANNED DESTRUCTIVE SUPPRESSION	17,680	17,680
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-TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM)	51,242	51,242
184	0207172F	JOINT ADVANCED TACTICAL MISSILE (JATM)	425,029	425,029
186	0207238F	E–11A	15,244	15,244
188	0207247F	AF TENCAP	52,492	52,492
189	0207249F	PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS PROCUREMENT	13,613	13,613
191	0207268F	AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM	52,734	52,734
192	0207325F	JOINT-TO-SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM)	232,252	237,252
		Joint Air to Surface Stand-Off Missile (JASSM) (USAF)		[5,000]
193	0207327F	SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)	24,810	24,810
194	0207410F	AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS CENTER (AOC)	113,086	113,086
195	0207412F	CONTROL AND REPORTING CENTER (CRC)	17,569	17,569
198	0207431F	COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM ACTIVITIES	33,601	33,601
199	0207438F	THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT (TBM) C4I	6,787	6,787
200	0207439F	ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE INT REPROG (EWIR)	60,072	60,072
202	0207452F	DCAPES	8,507	8,507
203	0207457F	AIR FORCE SPECIAL WARFARE (SPECWAR)	27,526	27,526
204	0207521F	AIR FORCE CALIBRATION PROGRAMS	2,273	2,273
206	0207590F	SEEK EAGLE	33,707	33,707
208	0207611F	READINESS DECISION SUPPORT ENTERPRISE	8,880	8,880
209	0207697F	DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND EXERCISES	4,399	4,399
210	0207701F	FULL COMBAT MISSION TRAINING	8,096	8,096
211	0208006F	MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS	138,745	138,745
212	0208007F	TACTICAL DECEPTION	13,711	13,711
213	0208087F	DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE OPERATIONS	31,197	31,197
214	0208088F	AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS	95,034	95,034
218	0208288F	INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS	1,012	1,012
219	0301025F	GEOBASE	999	999
220	0301113F	CYBER SECURITY INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT	14,749	14,749
226	0301377F	COUNTERING ADVANCED CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS (CACW)	1,117	1,117
228	0301401F	AF MULTI-DOMAIN NON-TRADITIONAL ISR BATTLESPACE AWARENESS	2,987	2,987
229	0302015F	E–4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC)	54,457	54,457
230	0302315F	NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT	7,006	7,006
232	0303089F	CYBERSPACE AND DODIN OPERATIONS	10,080	10,080
233	0303131F	MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK (MEECN)	99,599	99,599
234	0303133F	HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO SYSTEMS	19,955	19,955
235	0303140F	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM	98,414	98,414
236	0303248F	ALL DOMAIN COMMON PLATFORM	76,642	76,642
237	0303260F	JOINT MILITARY DECEPTION INITIATIVE	356	356
238	0304100F	STRATEGIC MISSION PLANNING & EXECUTION SYSTEM (SMPES)	75,164	75,164
239	0304109F	THRESHER	105	105
242	0304260F	AIRBORNE SIGINT ENTERPRISE	90,650	90,650
243	0304310F	COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS	4,127	4,127
247	0305020F	CCMD INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	1,547	1,547
248	0305022F	ISR MODERNIZATION & AUTOMATION DVMT (IMAD)	22,237	22,237
249	0305099F	GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (GATM)	4,257	4,257
250	0305103F	CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE	310	310
251	0305111F	WEATHER SERVICE	30,509	30,509
252	0305114F	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, APPROACH, AND LANDING SYSTEM (ATCALS)	17,259	17,259
253	0305116F	AERIAL TARGETS	5,081	5,081
256	0305128F	SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES	8,964	8,964
257	0305146F	DEFENSE JOINT COUNTERINTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES	6,524	6,524
258	0305158F	TACTICAL TERMINAL	1,099	1,099
259	0305179F	INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE (IBS)	19,085	19,085
261	0305206F	AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS	25,432	25,432
262	0305207F	MANNED RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS	16,643	16,643
263	0305208F	DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE SYSTEM	79,033	79,033
265	0305221F	NETWORK-CENTRIC COLLABORATIVE TARGETING	12,019	12,019
266	0305238F	NATO AGS	816	816
267	0305240F	ISR TRANSPORT AND PROCESSING	32,578	32,578
268	0305249F	AF JWICS ENTERPRISE	21,097	21,097
269	0305600F	INTERNATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY AND ARCHITECTURES	18,946	18,946
270	0305836F	C2IMERA	13,867	13,867
272	0305903F	MOBILE COMMAND AND CONTROL CENTERS (MCCCS)	3,988	3,988
273	0305984F	PERSONNEL RECOVERY COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2)	2,891	2,891
274	0307577F	INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA (IMD)	3,000	3,000
276	0401119F	C–5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS (IF)	33,713	33,713
277	0401130F	C–17 AIRCRAFT (IF)	76,514	101,514
		C–17 blade coatings		[17,000]
		C–17 winglet procurement		[8,000]
278	0401132F	C–130J PROGRAM	31,354	101,354
		LC–130 Non-recurring engineering		[70,000]
279	0401134F	LARGE AIRCRAFT IR COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM)	52,928	52,928
280	0401218F	KC–135S	0	35,000
	0401218F	KC–135 drag reduction		[35,000]
281	0401318F	CV–22	653	653
283	0708610F	LOGISTICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT)	18,581	18,581
284	0801380F	AF LVC OPERATIONAL TRAINING (LVC-OT)	33,898	33,898
285	0804743F	OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING	2,371	2,371
286	0901202F	JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY AGENCY	2,080	2,080
287	0901218F	CIVILIAN COMPENSATION PROGRAM	4,355	4,355
288	0901220F	PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION	2,766	2,766
289	0901226F	AIR FORCE STUDIES AND ANALYSIS AGENCY	14,761	14,761
290	0901538F	FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	3,982	3,982
291	0901554F	DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACNTNG MGT SYS (DEAMS)	38,942	38,942
292	1201921F	SERVICE SUPPORT TO STRATCOM—SPACE ACTIVITIES	335	335
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	22,264,031	22,398,031
		Acceleration of Air Force program		[121,000]
		Advanced Sensors Application Program		[13,000]
		SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	29,643,766	30,242,766

		TOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF	52,017,288	56,943,288

		RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, SF
		BASIC RESEARCH
1	0601102SF	DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES	22,270	22,270
2	0601103SF	UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES	14,569	14,569
		SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH	36,839	36,839

		APPLIED RESEARCH
4	1206601SF	SPACE TECHNOLOGY	245,497	253,497
		Space Modeling, Simulation, & Analysis Hub		[8,000]
5	1206616SF	SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT/DEMO	2,591	3,591
		Service Support to SPACECOM Activities		[1,000]
		SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH	248,088	257,088

		ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
6	1206310SF	SPACE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT	459,989	459,989
7	1206616SF	SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT/DEMO	128,588	129,588
		Rocket Cargo program		[–7,000]
		Space Advanced Technology Development/Demo		[8,000]
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	588,577	589,577

		ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
8	0604002SF	SPACE FORCE WEATHER SERVICES RESEARCH	857	857
9	1203010SF	SPACE FORCE IT, DATA ANALYTICS, DIGITAL SOLUTIONS	88,606	88,606
10	1203164SF	NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER EQUIPMENT) (SPACE)	175,304	175,304
11	1203622SF	SPACE WARFIGHTING ANALYSIS	125,982	125,982
12	1203710SF	EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS	77,135	77,135
13	1203955SF	SPACE ACCESS, MOBILITY & LOGISTICS (SAML)	14,478	14,478
14	1206410SF	SPACE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPING	1,307,970	1,584,970
		SDA Tranche 3 Transport Layer		[277,000]
15	1206427SF	SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE TRANSITIONS (SSPT)	67,246	67,246
16	1206438SF	SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY	60,106	60,106
17	1206458SF	TECH TRANSITION (SPACE)	326,144	326,144
18	1206730SF	SPACE SECURITY AND DEFENSE PROGRAM	45,200	45,200
19	1206760SF	PROTECTED TACTICAL ENTERPRISE SERVICE (PTES)	114,430	114,430
20	1206761SF	PROTECTED TACTICAL SERVICE (PTS)	571,921	571,921
21	1206855SF	EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM (ESS)	1,229,929	1,229,929
22	1206857SF	SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE	9,664	9,664
23	1206862SF	TACTICALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE	33,282	93,282
		Tactically Responsive Space		[60,000]
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES	4,248,254	4,585,254

		SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION
25	1203269SF	GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS IIIF)	179,249	179,249
26	1206421SF	COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS	31,298	31,298
27	1206422SF	WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON	38,501	38,501
28	1206425SF	SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS SYSTEM	992	992
29	1206431SF	ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM (SPACE)	13,825	13,825
31	1206433SF	WIDEBAND GLOBAL SATCOM (SPACE)	29,609	29,609
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 (COMSATCOM) INTEGRATION	132,060	132,060
37	1206446SF	RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING MISSILE TRACKING—LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO	1,757,354	1,757,354
38	1206447SF	RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING MISSILE TRACKING—MEDUM EARTH ORBIT (MEO	686,348	686,348
39	1206771SF	COMMERCIAL SERVICES	36,628	36,628
40	1206853SF	NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)—EMD	6,595	6,595
		SUBTOTAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	3,892,483	3,892,483

		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
44	1206392SF	ACQ WORKFORCE—SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS	269,162	269,162
45	1206398SF	SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER—MHA	15,356	15,356
46	1206399SF	SSC ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING & INTEGRATION	110,598	110,598
47	1206759SF	MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT—SPACE	189,083	189,083
48	1206860SF	ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)	19,857	19,857
49	1206864SF	SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP)	28,787	28,787
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	632,843	632,843

		OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
51	1201212SF	SERVICE-WIDE SUPPORT (NOT OTHERWISE ACCOUNTED FOR)	18,451	18,451
52	1203001SF	FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS TERMINALS (FAB-T)	303	303
53	1203040SF	DCO-SPACE	102,439	102,439
54	1203109SF	NARROWBAND SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS	421,847	421,847
55	1203110SF	SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK (SPACE)	93,780	93,780
56	1203154SF	LONG RANGE KILL CHAINS	1,916	1,916
57	1203155SF	GROUND MOVING TARGET INDICATOR (GMTI)	1,063,384	1,063,384
58	1203173SF	SPACE AND MISSILE TEST AND EVALUATION CENTER	22,128	22,128
59	1203174SF	SPACE INNOVATION, INTEGRATION AND RAPID TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	82,399	82,399
60	1203182SF	SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM (SPACE)	54,996	54,996
61	1203330SF	SPACE SUPERIORITY ISR	24,411	24,411
62	1203609SF	PLEO SATCOM (MILNET)	277,407	277,407
63	1203873SF	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE RADARS	0	22,000
		PARCS radar upgrades		[22,000]
64	1203906SF	NCMC—ITW/AA SYSTEM	25,839	25,839
66	1203913SF	NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM (SPACE)	96,836	96,836
67	1203940SF	SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS OPERATIONS	182,377	182,377
68	1206423SF	GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM III—OPERATIONAL CONTROL SEGMENT	190,484	190,484
73	1206772SF	RAPID RESILIENT COMMAND AND CONTROL (R2C2)	106,220	106,220
75	1208053SF	JOINT TACTICAL GROUND SYSTEM	6,698	6,698
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	2,866,499	2,866,499
		SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	5,638,414	5,660,414

		SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS
76	1208248SF	SPACE DOMAIN AWARENESS/PLANNING/TASKING SW	200,968	200,968
		SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS	200,968	200,968

		TOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, SF	15,486,466	15,855,466

		RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW
		BASIC RESEARCH
1	0601000BR	DTRA BASIC RESEARCH	15,643	15,643
3	0601108D8Z	HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH INITIATIVES	16,817	16,817
4	0601110D8Z	BASIC RESEARCH INITIATIVES	82,264	112,264
		Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research		[30,000]
6	0601120D8Z	NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION PROGRAM	146,010	146,010
7	0601122E	EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES	360,456	360,456
8	0601228D8Z	HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY INSTITUTIONS	99,610	109,610
		Efficient AI Linguistics Algorithmic Development to Support National Security		[10,000]
9	0601384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM	36,582	36,582
		SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH	757,382	797,382

		APPLIED RESEARCH
10	0602000D8Z	JOINT MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY	19,734	19,734
11	0602023E	ACCESS AND AWARENESS	100,791	100,791
12	0602024E	WARFIGHTING PERFORMANCE	278,121	278,121
13	0602025E	MAKING, MAINTAINING, SUPPLY CHAIN AND LOGISTICS	1,347,049	1,347,049
14	0602026E	EFFECTS	20,275	20,275
16	0602128D8Z	PROMOTION AND PROTECTION STRATEGIES	3,166	3,166
17	0602230D8Z	DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION	46,261	46,261
18	0602234D8Z	LINCOLN LABORATORY RESEARCH PROGRAM	11,479	41,479
		Lincoln Laboratory Research Program		[30,000]
19	0602251D8Z	APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF S&T PRIORITIES	53,983	53,983
21	0602384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM	230,751	230,751
22	0602668D8Z	CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH	17,988	50,988
		University Consortium for Cybersecurity		[20,000]
		Pacific Intelligence and Innovation Initiative (P3I)		[13,000]
28	0602718BR	COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION APPLIED RESEARCH	161,495	161,495
29	0602751D8Z	SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED RESEARCH	8,883	8,883
30	0602890D8Z	HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH	48,738	48,738
31	0602891D8Z	FSRM MODELLING	994	994
32	1160401BB	SOF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	50,026	61,226
		Comprehensive Protective Cold Weather Layering System		[11,200]
		SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH	2,399,734	2,473,934

		ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
33	0603000D8Z	JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	50,663	50,663
35	0603055D8Z	OPERATIONAL ENERGY CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT	168,253	183,253
		Power generation		[15,000]
37	0603122D8Z	COMBATING TERRORISM TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT	81,513	96,513
		U.S.-Israel Joint R&D on emerging technologies		[15,000]
38	0603133D8Z	FOREIGN COMPARATIVE TESTING	27,958	37,958
		Foreign Comparative Testing program		[10,000]
39	0603142D8Z	MISSION ENGINEERING & INTEGRATION (ME&I)	99,534	99,534
40	0603160BR	COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	393,469	393,469
42	0603176C	ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT	21,625	38,625
		Directed energy technology maturation		[17,000]
43	0603180C	ADVANCED RESEARCH	42,093	42,093
44	0603183D8Z	JOINT HYPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT &TRANSITION	50,998	50,998
45	0603225D8Z	JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	35,505	35,505
48	0603288D8Z	ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS	41,010	41,010
49	0603289D8Z	ADVANCED INNOVATIVE ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS	57,457	57,457
50	0603330D8Z	QUANTUM APPLICATION	59,521	59,521
51	0603342D8Z	DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT (DIU)	0	5,000
		DIU OnRamp Hub		[5,000]
52	0603375D8Z	TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION	19,654	29,654
		Auxilliary equipment		[10,000]
53	0603379D8Z	ADVANCED TECHNICAL INTEGRATION	19,991	19,991
54	0603384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM—ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	247,043	247,043
55	0603467E	DARPA ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	1,643,465	1,643,465
56	0603468E	ADVANCED COMPLEX SYSTEMS	350,695	350,695
57	0603469E	ADVANCED ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES	335,647	335,647
59	0603618D8Z	JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY	20,575	20,575
60	0603662D8Z	NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES	19,937	19,937
62	0603680D8Z	DEFENSE-WIDE MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	409,493	584,493
		Critical Minerals RDT&E Increase		[15,000]
		Advanced manufacturing		[150,000]
		Biotechnology Manufacturing		[5,000]
		Robotics Enhancements for Armaments Manufacturing		[5,000]
63	0603680S	MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	50,610	55,610
		DLA Critical Materials		[5,000]
64	0603712S	GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS	19,640	19,640
65	0603716D8Z	STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAM	58,092	58,092
66	0603720S	MICROELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT	135,016	135,016
67	0603727D8Z	JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM	945	945
70	0603766E	NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE TECHNOLOGY	0	14,000
		Air Combat Evolution (ACE)—autonomous air-to-air cruise missile and drone defense		[14,000]
72	0603781D8Z	SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE	12,972	12,972
73	0603838D8Z	DEFENSE INNOVATION ACCELERATION (DIA)	211,027	211,027
74	0603924D8Z	HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM	114,577	124,577
		Ultra-Short Pulsed Laser (USPL) Weapons Lethality		[10,000]
75	0603941D8Z	TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY	1,095,772	1,105,772
		Reusable Hypersonic Test Bed Integration & Testing		[10,000]
76	0603945D8Z	INTERNATIONAL INNOVATION INITIATIVES	173,048	178,048
		Critical Minerals for Energy Storage Solutions		[5,000]
78	0604055D8Z	OPERATIONAL ENERGY CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT	0	17,000
		Micro-Reactor Program Advancement		[5,000]
		TRISO fuel development		[12,000]
80	1160402BB	SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	152,282	152,282
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	6,220,080	6,528,080

		ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
81	0603161D8Z	NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P	55,465	103,465
		Nuclear Advanced Concept Development & Prototypes		[48,000]
82	0603600D8Z	WALKOFF	152,449	152,449
83	0603851D8Z	ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION PROGRAM	123,981	123,981
84	0603881C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT	508,898	508,898
85	0603882C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE MIDCOURSE DEFENSE SEGMENT	825,919	825,919
86	0603884BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM—DEM/VAL	272,940	272,940
87	0603884C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SENSORS	197,641	197,641
88	0603890C	BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS	646,039	646,039
89	0603891C	SPECIAL PROGRAMS—MDA	498,630	562,630
		AMD/LTRI		[55,000]
		C2BMC-G		[9,000]
90	0603892C	AEGIS BMD	588,440	588,440
91	0603896C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE COMMAND AND CONTROL, BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS (C2BMC)	634,183	636,183
		Fiber Festoon Cable sustainment		[2,000]
92	0603898C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT	45,758	47,758
		DEEP SENTRY		[2,000]
93	0603904C	MISSILE DEFENSE INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS CENTER (MDIOC)	55,097	55,097
94	0603906C	REGARDING TRENCH	29,608	29,608
95	0603907C	SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR (SBX)	166,813	166,813
96	0603913C	ISRAELI COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS	300,000	300,000
97	0603914C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TEST	463,079	463,079
98	0603915C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TARGETS	514,904	559,904
		Advanced reactive target simulation development		[5,000]
		Affordable air-breathing hypersonic flight vehicle		[10,000]
		High Mach Airbreathing Targets		[20,000]
		Sea-based launch for missile defense targets		[10,000]
99	0603923D8Z	COALITION WARFARE	10,090	10,090
100	0604011D8Z	NEXT GENERATION INFORMATION COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY (5G)	41,815	41,815
101	0604016D8Z	DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CORROSION PROGRAM	2,545	8,545
		Corrosion Control Research		[6,000]
102	0604102C	GUAM DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT	128,485	244,485
		AGS integration of AN/TPY–6 TAUs		[116,000]
105	0604125D8Z	ADVANCED MANUFACTURING COMPONENTS AND PROTOTYPES	45,513	45,513
106	0604181C	HYPERSONIC DEFENSE	200,627	200,627
107	0604250D8Z	ADVANCED INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES	749,452	768,452
		EUCOM: Defense of undersea infrastructure		[9,000]
		Project Pele		[10,000]
108	0604294D8Z	TRUSTED & ASSURED MICROELECTRONICS	512,151	512,151
109	0604331D8Z	RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM	235,292	235,292
112	0604400D8Z	DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM COMMON DEVELOPMENT	2,142	2,142
113	0604551BR	CATAPULT INFORMATION SYSTEM	4,161	4,161
114	0604555D8Z	OPERATIONAL ENERGY PROTOTYPING—NON S&T	55,005	55,005
117	0604682D8Z	SUPPORT FOR STRATEGIC ANALYSIS	2,776	2,776
119	0604791D8Z	MULTI-DOMAIN JOINT OPERATIONS (MDJO)	20,343	20,343
120	0604797D8Z	JOINT ENERGETIC TRANSITION OFFICE	3,000	3,000
121	0604826J	JOINT C5 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION AND INTEROPERABILITY ASSESSMENTS	25,889	25,889
122	0604873C	LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION RADAR (LRDR)	60,443	60,443
123	0604874C	IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE INTERCEPTORS	1,582,414	1,582,414
124	0604876C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT TEST	37,784	37,784
125	0604878C	AEGIS BMD TEST	153,618	153,618
126	0604879C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SENSOR TEST	68,699	84,699
		Sensor Ground Testing		[16,000]
127	0604880C	LAND-BASED SM–3 (LBSM3)	24,555	42,555
		Evaluation of CONUS, Hawaii, Alaska emplacements		[8,000]
		Guam SM–3 software integration		[10,000]
128	0604887C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST	38,325	38,325
129	0604924D8Z	HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPE	5,589	5,589
130	0202057C	SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT	1,806	1,806
131	0208059JCY	CYBERCOM ACTIVITIES	30,212	30,212
133	0208086JCY	CYBER TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (CTE)	124,971	124,971
135	0305103C	CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE	2,131	2,131
136	0305245D8Z	INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES AND INNOVATION INVESTMENTS	43,596	48,596
		Geospatial Workforce Development Program		[5,000]
139	1206895C	BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS	97,061	97,061
		SUBTOTAL ADVANCED COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES	10,390,334	10,731,334

		SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION
141	0604123D8Z	CHIEF DIGITAL AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (CDAO)—DEM/VAL ACTIVITIES	9,196	9,196
142	0604133D8Z	ALPHA–1 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES	441,821	441,821
143	0604161D8Z	NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD	12,874	12,874
144	0604384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM—EMD	255,630	255,630
145	0604771D8Z	JOINT TACTICAL INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (JTIDS)	10,527	10,527
146	0605000BR	COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	14,931	14,931
147	0605013BL	INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT	1,283	1,283
148	0605021SE	HOMELAND PERSONNEL SECURITY INITIATIVE	9,137	9,137
149	0605022D8Z	DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY PROGRAM	6,780	6,780
150	0605027D8Z	OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES	9,765	9,765
151	0605080S	DEFENSE AGENCY INITIATIVES (DAI)—FINANCIAL SYSTEM	31,714	31,714
152	0605141BR	MISSION ASSURANCE RISK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (MARMS)	9,573	9,573
153	0605210D8Z	DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES	9,366	9,366
154	0605294D8Z	TRUSTED & ASSURED MICROELECTRONICS	143,475	143,475
155	0605649D8Z	ACQUISITION INTEGRATION AND INTEROPERABILITY (AI2)	13,556	13,556
156	0605755D8Z	RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DEFENSE MODERNIZATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	3,307	3,307
157	0605772D8Z	NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, & COMMUNICATIONS	3,158	3,158
159	0305282K	JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN)	10,000	10,000
160	0305304D8Z	REAL PROPERTY INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	6,473	6,473
161	0305310D8Z	COUNTERPROLIFERATION ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT	12,107	12,107
		SUBTOTAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION	1,014,673	1,014,673

