```

[Senate Report 115-125]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                      Calendar No. 165
115th Congress     }                                      {     Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session       }                                      {    115-125
_______________________________________________________________________

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018

                              R E P O R T

                         [to accompany S. 1519]

                                   on

     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION,  
  AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE 
   MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               ----------                              

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 July 10, 2017.--Ordered to be printed

                                                      Calendar No. 165
115th Congress     }                                      {     Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session       }                                      {    115-125
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                                       

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018

                              R E P O R T

                         [to accompany s. 1519]

                                   on

     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND 
   FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE 
   MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               __________

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 July 10, 2017.--Ordered to be printed
                                  ______

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

26-141                         WASHINGTON : 2017 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                     JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma            JACK REED, Rhode Island
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         BILL NELSON, Florida
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
TOM COTTON, Arkansas                 JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota            KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
JONI ERNST, Iowa                     RICHARD BLUMENTHAL Connecticut
THOM TILLIS, North Carolina          JOE DONNELLY, Indiana
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia                TIM KAINE, Virginia
TED CRUZ, Texas                      ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina       MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
BEN SASSE, Nebraska                  ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama              GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
                    Christian Brose, Staff Director
               Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
                            C O N T E N T S

                                                                   Page
PURPOSE OF THE BILL..............................................     1
COMMITTEE OVERVIEW...............................................     2
SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS AND BUDGET AUTHORITY 
  IMPLICATION....................................................     3
BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT (SEC. 4)...........................     3
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS.................     5
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................     5
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................     5
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)...............     5
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................     5
        Transfer of excess High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled 
          Vehicles to foreign countries (sec. 111)...............     5
        Limitation on availability of funds for Army Air-Land 
          Mobile Tactical Communications and Data Network, 
          including Warfighter Information Network--Tactical 
          (WIN-T) (sec. 112).....................................     6
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................     7
        Multiyear procurement authority for Virginia-class 
          submarine program (sec. 121)...........................     7
        Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (sec. 122)................     7
        Multiyear procurement authority for V-22 joint aircraft 
          program (sec. 123).....................................     8
        Design and construction of amphibious ship replacement 
          designated LX(R) or amphibious transport dock 
          designated LPD-30 (sec. 124)...........................     8
        Modification of cost limitation baseline for CVN-78 class 
          aircraft carrier program (sec. 125)....................     9
        Extension of limitation on use of sole-source 
          shipbuilding contracts for certain vessels (sec. 126)..     9
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    10
        Inventory requirement for Air Force fighter aircraft 
          (sec. 131).............................................    10
        Comptroller General review of total force integration 
          initiatives for reserve component rescue squadrons 
          (Sec. 132).............................................    11
    Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters....    11
        F-35 economic order quantity contracting authority (sec. 
          141)...................................................    11
        Authority for Explosive Ordnance Disposal units to 
          acquire new or emerging technologies and capabilities 
          (sec. 142).............................................    12
    Budget Items.................................................    12
        Army.....................................................    12
            AH-64 Apache Block IIIA Remanufacture................    12
            AH-64 Apache Block IIIB New Build....................    12
            Common Missile Warning System (CMWS).................    12
            Common Infrared Countermeasure (CIRCM)...............    12
            Indirect Fire Protection Capability..................    12
            Joint Air-to-Ground Missile..........................    13
            Bradley program......................................    13
            Abrams Upgrade Program...............................    13
            Multi-Role Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon System...    13
            High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV)..    13
            Warfighter Information Network--Tactical.............    13
            Distributed Common Ground System--Army (Military 
              Intelligence Program)..............................    14
            Night Vision Test Equipment..........................    14
            Data Processing equipment............................    14
            Warfighter Information Network Tactical (WIN-T) 
              Increment 2 Spares.................................    14
            Army Unfunded Requirements List......................    14
        Navy.....................................................    15
            V-22.................................................    15
            Carrier replacement program..........................    15
            Virginia-class submarine advance procurement.........    15
             DDG-1000............................................    16
            Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.......................    16
            Arleigh Burke-class destroyer advance procurement....    17
             Littoral Combat Ship................................    17
             Amphibious ship replacement LX(R) or amphibious 
              transport dock designated LPD-30...................    17
            Outfitting...........................................    18
             Ship to Shore Connector.............................    18
            Expeditionary Sea Base...............................    18
             Cable ship..........................................    18
            Hybrid Electric Drive................................    18
            LCS support equipment................................    18
            LCS mine countermeasures mission modules.............    19
            Navy Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)..............    19
            Navy eProcurement System (Navy ePS)..................    19
            Classified project...................................    19
            Navy Unfunded Requirements List......................    19
        Air Force................................................    20
            Acquisition of Air Force light attack/observation 
              aircraft fleet.....................................    20
            B-1B Squadrons.......................................    20
            C-130 propulsion upgrades............................    21
            Budget request realignment...........................    21
            Air Force Unfunded Requirements List.................    21
        Defense Wide.............................................    22
            Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow Upper Tier 
              Israeli cooperative missile defense programs.......    22
            Silent Knight Terrain Following Terrain Avoidance 
              Radar..............................................    22
            Degraded Visual Environment..........................    22
            Shallow Water Combat Submersible.....................    23
            Defense-wide Unfunded Requirements List..............    23
    Items of Special Interest....................................    23
        Air Force Low Density/High Demand assets.................    23
        Aircrew Restraint........................................    24
        Amphibious assault ship acceleration.....................    24
        Apache and Black Hawk Drive Train and Transmission Weapon 
          System Components Rapid Deployment.....................    24
        Arctic Search and Rescue.................................    25
        Army Force Structure--Retaining a Full BCT...............    25
        Army M4 Modular Rail System Assessment...................    26
        Army Position Navigation and Timing-GPS (A-PNT) 
          Distribution and Anti-Jam Capability...................    26
        AWACS Upgrade to Block 40/50.............................    27
        C-130H modernization.....................................    27
        Columbia-class submarines................................    28
        Composite technology in submarine construction...........    28
        Domestic supply of submarine missile launcher tubes......    29
        Eagle Passive Active Warning and Survivability System 
          (EPAWSS)...............................................    29
        Expedited testing, development and fielding for Paladin 
          Integrated Management..................................    30
        F-16 Block 40/50 Mission Training Centers................    30
        Future air-to-ground missile capability..................    30
        Health and Usage Monitoring Systems......................    30
        HH-60 Combat Rescue Helicopter Program...................    31
        HMMWV Rollover Mitigation................................    31
        Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS)...    32
        Light Utility Helicopter Industrial Base.................    33
        Light-weight polymer technologies for ammunition and 
          small arms.............................................    33
        Maintaining strategic deterrence.........................    34
        Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle Inventory 
          Review.................................................    34
        Missile Warning Systems..................................    35
        Navy Air-to-Ground Rocket Program........................    35
        Navy large surface combatants............................    36
        Primary aircraft assigned to Air National Guard rescue 
          squadrons..............................................    36
        SUSV Replacement Rapid Acquisition Strategy..............    36
        Total force integration initiatives for rescue squadrons 
          in the reserve component of the U.S. Armed Forces......    37
        Unmanned U-2.............................................    38
        USAF UH-1N Replacement...................................    38
        USNS Navajo..............................................    39
        USS Los Alamos...........................................    39
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............    39
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    39
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)...............    39
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................    40
        Mechanisms for expedited access to technical talent and 
          expertise at academic institutions to support 
          Department of Defense missions (sec. 211)..............    40
        Codification and enhancement of authorities to provide 
          funds for defense laboratories for research and 
          development of technologies for military missions (sec. 
          212)...................................................    40
        Modification of laboratory quality enhancement program 
          (sec. 213).............................................    41
        Prizes for advanced technology achievements (sec. 214)...    41
        Expansion of definition of competitive procedures to 
          include competitive selection for award of research and 
          development proposals (sec. 215).......................    42
        Inclusion of modeling and simulation in test and 
          evaluation activities for purposes of planning and 
          budget certification (sec. 216)........................    42
        Differentiation of research and development activities 
          from service activities (sec. 217).....................    43
        Designation of additional Department of Defense science 
          and technology reinvention laboratories (sec. 218).....    45
        Department of Defense directed energy weapon system 
          prototyping and demonstration program (sec. 219).......    45
        Authority for the Under Secretary of Defense for Research 
          and Engineering to promote innovation in the Department 
          of Defense (sec. 220)..................................    46
        Limitation on availability of funds for F-35 Joint Strike 
          Fighter Follow-On Modernization (sec. 221).............    47
        Improvement of update process for populating mission data 
          files used in advanced combat aircraft (sec. 222)......    47
    Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................    47
        Competitive acquisition plan for low probability of 
          detection data link networks (sec. 231)................    47
        Clarification of selection dates for pilot program for 
          the enhancement of the research, development, test, and 
          evaluation centers of the Department of Defense (sec. 
