Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

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

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1735

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]


                                     



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

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

  

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1735

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

                                     



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

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

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

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

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

                                _______
                                

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

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1735]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

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

                       PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

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

                    RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

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

Reforming the Department Of Defense

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

Resources for Warfighters and Families

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

Readiness, Force Structure, and Support to Ongoing Military Operations

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

Addressing emerging threats and challenges

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

                                HEARINGS

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

                           COMMITTEE POSITION

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

                EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

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

            RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS

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

          SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS IN THE BILL

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

                      BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION

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

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


AH-64 Apache helicopter multi-year production contract

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

Armed aerial scout rotorcraft

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

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

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

Improved MQ-1C Gray Eagle modifications

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

                       Missile Procurement, Army


                                Overview

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

        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Bradley Fighting Vehicles

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

Combat vehicle industrial base management

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

Hercules recovery vehicle

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

M1 Abrams tank fleet configuration

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

M240 production and industrial base sustainment

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

Modular Handgun System

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

Small arms production industrial base

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

Stryker lethality upgrades

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

                    Procurement of Ammunition, Army


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Cost assessment of decommissioning lead-based ammunition and associated 
        components

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

Joint Hydra 70 guided rocket acquisition strategy

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

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

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

Small caliber ammunition industrial base

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

                        Other Procurement, Army


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Army radio modernization

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

Civil Support Team Information Management System

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

Mine resistant ambush protected family of vehicles enduring requirement

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

Personal protective equipment modernization and industrial base 
        sustainment

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

Rough Terrain Container Handler recapitalization

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

U.S. Army Europe garrison communications

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

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Airborne electronic attack low band transmitter consolidation

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

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

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

MQ-8 Fire Scout

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

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

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

V-22 for carrier on-board delivery

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

V-22 medical evacuation capability

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

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Joint Standoff Weapon sustainment

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

Tomahawk Block IV

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

            Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps


                                Overview

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

                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Advance procurement for Afloat Forward Staging Base

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

Air and Missile Defense Radar Testing evaluation

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

Amphibious ship construction

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

Coast Guard polar icebreaker

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

Joint High Speed Vessel Build Specification

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

National Defense Sealift Fund

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

Naval electric weapons systems fielding plan

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

Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement

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

Shipbuilding and industrial base

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

USS John F. Kennedy two-phase acquisition strategy

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

Virginia Payload Module

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

                        Other Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Aegis refurbishment and ship modernization

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

Air and Missile Defense Radar

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

Destroyer modernization

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

Littoral Combat Ship simulation training

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

Radar Obsolescence and Availability Recovery Upgrades

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

                       Procurement, Marine Corps


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Garrison Mobile Engineering Equipment

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

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


A-10 aircraft

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

Air National Guard wildfire assistance

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

Air refueling recapitalization strategy

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

Battlefield airborne communications node

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

C-130 modernization plan

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

C-130H modernization

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

EC-130H Compass Call aircraft

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

F-15 and F-16 spare engine shortfall

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

F-16 block 40/50 mission training center

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

F-35 aircraft program

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

Joint surveillance and target attack system sustainment report

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

KC-10

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

KC-46A quarterly report

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

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

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

UH-1N replacement program

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

                  Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force


                                Overview

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

                     Missile Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

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

                      Other Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Air Force Fire Emergency Services and Personal Protective Equipment

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

Civil engineers construction, surveying, and mapping equipment

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

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Procurement of Standard Missile-3 block IB interceptors

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


              Section 101--Authorization of Appropriations

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

                       Subtitle B--Army Programs


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

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

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

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

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

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

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs


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

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

    Section 122--Procurement Authority for Aircraft Carrier Programs

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

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                                OVERVIEW

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

           Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Acoustic mixing technology for energetic materials

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

Active protection system

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

Advanced tactical shelters

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

Army airborne networking radios

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

Army energy efficiency research and development programs

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

Army Warfighting Assessment and network experimentation activities

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

Ballistic resistant adaptive seating system

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

Composite barrel technology development

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

Detection and threat identification technologies

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

Fuel system survivability technology and standards

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

Geo-Enabled Mission Command Enterprise

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

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

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

Human performance research

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

Improved Turbine Engine Program

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

Indirect Fire Protection Capability

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

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Analysis Tool

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

Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile Program

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

Lethal Miniature Aerial Munition System

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

Lithium ion super-capacitors

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

Material development, characterization, and computational modeling

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

Medical evaluation of anthropomorphic data on vehicle blast testing

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

Mobile camouflage systems development

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

Next-Generation signature management system

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

Pacific Theater High Performance Computing capabilities

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

Rotorcraft Degraded Visual Environment

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

Simplified Army radio network

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

Situational awareness prototype Constellation for Countering Weapons of 
        Mass Destruction