		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
163	0603829J	JOINT CAPABILITY EXPERIMENTATION	13,822	13,822
164	0604122D8Z	JADC2 DEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIMENTATION ACTIVITIES	297,801	297,801
165	0604774D8Z	DEFENSE READINESS REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS)	8,552	8,552
166	0604875D8Z	JOINT SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT	8,627	8,627
167	0604940D8Z	CENTRAL TEST AND EVALUATION INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP)	542,773	542,773
168	0604942D8Z	ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS	1,275	1,275
170	0605001E	MISSION SUPPORT	115,673	115,673
171	0605100D8Z	JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC)	210,878	210,878
172	0605126J	JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO)	78,057	78,057
174	0605142D8Z	SYSTEMS ENGINEERING	23,405	23,405
175	0605151D8Z	STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT—OSD	5,301	5,301
176	0605161D8Z	NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL SECURITY	12,549	22,549
		Nuclear Matters Management Support		[10,000]
177	0605170D8Z	SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND INFORMATION INTEGRATION	15,597	15,597
178	0605200D8Z	GENERAL SUPPORT TO OUSD(INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY)	3,468	3,468
179	0605384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM	67,263	67,263
186	0605711D8Z	CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS	11,781	11,781
187	0605790D8Z	SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER (STTR) ADMINISTRATION	5,411	5,411
188	0605797D8Z	MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGE	29,675	34,675
		NSCEB recommendation—AIxBio Sandbox		[5,000]
189	0605798D8Z	DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS	45,134	45,134
190	0605801KA	DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER (DTIC)	60,209	60,209
191	0605803SE	R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND EVALUATION	30,778	30,778
192	0605804D8Z	DEVELOPMENT TEST AND EVALUATION	37,381	37,381
193	0605898E	MANAGEMENT HQ—R&D	13,623	13,623
194	0605998KA	MANAGEMENT HQ—DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER (DTIC)	3,466	3,466
195	0606005D8Z	SPECIAL ACTIVITIES	18,594	18,594
196	0606100D8Z	BUDGET AND PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS	13,084	13,084
197	0606114D8Z	ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP (AWG) SUPPORT	5,229	5,229
199	0606225D8Z	ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND RESOURCE ANALYSIS	3,461	3,461
200	0606300D8Z	DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD	6,563	6,563
201	0606301D8Z	AVIATION SAFETY TECHNOLOGIES	1,702	1,702
202	0606771D8Z	CYBER RESILIENCY AND CYBERSECURITY POLICY	14,220	14,220
203	0606774D8Z	DEFENSE CIVILIAN TRAINING CORPS	8,752	8,752
204	0606775D8Z	JOINT PRODUCTION ACCELERATOR CELL (JPAC)	5,493	5,493
205	0606829D8Z	SUSTAINMENT TRANSITION CAPABILITIES	30,000	30,000
206	0606853BR	MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT	14,841	24,841
		Critical Infrastructure Defense Analysis Center (CIDAC)		[10,000]
207	0203345D8Z	DEFENSE OPERATIONS SECURITY INITIATIVE (DOSI)	2,493	2,493
208	0204571J	JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL SUPPORT	8,070	8,070
209	0208045K	C4I INTEROPERABILITY	70,893	70,893
210	0303169D8Z	INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RAPID ACQUISITION	4,355	4,355
211	0305172K	COMBINED ADVANCED APPLICATIONS	5,447	5,447
213	0305208K	DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE SYSTEMS	2,887	2,887
214	0305248J	JOINT STAFF OFFICE OF THE CHIEF DATA OFFICER (OCDO) ACTIVITIES	14,500	14,500
215	0804768J	COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT AND TRAINING TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)—NON-MHA	91,952	91,952
216	0808709SE	DEFENSE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE (DEOMI)	388	388
217	0808737SE	INTEGRATED PRIMARY PREVENTION	5,744	5,744
218	0901598C	MANAGEMENT HQ—MDA	28,719	28,719
219	0903235K	JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER (JSP)	1,283	1,283
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	31,148	31,148
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	2,032,317	2,057,317

		OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
220	0604011D8Z	NEXT GENERATION INFORMATION COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY (5G)	22,439	22,439
223	0607162D8Z	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS ELIMINATION TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENT	2,360	2,360
224	0607210D8Z	INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT	273,379	294,379
		Corrosion Resistant Magnesium Coating for Aircraft		[17,000]
		Rare Earth Magnet Manufacturing		[4,000]
225	0607310D8Z	COUNTERPROLIFERATION MODERNIZATION	12,704	12,704
226	0607327T	GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY COOPERATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-TSCMIS)	6,173	6,173
227	0607384BP	CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT)	79,118	79,118
228	0607757D8Z	RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DEFENSE MODERNIZATION OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	2,945	2,945
229	0208085JCY	ROBUST INFRASTRUCTURE AND ACCESS	88,522	88,522
230	0208097JCY	CYBER COMMAND AND CONTROL (CYBER C2)	85,833	85,833
231	0208099JCY	DATA AND UNIFIED PLATFORM (D&UP)	83,039	83,039
235	0302019K	DEFENSE INFO INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING AND INTEGRATION	16,162	16,162
236	0302609V	COUNTERING THREATS AUTOMATED PLATFORM	5,030	5,030
237	0303126K	LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS—DCS	40,293	40,293
238	0303131K	MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK (MEECN)	5,113	5,113
240	0303140D8Z	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM	25,347	40,347
		National Narrative Intelligence Research Center		[15,000]
242	0303140K	INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM	23,224	23,224
243	0303153K	DEFENSE SPECTRUM ORGANIZATION	20,174	20,174
244	0303171K	JOINT PLANNING AND EXECUTION SERVICES	6,242	6,242
246	0303430V	FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY	22,700	22,700
252	0305104D8Z	DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE (DIB) CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE	10,840	10,840
257	0305146V	DEFENSE JOINT COUNTERINTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES	1,800	1,800
258	0305172D8Z	COMBINED ADVANCED APPLICATIONS	22,548	22,548
260	0305186D8Z	POLICY R&D PROGRAMS	6,043	6,043
262	0305199D8Z	NET CENTRICITY	17,114	17,114
264	0305208BB	DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE SYSTEMS	5,656	5,656
270	0305387D8Z	HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROGRAM	1,771	1,771
279	0306250JCY	CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT	473,399	473,399
280	0307609V	NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS (NISS)	34,710	34,710
283	0708012K	LOGISTICS SUPPORT ACTIVITIES	2,876	2,876
284	0708012S	PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS	2,000	4,000
		Pacific Disaster Centers		[2,000]
285	0708047S	DEFENSE PROPERTY ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM	3,020	3,020
289	1160403BB	AVIATION SYSTEMS	119,699	134,699
		Vertical Take Off and Landing Optionally Piloted Vehicle (VTOL-OPV)		[15,000]
290	1160405BB	INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT	102,732	105,732
		Ultra-lightweight Group 1 Small UAS		[3,000]
291	1160408BB	OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS	234,653	234,653
292	1160431BB	WARRIOR SYSTEMS	279,639	284,639
		Blast Overpressure Analysis and Mitigation		[5,000]
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 INTELLIGENCE	21,752	21,752
298	1203610K	TELEPORT PROGRAM	24,319	24,319
999	9999999999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	8,276,313	8,276,313
		SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT	10,594,200	10,655,200

		SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS
299	0608140D8Z	ENTERPRISE PLATFORMS AND CAPABILITIES—SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM	402,783	402,783
300	0608648D8Z	ACQUISITION VISIBILITY—SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM	17,549	17,549
301	0608776D8Z	DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT FIELDING	48,413	198,413
		Attritable autonomous systems		[150,000]
302	0303150K	GLOBAL COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM	44,474	44,474
		SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAMS	513,219	663,219

		TOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW	33,921,939	34,921,139

		OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE
		MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
1	0605118OTE	OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION	133,542	133,542
2	0605131OTE	LIVE FIRE TEST AND EVALUATION	108,109	108,109
3	0605814OTE	OPERATIONAL TEST ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES	76,492	76,492
		SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT	318,143	318,143

		TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE	318,143	318,143

		TOTAL RDT&E	142,001,108	150,453,940

SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE(In Thousands of Dollars)
Line	Item	FY 2026 Request	Senate 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	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	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	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	414,046
	AFRICOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees		[1,000]
170	US EUROPEAN COMMAND	385,744	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	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	553,089
	Human-Artificial Intelligence teaming		[3,000]
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	39,885,565	34,133,821

	MOBILIZATION
220	STRATEGIC MOBILITY	134,892	134,892
230	ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS	330,812	362,212
	Army Prepositioned Stocks		[31,400]
240	INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS	3,162	3,162
	SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION	468,866	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	212,668
	Fully fund Army JROTC		[22,000]
	SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING	5,560,242	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	2,256,487
	Army Data Platform 1.0 (VANTAGE)/Army Data Platform 2.0		[74,880]
	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	13,145,272

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–812,335
	Unobligated balances		[–812,335]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–812,335

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY	58,975,065	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	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	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	101,901

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–10,222
	Unobligated balances		[–10,222]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–10,222

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES	3,314,178	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	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	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	327,265

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–246,699
	Unobligated balances		[–246,699]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–246,699

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG	8,673,981	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	357,516

	TOTAL COUNTER-ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP	357,516	357,516

	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	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	127,634
	Critical Joint Manpower		[16,720]
	INDOPACOM's Community Engagement Initiative		[5,000]
210	COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT	386,657	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	0
	Transferred to Division B		[–3,991,438]
280	BASE OPERATING SUPPORT	6,166,266	6,210,266
	Barber’s Point—sec. 2856 of FY24 NDAA		[9,000]
	Red Hill long-term monitoring, research, and remediation		[35,000]
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	63,984,821	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	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	61,334
	Fully fund Navy JROTC		[36,000]
	SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING	2,541,546	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	5,774,586

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–540,421
	Unobligated balances		[–540,421]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–540,421

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY	74,080,120	70,061,711

	OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
	OPERATING FORCES
010	OPERATIONAL FORCES	1,950,784	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	0
	Transferred to Division B		[–2,079,890]
070	BASE OPERATING SUPPORT	2,834,721	2,834,721
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	9,371,644	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	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	592,579

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–89,275
	Unobligated balances		[–89,275]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–89,275

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS	11,004,201	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	0
	Transferred to Division B		[–58,213]
120	BASE OPERATING SUPPORT	118,361	118,361
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	1,415,813	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	26,241

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–19,763
	Unobligated balances		[–19,763]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–19,763

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES	1,442,054	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	0
	Transferred to Division B		[–48,519]
040	BASE OPERATING SUPPORT	123,079	123,079
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	312,271	263,752

	ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
050	ADMINISTRATION	49,774	49,774
	SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES	49,774	49,774

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–12,267
	Unobligated balances		[–12,267]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–12,267

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE	362,045	301,259

	OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
	OPERATING FORCES
010	PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES	1,425,125	1,711,125
	DAF campaigning and exercises		[150,000]
	FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning		[136,000]
020	COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES	2,753,789	2,773,789
	FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning		[20,000]
030	AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)	1,701,493	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	0
	Transferred to Division B		[–3,093,331]
060	CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT	245,874	245,874
070	CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT	9,283,958	9,305,458
	FY26 INDOPACOM Campaigning		[21,500]
080	FLYING HOUR PROGRAM	6,772,468	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	1,351,566
	CENTCOM: Office of Strategic Capital detailees		[1,000]
	CENTCOM: replenishment of munitions and readiness for Operations ROUGH RIDER and MIDNIGHT HAMMER		[1,000,000]
180	US SOCOM	28,018	28,018
190	US TRANSCOM	703	703
200	CENTCOM CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT	928	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	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	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	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
	Fully fund AF JROTC		[80,000]
	SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING	3,313,275	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	6,199,890