          232)...................................................    48
        Requirement for a plan to build a prototype for a new 
          ground combat vehicle for the Army (sec. 233)..........    48
        Plan for successfully fielding the Integrated Air and 
          Missile Defense Battle Command System (sec. 234).......    50
        Sense of the Congress on hypersonic weapons (sec. 235)...    50
    Budget Items.................................................    50
        Research, Development, Test & Evaluation Unfunded 
          Requirements List......................................    50
        Army.....................................................    51
            Defense research sciences............................    51
            University and industry research centers.............    51
            Army basic research..................................    52
            Strategic materials..................................    52
            Aviation technology..................................    52
            Command, control, communications technology..........    53
            Army applied research................................    53
            Aviation advanced technology.........................    53
            High performance computing modernization program.....    53
            Military engineering advanced technology.............    54
            Army advanced technology development.................    54
            Army armored systems modernization advanced 
              development of advanced fuel cell prototypes.......    54
            Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems--Active 
              Protection System (APS)............................    54
            Army Contract Writing System.........................    55
            Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense (AIAMD)......    55
            Accelerated development of the Hercules recovery 
              vehicle............................................    55
            Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs..................    55
            Missile/Air Defense Product Improvement Program......    56
            Distributed Common Ground/Surface System.............    56
            Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 2-
              Initial Networking (WIN-T Inc. 2)..................    56
        Navy.....................................................    56
            University research initiatives......................    56
            Ocean warfighting environmental applied research.....    56
            Undersea warfare applied research....................    57
            Innovative naval prototypes applied research.........    57
            United States Marine Corps advanced technology 
              demonstration......................................    58
            Future naval capabilities advanced technology 
              developments.......................................    58
            Mine and expeditionary warfare advanced technology...    58
            Innovative naval prototypes advanced technology 
              developments.......................................    59
            Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures.......    59
            Aircraft carrier preliminary design..................    59
            Littoral Combat Ship.................................    60
            Marine Corps Rapid Capabilities Office...............    60
            Extra large unmanned undersea vehicles...............    60
            Air Crew Systems Development.........................    61
            F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Marine Corps...    61
            F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Navy...........    62
            Navy eProcurement (Navy ePS).........................    62
            Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS)....    62
            DDG-1000.............................................    63
            Management, technical, and international support.....    63
            Classified project...................................    63
        Air Force................................................    63
            Hypersonic wind tunnels..............................    63
            Human effectiveness applied research.................    63
            Aerospace propulsion.................................    64
            Electronic combat technology.........................    64
            Commercial Space Situational Awareness (SSA) 
              Consortia/Testbed..................................    64
            Air Force Contracting Information Technology System..    65
            F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Air Force......    65
            Restructure of Air and Space Operations Center--
              Weapons System upgrade program.....................    66
            Advanced weapons systems testing capabilities........    67
            Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-
              IPPS)..............................................    67
            Minuteman III Squadrons..............................    67
            Pulsed solid rocket motor technology.................    67
            Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network...    68
            C-130J...............................................    68
        Defense Wide.............................................    68
            National defense education program...................    68
            Manufacturing Engineering Education Program..........    69
            Support for minority women in science, technology, 
              engineering, and mathematics fields at historically 
              black colleges and universities....................    69
            Tactical technology..................................    70
            Electronics technology...............................    70
            Analytic assessments.................................    70
            Enhancement of Hollings Manufacturing Extension 
              Partnership to Department of Defense...............    70
            Sustaining Investment in Manufacturing USA Institutes    71
            SERDP and ESTCP increases............................    72
            Microelectronics technology development and support..    73
            Operational energy capability improvement............    73
            Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Program..........    73
            Corrosion control and prevention funding increase....    74
            Defense technology offset............................    74
            Ground-Launched Intermediate-Range Missile...........    74
            Government-unique Tracking and Reporting Tool........    75
            Defense-Wide Electronic Procurement Capabilities.....    75
            Software developmental testing.......................    75
            MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles........................    75
    Items of Special Interest....................................    76
        Active electronically scanned array radar improvements...    76
        Advanced airlift airship technology......................    76
        Aircraft battery cost-savings technology improvements....    77
        Botulinum Toxin Type A countermeasures...................    78
        Briefings on autonomy, robotics, and artificial 
          intelligence...........................................    78
        Clarification of definition of small business for 
          purposes of prototype project authority................    78
        Common data environment for modeling and simulation......    79
        Comptroller General review of Next Generation Air 
          Dominance..............................................    79
        Executive agent for printed circuit board technology.....    80
        Facility leasing authority for Department of Defense 
          science and technology laboratories and test and 
          evaluation centers.....................................    80
        Human simulation.........................................    81
        Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP)...................    81
        Improving aerospace materials performance................    82
        Joint directed energy test center........................    82
        Live, Virtual, and Constructive Training.................    83
        Low cost unmanned aerospace systems development..........    83
        Machine learning for national security...................    84
        Management innovation at Department of Defense labs and 
          test ranges............................................    84
        Marine Corps nano-sized vertical takeoff and landing 
          small unmanned aircraft................................    85
        Maritime barriers........................................    85
        Minerva special interest area on information operations..    86
        Next Generation Jammer...................................    86
        Radiation detection technology...........................    87
        Report on defense manufacturing and technology supply 
          chain..................................................    87
        Review of policies on use of directed energy weapon 
          systems................................................    87
        Small engine technologies................................    88
        Streamlined acquisition practices to support innovation 
          at Department of Defense laboratories..................    88
        Ultra Low Power Deployable Radar.........................    88
        University science, technology, engineering, and 
          mathematics programs with the Junior Reserve Officer 
          Training Corps V.......................................    89
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................    91
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    91
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)...............    91
    Subtitle B--Logistics and Sustainment........................    91
        Sentinel Landscapes Partnership (sec. 311)...............    91
        Increased percentage of sustainment funds authorized for 
          realignment to restoration and modernization at each 
          installation (sec. 312)................................    91
    Subtitle C--Reports..........................................    91
        Plan for modernized, dedicated Department of the Navy 
          adversary air training enterprise (sec. 321)...........    91
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................    92
        Defense Siting Clearinghouse (sec. 331)..................    92
        Temporary installation reutilization authority for 
          arsenals, depots, and plants (sec. 332)................    92
        Pilot program for operation and maintenance budget 
          presentation (sec. 333)................................    92
        Servicewomen's commemorative partnerships (sec. 334).....    93
        Authority for agreements to reimburse states for costs of 
          suppressing wildfires on State lands caused by 
          Department of Defense activities under leases and other 
          grants of access to state lands (sec. 335).............    93
        Repurposing and reuse of surplus Army firearms (sec. 336)    93
        Department of the Navy marksmanship awards (sec. 337)....    93
    Subtitle E--Energy and Environment...........................    93
        Authority to carry out environmental restoration 
          activities at National Guard and Reserve locations 
          (sec. 341).............................................    93
        Special considerations for energy performance goals (sec. 
          342)...................................................    94
        Centers for Disease Control study on health implications 
          of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination in 
          drinking water (sec. 343)..............................    94
        Environmental oversight and remediation at Red Hill Bulk 
          Fuel Storage Facility (sec. 344).......................    94
    Budget Items.................................................    94
        Army support reduction...................................    94
        Navy information technology reduction....................    94
        Naval History and Heritage Command reduction.............    95
        Air and Space Operations Center--Weapons System..........    95
        Air National Guard advertising reduction.................    95
        Defense Acquisition University...........................    95
        STARBASE increase........................................    96
        Funding for impact aid...................................    96
        Defense environmental international cooperation program..    96
        Studies on aircraft inventories for the Air Force........    96
        CDC study increase.......................................    97
        Bulk fuel savings........................................    97
        Foreign currency fluctuations............................    97
        Operation and Maintenance Unfunded Requirements List.....    98
    Items of Special Interest....................................    98
        Availability and Readiness of Special Operations Forces 
          to Support Geographic Combatant Commander Requirements.    98
        Basic Expeditionary Airmen Skills Training and Base Camp 
          Integration Lab........................................    99
        Cyber-secure microgrids and energy resilience for 
          installations..........................................   100
        Cybersecurity risk to Department of Defense facilities...   100
        Defense Media Activity IP Streaming......................   101
        Defense threat assessment and master plan for climate....   101
        Defense-wide Working Capital Fund cash management 
          practices..............................................   103
        Department of Defense and Department of Energy 
          collaboration to improve energy resilience.............   103
        Eastern Gulf Test and Training Range.....................   104
        Encouraging the use of the Innovative Readiness Training 
          program................................................   105
        Energy assurance on military installations...............   106
        Energy efficient military shelters.......................   106
        Energy savings performance contracts and combined heat 
          and power..............................................   106
        Energy savings performance contracts assessment..........   107
        Fabric and membrane technology...........................   107
        Foreign language training................................   108
        Implementation of Defense Science Board Task Force on 
          energy systems for forward/remote operating bases......   108
        Implementation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances 
          cleanup................................................   109
        Increasing contracting efficiency through commercial off-
          the-shelf solutions for personal protective equipment..   110
        Individual soldier equipment acquisition strategy........   110
        Item unique identification implementation and 
          verification...........................................   111
        KC-46A aerial refueling tanker emergent requirements.....   111
        Lithium-ion powered devices..............................   111
        Marine Corps cold-weather and high altitude training.....   112
        Master plan and investment strategy for the modernization 
          of public shipyards under jurisdiction of the 
          Department of the Navy.................................   113
        Military training for operations in densely populated 
          urban terrain..........................................   114
        Navy dry dock capacity...................................   114
        Organic depot capacity and interoperability..............   114
        Paint training programs..................................   115
        Processes for translating strategy into force structure 
          and readiness decisions................................   115
        Report on F-35 Joint Strike Fighter sustainment 
          affordability and transparency.........................   116
        Report on required training capabilities of the Fallon 
          Range Training Complex.................................   117
        Report on small arms industrial base.....................   117
        Review of corrosion control and prevention in the 
          Department of Defense..................................   118
        Review of minimum capital investment for certain depots..   118
        Review of training for commanders that consult and 
          interact with federally recognized tribes..............   119
        Ship and submarine depot maintenance.....................   119
        Technology roadmap and comprehensive water strategy......   120
        Textile decisions........................................   121
        Third-party financed energy projects.....................   122
        Use of proximate airfields to support undergraduate pilot 
          training installations.................................   122
        Wargame for operations in the Arctic.....................   122
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS......................   125
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   125
        End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)...............   125
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   125
        End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............   125
        End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of 
          the reserves (sec. 412)................................   125
        End strengths for military technicians (dual status) 
          (sec. 413).............................................   126
        Fiscal year 2018 limitation on number of non-dual status 
          technicians (sec. 414).................................   126
        Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on 
          active duty for operational support (sec. 415).........   126
        Number of members of the National Guard on full-time duty 
          in support of the reserves within the National Guard 
          Bureau (sec. 416)......................................   127
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   127
        Military personnel (sec. 421)............................   127
    Budget Items.................................................   127
        Military personnel funding changes.......................   127
        Military Personnel Unfunded Priorities List..............   127
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   129
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   129
        Clarification of baselines for authorized numbers of 
          general and flag officers on active duty and in joint 
          duty assignments (sec. 501)............................   129
        Authority of promotion boards to recommend officers of 
          particular merit be placed at the top of the promotion 
          list (sec. 502)........................................   129
        Clarification to exception for removal of officers from 
          list of officers recommended for promotion after 18 
          months without appointment (sec. 503)..................   129
        Flexibility in promotion of officers to positions of 
          Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine 
          Corps and Deputy Judge Advocate General of the Navy 
          (sec. 504).............................................   129
        Repeal of requirement for specification of number of 
          officers who may be recommended for early retirement by 
          a Selective Early Retirement Board (sec. 505)..........   130
        Extension of service-in-grade waiver authority for 
          voluntary retirement of certain general and flag 
          officers for purposes of enhanced flexibility in 
          officer personnel management (sec. 506)................   130
        Inclusion of Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant 
          Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and 
          Logistics among officers subject to repeal of statutory 
          specification of general officer grade (sec. 507)......   130
        Clarification of effect of repeal of statutory 
          specification of general or flag officer grade for 
          various positions in the Armed Forces (sec. 508).......   130
        Grandfathering of retired grade of Assistant Judge 
          Advocates General of the Navy as of repeal of statutory 
          specification of general and flag officers grades in 
          the Armed Forces (sec. 509)............................   131
        Service credit for cyberspace experience or advanced 
          education upon original appointment as a commissioned 
          officer (sec. 510).....................................   131
        Authority for officers to opt-out of promotion board 
          consideration (sec. 510A)..............................   131
        Reauthorization of authority to order retired members to 
          active duty in high-demand, low-density assignments 
          (sec. 510B)............................................   131
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management.....................   132
        Consolidation of authorities to order members of the 
          reserve components of the Armed Forces to perform duty 
          (sec. 511).............................................   132
        Establishment of Office of Complex Investigations within 
          the National Guard Bureau (sec. 512)...................   132
    Subtitle C--General Service Authorities......................   133
        Report on policies for regular and reserve officer career 
          management (sec. 516)..................................   133
        Responsibility of Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces for 
          standards and qualifications for military specialties 
          within the Armed Forces (sec. 517).....................   135
        Confidential review of characterization of terms of 
          discharge of members of the Armed Forces who are 
          survivors of sexual assault (sec. 518).................   135
        Improvements to certain authorities and procedures of 
          discharge review boards (sec. 519).....................   135
        Public availability of information related to disposition 
          of claims regarding discharge or release of members of 
          the Armed Forces when claims involve sexual assault 
          (sec. 520).............................................   136
    Subtitle D--Military Justice Matters.........................   136
        Revision to Manual for Courts-Martial with respect to 
          dissemination of visual depictions of private areas or 
          sexually explicit conduct without the consent of the 
          person depicted (sec. 521).............................   136
        Technical and conforming amendments in connection with 
          reform of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (sec. 