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

Soldier Enhancement Program

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

Soldier Protection System and weight reduction technology

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

Technology for countering enemy unmanned aerial systems

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

Ultra-light combat tactical vehicle test and evaluation

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

Vehicle occupant protection technology development

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

           Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced Low Cost Munitions Ordnance

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

Anti-Submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel

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

Anti-surface warfare missile capability for Littoral Combat Ship

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

Automated Test and Retest

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

Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range

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

Continuation of Brimstone missile assessment

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

F414 engine noise reduction research and development

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

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

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

Fully homomorphic encryption

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

National Sea Based Deterrence Fund

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

Navy communications experimentation

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

Requirements maturation and developmental planning

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

Service life extension program for Auxiliary General Purpose 
        Oceanographic Research

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

Spectral Warrior

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

Tactical Combat Training System program

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

Unmanned carrier aviation

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

         Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Adaptive engine transition program

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

Advanced manufacturing for low-cost sustainment

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

Advanced pilot training family of systems

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

Air Force Minority Leaders Program

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

Airborne sensor data correlation

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

B-52 radar modernization program

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

Conformal phased array antennas

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

Digital polarimetric radar development

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

Experimentation program

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

F-16 active electronically scanned array radar upgrade

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

F-35 dual-capable aircraft development program

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

Fifth generation tactical data link enterprise

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

KC-135 auto throttles

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

KC-46 aerial refueling tanker aircraft program

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

Long-range strike bomber

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

Long-range strike bomber program

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

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

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

Next Generation Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System 
        operational concepts

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

Technology transfer

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

Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar

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

Wide area surveillance

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

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


                                Overview

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

                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced semiconductor platform

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

Assessment of the directed energy industrial base

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

Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office

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

Comptroller General review of advanced semiconductors and 
        microelectronics

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

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

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

Computational Research and Engineering Acquisition Tools and 
        Environment

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

Corrosion control and prevention

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

Department of Defense infectious disease research and development

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

Electronic Warfare Executive Committee

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

Enhancing situation awareness for military aircraft

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

High Power Directed Energy research

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

Language translation technology

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

Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle

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

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

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

Research and development work with biosafety facilities

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

Ribonucleic acid technology research

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

Simulation training for emerging health threats

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

Special Operations Forces Combat Diving Program

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

Strategic Capabilities Office transitions of technology

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

Technology supporting information operations and strategic 
        communications

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

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

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

                Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense


                                Overview

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

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

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations


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

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

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

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

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

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

       Section 214--Independent Assessment of F135 Engine Program

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

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


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

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

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

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

      Section 223--Plan for Advanced Weapons Technology War Games

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

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

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

   Section 225--Briefing on Shallow Water Combat Submersible Program

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

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                       Budget Request Adjustments


      Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Training and Operations

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

                   Base Realignment and Closure 2017

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

                             Energy Issues


  Analysis for Additional Uses of Energy Savings Performance Contracts

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

               Briefing on Energy Performance Initiatives

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

              Briefing on Military Installation Readiness

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

                  Collaboration on Operational Energy

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

      Progress and Savings from Net Zero Installation Initiatives

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

                Tubular Light-Emitting Diode Technology

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

                    Logistics and Sustainment Issues


               Auxiliary Personnel Lighter Barracks Ships

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

               Combat Footwear for Female Service Members

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

                   Continuous Technology Refreshment

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

          Decision Analysis Using Readiness Cost Analysis Tool

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

                    Defense Personal Property System

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

           Defense Supply Single Point of Failure Assessment

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

            Department of Defense Corrosion Control Efforts

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

                      Depot Maintenance Capability

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

          Humidity-Controlled Shelters and Temporary Buildings

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

                       Laser Ablation of Coatings

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

            Marine Corps Systems Command Engineering Support

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

Planning for Critical Organizational Clothing and Individual Equipment 
                               Innovation