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–1,020,189
	Unobligated balances		[–1,020,189]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–1,020,189

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE	62,429,535	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	0
	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	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	220,642

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–218,077
	Unobligated balances		[–218,077]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–218,077

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE	5,888,163	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	0
	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	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	124,508

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–224,891
	Unobligated balances		[–224,891]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–224,891

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE	4,322,617	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	0
	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	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	132,731

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–5,861
	Unobligated balances		[–5,861]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–5,861

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG	7,332,599	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	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	251,242
	AFRICOM: MISO		[14,000]
	INDOPACOM Information Operations (MISO)		[27,800]
050	SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES	2,136,165	2,136,165
060	SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MAINTENANCE	1,273,409	1,273,409
070	SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS	181,122	181,122
080	SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER FORCES	3,409,285	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	1,310,384
	IOM capabilities		[10,000]
130	USCYBERCOM HEADQUARTERS	314,284	314,284
	SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES	13,117,754	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 EDUCATION	28,697	28,697
	SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING	326,831	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—CYBER	11,120	11,120
250	DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY—CYBER	46,621	46,621
260	DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY	932,144	967,144
	DLNSEO Restoration		[20,000]
	Flagship Language Program for Chinese & Arabic		[15,000]
290	DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY	3,042,559	3,047,559
	Defense Information System Network (DISN)—Service Delivery Nodes		[5,000]
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	190,339
	Reverse cuts to Defense POW/MIA office (DPAA)		[19,000]
350	DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY	2,864,252	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	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	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	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 Cooperation		[15,000]
	Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration (REPI)		[20,000]
530	WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES	411,182	411,182
999	CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS	22,750,830	22,750,830
	SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES	42,491,133	43,517,433

	UNDISTRIBUTED
998	UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–935,000
	Unobligated balances		[–935,000]
	SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED	0	–935,000

	TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE	55,935,718	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 ARMED FORCES	21,243	21,243

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	21,243	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 AID	100,793	100,793

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	100,793	100,793

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT
010	COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION	282,830	282,830
	SUBTOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT	282,830	282,830

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	282,830	282,830

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
010	ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD	45,346	45,346
	SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT	45,346	45,346

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	45,346	45,346

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
050	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY	148,070	148,070
	SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY	148,070	148,070

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	148,070	148,070

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
080	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE	8,885	8,885
	SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE	8,885	8,885

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	8,885	8,885

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
070	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE	342,149	342,149
	SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE	342,149	342,149

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	342,149	342,149

	MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
060	ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY	357,949	357,949
	SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE	357,949	357,949

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	357,949	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 DEFENSE SITES	235,156	235,156

	TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS	235,156	235,156

	TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE	295,660,213	277,708,889

SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL(In Thousands of Dollars)
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS	181,803,437	181,063,437
Unobligated balances		[–740,000]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS	181,803,437	181,063,437

MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTIONS	12,850,165	12,850,165
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND CONTRIBUTIONS	12,850,165	12,850,165

TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL	194,653,602	193,913,602

SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
	WORKING CAPITAL FUND
	WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
010	INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS	20,589	520,589
	Spares and readiness		[500,000]
	SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY	20,589	520,589
	WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY
010	NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTERS	381,600	381,600
	SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY	381,600	381,600

	WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
020	SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS	90,262	90,262
	SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE	90,262	90,262

	NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION FUND
010	DEFENSE STOCKPILE	5,700	5,700
	SUBTOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION FUND	5,700	5,700

	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	1,272	1,272
	SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE	10,697	10,697

	WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
010	WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA	1,527,817	1,527,817
	SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA	1,527,817	1,527,817

	TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND	2,037,937	2,537,937

	CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
	OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
1	CHEM DEMILITARIZATION—O&M	3,243	3,243
	SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE	3,243	3,243

	RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
3	CHEM DEMILITARIZATION -RDT&E	210,039	210,039
	SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION	210,039	210,039

	TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION	213,282	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	652,884

	DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
020	DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM	134,938	134,938
	SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM	134,938	134,938

	NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
030	NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM	110,125	295,125
	National Guard Counter-Drug Program		[185,000]
	SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM	110,125	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	6,354

	TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF	904,301	1,089,301

	OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
	OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
010	OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE	494,865	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
	SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL	496,895	516,066
	SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL	4,625	4,625
	SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL	1,079	1,079

	TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL	502,599	521,770

	DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
	OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
010	IN-HOUSE CARE	10,731,135	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	2,321,798
	Fully fund Defense Health Agency information management systems		[50,000]
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	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	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 SYSTEM	30,732	30,732
180	PROC MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM—DESKTOP TO DATACENTER	77,047	77,047
	SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT	354,821	354,821

	TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM	40,502,123	40,842,123

	TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS	44,160,242	45,204,413

SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION(In Thousands of Dollars)
Account	State/Country and Installation	Project Title	FY 2026 Request	Senate Authorized

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
	Alabama
Army	Redstone Arsenal	COST TO COMPLETE—PROPULSION SYSTEMS BUILDING	55,000	55,000
	Alaska
Army	Fort Wainwright	BARRACKS	208,000	63,000
Army	Fort Wainwright	DINING FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	8,000
	Arizona
Army	Fort Huachuca	FLIGHT CONTROL TOWER (DESIGN)	0	2,000
Army	Yuma Proving Ground	POLE LINE ROAD (DESIGN)	0	990
	Florida
Army	Eglin Air Force Base	BARRACKS	91,000	50,000
Army	Naval Air Station Key West	COMMAND & CONTROL FACILITY (INC)	50,000	50,000
	Georgia
Army	Fort Benning	CAMP MERRILL BARRACKS (DESIGN)	0	3,800
Army	Fort Gillem	EVIDENCE STORAGE BUILDING	166,000	45,000
Army	Fort Gordon	CYBER FACULTY OPERATIONS AND AUDITORIUM FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	6,100
	Germany
Army	U.S. Army Garrison Ansbach	VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP	92,000	92,000
Army	U.S. Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	KNOWN DISTANCE RANGE	9,800	9,800
Army	U.S. Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	LIVE FIRE EXERCISE SHOOTHOUSE	13,200	13,200
Army	U.S. Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP	39,000	39,000
	Guam
Army	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, EIAMD, PHASE 2 (INC)	33,000	33,000
	Hawaii
Army	Pohakuloa Training Area	AIRFIELD OPERATIONS BUILDING	0	20,000
Army	Schofield Barracks	MCA WILDLAND FIRE STATION (DESIGN)	0	2,100
	Illinois
Army	Rock Island Arsenal	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	0	50,000
Army	Rock Island Arsenal	FORGING EQUIPMENT ANNEX (DESIGN)	0	5,000
	Indiana
Army	Crane Army Ammunition Plant	PYROTECHNIC PRODUCTION FACILITY	161,000	72,000
	Kansas
Army	Fort Riley	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER	0	26,000
Army	Fort Riley	AUTOMATED INFANTRY PLATOON BATTLE COURSE	13,200	13,200
Army	Fort Riley	BARRACKS (DESIGN)	0	16,000
	Kentucky
Army	Fort Campbell	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER	0	45,000
Army	Fort Campbell	BARRACKS	112,000	40,000
Army	Fort Campbell	FLIGHT CONTROL TOWER	0	55,000
	Maryland
Army	Aberdeen Proving Ground	APPLIED SCIENCE CENTER, ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND (DESIGN)	0	8,000
	New York
Army	Fort Drum	AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION DESIGN)	0	9,824
Army	Fort Drum	ORTC TRANSIENT TRAINING BARRACKS (DEISGN)	0	8,655
Army	Fort Drum	RANGE 41C, AUTOMATED RECORD FIRE PLUS RANGE (DESIGN)	0	2,500
Army	Fort Hamilton	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	31,000	31,000
Army	Watervliet Arsenal	ELECTRICAL SWITCHING STATION	29,000	29,000
	North Carolina
Army	Fort Bragg	AUTOMATED INFANTRY PLATOON BATTLE COURSE	19,000	19,000
Army	Fort Bragg	COST TO COMPLETE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR	24,000	24,000
	Oklahoma
Army	McAlester Army Ammunition Plant	COST TO COMPLETE—AMMUNITION DEMOLITION SHOP	55,000	55,000
	Pennsylvania
Army	Letterkenny Army Depot	DEFENSE ACCESS ROADS	7,500	7,500
Army	Letterkenny Army Depot	GUIDED MISSILE MAINTENANCE BUILDING	84,000	84,000
Army	Tobyhanna Army Depot	RADAR TEST RANGE EXPANSION	68,000	68,000
	Republic of the Marshall Islands
Army	U.S. Army Garrison Kwajalein	AIRFIELD APRON & TAXIWAY REPAIR	0	161,000
	South Carolina
Army	Fort Jackson	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	51,000	51,000
	Texas
Army	Corpus Christi Army Depot	COST TO COMPLETE—POWERTRAIN FACILITY (ENGINE ASSEMBLY)	60,000	60,000
Army	Red River Army Depot	COST TO COMPLETE—COMPONENT REBUILD SHOP	93,000	48,000
	Washington
Army	Joint Base Lewis-McChord	COMMAND & CONTROL FACILITY	128,000	55,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	287,557	287,557
Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION ($6,159,744 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	6,459,744
Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	HOST NATION SUPPORT	46,031	46,031
Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	PDI: INDOPACOM MINOR CONSTRUCTION PILOT	68,453	68,453
Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	79,218	79,218