          522)...................................................   136
        Priority of review by Court of Appeals for the Armed 
          Forces of decisions of Courts of Criminal Appeals on 
          petitions for enforcement of victims' rights (sec. 523)   136
        Assistance of defense counsel in additional post-trial 
          matters for accused convicted by court-martial (sec. 
          524)...................................................   136
        Enumeration of additional limitations on acceptance of 
          plea agreements by military judges of general or 
          special courts-martial (sec. 525)......................   137
        Additional proceedings by Courts of Criminal Appeals by 
          order of United States Court of Appeals for the Armed 
          Forces (sec. 526)......................................   137
        Clarification of applicability and effective dates for 
          statute of limitations amendments in connection with 
          Uniform Code of Military Justice reform (sec. 527).....   137
        Modification of year of initial review by Military 
          Justice Review Panel of Uniform Code of Military 
          Justice reform amendments (sec. 528)...................   137
        Clarification of applicability of certain provisions of 
          law to civilian judges of the United States Court of 
          Military Commission Review (sec. 529)..................   137
        Enhancement of effective prosecution and defense in 
          courts-martial and related matters (sec. 530)..........   138
        Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces jurisdiction to 
          review interlocutory appeals of decisions on certain 
          petitions for writs of mandamus (sec. 531).............   138
        Punitive article on wrongful broadcast or distribution of 
          intimate visual images or visual images of sexually 
          explicit conduct under the Uniform Code of Military 
          Justice (sec. 532).....................................   138
    Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, Transition, and 
      Resilience.................................................   138
        Ready, Relevant Learning initiative of the Navy (sec. 
          541)...................................................   138
        Element in preseparation counseling for members of the 
          Armed Forces on assistance and support services for 
          caregivers of certain veterans through the Department 
          of Veterans Affairs (sec. 542).........................   139
        Discharge in the Selected Reserve of the commissioned 
          service obligation of military service academy 
          graduates who participate in professional athletics 
          (sec. 543).............................................   139
        Pilot programs on appointment in the excepted service in 
          the Department of Defense of physically disqualified 
          former cadets and midshipmen (sec. 544)................   140
        Limitation on availability of funds for attendance of Air 
          Force enlisted personnel at Air Force officer 
          professional military education in-residence courses 
          (sec. 545).............................................   140
        Pilot program on integration of Department of Defense and 
          non-Federal efforts for civilian employment of members 
          of the Armed Forces following transition from Active 
          Duty to civilian life (sec. 546).......................   141
        Two-year extension of suicide prevention and resilience 
          program for the National Guard and Reserves (sec. 547).   141
        Sexual assault prevention and response training for all 
          individuals enlisted in the Armed Forces under a 
          delayed entry program (sec. 548).......................   141
        Use of assistance under Department of Defense Tuition 
          Assistance Program for non-traditional education to 
          develop cybersecurity and computer coding skills (sec. 
          549)...................................................   141
    Subtitle F--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family 
      Readiness Matters..........................................   142
        Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters............   142
            Impact aid for children with severe disabilities 
              (sec. 551).........................................   142
            Continuation of authority to assist local educational 
              agencies that benefit dependents of members of the 
              Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian 
              employees (sec. 552)...............................   142
            One-year extension of authorities relating to the 
              transition and support of military dependent 
              students to local educational agencies (sec. 553)..   142
        Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters...............   143
            Housing treatment for certain members of the Armed 
              Forces, and their spouses and other dependents, 
              undergoing a permanent change of station within the 
              United States (sec. 556)...........................   143
            Direct hire authority for Department of Defense for 
              childcare services providers for Department child 
              development centers (sec. 557).....................   143
            Report on expanding and contracting for childcare 
              services of the Department of Defense (sec. 558)...   143
            Report on review of General Schedule pay grades of 
              childcare services providers of the Department of 
              Defense (sec. 559).................................   144
            Pilot program on public-private partnerships for 
              telework facilities on military installations 
              outside the United States (sec. 560)...............   144
            Report on mechanisms to facilitate the obtaining by 
              military spouses of professional licenses or 
              credentials in other States (sec. 561).............   144
            Additional military childcare matters (sec. 562).....   145
    Subtitle G--Decorations and Awards...........................   145
        Authority of Secretary of the Army to award the Personnel 
          Protection Equipment award of the Army to former 
          members of the Army (sec. 571).........................   145
        Authorization for award of Distinguished Service Cross to 
          Specialist Frank M. Crary for acts of valor in Vietnam 
          (sec. 572).............................................   145
    Subtitle H--Other Matters....................................   145
        Modification of submittal date of Comptroller General of 
          the United States report on integrity of the Department 
          of Defense whistleblower program (sec. 581)............   145
        Report to Congress on accompanied and unaccompanied tours 
          of duty in remote locations with high family support 
          costs (sec. 582).......................................   145
    Items of Special Interest....................................   146
        Addressing challenges in remotely piloted aircraft 
          community..............................................   146
        DANTES program for members of the Armed Forces applying 
          for tuition assistance.................................   147
        Department of Defense collaboration with educational 
          institutions on cybersecurity education and training...   147
        Department of Defense review of overseas assignment 
          policy for civilian and contractor personnel in support 
          of Department of Defense operations....................   147
        Encouraging more flexibility in changes of station.......   148
        Ensuring military borrowers receive appropriate benefits.   148
        Greater discretion to garrisons for Family, Morale, 
          Wellness, and Recreation programs......................   149
        Leadership training......................................   149
        Quality of instruction in schools of the Department of 
          Defense Education Activity.............................   150
        Report on credentialing program utilization..............   150
        Report on joint Department of Defense-Department of 
          Veterans Affairs suicide prevention....................   150
        Report on measures to prevent retaliation against 
          survivors of sexual assault and harassment in the 
          performance evaluation process.........................   151
        Review of United States Marine Corps recruit training 
          policies...............................................   151
        ROTC Cyber Institute.....................................   152
        Service-specific history courses as a core curriculum 
          requirement of the military service academies..........   153
        Shortfall of United States Air Force aircraft maintenance 
          personnel..............................................   153
        Transition Assistance Program challenges for the National 
          Guard and Reserves.....................................   154
        Transition Assistance Program information for unit 
          commanders.............................................   154
        Use of Post-9/11 GI Bill for technical schools and 
          institutes.............................................   154
    TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..........   155
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   155
        Fiscal year 2018 increase in military basic pay (sec. 
          601)...................................................   155
        Extension of authority to provide temporary increase in 
          rates of Basic Allowance for Housing under certain 
          circumstances (sec. 602)...............................   155
        Adjustment to Basic Allowance for Housing at with 
          dependents rate of certain members of the uniformed 
          services (sec. 603)....................................   155
        Modification of authority of President to determine 
          alternative pay adjustment in annual basic pay of 
          members of the uniformed services (sec. 604)...........   156
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   156
        One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay 
          authorities for reserve forces (sec. 611)..............   156
        One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay 
          authorities for health care professionals (sec. 612)...   156
        One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities 
          for nuclear officers (sec. 613)........................   156
        One-year extension of authorities relating to title 37 
          consolidated special pay, incentive pay, and bonus 
          authorities (sec. 614).................................   157
        One-year extension of authorities relating to payment of 
          other title 37 bonuses and special pays (sec. 615).....   157
        Aviation bonus matters (sec. 616)........................   157
        Special aviation incentive pay and bonus authorities for 
          enlisted members who pilot remotely piloted aircraft 
          (sec. 617).............................................   158
        Technical and clerical amendments relating to 2008 
          consolidation of certain special pay authorities (sec. 