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

                        Report on Asset Tracking

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

              Service Life Extension of Emergency Vehicles

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

                            Readiness Issues


         Advanced Foreign Language Proficiency Training Systems

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

                   Air Combat Training Range Upgrades

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

             Analysis of Continuous Bomber Presence on Guam

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

                    Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal

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

        Aviation Support to the Joint Readiness Training Center

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

     Comptroller General Assessment of Army and Air Force Training 
                              Requirements

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

      Comptroller General Assessment of Plans to Rebuild Readiness

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

                        Initial Flight Training

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

                     Marine Corps Search and Rescue

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

                   Optimizing National Guard Training

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

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

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

           Review of the Navy's Optimized Fleet Response Plan

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

 Synthetic Training for Small Arms Weapons Skills and Combat Readiness

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

                   U.S. Army Pacific Pathways Program

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

    Use of Service Contracts for Simulated Training and Associated 
                               Equipment

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

                    Uses of Modeling and Simulation

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

                             Other Matters


                  Arctic Investments and Capabilities

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

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

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

                       Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle

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

                     Deep Water Unexploded Ordnance

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

                Flame Retardant Military Uniform Safety

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

 United States Special Operations Command Global Inform and Influence 
                               Activities

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

   Weather and Geographic Impacts on Aerospace Control Alert Missions

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


              Section 301--Authorization of Appropriations

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

                   Subtitle B--Energy and Environment


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

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

        Section 312--Southern Sea Otter Military Readiness Areas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                 Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


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

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

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                                OVERVIEW

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                       Subtitle A--Active Forces


              Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces

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

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

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

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

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces


            Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve

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


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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................       17,000       17,000       17,000            0            0
Army Reserve...................................       13,000       13,000       13,000            0            0
Navy Reserve...................................        6,200        6,200        6,200            0            0
Marine Corps Reserve...........................        3,000        3,000        3,000            0            0
Air National Guard.............................       16,000       16,000       16,000            0            0
Air Force Reserve..............................       14,000       14,000       14,000            0            0
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD Total....................................       69,200       69,200       69,200            0            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations


                    Section 421--Military Personnel

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

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


           Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Manning Issues

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

                   Alcohol Abuse Prevention Programs

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

                 Assistance to Local Education Agencies

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

                    Commissary Transportation Costs

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

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

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

  Comptroller General Review of the Federal Voting Assistance Program

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

                   DACA Impact on Military Readiness

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

             Diversity in Department of Defense Advertising

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

           Improvements to the Transition Assistance Program

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

               Increasing Diversity in Military Academies

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

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

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

       Installation Access for Regular College Student Counseling

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

             National Military Dependent Student Identifier

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

                 O-6 Command Selection Board Processes

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

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

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

        Recognizing the Value of the Military Commissary Benefit

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

              Religious Accommodations in the Armed Forces

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

                  Report on Female Muslim Garb Policy

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

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

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

   Report on Prisoner of War and Missing in Action Declassification 
                               Procedures

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

               Rulemaking Under the Military Lending Act

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

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

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

                   The Reverent Treatment of Remains

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

         Timely Access to Child Care on Military Installations

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

             Tracking for Non-Disability Mental Conditions

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

            Transfer of Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits

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

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

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

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

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy


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

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

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

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

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

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

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


              Section 521--Administration of Reserve Duty

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

                 Section 522--Reserve Duty Authorities

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

                  Section 523--Purpose of Reserve Duty

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

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

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

            Section 525--Conforming and Clerical Amendments

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

             Section 526--Effective Date and Implementation

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

                Subtitle D--General Service Authorities


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


     Section 541--Improvements to Special Victims' Counsel Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Subtitle F--Member Education, Training, and Transition


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

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

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

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

    Section 563--Enhancements to Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                   Subtitle H--Decorations and Awards


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

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

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

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

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

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

                 Subtitle I--Reports and Other Matters


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

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

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

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

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

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

         Section 594--Transfer and Adoption of Military Animals

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

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

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

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


          Military Allotment Prohibition Briefing to Congress

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances


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

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

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

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

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

        Subtitle C--Modernization of Military Retirement System


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

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

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

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

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

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

             Section 634--Effective Date and Implementation

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

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


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

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

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

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

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


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

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

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                      Access to Mental Health Care