Subtotal Military Construction, Army	2,173,959	8,477,672

NAVY & MARINE CORPS
	Arizona
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Air Station Yuma	UDP TRANSIENT BARRACKS (DESIGN)	0	6,700
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Air Station Yuma	WATER TREATMENT PLANT (DESIGN)	0	26,100
	Australia
Navy & Marine Corps	Royal Australian Air Force Base Darwin	PDI: AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON (INC)	190,630	190,630
	Bahrain
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Support Activity Bahrain	COST TO COMPLETE—FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY & TOC	42,000	42,000
	California
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton	COMMUNICATION CENTER (AREA 52)	18,480	18,480
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton	FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONSE STATION	0	43,800
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton	MESS HALL & ARMORY (AREA 43)	108,740	22,740
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Lemoore	STRIKE FIGHTER CENTER OF EXCELLENCE PACIFIC (INC)	55,542	55,542
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Coronado	FORD CLASS CVN INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES, PIER LIMA	103,000	24,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Coronado	UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING	0	199,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base San Diego	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	86,820	86,820
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base San Diego	RECONNGURABLE CYBER LABORATORY	0	68,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Ventura County	COMMUNITY & AIRFIELD AREA FLOOD PROTECTION	0	104,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu	COST TO COMPLETE—MQ–25 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR	71,200	71,200
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Support Activity Monterey	NAVAL INNOVATION CENTER (INC)	30,000	30,000
	Connecticut
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Submarine Base New London	WEAPONS MAGAZINE & ORDNANCE OPERATIONS FACILITY	30,000	30,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Submarine Base New London	SUBMARINE PIER 8 REPLACEMENT	0	225,000
	District of Columbia
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Barracks Washington (8th Street & I)	BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS & SUPPORT FACILITY (INC)	65,900	65,900
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Research Laboratory	BIOMOLECULAR SCIENCE & SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY LABORATORY	0	157,000
	Djibouti
Navy & Marine Corps	Camp Lemmonier	ELECTRICAL POWER PLANT (INC)	51,600	51,600
	Florida
Navy & Marine Corps	Cape Canaveral Space Force Station	COST TO COMPLETE—ENGINEERING TEST FACILITY	15,600	15,600
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Pensacola	CONSOLIDATED "A" SCHOOL DORMITORY	0	164,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Whiting Field	ADVANCED HELICOPTER TRAINING SYSTEM HANGAR (INC)	98,505	98,505
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Whiting Field	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (DESIGN)	0	3,000
	Georgia
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay	TRIDENT REFIT FACILITY EXPANSION—COLUMBIA (INC)	119,030	119,030
	Guam
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	BLK V VA CLASS OPERATIONAL STORAGE FACILITY	0	103,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	NEX COLD STORAGE WAREHOUSE	0	62,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Andersen Air Force Base	PDI: JOINT CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS CENTER (INC)	181,124	121,124
Navy & Marine Corps	Andersen Air Force Base	PDI: WATER WELLS	70,070	70,070
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: COST TO COMPLETE—X-RAY WHARF BERTH	31,000	31,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: JOINT COMMUNICATION UPGRADE (INC)	158,600	83,600
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: MISSILE INTEGRATION TEST FACILITY (INC)	87,270	87,270
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Guam	PDI: INNER APRA HARBOR RESILIENCY	105,950	105,950
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Guam North Finegayan Telecommunications Site	PDI: ARTILLERY BATTERY FACILITIES (INC)	64,774	64,774
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Guam North Finegayan Telecommunications Site	PDI: RECYCLE CENTER	61,010	61,010
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	POLARIS POINT ECP UPGRADE	0	35,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	POLARIS POINT ECP UPGRADE	0	587,020
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	SATELLITE FIRE STATION	0	23,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	SUBMARINE MAINTENANCE FACILITY PHASES 1–3	0	537,100
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE & ACCESS ROAD	0	32,000
	Hawaii
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	DDG–1000 SHIP SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES	83,000	83,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	DRY DOCK 3 REPLACEMENT (INC)	553,720	492,720
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	WATER TREATMENT PLANT (INC)	141,650	141,650
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay	ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION MODERNIZATION	0	94,250
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay	MAIN GATE ENTRY REPLACEMENT	0	49,260
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay	WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY COMPLIANCE UPGRADE (INC)	108,350	37,350
Navy & Marine Corps	Pacific Missile Range Facility Barking Sands	PDI: AIRFIELD PAVEMENT UPGRADES	235,730	65,730
	Japan
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Camp Smedley D. Butler	PDI: SCHOOL AGE CARE CENTERS	58,000	58,000
	Maine
Navy & Marine Corps	Portsmouth Naval Shipyard	MULTI-MISSION DRYDOCK #1 EXTENSION (INC)	220,793	220,793
Navy & Marine Corps	Portsmouth Naval Shipyard	POWER RELIABILITY & WATER RESILIENCE UPGRADES (INC)	227,769	227,769
	Maryland
Navy & Marine Corps	National Maritime Intelligence Center	FOREIGN MATERIALS EXPLOITATION LAB	114,000	73,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Support Facility Indian Head	CONT AINED BURN FACILITY	0	65,000
Navy & Marine Corps	US Naval Academy Annapolis	STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES	0	86,000
	Nevada
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Fallon	RANGE TRAINING COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS	47,000	47,000
	North Carolina
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point	F–35 AIRCRAFT SUSTAINMENT CTR (INC)	200,000	40,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point	FLIGHTLINE UTILITIES MODERNIZATION, PHASE 2 (DESIGN)	0	15,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune	AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT VEHICLE SHELTERS	0	48,280
	Pennsylvania
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Support Activity Mechanicsburg	MACHINERY CONTROL DEVELOPMENT CENTER	0	88,000
	Rhode Island
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Newport	CONSOLIDATED RDT&E SYSTEMS FACILITY	0	40,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Newport	NEXT GENERATION SECURE SUBMARINE PLATFORM FACILITY	0	73,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Newport	NEXT GENERATION TORPEDO INTEGRATION LAB	0	37,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Newport	SUBMARINE PAYLOAD INTEGRATION LABORATORY	0	40,000
	South Carolina
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Base Charleston	NUCLEAR POWER TRAINING FACILITY SIMULATION EXPANSION (INC)	65,400	65,400
	Virginia
Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story	COST TO COMPLETE—CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	12,360	12,360
Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Base Quantico	WATER TREATMENT PLANT	63,560	63,560
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Norfolk	COST TO COMPLETE—CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	11,700	11,700
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Norfolk	ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM UPGRADES (INC)	93,307	93,307
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Norfolk	MQ–25 AIRCRAFT LAYDOWN FACILITIES	20,430	20,430
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Station Norfolk	PPV UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING INVESTMENT	380,000	380,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Weapons Station Yorktown	WEAPONS MAGAZINES (INC)	71,758	71,758
Navy & Marine Corps	Norfolk Naval Shipyard	DRY DOCK 3 MODERNIZATION (INC)	188,576	188,576
	Washington
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Air Station Whidbey Island	EA–18G GROWLER MAINTENANCE FACILITY	0	75,000
Navy & Marine Corps	Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor	TRIDENT REFIT FACILITY WAREHOUSE	245,700	95,700
Navy & Marine Corps	Puget Sound Naval Shipyard	COST TO COMPLETE—CVN 78 AIRCRAFT CARRIER ELECTRICAL UPGRADES	48,800	48,800
	Worldwide Unspecified
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DATA PROCESSING FACILITY	57,190	57,190
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	562,423	562,423
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (NAVY) ($3,991,438 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	4,191,438
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (MARINE CORPS) ($2,079,890 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	2,179,890
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM	162,855	162,855
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	JOINT MARITIME FACILITY	72,430	72,430
Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	119,331	119,331

Subtotal Military Construction, Navy & Marine Corps	6,012,677	14,517,515


AIR FORCE
	Alaska
Air Force	Eielson Air Force Base	COAL THAW SHED ADDITION (DESIGN)	0	1,750
Air Force	Eielson Air Force Base	CONSOLIDATED MUNITIONS COMPLEX (DESIGN)	0	13,200
Air Force	Eielson Air Force Base	JOINT PACIFIC ALASKA RANGE COMPLEX OPERATIONS FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	8,040
Air Force	Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson	JOINT INTEGRATED TEST & TRAINING CENTER (INC)	152,000	82,000
	Arizona
Air Force	Davis-Monthan Air Force Base	COMMUNICATIONS HEADQUARTERS FACILITY	49,000	49,000
Air Force	Davis-Monthan Air Force Base	MC–130J HANGAR/AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE UNIT	125,000	50,000
Air Force	Luke Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	0	45,000
	California
Air Force	Travis Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	60,000	60,000
	Diego Garcia
Air Force	Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia	OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITY	29,000	29,000
	Florida
Air Force	Cape Canaveral Space Force Station	INSTALL WASTE WATER "FORCE" MAIN, ICBM ROAD	11,400	11,400
Air Force	Cape Canaveral Space Force Station	INSTALL WATER MAIN, ICBM ROAD	10,400	10,400
Air Force	Cape Canaveral Space Force Station	PHILLIPS PARKWAY HAUL ROUTE	28,000	28,000
Air Force	Eglin Air Force Base	350TH SPECTRUM WARFARE WING (DESIGN)	0	3,300
Air Force	Eglin Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER WITH LAND ACQUISITION	41,000	41,000
Air Force	Eglin Air Force Base	F–35A ADAL SQUADRON OPERATIONS	23,000	23,000
Air Force	Eglin Air Force Base	F–35A DEVELOPMENTAL TEST 2–BAY MX HANGAR	52,000	52,000
Air Force	Eglin Air Force Base	F–35A DEVELOPMENTAL TEST 2–BAY TEST HANGAR	50,000	50,000
Air Force	Hurlburt Field	361 ISRG MISSION OPERATIONS FACILITY	0	66,000
Air Force	MacDill Air Force Base	KC–46A ADAL AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR 2	30,000	30,000
Air Force	MacDill Air Force Base	KC–46A ADAL AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR 3	33,000	33,000
Air Force	MacDill Air Force Base	KC–46A GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE	11,000	11,000
Air Force	Tyndall Air Force Base	FIRE/CRASH RESCUE STATION	0	48,000
	Georgia
Air Force	Moody Air Force Base	23RD SECURITY FORCES SQUADRON OPS FACILITY	0	35,000
Air Force	Moody Air Force Base	MILITARY WORKING DOG KENNEL	0	14,500
Air Force	Robins Air Force Base	AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER	28,000	28,000
	Germany
Air Force	Ramstein Air Base	35 POINT INDOOR FIRING RANGE	44,000	44,000
Air Force	Ramstein Air Base	AEROMEDICAL EVACUATION COMPOUND	29,000	0
	Greenland
Air Force	Pituffik Space Base	RUNWAY APPROACH LANDING SYSTEM	32,000	32,000
	Hawaii
Air Force	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	COMBINED OPERATIONS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	5,000
	Japan
Air Force	Kadena Air Base	PDI: THEATER A/C CORROSION CONTROL CENTER (INC)	66,350	66,350
	Louisiana
Air Force	Barksdale Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (DESIGN)	0	2,200
Air Force	Barksdale Air Force Base	WEAPONS GENERATION FACILITIES DORMITORY	116,000	18,000
	Maryland
Air Force	Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling	LARGE VEHICLE INSPECTION STATION	0	50,000
	Massachusetts
Air Force	Hanscom Air Force Base	FIRE STATION	55,000	55,000
	Mississippi
Air Force	Columbus Air Force Base	WATER TANK STORAGE	0	14,200
	Missouri
Air Force	Whiteman Air Force Base	B–21 ADAL WEAPONS RELEASE SYSTEM STORAGE	13,600	13,600
Air Force	Whiteman Air Force Base	B–21 RADIO FREQUENCY HANGAR	114,000	20,000
	Montana
Air Force	Malmstrom Air Force Base	WEAPONS STORAGE & MAINTENANCE FACILITY (INC)	60,000	60,000
	Nebraska
Air Force	Offutt Air Force Base	SAOC BEDDOWN—1–BAY HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	1,900
Air Force	Offutt Air Force Base	SAOC BEDDOWN—2–BAY HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	16,000
Air Force	Offutt Air Force Base	SAOC BEDDOWN—SUPPLY STORAGE FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	7,350
	New Hampshire
Air Force	Pease Air Force Base	JOINT USE CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (DESIGN)	0	3,613
	New Jersey
Air Force	Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst	WELL NO. 5	0	11,500
Air Force	Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst	WELL NO. 6	0	11,500
	New Mexico
Air Force	Cannon Air Force Base	192 BED DORMITORY (DESIGN)	0	9,000
Air Force	Cannon Air Force Base	DEPLOYMENT PROCESSING CENTER	0	79,000
Air Force	Cannon Air Force Base	DORMITORY	90,000	10,000
Air Force	Kirtland Air Force Base	58 SOW/PJ/CRO PIPELINE DORM	0	91,000
Air Force	Kirtland Air Force Base	COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER SIMULATOR	0	33,000
Air Force	Kirtland Air Force Base	EXPLOSIVE OPERATIONS BUILDING	0	26,000
Air Force	Kirtland Air Force Base	JOINT NAVIGATION WARFARE CENTER HEADQUARTERS (DESIGN)	0	6,200
Air Force	Kirtland Air Force Base	SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE HEADQUARTERS	83,000	83,000
	North Carolina
Air Force	Seymour Johnson Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	0	54,000
Air Force	Seymour Johnson Air Force Base	COMBAT ARMS TRAINING AND MAINTENANCE COMPLEX	0	41,000
	Norway
Air Force	Royal Norwegian Air Force Base Rygge	QUICK REACTION AIRCRAFT HANGAR	72,000	72,000
	Ohio
Air Force	Wright-Patterson Air Force Base	AI SUPERCOMPUTING CENTER (DESIGN)	0	2,800
Air Force	Wright-Patterson Air Force Base	HUMAN PERFORMANCE CENTER LAB	0	45,000
Air Force	Wright-Patterson Air Force Base	RUNWAY (DESIGN)	0	15,000
	Oklahoma
Air Force	Tinker Air Force Base	BOMBER AGILE COMMON HANGAR (INC)	127,000	15,000
Air Force	Tinker Air Force Base	CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER	54,000	54,000
Air Force	Tinker Air Force Base	E–7 SQUAD OPERATIONS CENTER	0	108,000
	South Dakota
Air Force	Ellsworth Air Force Base	B–21 ADD FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2	63,000	63,000
Air Force	Ellsworth Air Force Base	B–21 ALERT FACILITY	71,000	71,000
Air Force	Ellsworth Air Force Base	B–21 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SHELTERS	75,000	75,000
Air Force	Ellsworth Air Force Base	B–21 S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SHELTERS	88,000	88,000
Air Force	Ellsworth Air Force Base	B–21 W. ALERT APRON & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SHELTERS	81,000	81,000
	Tennessee
Air Force	Arnold Air Force Base	INSTALLATION ACP GATE 2 UPGRADE	0	17,500
	Texas
Air Force	Dyess Air Force Base	B–21 LOW OBSERVABLE CORROSION HANGAR AND THE MISSION PLANNING FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	24,700
Air Force	Dyess Air Force Base	B–21 MISSION PLANNING FACILITY	78,000	78,000
Air Force	Dyess Air Force Base	B–21 UTILITIES & SITE IMPROVEMENTS	12,800	12,800
Air Force	Dyess Air Force Base	GATE REPAIRS (DESIGN)	0	4,500
Air Force	Goodfellow Air Force Base	PIPELINE STUDENT DORMITORY	112,000	23,000
Air Force	Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland	BMT CLASSROOMS/DINING FACILITY 4 (INC)	79,000	29,000
	United Kingdom
Air Force	Royal Air Force Feltwell	RADR STORAGE FACILITY	20,000	20,000
Air Force	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	SURETY: COMMAND POST	104,000	10,000
Air Force	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	SURETY: DEFENDER OPERATIONS COMPOUND	149,000	10,000
	Utah
Air Force	Hill Air Force Base	F–35 MAINTENANCE FACILITY, PHASE 1 (INC)	22,000	22,000
Air Force	Hill Air Force Base	T–7A DEPOT MAINTENANCE COMPLEX (INC)	178,000	123,000
	Virginia
Air Force	Joint Base Langley-Eustis	FUEL SYSTEM MAINTENANCE DOCK	0	49,000
Air Force	Langley Air Force Base	192ND WING HEADQUARTERS (DESIGN)	0	3,200
	Washington
Air Force	Fairchild Air Force Base	ALTERATION AIRCRAFT PARTS WAREHOUSE (DESIGN)	0	2,500
	Worldwide Unspecified
Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	573,223	573,223
Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (AIR FORCE) ($3,093,331 TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	3,643,331
Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (SPACE FORCE) (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	557,175
Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM	123,800	123,800
Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	72,900	72,900
	Wyoming
Air Force	F.E. Warren Air Force Base	GBSD UTILITY CORRIDOR (INC)	130,000	130,000