          618)...................................................   158
    Subtitle C--Disability Pay, Retired Pay, and Survivor 
      Benefits...................................................   158
        Part I--Amendments in Connection With Retired Pay Reform.   158
            Adjustment to the Survivor Benefit Plan for members 
              electing lump sum payments of retired pay under the 
              modernized retirement system for members of the 
              uniformed services (sec. 631)......................   158
            Technical correction regarding election to 
              participate in modernized retirement system for 
              non-regular component members experiencing a break 
              in service (sec. 632)..............................   158
        Part II--Other Matters...................................   159
            Authority for the Secretaries of the military 
              departments to provide for care of remains of those 
              who die on Active Duty and are interred in a 
              foreign cemetery (sec. 636)........................   159
            Technical corrections for use of member's current pay 
              grade and years of service in a division of 
              property involving disposable retired pay (sec. 
              637)...............................................   159
            Permanent extension and cost-of-living adjustments of 
              Special Survivor Indemnity Allowances under the 
              survivor benefit plan (sec. 638)...................   159
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   159
        Construction of domestic source requirement for footwear 
          furnished to enlisted members of the Armed Forces on 
          initial entry into the Armed Forces (sec. 651).........   159
        Inclusion of Department of Agriculture in Transition 
          Assistance Program (sec. 652)..........................   160
        Review and update of regulations governing debt 
          collectors interactions with unit commanders (sec. 653)   160
    Items of Special Interest....................................   160
        Report on base pay of senior enlisted members performing 
          special advisory duties................................   160
    United States Air Force civilian pay budgeting process.......   160
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................   163
    Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits...........   163
        TRICARE Advantage demonstration program (sec. 701).......   163
        Continued access to medical care at facilities of the 
          uniformed services for certain members of the reserve 
          components (sec. 702)..................................   164
        Modification of eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select 
          and TRICARE Retired Reserve of certain members of the 
          reserve components (sec. 703)..........................   164
        Expedited evaluation and treatment for prenatal surgery 
          under the TRICARE program (sec. 704)...................   164
        Specification that individuals under the age of 21 are 
          eligible for hospice care services under the TRICARE 
          program (sec. 705).....................................   164
        Modifications of cost-sharing requirements for the 
          TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program and treatment of 
          certain pharmaceutical agents (sec. 706)...............   164
        Consolidation of cost-sharing requirements under TRICARE 
          Select and TRICARE Prime (sec. 707)....................   165
        TRICARE technical amendments (sec. 708)..................   165
        Contraception coverage parity under the TRICARE program 
          (sec. 709).............................................   165
    Subtitle B--Health Care Administration.......................   166
        Modification of priority for evaluation and treatment of 
          individuals at military treatment facilities (sec. 721)   166
        Selection of directors of military treatment facilities 
          and tours of duty of such directors (sec. 722).........   166
        Clarification of administration of military medical 
          treatment facilities (sec. 723)........................   166
        Modification of execution of TRICARE contracting 
          responsibilities (sec. 724)............................   166
        Pilot program on establishment of integrated health care 
          delivery systems (sec. 725)............................   167
    Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................   167
        Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-
          Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility........   167
        Demonstration Fund (sec. 731)............................   167
        Additional emergency uses for medical products to reduce 
          deaths and severity of injuries caused by agents of war 
          (sec. 732).............................................   167
        Prohibition on conduct of certain medical research and 
          development projects (sec. 733)........................   168
        Modification of determination of average wait times at 
          urgent care clinics and pharmacies at military medical 
          treatment facilities under pilot program (sec. 734)....   168
        Report on plan to improve pediatric care and related 
          services for children of members of the Armed Forces 
          (sec. 735).............................................   168
        Inclusion of gambling disorder in health assessments and 
          related research efforts of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 736).............................................   168
    Items of Special Interest....................................   169
        Aircraft medical kits on rotary aircraft responding to 
          mass casualty incidents................................   169
        Assessment of ability of Department of Defense to use 
          modeling and simulation capabilities to address medical 
          training requirements..................................   169
        Comptroller General report on Department of Defense 
          measures to maintain critical wartime medical readiness 
          skills and core competencies of health care providers..   169
        Comptroller General review of the Department of Defense's 
          recruitment and retention programs for military 
          dentists...............................................   170
        Comptroller General review of workforce mix within the 
          military health system.................................   171
        Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense 
          electronic health record interoperability..............   171
        Epidemiological study on the association between certain 
          cancers and military aircraft operations...............   172
        Impact of medical care referrals on servicemembers 
          assigned to remote and isolated military installations 
          in the United States...................................   172
        Improper medical claims payments.........................   172
        Licensed mental health counselors........................   173
        Licensing of federally owned medical inventions..........   173
        Military dental research.................................   173
        Novel drug therapies for PTSD............................   173
        Report on action to address mental health of remotely 
          piloted aircraft community.............................   174
        Traumatic brain injury research..........................   174
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND 
  RELATED MATTERS................................................   175
    Implementation of acquisition reforms........................   175
    Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................   176
        Repeal of temporary suspension of public-private 
          competitions for conversion of Department of Defense 
          functions to performance by contractors (sec. 801).....   176
        Technical and conforming amendments related to program 
          management provisions (sec. 802).......................   177
        Should-cost management (sec. 803)........................   177
        Clarification of purpose of Defense acquisition (sec. 
          804)...................................................   177
        Defense policy advisory committee on technology (sec. 
          805)...................................................   178
        Report on extension of development, acquisition, and 
          sustainment authorities of the military departments to 
          the United States Special Operations Command (sec. 806)   178
    Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, 
      Procedures, and Limitations................................   179
        Waiver authority for purposes of expanding competition 
          (sec. 811).............................................   179
        Increased simplified acquisition threshold applicable to 
          Department of Defense procurements (sec. 812)..........   179
        Increased threshold for cost or pricing data and truth in 
          negotiations requirements (sec. 813)...................   179
        Contract authority for advanced development of initial or 
          additional prototype units (sec. 814)..................   179
        Treatment of independent research and development costs 
          on certain contracts (sec. 815)........................   180
        Non-traditional contractor definition (sec. 816).........   180
        Repeal of domestic source restriction related to wearable 
          electronics (sec. 817).................................   180
        Use of outcome-based and performance-based requirements 
          for services contracts (sec. 818)......................   180
        Pilot program for longer term multiyear service contracts 
          (sec. 819).............................................   181
        Identification of commercial services (sec. 820).........   181
        Government Accountability Office bid protest reforms 
          (sec. 821).............................................   181
        Enhanced post-award debriefing rights (sec. 822).........   182
        Limitation on unilateral definitization (sec. 823).......   182
        Restriction on use of reverse auctions and lowest price 
          technically acceptable contracting methods for safety 
          equipment (sec. 824)...................................   182
        Use of lowest price technically acceptable source 
          selection process (sec. 825)...........................   183
        Middle tier of acquisition for rapid prototype and rapid 
          fielding (sec. 826)....................................   183
        Elimination of cost underruns as factor in calculation of 
          penalties for cost overruns (sec. 827).................   183
        Contract closeout authority (sec. 828)...................   183
        Service contracts of the Department of Defense (sec. 829)   183
        Department of Defense contractor workplace safety and 
          accountability (sec. 830)..............................   183
        Department of Defense promotion of contractor compliance 
          with existing law (sec. 831)...........................   184
    Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition 
      Programs...................................................   184
        Revisions to definition of major defense acquisition 
          program (sec. 835).....................................   184
        Prohibition on use of lowest price technically acceptable 
          source selection process for major defense acquisition 
          programs (sec. 836)....................................   184
    Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce.....   185
        Training in commercial items procurement (sec. 841)......   186
        Modification of definition of acquisition workforce to 
          include personnel engaged in the acquisition or 
          development of cybersecurity systems (sec. 842)........   186
        Training and support for programs pursuing agile 
          acquisition methods (sec. 843).........................   186
        Credits to Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce 
          Development Fund (sec. 844)............................   186
    Subtitle E--Provisions Related to Commercial Items...........   186
        Modification to definition of commercial items (sec. 851)   186
        Revision to definition of commercial item (sec. 852).....   187
        Commercial item determinations (sec. 853)................   187
        Preference for acquisition of commercial items (sec. 854)   187
        Inapplicable laws and regulations (sec. 855).............   187
    Subtitle F--Industrial Base Matters..........................   188
        Review regarding applicability of foreign ownership, 
          control, or influence requirements of national security 
          industrial program to national technology and 
          industrial base companies (sec. 861)...................   188
        Pilot program on strengthening manufacturing in defense 
          industrial base (sec. 862).............................   188
        Sunset of certain provisions relating to the industrial 
          base (sec. 863)........................................   188
    Subtitle G--International Contracting Matters................   189
        Procurement exception relating to agreements with foreign 
          governments (sec. 865).................................   189
        Applicability of cost and pricing data certification 
          requirements (sec. 866)................................   189
        Enhancing program licensing (sec. 867)...................   189
    Subtitle H--Other Transactions...............................   189
        Use of Other Transaction Authority.......................   189
        Other transaction authority (sec. 871)...................   191
        Education and training for transactions other than 
          contracts and grants (sec. 872)........................   191
        Preference for use of other transactions and experimental 
          authority (sec. 873)...................................   191
        Methods for entering into research agreements (sec. 874).   192
    Subtitle I--Development and Acquisition of Software Intensive 
      and Digital Products and Services..........................   192
        Digitizing the Department of Defense business, 
          enterprise, and warfighting capabilities...............   192
        Rights in technical data (sec. 881)......................   193
        Defense Innovation Board analysis of software acquisition 
          regulations (sec. 882).................................   193
        Pilot to tailor software-intensive major programs to use 
          agile methods (sec. 883)...............................   194
        Review and realignment of defense business systems to 
          emphasize agile methods (sec. 884).....................   194
        Software development pilot using agile best practices 
          (sec. 885).............................................   194
        Use of open source software (sec. 886)...................   195
    Subtitle J--Other Matters....................................   196
        Improved transparency and oversight over Department of 
          Defense research, development, test, and evaluation 
          efforts and procurement activities related to medical 
          research (sec. 891)....................................   196
        Rights in technical data related to medical research 
          (sec. 892).............................................   196
        Oversight, audit, and certification from the Defense 
          Contract Audit Agency for procurement activities 
          related to medical research (sec. 893).................   196
        Requirements for Defense Contract Audit Agency report 
          (sec. 894).............................................   196
        Prototype projects to digitize defense acquisition 
          regulations, policies, and guidance, and empower user 
          tailoring of acquisition process (sec. 895)............   196
        Pilot program for adoption of acquisition strategy for 
          Defense Base Act insurance (sec. 896)..................   197
        Phase III awards (sec. 897)..............................   197
        Pilot program for streamlined technology transition from 
          the SBIR and STTR programs of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 898).............................................   197
        Annual report on limitation of subcontractor intellectual 
          property rights (sec. 899).............................   197
        Extension from 20 to 30 years of maximum total period for 
          Department of Defense contracts for storage, handling, 
          or distribution of liquid fuels and natural gas (sec. 