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

               Alcohol Prevention and Monitoring Programs

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

                      Compound Drug Prescriptions

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

      Comptroller General Report on Army Warrior Transition Units

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

           Dietary Guidelines for Military Nutrition Programs

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

 Direct Hire Authority for Critical Health Care Occupational Shortages

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

                           Medical Readiness

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

          Meeting the Needs of Female Service Member Amputees

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

                 Military Doctors of Podiatric Medicine

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

                     Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

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

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

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

    Status and Impacts of Reductions in TRICARE Prime Service Areas

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

             Study and Report on the Use of Equine Therapy

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

                         Transport Telemedicine

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

                              Trauma Care

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

               Wounded Warrior Recovery Care Coordination

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


           Subtitle A--TRICARE and Other Health Care Benefits


      Section 701--Joint Uniform Formulary for Transition of Care

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                 Subtitle B--Health Care Administration


                  Section 711--Unified Medical Command

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters


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

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

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

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

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

                                OVERVIEW

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

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


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

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

           Contracting Activities to Employ Disabled Persons

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

             Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund

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

               Department Management of Unobligated Funds

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

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

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

   Department of Defense Oversight of Non-Major Defense Acquisition 
                                Programs

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

     Education and Training Related to Commercial Item Procurements

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

       Education and Training Related to Setting of Requirements

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

    Education and Training Related to the Conduct of Market Research

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

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

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

                     Ethics Awareness and Training

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

                        Exchanges with Industry

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

             Foreign Military Sales Procedural Improvements

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

     Impact of Rescinded Solicitations on Efficiency and Innovation

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

        Importance of the North American Defense Industrial Base

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

    Improvements in Accountability for Contracted Services Spending

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

            Improving the Acquisition of Contracted Services

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

     Improving the Efficiency of the Defense Contract Audit Agency

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

    Improving the Financial Auditability of the Defense Finance and 
                           Accounting Service

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

        Improving the Goals and Metrics for Contracted Services

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

     Improving the Requirements Development for and Acquisition of 
                          Contracted Services

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

     Improving Transparency of Defense Contracted Services Budget 
                              Information

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

      Increased Transparency in Non-Appropriated Fund Contracting

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

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

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

            Joint Exercises in Operational Contract Support

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

                         Mentor-Protege Program

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

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

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

        Report on the Effect of Delays in First-Article Testing

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

                          Requirements Process

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

  Secretary of Defense Review of Implementing Guidance and Regulation

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

                Shared Savings through Value Engineering

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

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

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

            Strategic Minerals Domestic Production Research

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

 Streamlining Acquisition Reviews by Reducing Unnecessary Documentation

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

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

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

         Tracking of Contractor Personnel During Contingencies

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

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

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

 Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Source Selection Processes

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


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

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

             Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management


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

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

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

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

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

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

              Section 804--Procurement of Commercial Items

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

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

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

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

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

    Section 807--Compliance with Inventory of Contracts for Services

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

         Subtitle B--Workforce Development and Related Matters


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

       SUBTITLE C--WEAPON SYSTEMS ACQUISITION AND RELATED MATTERS


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                  Subtitle D--Industrial Base Matters


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

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

        Section 832--Amendments to Data Quality Improvement Plan

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

     Section 833--Notice of Contract Consolidation for Acquisition 
                               Strategies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

     Section 839--Surety Bond Requirements and Amount of Guarantee

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

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

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

 Section 841--Including Subcontracting Goals in Agency Responsibilities

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

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

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

                Section 843--Joint Venturing and Teaming

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

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


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

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

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

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

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

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

       Section 854--Amendments to Certain Acquisition Thresholds

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

       Section 860--Procurement of Personal Protective Equipment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


               Improving Agility in Shaping the Workforce

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

                           Productivity Goals

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                        Counter-Drug Activities


Counter-Drug Authority Regarding Support to Certain Foreign Governments

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

              Counternarcotics and Global Threats Strategy

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

                  National Guard Counterdrug Programs

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

                      Unaccompanied Alien Children

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

                Western Hemisphere Maritime Intelligence

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

                             Other Matters


                  Adequacy of Support Assets for Asia

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

          Attendance at Professional and Technical Conferences

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

            Comptroller General Review of Drawdown Authority

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

         Comptroller General Review of Homeland Response Forces

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

     Comptroller General Review of Pandemic Civil Support Planning

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

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

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

   Congressional Review of Federal Acquisition Regulation Rulemaking

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

              Counter Threat Financing and Analytic Tools

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

                     Defense Innovation Initiative

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

                            Defense Strategy

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

              Department of Defense Installation Security

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

                    Electromagnetic Spectrum Roadmap

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

                  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account

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

    Importance of the Department of Defense Meeting Audit Deadlines

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

     Navy's Proposed Transition to an Evolved Contracting Strategy

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

Notifications of Changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement 
                              to Congress