Subtotal Military Construction, Air Force	3,721,473	7,906,432


DEFENSE-WIDE
	Alabama
Defense-Wide	DLA Distribution Center Anniston	GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE	32,000	32,000
	California
Defense-Wide	Armed Forces Reserve Center Mountain View	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	20,600
Defense-Wide	Naval Base Coronado	SOF SEAL TEAM SEVENTEEN OPERATIONS FACILITY	0	75,900
Defense-Wide	Travis Air Force Base	MEDICAL WAREHOUSE ADDITION	49,980	49,980
Defense-Wide	Travis Air Force Base	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	25,120
	Cuba
Defense-Wide	Naval Station Guantanamo Bay	HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT (INC 3)	35,794	35,794
	Florida
Defense-Wide	Homestead Air Reserve Base	SOF CLIMATE CONTROLLED TACTICAL STORAGE WAREHOUSE	0	33,000
Defense-Wide	Marine Corps Support Facility Blount Island	POWER GENERATION & ELECTRICAL INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE	0	30,500
	Georgia
Defense-Wide	Fort Benning	DEXTER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL	127,375	22,375
	Germany
Defense-Wide	Rhine Ordnance Barracks	MEDICAL CENTER REPLACEMENT (INC 12)	99,167	99,167
Defense-Wide	U.S. Army Garrison Ansbach	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	73,000
Defense-Wide	U.S. Army Garrison Rheinland-Pfalz	SOF HUMAN PERFORMANCE TRAINING CENTER	16,700	16,700
	Guam
Defense-Wide	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, COMMAND CENTER (INC)	183,900	88,900
Defense-Wide	Joint Region Marianas	PDI: GUAM DEFENSE SYSTEM, EIAMD, PHASE 1 (INC)	61,903	61,903
Defense-Wide	Joint Region Marianas	POWER RESILIENCY UPGRADES	0	53,000
Defense-Wide	Naval Base Guam	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	63,010
	Japan
Defense-Wide	Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	10,000
	Maryland
Defense-Wide	Fort Meade	NSAW EAST CAMPUS BUILDING #5 (INC 2)	455,000	395,000
Defense-Wide	Fort Meade	NSAW VENONA WIDENING	26,600	26,600
Defense-Wide	Walter Reed National Military Medical Center	MEDCEN ADDITION/ALTERATION (INC 9)	70,000	70,000
	Massachusetts
Defense-Wide	Cape Cod Space Force Station	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	10,000
	New Mexico
Defense-Wide	White Sands Missile Range	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	38,500
	North Carolina
Defense-Wide	Fort Bragg	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	80,000
Defense-Wide	Fort Bragg	SOF MISSION COMMAND CENTER	130,000	32,000
Defense-Wide	Fort Bragg	SOF OPERATIONAL AMMUNITION	0	65,000
Defense-Wide	Fort Bragg	SOF OPERATIONAL AMMUNITION SUPPLY POINT	80,000	80,000
Defense-Wide	Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune	SOF COMBAT SERIVCE SUPPORT/MOTOR TRANSPORT EXPANSION	0	34,000
Defense-Wide	Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune	SOF MARINE RAIDER BATTALION OPS FACILITY (INC)	90,000	90,000
	Pennsylvania
Defense-Wide	DLA Distribution Center Susquehanna	GENERAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE	90,000	90,000
Defense-Wide	Harrisburg Air National Guard Base	SOF SIMULATOR FACILITY (MC–130J)	13,400	13,400
	Puerto Rico
Defense-Wide	Punta Borinquen	RAMEY UNIT SCHOOL REPLACEMENT	155,000	41,000
	Texas
Defense-Wide	Camp Swift	SMART WATER GRID	0	19,800
Defense-Wide	Fort Hood	CENTRAL ENERGY PLANT	0	34,500
Defense-Wide	NSA Texas	NSA/CSS TEXAS CRYPTOLOGIC CENTER (INC)	500,000	147,327
	United Kingdom
Defense-Wide	Royal Air Force Lakenheath	HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT, PHASE 2 (INC)	322,200	47,200
Defense-Wide	Royal Air Force Mildenhall	SOF MRSP & PARTS STORAGE	45,000	45,000
	Utah
Defense-Wide	Camp Williams	POWER GENERATION & MICROGRID	0	28,500
	Virginia
Defense-Wide	Pentagon	OPERATIONS FACILITY	34,000	34,000
	Washington
Defense-Wide	Fairchild Air Force Base	HYDRANT SYSTEM AREA C	85,000	85,000
Defense-Wide	Manchester Tank Farm	BULK STORAGE TANKS, PHASE 3	71,000	71,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (DEFENSE-WIDE)	26,571	26,571
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (DHA)	29,077	29,077
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (DLA)	30,900	30,900
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (ERCIP)	38,669	38,669
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (MDA)	21,360	21,360
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (NSA)	14,842	14,842
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (SOCOM)	32,731	32,731
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (TJS)	2,000	2,000
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (WHS)	14,851	14,851
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	ENERGY RESILIENCE & CONSERVATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM	684,330	0
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	EXERCISE RELATED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	4,727	4,727
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM	77,000	77,000
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (DEFENSE-WIDE)	3,000	3,000
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (DLA)	3,084	3,084
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (MDA)	4,140	4,140
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (NSA)	6,000	6,000
Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION (SOCOM)	25,000	25,000

Subtotal Military Construction, Defense-Wide	3,792,301	2,702,728


ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
	Arizona
Army National Guard	Camp Navajo	BRIDGE (DESIGN)	0	4,000
	Guam
Army National Guard	Joint Forces Headquarters—Guam	READINESS CENTER ADDITION	55,000	55,000
	Illinois
Army National Guard	General Richard L. Jones National Guard Readiness Center	READINESS CENTER ALTERATION (DESIGN)	0	5,000
Army National Guard	Marseilles Training Center	RANGE CONTROL (DESIGN)	0	3,050
Army National Guard	Peoria Armory	READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	8,000
	Indiana
Army National Guard	Shelbyville Armory	AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION/ALTERATION	0	55,000
	Iowa
Army National Guard	Waterloo Armory	VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP	13,800	13,800
	Kentucky
Army National Guard	Jackson Field	VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP (DESIGN)	0	1,850
	Michigan
Army National Guard	Camp Grayling	ALL-DOMAIN WARFIGHTING TRAINING COMPLEX (DESIGN)	0	4,400
	Mississippi
Army National Guard	Camp Shelby	ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITY AND READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	11,600
Army National Guard	Meridian Readiness Center and Army Aviation Support Facility	ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	2,200
	Nevada
Army National Guard	Henderson Armory	ARMORY EXPANSION (DESIGN)	0	2,371
	New Hampshire
Army National Guard	Plymouth Training Center	READINESS CENTER	26,000	26,000
	New Mexico
Army National Guard	Santa Fe Training Center	SOLDIER PERFORMANCE READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	4,250
	New York
Army National Guard	Albany	READINESS CENTER	0	90,000
	North Carolina
Army National Guard	Salisbury Training Center	AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION/ALTERATION	0	69,000
	North Dakota
Army National Guard	Jamestown Armory	ARMORY (DESIGN)	0	5,200
	Oregon
Army National Guard	Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility Boardman	AUTOMATED MULTIPURPOSE MACHINE GUN (MPMG) RANGE	0	16,000
	South Dakota
Army National Guard	Watertown Training Center	VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP	28,000	28,000
	Tennessee
Army National Guard	Smyrna Training Site	AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	4,000
	Vermont
Army National Guard	Swanton Armory	READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	4,000
	Virginia
Army National Guard	Army Aviation Support Facility Sandston	COST TO COMPLETE—AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR	15,500	15,500
	Washington
Army National Guard	Fairchild Air Force Base	DINING FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	1,800
	Wisconsin
Army National Guard	Black River Falls	READINESS CENTER (DESIGN)	0	2,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Army National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	13,580	13,580
Army National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	1,275,984
Army National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	0	39,000