          899A)..................................................   198
        Exception for Department of Defense contracts from 
          requirement that business operations conducted under 
          government contracts accept and dispense $1 coins (sec. 
          899B)..................................................   198
        Investing in rural small businesses (sec. 899C)..........   198
    Items of Special Interest....................................   198
        Assess requirements in certain categories of business 
          systems for consolidation to pursue cost-effective 
          solutions..............................................   198
        Avoidance of specification of contractor facility 
          locations in solicitations and contract requirements...   199
        Commercial off-the-shelf power supplies..................   199
        Comptroller General evaluation of Contractor Business 
          Systems Improvement Program............................   200
        Cybersecurity in modernizing the Department of Defense 
          healthcare management system...........................   201
        Cybersecurity Regulation--Small Business Compliance 
          Assistance.............................................   201
        Defense Acquisition University research collaboration 
          with academia..........................................   202
        Defense Innovation Unit Experimental.....................   202
        Department of Defense exemptions from certain regulations   203
        Exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals......   203
        Impact of Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 
          contract vehicles on small businesses and innovation...   204
        Increase in licensing fees and the negative competitive 
          impact on the services sector..........................   204
        Integrity of patented intellectual property in reverse 
          engineering programs...................................   204
        Notice of cost-free federal procurement technical 
          assistance in connection with registration of small 
          business concerns in procurement systems...............   205
        Ongoing improvement to the management of the National 
          Technology and Industrial Base.........................   205
        Procurement Technical Assistance Center transitional cost 
          share..................................................   206
        Program Management Report................................   206
        Report on Monopolistic Practices.........................   206
        Strategic Capabilities Office Support....................   207
        Supporting the Development and Commercialization of 
          National Security Technologies.........................   207
        Use of Commercial Services...............................   207
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......   209
    Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related 
      Matters....................................................   209
        Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 901).............................................   209
        Realignment of responsibilities, duties, and powers of 
          Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 902).............................................   210
        Clarification of the authority of the Under Secretary of 
          Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment with respect to 
          service acquisition programs for which the service 
          acquisition executive is the milestone decision 
          authority (sec. 903)...................................   213
        Executive schedule matters relating to Under Secretary of 
          Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (sec. 904).....   213
        Technical amendment (sec. 905)...........................   213
        Redesignation of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 
          and Readiness as Under Secretary of Defense for 
          Personnel and Health (sec. 906)........................   213
        Qualifications for appointment and additional duties and 
          powers of certain officials within the Office of the 
          Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (sec. 907)....   214
        Five-year period of relief from Active Duty as a 
          commissioned officer of a regular component of the 
          Armed Forces for appointment to Under Secretary of 
          Defense positions (sec. 908)...........................   214
        Redesignation of Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of 
          Defense as Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense and 
          related matters (sec. 909).............................   214
        Reduction of number and elimination of specific 
          designations of Assistant Secretaries of Defense (sec. 
          910)...................................................   214
        Limitation of maximum number of Deputy Assistant 
          Secretaries of Defense (sec. 911)......................   215
        Modification of definition of OSD personnel for purposes 
          of limitation on number of Office of Secretary of 
          Defense personnel (sec. 912)...........................   215
    Subtitle B--Organization of Other Department of Defense 
      Offices and Elements.......................................   215
        Reduction in authorized number of Assistant Secretaries 
          of the military departments (sec. 921).................   215
        Qualifications for appointment of Assistant Secretaries 
          of the military departments for financial management 
          (sec. 922).............................................   215
        Subtitle C--Organization and Management of the Department 
          of Defense Generally...................................   215
        Reduction in limitation of number of Department of 
          Defense SES positions (sec. 931).......................   215
        Manner of carrying out reductions in major Department of 
          Defense headquarters activities (sec. 932).............   216
        Certifications on cost savings achieved by reductions in 
          major Department of Defense headquarters activities 
          (sec. 933).............................................   216
        Direct hire authority for the Department of Defense for 
          personnel to assist in business transformation and 
          management innovation (sec. 934).......................   216
        Data analytics capability for support of enhanced 
          oversight and management of the Defense Agencies and 
          Department of Defense Field Activities (sec. 935)......   217
        Enhanced use of data analytics to improve acquisition 
          program outcomes (sec. 936)............................   217
        Pilot programs on data integration strategies for the 
          Department of Defense (sec. 937).......................   217
        Background and security investigations for Department of 
          Defense personnel (sec. 938)...........................   218
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   220
        Transfer of lead of Guam Oversight Council from the 
          Deputy Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of the 
          Navy (sec. 951)........................................   220
        Corrosion control and prevention executive matters (sec. 
          952)...................................................   220
    Items of Special Interest....................................   220
        Comptroller General of the United States report on 
          Department of Defense oversight of the defense agencies 
          and Department of Defense field activities.............   220
        Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Arctic.....   221
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   223
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   223
        General transfer authority (sec. 1001)...................   223
        Calculations for payments into Department of Defense 
          Military Retirement Fund using single level percentage 
          of basic pay determined on Armed Force-wide rather than 
          Armed Forces-wide basis (sec. 1002)....................   223
        Certifications on audit readiness of the Department of 
          Defense and the military departments, Defense Agencies, 
          and other organizations and elements of the Department 
          of Defense (sec. 1003).................................   223
        Failure to obtain audit opinion on fiscal year full 
          financial statements of the Department of Defense (sec. 
          1004)..................................................   224
        Improper payment matters (sec. 1005).....................   224
        Financial operations dashboard for the Department of 
          Defense (sec. 1006)....................................   225
        Comptroller General of the United States recommendations 
          on audit capabilities and infrastructure and related 
          matters (sec. 1007)....................................   226
    Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities...........................   226
        Extension and modification of authority to support a 
          unified counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in 
          Colombia (sec. 1011)...................................   226
    Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   226
        Policy of the United States on minimum number of battle 
          force ships (sec. 1016)................................   226
        Operational readiness of Littoral Combat Ships on 
          extended deployment (sec. 1017)........................   227
        Authority to purchase used vessels to recapitalize the 
          Ready Reserve Force and the Military Sealift Command 
          surge fleet (sec. 1018)................................   227
        Surveying ships (sec. 1019)..............................   228
        Pilot program on funding for national defense sealift 
          vessels (sec. 1020)....................................   228
    Subtitle D--Counterterrorism.................................   229
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or 
          release of individuals detained at United States Naval 
          Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States 
          (sec. 1031)............................................   229
        Extension on prohibition on use of funds to construct or 
          modify facilities in the United States to house 
          detainees transferred from United States Naval Station, 
          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1032).......................   229
        Extension on prohibition on use of funds for transfer or 
          release to certain countries of individuals detained at 
          United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 
          1033)..................................................   230
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds for realignment 
          of forces at or closure of United States Naval Station, 
          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1034).......................   230
        Authority to transfer individuals detained at United 
          States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the 
          United States temporarily for emergency or critical 
          medical treatment (sec. 1035)..........................   230
    Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........   230
        Matters relating to the submittal of future-years defense 
          programs (sec. 1041)...................................   230
        Department of Defense integration of information 
          operations and cyber-enabled information operations 
          (sec. 1042)............................................   231
        Prohibition on lobbying activities with respect to the 
          Department of Defense by certain officers of the Armed 
          Forces and civilian employees of the Department within 
          two years of separation from military service or 
          employment with the Department (sec. 1043).............   231
        Definition of ``unmanned aerial vehicle'' for the 
          purposes of title 10, United States Code (sec. 1044)...   231
        Technical amendment relating to management of military 
          technicians (sec. 1045)................................   231
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds for retirement 
          of legacy maritime mine countermeasures platforms (sec. 
          1046)..................................................   232
        Sense of Congress on the basing of KC-46A aircraft 
          outside the continental United States (sec. 1047)......   232
        Authorization to procure up to six polar-class 
          icebreakers (sec. 1048)................................   232
    Subtitle F--Studies and Reports..............................   232
        Assessment of global force posture (sec. 1061)...........   232
        Army modernization strategy (sec. 1062)..................   233
        Report on Army plan to improve operational unit readiness 
          by reducing the number of non-deployable soldiers 
          assigned to operation units (sec. 1063)................   234
        Efforts to combat physiological episodes on certain Navy 
          aircraft (sec. 1064)...................................   235
        Studies on aircraft inventories for the Air Force (sec. 
          1065)..................................................   236
        Plan and recommendations for interagency vetting of 
          foreign investments with potential impacts on national 
          defense and national security (sec. 1066)..............   237
        Report on authorities for the employment, use, and status 
          of National Guard and Reserve technicians (sec. 1067)..   237
        Conforming repeals and technical amendments in connection 
          with reports of the Department of Defense whose 
          submittal to Congress has previously been terminated by 
          law (sec. 1068)........................................   238
        Annual reports on approval of employment or compensation 
          of retired general or flag Officers by foreign 
          governments for Emoluments Clause purposes (sec. 1069).   238
        Annual report on civilian casualties in connection with 
          United States military operations (sec. 1070)..........   238
        Report on large-scale, joint exercises involving the air 
          and land domains (Sec. 1071)...........................   238
        Department of Defense review of Navy capabilities in the 
          Arctic region (sec. 1072)..............................   238
        Business case analysis on establishment of active duty 
          association and additional primary aircraft 
          authorizations for the 168th Air Refueling Wing (sec. 