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

                   Pacific Command Operational Plans

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

    Proposed Retirement of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 and 85 
                                Aircraft

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

               Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Briefing

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

    Strategic Vision and Plan for an Effective Global Response Force

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters


                Section 1001--General Transfer Authority

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

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

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

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

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

                  Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities


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

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

       Section 1012--Statement of Policy on Plan Central America

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

                Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                      Subtitle D--Counterterrorism


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

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

    Section 1032--Congressional Notification of Sensitive Military 
                               Operations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   Section 1037--Prohibition on Use of Funds to Construct or Modify 
  Facilities in the United States to House Detainees Transferred from 
           United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations


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

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

      Section 1052--Department of Defense Excess Property Program

    This section would make changes to excess defense article 
donations authorized under section 2576a of title 10, United 
States Code. Specifically, the provision would require the 
establishment of a public website containing information on 
certain transfers made under the program, establish specific 
criteria for State program managers to be met before the 
Defense Logistics Agency may transfer certain types of 
equipment, and mandate several reviews of program objectives 
and efficacy, to include training recommendations, by a 
federally funded research and development center, the 
Comptroller General of the United States, and the Department of 
Defense.

     Section 1053--Limitation of Transfer of Certain AH-64 Apache 
   Helicopters from Army National Guard to Regular Army and Related 
                            Personnel Levels

    This section would amend section 1712(b) of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to preserve the 
60-day congressional review of the report from the National 
Commission on the Future of the Army.

Section 1054--Space Available Travel for Environmental Morale Leave by 
  Certain Spouses and Children of Deployed Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
amend the Air Transportation Eligibility Regulation, DOD 
4515.13-R (1994) (as modified by the December 6, 2007, 
memorandum of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
Logistics and Materiel Readiness) to authorize space-available 
travel for environmental morale leave by unaccompanied spouses 
and dependent children of service members deployed for at least 
30 consecutive days under priority category IV. This section 
also requires the Secretary to update any other instructions, 
directives, or internal policies necessary to facilitate this 
expansion.
    The committee notes that the Military Compensation and 
Retirement Modernization Commission, in its final report, found 
that the average service member deploys 2.6 times during their 
time of Active Duty service, with many military occupational 
specialties deploying even more frequently. The Commission also 
noted that an analysis conducted in 2012 showed that, of the 
678,382 Active Duty personnel deployed from 2001 to 2006 as 
part of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, 
a significant portion were deployed for fewer than 120 days.
    The committee recognizes that the current policy governing 
the use of space-available travel under section 2641b of title 
10, United States Code, allowing unaccompanied space-available 
travel for environmental morale leave for military dependents 
of service members deployed for 120 days or more, leaves a 
significant portion of recently deployed service member 
dependents ineligible for this important privilege. The 
committee concurs with the Commission's recommendation that the 
Department of Defense expand space-available travel to a larger 
population of dependents by shortening the deployment length 
needed to qualify for unaccompanied travel on environmental 
morale leave under priority category IV to 30 days.

    Section 1055--Information-Related and Strategic Communications 
                 Capabilities Engagement Pilot Program

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a pilot program to assess information-related and 
strategic communications capabilities to support the tactical, 
operational, and strategic requirements of the various 
combatant commanders, including urgent and emergent operational 
needs, and the operational and theater security cooperation 
plans of the Geographic and Functional Combatant Commanders.
    The committee is concerned that the U.S. Government is 
losing the battle to operationalize information, which can 
shape the information environment and support its operational 
goals. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Al 
Qaeda are using radical jihadist narratives to shape the 
battlefield, drive recruitment and support, and inspire 
imitators outside their main area of control. In the case of 
ISIL, it is able to use the narratives in ways that reinforce 
its battlefield successes.
    In addition, the Russian Federation has reinvigorated its 
uses of narratives to create uncertainty, providing cover for 
its activities and helping to shape the battlefield. It deploys 
similar narratives to mobilize support in society at home and, 
where possible, in the local population of other countries.
    The committee does not believe that the U.S. Government, 
including the Department of Defense, is effectively 
coordinating i