Subtotal Military Construction, Army National Guard	151,880	1,760,585


ARMY RESERVE
	Alabama
Army Reserve	Maxwell Gunter	AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY	0	28,000
	Alaska
Army Reserve	Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson	MAINTENANCE FACILITY	0	46,000
	Illinois
Army Reserve	Fort Sheridan	AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY	0	36,000
	Pennsylvania
Army Reserve	New Castle Army Reserve Center	AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY/VMS/LAND	30,000	30,000
	Texas
Army Reserve	Conroe Army Reserve Center	ROTARY-WING LANDING PAD & TAXIWAY	0	12,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Army Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	6,013	6,013
Army Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	504,922
Army Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	6,226	6,226

Subtotal Military Construction, Army Reserve	42,239	669,161


NAVY RESERVE & MARINE CORPS RESERVE
	Maine
Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	Portsmouth Naval Shipyard	PARKING CONSOLIDATION (DESIGN)	0	1,020
	Texas
Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth	AIRCRAFT HANGAR MODERNIZATION	0	106,870
	Worldwide Unspecified
Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	2,255	2,255
Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (MARINE CORPS RESERVE) (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	48,519
Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (NAVY RESERVE) (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	58,213

Subtotal Military Construction, Navy Reserve & Marine Corps Reserve	2,255	216,877


AIR NATIONAL GUARD
	Alaska
Air National Guard	Eielson Air Force Base	BCE PAVEMENTS & GROUNDS FACILITY	0	16,000
Air National Guard	Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson	BASE SUPPLY COMPLEX	46,000	46,000
	Georgia
Air National Guard	Savannah Combat Readiness Training Center	C130J CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	1,130
Air National Guard	Savannah Combat Readiness Training Center	TROOP CAMP (DESIGN)	0	3,800
Air National Guard	Savannah Hilton Head International Airport	C–130J CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY	0	11,400
Air National Guard	Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport	DINING HALL & SERVICES TRAIN FACILITY	27,000	27,000
	Illinois
Air National Guard	Scott Air Force Base	AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	6,000
	Indiana
Air National Guard	Fort Wayne International Airport	F16 MISSION TRAINING FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	18,000
	Iowa
Air National Guard	Sioux Gateway Airport	ADAL AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON	0	45,000
Air National Guard	Sioux Gateway Airport	EXTEND RUNWAY 13–31	0	47,000
Air National Guard	Sioux Gateway Airport	REPAIR RUNWAY 13–31	0	45,000
Air National Guard	Sioux Gateway Airport	WARM-UP / HOLDING PAD	0	11,000
	Maine
Air National Guard	Bangor Air National Guard Base	MENG 101ST ARW AMXS/AGE FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	2,500
	Maryland
Air National Guard	Warfield Air National Guard Base	ENGINE SOUND SUPPRESSOR EQUIPMENT (DESIGN)	0	1,000
	Massachusetts
Air National Guard	Otis Air National Guard Base	DINING FACILITY / EMEDS	31,000	31,000
	Michigan
Air National Guard	Selfridge Air National Guard Base	BRAVO RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT (DESIGN)	0	2,400
Air National Guard	Selfridge Air National Guard Base	RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (DESIGN)	0	9,000
Air National Guard	Selfridge Air National Guard Base	TAXIWAY ALPHA RUNWAY IMPROVEMENT (DESIGN)	0	2,800
	Mississippi
Air National Guard	Key Field Air National Guard Base	BASE SUPPLY WAREHOUSE	19,000	19,000
Air National Guard	Key Field Air National Guard Base	CORROSION CONTROL HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	6,700
	Nevada
Air National Guard	Reno-Tahoe International Airport	ENGINE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	3,200
Air National Guard	Reno-Tahoe International Airport	FUEL CELL HANGAR (DESIGN)	0	5,400
	New Hampshire
Air National Guard	Pease Air National Guard Base	SMALL ARMS RANGE	0	16,000
	New Jersey
Air National Guard	Atlantic City International Airport	MAINTENANCE HANGAR ADDITION PHASE 1	0	68,000
	Oregon
Air National Guard	Kingsley Field Air National Guard Base	ACADEMIC TRAINING CENTER (DESIGN)	0	8,000
Air National Guard	Klamath Falls Airport	F–35 FTU ACADEMIC TRAINING CENTER	0	80,000
Air National Guard	Portland International Airport	ADAL COMMUNICATIONS ANNEX	16,500	16,500
	Utah
Air National Guard	Salt Lake City International Airport	FUEL CELL CORROSION CONTROL HANGAR	0	73,000
Air National Guard	Salt Lake City International Airport	MAINT HANGAR & SHOPS	0	72,000
	West Virginia
Air National Guard	Mclaughlin Air National Guard Base	SQUADRON OPERATIONS FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	3,300
	Wisconsin
Air National Guard	Volk Air National Guard Base	ADAL ACS COMPLEX	0	8,400
	Worldwide Unspecified
Air National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	24,146	24,146
Air National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	549,496
Air National Guard	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	25,000	25,000

Subtotal Military Construction, Air National Guard	188,646	1,304,172


AIR FORCE RESERVE
	Delaware
Air Force Reserve	Dover Air Force Base	512TH OPERATIONS GROUP FACILITY	42,000	0
	New York
Air Force Reserve	Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station	COMBINED OPERATIONS FACILITY	0	54,000
	South Carolina
Air Force Reserve	Joint Base Charleston Air Reserve Base	MEDICAL FACILITY ADDITION 307BW	0	33,000
	Texas
Air Force Reserve	Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland	C5M AGE MAINTENANCE FACILITY	18,000	18,000
	Virginia
Air Force Reserve	Joint Base Langley-Eustis	TARGETING ISR CRITICAL COMMUNICATIONS DATA FACILITY (DESIGN)	0	15,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Air Force Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	270	270
Air Force Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FACILITIES, SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION (TRANSFERRED FROM O&M)	0	188,802
Air Force Reserve	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION	188	188

Subtotal Military Construction, Air Force Reserve	60,458	309,260

NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
	Worldwide Unspecified
NATO	NATO Security Investment Program	NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM	481,832	531,832

Subtotal NATO Security Investment Program	481,832	531,832


INDOPACIFIC COMBATANT COMMAND
	Worldwide Unspecified
MILCON, INDOPACOM	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM	0	150,000

Subtotal INDOPACOM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM	0	150,000


TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION	16,627,720	38,546,234

FAMILY HOUSING
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
	Belgium
Fam Hsg Con, Army	Chièvres Air Base	FAMILY HOUSING NEW CONSTRUCTION (100 UNITS)	145,042	45,042
	Germany
Fam Hsg Con, Army	U.S. Army Garrison Bavaria	FAMILY HOUSING REPLACEMENT CONSTRUCTION (27 UNITS)	50,692	50,692
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg Con, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	32,824	32,824

Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Army	228,558	128,558


FAMILY HOUSING O&M, ARMY
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FURNISHINGS	16,254	16,254
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT	41,089	41,089
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	LEASED HOUSING	116,275	116,275
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MAINTENANCE	110,941	110,941
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MANAGEMENT	41,450	41,450
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MISCELLANEOUS	319	319
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	SERVICES	8,096	8,096
Fam Hsg O&M, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UTILITIES	43,994	43,994

Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Army	378,418	378,418


FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, NAVY & MARINE CORPS
	Guam
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	COST TO COMPLETE—REPLACE ANDERSEN HOUSING, PHASE 4 (68 UNITS)	19,384	19,384
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	COST TO COMPLETE—REPLACE ANDERSEN HOUSING, PHASE 7 (46 UNITS)	18,000	18,000
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Joint Region Marianas	REPLACE ANDERSEN HOUSING, PHASE 9 (136 UNITS) (INC)	65,378	65,378
	Japan
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni	REPAIR WHOLE HOUSE BUILDING 1255 (6 UNITS)	11,230	11,230
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	3,806	3,806
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN (DPRI/GUAM)	2,799	2,799
Fam Hsg Con, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	NAVY SOUTHEAST MHPI (2ND RESTRUCTURE) (100 UNITS)	57,000	57,000

Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Navy & Marine Corps	177,597	177,597


FAMILY HOUSING O&M, NAVY & MARINE CORPS
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FURNISHINGS	16,820	16,820
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT	57,061	57,061
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	LEASING	68,426	68,426
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MAINTENANCE	112,019	112,019
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MANAGEMENT	56,956	56,956
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MISCELLANEOUS	435	435
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	SERVICES	17,424	17,424
Fam Hsg O&M, Navy & Marine Corps	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UTILITIES	44,967	44,967

Subtotal Family Housing Operation & Maintenance, Navy & Marine Corps	374,108	374,108

FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
	Colorado
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force	Buckley Air Force Base	MHPI RESTRUCTURE (351 UNITS)	12,000	12,000
	Hawaii
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force	Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam	MHPI RESTRUCTURE (460 UNITS)	147,555	147,555
	Japan
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force	Kadena Air Base	FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENTS, KADENA TOWER 4511 (68 UNITS)	34,100	34,100
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force	Yokota Air Base	FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENTS, PAIP 9, PHASE 3 (34 UNITS)	44,000	44,000
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg Con, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	DESIGN	36,575	36,575

Subtotal Family Housing Construction, Air Force	274,230	274,230


FAMILY HOUSING O&M, AIR FORCE
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FURNISHINGS	31,275	31,275
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	HOUSING PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT	38,987	38,987
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	LEASING	5,436	5,436
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MAINTENANCE	142,572	142,572
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MANAGEMENT	54,581	54,581
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MISCELLANEOUS	1,475	1,475
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	SERVICES	12,701	12,701
Fam Hsg O&M, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UTILITIES	72,738	72,738

Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Air Force	359,765	359,765


FAMILY HOUSING O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE
	Worldwide Unspecified
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FURNISHINGS (DIA)	553	553
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	FURNISHINGS (NSA)	93	93
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	LEASING (DIA)	33,911	33,911
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	LEASING (NSA)	14,320	14,320
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	MAINTENANCE (NSA)	37	37
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UTILITIES (DIA)	4,445	4,445
Fam Hsg O&M, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	UTILITIES (NSA)	15	15

Subtotal Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Defense-Wide	53,374	53,374


FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND
	Worldwide Unspecified
Family Housing Improvement Fund	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES—FHIF	8,315	8,315

Subtotal Family Housing Improvement Fund	8,315	8,315


UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND
	Worldwide Unspecified
Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES—UHIF	497	497

Subtotal Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund	497	497


TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING	1,854,862	1,754,862
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, ARMY
	Worldwide Unspecified
BRAC, Army	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE	171,870	171,870

Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure—Army	171,870	171,870


BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, NAVY
	Worldwide Unspecified
BRAC, Navy	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE	112,791	112,791

Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure—Navy	112,791	112,791


BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, AIR FORCE
	Worldwide Unspecified
BRAC, Air Force	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE	124,196	124,196

Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure—Air Force	124,196	124,196


BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE, DEFENSE-WIDE
	Worldwide Unspecified
BRAC, Defense-Wide	Unspecified Worldwide Locations	BASE REALIGNMENT & CLOSURE	1,304	1,304

Subtotal Base Realignment and Closure—Defense-Wide	1,304	1,304

TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE	410,161	410,161

TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC	18,892,743	40,711,257

SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS(In Thousands of Dollars)
Program	FY 2026 Request	Senate Authorized
Discretionary Summary by Appropriation
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriation Summary:
Energy Programs
Nuclear Energy	160,000	160,000

Atomic Energy Defense Activities
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Weapons Activities	20,074,400	21,831,587
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation	2,284,600	2,238,653
Naval Reactors	2,346,000	2,247,000
Federal Salaries and Expenses	555,000	555,000
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration	25,260,000	26,872,240