          1073)..................................................   238
        Report on Navy capacity to increase production of anti-
          submarine warfare and search and rescue rotary wing 
          aircraft in light of increase in the size of the 
          surface fleet to 355 ships. (Sec. 1074)................   239
    Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   239
        Protection against misuse of Naval Special Warfare 
          Command insignia (sec. 1081)...........................   239
        Collaborations between the Armed Forces and certain non-
          Federal entities on support of Armed Forces missions 
          abroad (sec. 1082).....................................   239
        Federal charter for Spirit of America (sec. 1083)........   240
        Reconsideration of claims for disability compensation for 
          veterans who were the subjects of mustard gas or 
          lewisite experiments during World War II (sec. 1084)...   240
        Prize competition to identify root cause of physiological 
          episodes on Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force training 
          and operational aircraft (sec. 1085)...................   240
        Exception to the interdepartmental waiver doctrine for 
          cleanup of vehicle crashes (sec. 1086).................   240
        Transfer of surplus firearms to Corporation for the 
          Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety (sec. 
          1087)..................................................   241
    Items of Special Interest....................................   241
        355 ship build-up review.................................   241
        Arctic domain awareness..................................   241
        Assessment of Navy capabilities to support U.S. Coast 
          Guard and partner nations' international maritime law 
          enforcement activities.................................   242
        Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and 
          Low Intensity Conflict.................................   242
        Audit progress...........................................   243
        Budget Control Act Repeal................................   243
        Comptroller General of the United States review of the 
          U.S. Navy's approach to nuclear-powered aircraft 
          carrier dismantlement and disposal.....................   243
        DUI prevention and rideshares............................   245
        Efficient use of non-tactical government owned 
          transportation.........................................   245
        Encouraging Air Force Rescue Unit Associations...........   245
        Management of Special Access Programs....................   246
        National Guard Counterdrug Program.......................   246
        National Guard role in enhanced border security..........   247
        Navy strategic laydown and dispersal plan................   248
        Northern Triangle human rights training..................   248
        Plan on actions to address vulnerabilities arising from 
          unencrypted aircraft transponders on military aircraft.   248
        Report on infrastructure required to protect national 
          security interests of the United States in the Arctic 
          region.................................................   249
        Report on initiatives for mitigating military pilot 
          shortfalls.............................................   249
        Trafficking of commodities...............................   250
        Unmanned maritime systems test and training range........   251
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS.............................   253
    Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters....................   253
        Pilot program on enhanced personnel management system for 
          cybersecurity and legal professionals in the Department 
          of Defense (sec. 1101).................................   253
        Inclusion of Strategic Capabilities Office and Defense 
          Innovation Unit Experimental of the Department of 
          Defense in personnel management authority to attract 
          experts in science and engineering (sec. 1102).........   253
        Permanent authority for demonstration projects relating 
          to acquisition personnel management policies and 
          procedures (sec. 1103).................................   253
        Establishment of senior scientific technical managers at 
          Major Range and Test Facility Base facilities and 
          Defense Test Resource Management Center (sec. 1104)....   254
        Extension of temporary direct hire authority for domestic 
          defense industrial base facilities, the major range and 
          test facilities base (sec. 1105).......................   254
        Direct hire authority for financial management experts in 
          the Department of Defense workforce (sec. 1106)........   254
        Authority for wavier of requirement for a baccalaureate 
          degree for positions in the Department of Defense on 
          cybersecurity and computer programming (sec. 1107).....   254
    Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters..........................   255
        Elimination of the foreign exemption provision in regard 
          to overtime for Federal civilian employees temporarily 
          assigned to a foreign area (sec. 1111).................   255
        One-year extension of authority to waive annual 
          limitation on premium pay and aggregate limitation on 
          pay for Federal civilian employees working overseas 
          (sec. 1112)............................................   255
        One-year extension of temporary authority to grant 
          allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian 
          personnel on official duty in a combat zone (sec. 1113)   255
    Items of Special Interest....................................   255
        Direct hiring authorities................................   255
        Implementation of direct hiring authorities for military 
          spouses................................................   255
        Industry fellowships for civilian contracting officers...   256
        Waiver of Long-Term Temporary Duty travel per diem rates.   256
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS...................   257
    Subtitle A--Assistance and Training..........................   257
        Support of special operations for irregular warfare (sec. 
          1201)..................................................   257
        Modification of authority on support of special 
          operations to combat terrorism (sec. 1202).............   257
        Modifications of certain authority in connection with 
          reform of defense security cooperation programs and 
          activities (sec. 1203).................................   257
        Global Security Contingency Fund matters (sec. 1204).....   258
        Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (sec. 
          1205)..................................................   258
    Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan.....   258
        Extension of Commanders' Emergency Response Program and 
          related authorities (sec. 1211)........................   258
        Extension of authority to transfer defense articles and 
          provide defense services to the military and security 
          forces of Afghanistan (sec. 1212)......................   258
        Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement 
          of certain coalition nations for support provided to 
          United States military operations (sec. 1213)..........   258
        Extension of authority to acquire products and services 
          produced in countries along a major route of supply to 
          Afghanistan (sec. 1214)................................   259
        Extension of semiannual report on enhancing security and 
          stability in Afghanistan (sec. 1215)...................   259
        Sense of Congress regarding the Afghan special immigrant 
          visa program (sec. 1216)...............................   259
        Special immigrant visas for Afghan allies (sec. 1217)....   259
    Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran........   260
        Modification of authority to provide assistance to 
          counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (sec. 1231)   260
        Modification of authority to provide assistance to the 
          vetted Syrian opposition (sec. 1232)...................   260
        Extension and modification of authority to support 
          operations and activities of the Office of Security 
          Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 1233)........................   261
        Modification and additional elements in annual report on 
          the military power of Iran (sec. 1234).................   261
    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to the Russian Federation.......   262
        Extension of limitation on military cooperation between 
          the United States and the Russian Federation (sec. 
          1241)..................................................   262
        Extension of limitation on availability of funds relating 
          to sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea 
          (sec. 1242)............................................   262
        Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 
          1243)..................................................   262
        Extension of authority on training for Eastern European 
          national security forces in the course of multilateral 
          exercises (sec. 1244)..................................   263
        Security assistance for Baltic nations for joint program 
          for resiliency and deterrence against aggression (sec. 
          1245)..................................................   263
        Annual report on military and security developments 
          involving the Russian Federation (sec. 1246)...........   264
        Annual report on attempts of the Russian Federation to 
          provide disinformation and propaganda to members of the 
          Armed Forces by social media. (sec. 1247)..............   264
        Support of European Deterrence Initiative to deter 
          Russian aggression (sec. 1248).........................   264
        Sense of Congress on the European Deterrence Initiative 
          (sec. 1249)............................................   264
        Enhancement of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative 
          (sec. 1250)............................................   265
        Sense of Congress on importance of the North Atlantic 
          Treaty Organization Intelligence Fusion Center (sec. 
          1251)..................................................   265
    Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Asia-Pacific Region......   265
        Asia-Pacific Stability Initiative (sec. 1261)............   265
        Expansion of military-to-military engagement with the 
          government of Burma (sec. 1262)........................   266
        Agreement supplemental to Compact of Free Association 
          with Palau (sec. 1263).................................   266
        Workforce issues for relocation of Marines to Guam (sec. 
          1264)..................................................   267
        United States policy with respect to freedom of 
          navigation operations and overflight beyond the 
          territorial seas (sec. 1265)...........................   267
        Sense of Congress on the importance of the rule of law in 
          the South China Sea (sec. 1266)........................   268
        Sense of Congress on the importance of the relationship 
          between the United States and Japan (sec. 1267)........   268
        Sense of Congress on the importance of the United States 
          alliance with the Republic of Korea (sec. 1268)........   268
        Sense of Congress on extended deterrence for the Korean 
          Peninsula and Japan (sec. 1269)........................   269
        Defense partnership between the United States and Taiwan 
          (sec. 1270)............................................   269
        Naval port of call exchanges between the United States 
          and Taiwan (sec. 1270A)................................   269
        Program to enhance Taiwan's undersea warfare capabilities 
          (sec. 1270B)...........................................   269
        Invitation of Taiwan military forces to participate in 
          joint military exercises (Sec. 1270C)..................   270
        Report on military exchanges between senior officers and 
          officials of the United States and Taiwan (Sec. 1270D).   270
    Subtitle F--Reports..........................................   270
        Submittal of Department of Defense Supplemental and Cost 
          of War Execution Reports on a quarterly basis (sec. 
          1271)..................................................   270
        Consolidation of reports on United States Armed Forces, 
          civilian employees, and contractors deployed in support 
          of Operation Inherent Resolve and Operation Freedom's 
          Sentinel (sec. 1272)...................................   271
    Subtitle G--Others Matters...................................   271
        Modification of availability of funds in Special Defense 
          Acquisition Fund for precision guided munitions (sec. 
          1281)..................................................   271
        Use of funds in the United States for certain United 
          States-Israel anti-tunnel cooperation activities (sec. 
          1282)..................................................   271
        Foreign military sales letters of request for pricing and 
          availability (sec. 1283)...............................   272
        Sense of Congress reaffirming strategic partnerships and 
          allies (sec. 1284).....................................   272
    Budget Items.................................................   272
        Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative...................   272
    Items of Special Interest....................................   272
        Enhanced assistance and cooperation for Afghanistan by 
          the Government of India................................   272
        Importance of soft power tools in the Asia-Pacific region   273
        Institutionalizing Advise and Assist Lessons Learned.....   273
        NATO Strategic Communications Center of Excellence.......   274
        Report on the military capabilities of Hezbollah.........   275
        Security strategy for Great Lakes region of Africa.......   275
        Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative..............   276
        Southeast Asia terrorism.................................   277
        Transformation of the Kosovo Security Forces to the 
          Kosovo Armed Forces....................................   277
        U.S.-India defense cooperation...........................   277
        Ukrainian wounded warriors...............................   279
        United States commitment to the NATO alliance............   280
        Venezuelan military cooperation..........................   280
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION.........................   283
        Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction funds (sec. 
          1301)..................................................   283
        Funding allocations (sec. 1302)..........................   283
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   285
    Subtitle A--Military Programs................................   285
        Working capital funds (sec. 1401)........................   285
        Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec. 
          1402)..................................................   285
        Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
          wide (sec. 1403).......................................   285
        Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404)....................   285
        Defense Health Program (sec. 1405).......................   285
    Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile.......................   285
        Authority to dispose of certain materials from and to 
          acquire additional materials for the National Defense 
          Stockpile (sec. 1411)..................................   285
    Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Matters................   286
        Acquisition reporting on major chemical demilitarization 
          programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 1421)......   286
    Subtitle D--Armed Forces Retirement Home.....................   286
        Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces 
          Retirement Home (sec. 1431)............................   286
        Armed Forces Retirement Home matters (sec. 1432).........   286
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   286
        Authority for transfer of funds to Joint Department of 
          Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility 
          Demonstration Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health 
          Care Center, Illinois (sec. 1441)......................   286
        Enhancement of database of emergency response 
          capabilities of the Department of Defense (sec. 1442)..   286
    Items of Special Interest....................................   287
        Agro-terrorism...........................................   287
        Assessment of designating a Joint Chemical-Biological 
          Defense Logistics Distribution Center..................   287
        Domestic production of Scandium..........................   287
        Fiscal stability of the National Defense Stockpile.......   288
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS 
  CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.........................................   289
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations.......   289
        Purpose (sec. 1501)......................................   289
        Overseas contingency operations (sec. 1502)..............   289
        Procurement (sec. 1503)..................................   289
        Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1504)..   289
        Operation and maintenance (sec. 1505)....................   289
        Military personnel (sec. 1506)...........................   289
        Working capital funds (sec. 1507)........................   289
        Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
          wide (sec. 1508).......................................   290
        Defense Inspector General (sec. 1509)....................   290
        Defense Health Program (sec. 1510).......................   290
    Subtitle B--Financial Matters................................   290
        Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1521).......   290
        Special transfer authority (sec. 1522)...................   290
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   290
        Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1531).............   290
    Budget Items.................................................   291
        Defense Security Cooperation Agency......................   291
        Transfer of European Reassurance Initiative..............   291
TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS...   293
    Subtitle A--Space Activities.................................   293
        Air Force Space Command (sec. 1601)......................   293
        Air Force space contractor responsibility watch list 
          (sec. 1602)............................................   293
        Presidential National Voice Conferencing system (sec. 
          1603)..................................................   294
        Limitation on use of funds for Delta IV launch vehicle 
          (sec. 1604)............................................   295
        Policy of the United States with respect to 
          classification of space as a combat domain (sec. 1605).   295
        Launch support and infrastructure modernization (sec. 
          1606)..................................................   296
    Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related 
      Activities.................................................   296
        Extension of authority to engage in commercial activities 
          as security for intelligence collection activities 
          (sec. 1611)............................................   296
    Subtitle C--Cyber Warfare, Cybersecurity, and Related Matters   296
        Policy of the United States on cyberspace, cybersecurity, 
          and cyber warfare (sec. 1621)..........................   296
        Cyber posture review (sec. 1622).........................   297
        Modification and clarification of requirements and 
          authorities relating to establishment of unified 
          combatant command for cyber operations (sec. 1623).....   297
        Annual assessment of cyber resiliency of nuclear command 
          and control system (sec. 1624).........................   298
        Strategic Cybersecurity Program (sec. 1625)..............   298
        Evaluation of agile acquisition of cyber tools and 
          applications (sec. 1626)...............................   299
        Report on cost implications of terminating dual-hat 
          arrangement for Commander of United States Cyber 
          Command (sec. 1627)....................................   300
        Modification of Information Assurance Scholarship Program 
          (sec. 1628)............................................   300
        Measuring compliance of components of Department of 
          Defense with cybersecurity requirements for securing 
          industrial control systems (sec. 1629).................   301
        Exercise on assessing cybersecurity support to election 
          systems of States (sec. 1630)..........................   301
        Report on various approaches to cyber deterrence (sec. 
          1630A).................................................   301
        Prohibition on use of software platforms developed by 
          Kaspersky Lab (sec. 1630B).............................   302
    Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces...................................   302
        Collection, storage, and sharing of data relating to 
          nuclear security enterprise (sec. 1631)................   302
        Establishment of procedures for implementation of Nuclear 
          Enterprise Review (sec. 1632)..........................   302
        Procurement authority for certain parts of 
          intercontinental ballistic missiles (sec. 1633)........   302
        Execution and programmatic oversight of nuclear command, 
          control, and communications programs (sec. 1634).......   303
        Measures in response to noncompliance of the Russian 
          Federation with its obligations under the INF Treaty 
          (sec. 1635)............................................   304
        Certification that the Nuclear Posture Review addresses 
          deterrent effect and operation of United States nuclear 
          forces in current and future security environment (sec. 
          1636)..................................................   305
        Plan to manage Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack 
          Assessment System and multi-domain sensors (sec. 1637).   305
        Certification requirement with respect to strategic 
          radiation hardened trusted foundry (sec. 1638).........   305
        Requirements for Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1639)......   306
        Sense of Congress on Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1640)..   306
    Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs.........................   306
        Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli 
          Cooperative Missile Defense Program co-development and 
          co-production (sec. 1651)..............................   306
        Development of persistent space-based sensor architecture 
          (sec. 1652)............................................   307
        Ground-based interceptor capacity and Fort Greely missile 
          field infrastructure requirements (sec. 1653)..........   308
        Sense of the Senate on the state of United States missile 
          defense (sec. 1654)....................................   309
        Sense of the Senate and report on ground-based mid-course 
          defense testing (sec. 1655)............................   309
    Items of Special Interest....................................   310
        Airborne boost phase laser missile defense demonstration.   310
        AN/TPY-2 detection and cueing capability.................   310
        Assistance of U.S. Special Operations Command to U.S. 
          Forces-Korea for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction   311
        Cobra Dane radar system improvements.....................   311
        Commercial Geospatial-Intelligence Imagery...............   312
        Comptroller General review of very low frequency/low 
          frequency terminals....................................   312
        Conventional Prompt Strike...............................   313
        Counter unmanned aerial systems capabilities.............   313
        Expand capacity and capabilities of the ICCAE with focus 
          on data sciences, machine learning, artificial 
          intelligence, modeling & war gaming, and intelligence 
          integration............................................   314
         Fill rate of billets for United States Cyber Command....   314
        Importance and use of United States Federal Aviation 
          Administration licensed spaceports.....................   315
        Increased procurement of low-cost ballistic missile 
          targets................................................   316
        Intelligence support to U.S. Strategic Command...........   316
        Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense 
          interoperability.......................................   316
        Positioning, Navigation, and Timing alternate sources....   317
        Replacement of National Airborne Operations Center 
          aircraft...............................................   317
        Report on Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Commission 
          findings and recommendations...........................   317
        Reusable Launch Vehicles.................................   318
        Sea-based X-Band Radar...................................   318
         Simultaneous strategic missile system flight tests......   318
        Space Launch Automated Flight Safety and Termination 
          Systems................................................   319
         Staffing for nuclear command, control, and 
          communications acquisition.............................   319
        Training for cyber mission forces........................   319
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   321
        Summary and explanation of funding tables................   321
        Short title (sec. 2001)..................................   321
        Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
          specified by law (sec. 2002)...........................   322
        Effective date (sec. 2003)...............................   322
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................   323
        Summary..................................................   323
         Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2101)...................................   323
        Family housing (sec. 2102)...............................   323
        Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)........   323
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2014 project (sec. 2104)..........................   324
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2015 project (sec. 2105)..........................   324
        Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2014 
          project (sec. 2106)....................................   324
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2107)...................................   324
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...........................   325
        Summary..................................................   325
        Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2201)...................................   325
        Family housing (sec. 2202)...............................   325
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)   325
        Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........   326
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2014 
          projects (sec. 2205)...................................   326
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2206)...................................   326
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.....................   327
        Summary..................................................   327
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2301)...................................   327
        Family housing (sec. 2302)...............................   327
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)   327
        Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)...   327
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2017 projects (sec. 2305).........................   328
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2306)...................................   328
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...............   329
        Summary..................................................   329
        Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2401).......................   329
        Authorized energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)......   329
        Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 
          2403)..................................................   329
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2017 project (sec. 2404)..........................   329
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2014 
          projects (sec. 2405)...................................   330
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2406)...................................   330
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................   331
        Summary..................................................   331
    Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 
      Investment Program.........................................   331
        Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2501)...................................   331
        Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........   331
    Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions...............   331
        Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec. 
          2511)..................................................   331
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2017 projects (sec. 2512).........................   331
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   333
        Summary..................................................   333
    Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of 
      Appropriations.............................................   333
        Authorized Army National Guard construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2601).......................   333
        Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2602)...................................   333
        Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve 
          construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603).   333
        Authorized Air National Guard construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2604).......................   334
        Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2605).......................   334
        Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and 
          Reserve (sec. 2606)....................................   334
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   334
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2015 project (sec. 2611)..........................   334
        Extension of authorizations for certain fiscal year 2014 
          projects (sec. 2612)...................................   334
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2613)...................................   334
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES.............   335
        Summary and explanation of tables........................   335
        Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and 
          closure activities funded through Department of Defense 
          Base Closure Account (sec. 2701).......................   335
        Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and 
          closure (BRAC) round (sec. 2702).......................   335
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS.......   337
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   337
        Authority to use expiring funds for certain military 
          construction projects (sec. 2801)......................   337
        Extension of temporary, limited authority to use 
          operation and maintenance funds for construction 
          projects in certain areas outside the United States 
          (sec. 2802)............................................   337
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   337
        Authority to use energy cost savings for energy 
          resilience, mission assurance, and weather damage 
          repair and prevention measures (sec. 2811).............   337
        Modification of unspecified minor military construction 
          project authority to cover correction of deficiencies 
          that are threats to installation resilience (sec. 2812)   337
        Land exchange valuation of property with reduced 
          development that limits encroachment on military 
          installations (sec. 2813)..............................   337
        Treatment of storm water collection systems as utility 
          systems (sec. 2814)....................................   338
        Access to military installations by transportation 
          network companies (sec. 2815)..........................   338
    Subtitle C--Land Conveyances.................................   338
        Land conveyance, Natick Soldier Systems Center, 
          Massachusetts (sec. 2821)..............................   338
        Land conveyance, Army and Air Force exchange service 
          property, Dallas, Texas (sec. 2822)....................   338
        Land conveyances, certain former peacekeeper ICBM 
          facilities in Wyoming (sec. 2823)......................   338
        Land exchange, Naval Industrial Ordnance Reserve Plant, 
          Sunnyvale, California (sec. 2824)......................   338
        Land exchange, Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, Texas 
          (sec. 2825)............................................   339
    Subtitle D--Project Management and Oversight Reforms.........   339
        Project management oversight reforms.....................   339
        Notification requirement for certain cost overruns and 
          schedule delays (sec. 2831)............................   339
        Limited authority for private sector supervision of 
          military construction projects in event of extensive 
          overruns or project delays (sec. 2832).................   339
        Annual report on cost overruns and schedule delays (sec. 