Defense Environmental Cleanup	6,956,000	6,961,000

Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D	278,000	0

Other Defense Activities	1,182,000	1,182,000

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities	33,676,000	35,015,250

Total, Discretionary Funding	33,836,000	35,175,250



Nuclear Energy
Safeguards and security	160,000	160,000
Total, Nuclear Energy	160,000	160,000

National Nuclear Security Administration

Weapons Activities
Stockpile management
Stockpile major modernization
B61–12 Life Extension Program	16,000	16,000
W80–4 Life extension program	1,259,048	1,259,048
SLCM-N Warhead	0	186,000
Restoration of full funding for Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile Warhead		(186,000)
W87–1 Modification Program	649,096	770,283
Restoration of management reserve for program stabilization		(121,187)
W93	806,797	781,797
Program decrease		(–25,000)
B61–13	49,357	49,357
Subtotal, Stockpile major modernization	2,780,298	3,062,485
Stockpile sustainment	1,720,200	1,620,200
Program decrease		(–100,000)
Weapons dismantlement and disposition	82,367	87,367
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(–20,000)
Harvesting dismantlement for stockpile modernization		(25,000)
Production operations	1,020,243	1,020,243
Nuclear enterprise assurance	117,193	98,193
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(–19,000)
Total, Stockpile management	5,720,301	5,888,488

Production Modernization
Primary Capability Modernization
Plutonium Modernization
Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization
Los Alamos Pit Production	982,263	982,263
21–D–512 Plutonium Pit Production Project, LANL	509,316	509,316
15–D–302 TA–55 Reinvestments Project, Phase 3, LANL	7,942	7,942
07–D–220-04 Transuranic Liquid Waste Facility, LANL	5,865	5,865
Subtotal, Los Alamos Plutonium Modernization	1,505,386	1,505,386
Savannah River Plutonium Modernization
Savannah River Pit Production	75,486	75,486
21–D–511 Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility, SRS	1,130,000	1,130,000
Subtotal, Savannah River Plutonium Modernization	1,205,486	1,205,486
Enterprise Plutonium Support	122,094	122,094
Total, Plutonium Modernization	2,832,966	2,832,966
High Explosives & Energetics
High Explosives & Energetics	132,023	156,023
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(24,000)
21–D–510 HE Synthesis, Formulation, and Production, PX	0	125,000
Project Continuation		(125,000)
PFAS Binder Mitigation and Future Alternatives		(60,000)
Subtotal, High Explosives & Energetics	132,023	341,023
Total, Primary Capability Modernization	2,964,989	3,173,989
Secondary Capability Modernization
Secondary Capability Modernization	770,186	1,052,186
Depleted uranium risk reduction		(145,000)
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(137,000)
18–D–690 Lithium Processing Facility, Y–12	0	150,000
Project Continuation		(150,000)
06–D–141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y–12	0	830,000
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(830,000)
Total, Secondary Capability Modernization	770,186	2,032,186
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program
Tritium and Defense Fuels Program	568,384	568,384
18–D–650 Tritium Finishing Facility, SRS	0	35,000
Program increase		(35,000)
Total, Tritium and Domestic Uranium Enrichment	568,384	603,384
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization	221,588	190,588
Program decrease		(–31,000)
26–D–511 MESA Photolithography Capability (MPC), SNL	40,000	40,000
26–D–510 Product Realization Infrastructure for Stockpile Modernization (PRISM), LLNL	15,000	15,000
Total, Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization	276,588	245,588
Capability Based Investments	177,996	153,996
Program decrease		(–24,000)
Warhead Assembly Modernization	34,336	34,336
Total, Production Modernization	4,792,479	6,243,479

Stockpile research, technology, and engineering
Assessment Science
Assessment Science	980,959	992,959
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(–97,000)
Plutonium aging and mitigation; high explosives evaluation and alternate pathways development		(109,000)
26–D–512 LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP), LANL	20,000	20,000
Total, Assessment Science	1,000,959	1,012,959
Engineering and integrated assessments
Engineering and Integrated Assessments	399,777	473,777
Establishment of Rapid Capabilities Development Office		(12,000)
Phase 1 study support		(36,000)
Realignment of improperly applied reconciliation funds		(26,000)
26–D–513 Combined Radiation Environments for Survivability Testing, SNL	52,248	52,248
Total, Engineering and Integrated Assessments	452,025	526,025
Inertial Confinement Fusion
Inertial Confinement Fusion	699,206	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	750,206
Advanced simulation and computing	865,995	865,995
Weapons technology and manufacturing maturation	276,279	276,279
Total, Stockpile research, technology, and engineering	3,320,464	3,431,464

Academic Programs	94,000	94,000

Infrastructure and operations
Operating
Operations of facilities	1,722,000	1,642,000
Program decrease		(–80,000)
Safety and Environmental Operations	194,360	194,360
Maintenance and Repair of Facilities	920,000	1,061,000
Program decrease		(–50,000)
Deferred maintenance buy-down		(191,000)
Recapitalization	741,179	935,000
Program decrease		(–31,179)
Deferred maintenance buy-down		(225,000)
Total, Operating	3,577,539	3,832,360
Total, Infrastructure and operations	3,577,539	3,832,360

Secure transportation asset
Operations and equipment	299,541	269,541
Program decrease		(–30,000)
Program direction	149,244	149,244
Total, Secure transportation asset	448,785	418,785

Defense nuclear security
Operations and maintenance	1,245,418	1,200,418
Program decrease		(–45,000)
Construction:
Total, Defense nuclear security	1,245,418	1,200,418

Information Technology and Cybersecurity	811,208	658,387
Program decrease		(–152,821)
Legacy Contractor Pensions and Settlement Payments	64,206	64,206
Total, Weapons Activities	20,074,400	21,831,587

Total, Weapons Activities	20,074,400	21,831,587


Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
Material Management and Minimization
Reactor conversion and uranium supply	63,383	63,383
Nuclear material removal and elimination	61,000	38,000
Program decrease		(–23,000)
Plutonium disposition	150,686	150,686
Total, Material Management and Minimization	275,069	252,069
Global Material Security
International nuclear security	62,865	62,865
Radiological security	186,406	186,406
Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence	140,601	140,601
Total, Global Material Security	389,872	389,872
Nonproliferation and Arms Control	221,008	221,008
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D
Proliferation detection	269,376	269,376
Nonproliferation stewardship program	149,383	124,383
Program decrease		(–25,000)
Nuclear detonation detection	307,435	309,488
Restoral of orbital sensors	0	(2,053)
Forensics R&D	20,460	20,460
Nonproliferation fuels development	0	0
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D	746,654	723,707
Nonproliferation Construction:
U.S. Construction
18–D–150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project, SRS	50,000	50,000
Total, Nonproliferation Construction	50,000	50,000
Legacy contractor pensions	20,993	20,993
Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program
Emergency Management	33,122	33,122
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation	596,878	596,878
Total, Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program	630,000	630,000
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation	2,333,596	2,287,649

Adjustments
Use of prior year balances	–39,574	–39,574
Cancellation of Prior Year Balances	–9,422	–9,422
Total, Adjustments	–48,996	–48,996

Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation	2,284,600	2,238,653


Naval Reactors
Naval reactors development	884,579	884,579
Columbia-Class reactor systems development	35,300	35,300
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure	703,581	703,581
Program direction	61,540	61,540
Construction:
14–D–901 Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project, NRF	526,000	427,000
Program decrease		(–99,000)
25–D–530 Naval Examination Acquisition Project	60,000	60,000
26–D–530 East Side Office Building	75,000	75,000
Total, Naval Reactors Construction	661,000	562,000
Total, Naval Reactors	2,346,000	2,247,000

Federal Salaries and Expenses
Program direction	555,000	555,000
Total, Federal Salaries and Expenses	555,000	555,000

TOTAL, National Nuclear Security Administration	25,260,000	26,872,240

Defense Environmental Cleanup
Closure sites administration	500	500
Richland
River corridor and other cleanup operations	68,562	68,562
Central plateau remediation	754,259	754,259
Richland community and regulatory support	10,700	10,700
22–D–402 L–897 200 Area Water Treatment Facility	4,000	4,000
Total, Richland	837,521	837,521

Office of River Protection:
Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning	390,415	390,415
Tank Farm Activities	923,212	923,212
Construction:
23–D–403 Hanford 200 West Area Tank Farms Risk Management Project	108,200	108,200
15–D–409 Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System	78,600	78,600
01–D–416: Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant, RL	600,000	600,000
Subtotal, Construction	786,800	786,800
Total, Office of River Protection	2,100,427	2,100,427

Idaho National Laboratory:
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition	452,242	452,242
Idaho community and regulatory support	3,779	3,779
Construction:
22–D–403 Idaho Spent Nuclear Fuel Staging Facility	2,000	2,000
22–D–402 Calcine Construction	2,000	2,000
Subtotal, Construction	4,000	4,000
Total, Idaho National Laboratory	460,021	460,021

NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory	1,955	1,955
Separations Processing Research Unit	950	950
Nevada	64,835	64,835
Sandia National Laboratory	1,030	1,030
Los Alamos National Laboratory	278,288	278,288
Los Alamos Excess Facilities D&D	1,693	1,693
Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites	348,751	348,751

Oak Ridge Reservation:
OR Nuclear Facility D&D	346,562	346,562
U233 Disposition Program	63,000	63,000
OR cleanup and waste disposition	75,000	75,000
Construction:
14–D–403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility	34,885	34,885
17–D–401 On-site Waste Disposal Facility	15,050	15,050
Subtotal, Construction	49,935	49,935
OR reservation community & regulatory support	5,900	5,900
OR technology development and deployment	3,300	3,300
Total, Oak Ridge Reservation	543,697	543,697

Savannah River Site:
Savannah River risk management operations	396,394	396,394
Savannah River community and regulatory support	5,317	10,317
Payment in lieu of taxes		(5,000)
Savannah River National Laboratory O&M	90,719	90,719
Construction:
20-D–401 Saltstone Disposal Unit #10, 11, 12	52,500	52,500
19–D–701: SR Security Systems Replacement	708	708
Subtotal, Construction	53,208	53,208
Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition	1,066,000	1,066,000
Total, Savannah River Site	1,611,638	1,616,638

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant	413,424	413,414
Construction:
21–D–401: Hoisting Capability Project	2,000	2,000
Total, Construction	2,000	2,000
Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant	415,424	415,424

Program direction	312,818	312,818
Program support	20,320	20,320
Safeguards and Security—Defense Environmental Cleanup	288,871	288,871
Technology development and deployment	16,012	16,012
Subtotal, Defense Environmental Cleanup	6,956,000	6,961,000

TOTAL, Defense Environmental Cleanup	6,956,000	6,961,000

Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D	278,000	0
Program Reduction		(–278,000)

Other Defense Activities
Environment, health, safety and security
Environment, health, safety and security mission support	141,908	141,908
Program direction	90,555	90,555
Total, Environment, health, safety and security	232,463	232,463

Office of Enterprise Assessments
Enterprise assessments	30,022	30,022
Program direction	59,132	59,132
Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments	89,154	89,154

Specialized security activities	441,000	441,000

Legacy Management
Legacy Management Activities—Defense	177,716	177,716
Program Direction	22,542	22,542
Total, Legacy Management	200,258	200,258

Defense-Related Administrative Support	214,626	214,626

Office of Hearings and Appeals	4,499	4,499
Subtotal, Other Defense Activities	1,182,000	1,182,000
Total, Other Defense Activities	1,182,000	1,182,000