          2833)..................................................   340
        Report on design errors and omissions related to Fort 
          Bliss hospital replacement project (sec. 2834).........   340
        Report on cost increase and delay related to USSTRATCOM 
          command and control facility project at Offutt Air 
          Force Base (sec. 2835).................................   340
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   340
        Annual Department of Defense energy management reports 
          (sec. 2841)............................................   340
        Aggregation of energy efficiency and energy resilience 
          projects in life cycle costs (sec. 2842)...............   341
        Authority of the Secretary of the Air Force to accept 
          lessee improvements at Air Force Plant 42 (sec. 2843)..   341
        Prohibition on use of funds for Kwajalein project (sec. 
          2844)..................................................   341
        Energy resilience (sec. 2845)............................   341
        Consideration of energy security and energy resilience in 
          awarding energy and fuel contracts for military 
          installations (sec. 2846)..............................   342
        Requirement to address energy resilience in exercising 
          utility system conveyance authority (sec. 2847)........   342
        In-kind lease payments; prioritization of utility 
          services that promote energy resilience (sec. 2848)....   342
        Disclosure of beneficial ownership by foreign persons of 
          high security space leased by the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 2849)............................................   342
    Items of Special Interest....................................   342
        Bachelor Enlisted Quarters conditions....................   342
        Joint Test and Training Operations Center................   343
        Life cycle construction materials........................   343
        Lincoln Laboratory.......................................   343
        Major range and test facility bases......................   344
        Review of DOD utility privatization......................   344
        Unified Facilities Criteria for elevator design..........   345
        Window fall prevention...................................   345
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION   347
        Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2901)...................................   347
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2902)...................................   347
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2903)..............   347
        Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2904)...................................   347
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS 
  AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................   349
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   349
    Overview.....................................................   349
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   350
        National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101).....   350
        Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)................   350
        Other defense activities (sec. 3103).....................   350
        Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)...............................   350
    Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   350
        Assessment and development of prototype nuclear weapons 
          of foreign countries (sec. 3111).......................   350
        Use of funds for construction and project support 
          activities relating to MOX facility (sec. 3112)........   351
        Repeal, consolidation, and modification of reporting 
          requirements (sec. 3113)...............................   351
        National Nuclear Security Administration personnel system 
          (sec. 3114)............................................   351
        Annual reports on unfunded priorities of National Nuclear 
          Security Administration (sec. 3115)....................   351
    Budget Items.................................................   352
        National Nuclear Security Administration research and 
          development certification and safety...................   352
        Enhanced capabilities for subcritical experiments........   352
        National Nuclear Security Administration enhanced surety.   352
        Stockpile Responsiveness Program.........................   352
        Inertial confinement facility operations.................   353
        National Nuclear Security Administration additive 
          manufacturing..........................................   353
        National Nuclear Security Administration component 
          manufacturing development..............................   353
        National Nuclear Security Administration deferred 
          maintenance............................................   353
        Defense Nuclear Security deferred maintenance............   353
        International nuclear security program...................   354
        Nonproliferation and arms control........................   354
        Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication facility....................   354
        Naval Reactors deferred maintenance......................   355
    Items of Special Interest....................................   355
        Common financial reporting...............................   355
        Competition in contracting...............................   355
        Comptroller General review of high explosives capability.   356
        Comptroller General review of Kansas City Plant 
          capabilities...........................................   356
        Comptroller General review of plutonium oxide feedstock 
          production capacity....................................   357
        National Nuclear Security Administration arms control 
          research and development plan..........................   358
        National Nuclear Security Administration plutonium 
          strategy...............................................   358
        Pantex material staging facility.........................   359
        Requirement for update on progress on interoperable 
          warhead................................................   359
        Requirements for managing schedules for analyses of 
          alternatives for projects of the National Nuclear 
          Security Administration................................   360
        Waste Isolation Pilot Plant planning.....................   360
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD.............   363
        Authorization (sec. 3201)................................   363
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION..............................   365
        Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)......................   365
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES.......................................   367
        Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)...   369
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT...........................................   377
        Procurement (sec. 4101)..................................   378
        Procurement for overseas contingency operations (sec. 
          4102)..................................................   427
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION..........   439
        Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 4201)..   440
        Research, development, test, and evaluation for overseas 
          contingency operations (sec. 4202).....................   481
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE...........................   485
        Operation and maintenance (sec. 4301)....................   486
        Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency 
          operations (sec. 4302).................................   507
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL...................................   517
        Military personnel (sec. 4401)...........................   518
        Military personnel for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4402)............................................   519
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   520
        Other authorizations (sec. 4501).........................   520
        Other authorizations for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4502)............................................   524
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................   527
        Military construction (sec. 4601)........................   527
        Military construction for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4602)............................................   547
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.....   549
        Department of Energy national security programs (sec. 
          4701)..................................................   550
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS.........................................   566
        Departmental Recommendations.............................   566
        Committee Action.........................................   566
        Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate................   567
        Regulatory Impact........................................   568
        Changes in Existing Laws.................................   568
ADDITIONAL VIEWS.................................................   569
        Additional Views of Mr. Rounds...........................   569

                                                      Calendar No. 165
115th Congress     }                                    {       Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session       }                                    {      115-125

======================================================================

 
     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND 
   FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE 
   MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                  July 10, 2017.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 1519]

    The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an 
original bill (S. 1519) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2018 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
for military construction, and for defense activities of the 
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths 
for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and recommends 
that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    This bill would:
          (1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) 
        research, development, test and evaluation, (c) 
        operation and maintenance and the revolving and 
        management funds of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2018;
          (2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each 
        military active duty component of the Armed Forces for 
        fiscal year 2018;
          (3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the 
        Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of 
        the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2018;
          (4) impose certain reporting requirements;
          (5) impose certain limitations with regard to 
        specific procurement and research, development, test 
        and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide 
        certain additional legislative authority, and make 
        certain changes to existing law;
          (6) authorize appropriations for military 
        construction programs of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2018; and
          (7) authorize appropriations for national security 
        programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
        2018.

                           COMMITTEE OVERVIEW

    One of Congress' most important constitutional 
responsibilities is providing for the common defense. To 
fulfill this fundamental duty, Congress has for the last 55 
consecutive years passed the National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA), which authorizes funding and provides authorities for 
the U.S. military.
    The Senate Armed Services Committee takes seriously its 
obligation to our men and women in uniform and their families, 
as well as the civilians and contractors who support our Armed 
Forces. Their service represents the best of our country, and 
this committee and the Congress honor their sacrifice.
    The committee markup of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 contributes to a total of $640 billion 
for national defense, which exceeds the President's budget 
request and the spending cap of the Budget Control Act (BCA). 
The committee believes this authorization is necessary to help 
the U.S. military restore readiness, rebuild capacity, and 
modernize the force for future challenges. The committee markup 
also builds on the important work of previous legislation to 
ensure our military is prepared to fulfill the missions of 
today and rise to the challenges of tomorrow.
    The committee markup:
           Authorizes critical funding for the 
        Department of Defense (DOD) to rebuild a ready and 
        capable force by increasing maritime capacity, 
        procuring combat aircraft and munitions, and reducing 
        the shortfall in end strength.
           Ensures the long-term viability of the All-
        Volunteer Force by improving the quality of life of the 
        men and women of the total force (Active Duty, National 
        Guard, and Reserves), their families, and DOD civilian 
        personnel through fair pay and policies as well as 
        continued reform of the military health system.
           Continues a comprehensive overhaul of the 
        acquisition system to ensure that our men and women in 
        uniform have the equipment they need to succeed and 
        drives innovation by allocating funds for advanced 
        technology development and next-generation capabilities 
        to ensure America's military dominance.
           Advances our ability to protect our allies, 
        partners, and friends.
           Enhances the capability of the U.S. Armed 
        Forces and the security forces of allied and partner 
        nations to defeat ISIS, al Qaeda, and other violent 
        extremist organizations.
           Improves the ability of the U.S. Armed 
        Forces to counter threats in the information domain, 
        including space, cyber, and electronic warfare.
           Reduces the threats from nuclear weapons and 
        materials by strengthening nonproliferation programs, 
        modernizing our nuclear deterrent, and ensuring the 
        safety, security, and reliability of our nuclear 
        stockpile, delivery systems, and infrastructure.
           Terminates troubled or redundant programs 
        and activities, identifies efficiencies, and reduces 
        unnecessary defense expenditures to make the best use 
        of taxpayer dollars.
           Promotes aggressive and thorough oversight 
        of the Department's programs and activities to ensure 
        compliance with relevant laws and regulations and 
        proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

     SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS AND BUDGET AUTHORITY 
                              IMPLICATION

    The administration's budget request for national defense 
discretionary programs within the jurisdiction of the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services for fiscal year 2018 was $659.8 
billion. Of this amount, $574.7 billion was requested for base 
Department of Defense (DOD) programs, $20.5 billion was 
requested for national security programs in the Department of 
Energy (DOE) and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
(DNFSB), and $64.6 billion was requested for Overseas 
Contingency Operations (OCO).
    The committee recommends an overall discretionary 
authorization of $692.1 billion in fiscal year 2018, including 
$610.9 billion for base DOD programs, $21.0 billion for 
national security programs in the DOE and the DNFSB, and $60.2 
billion for OCO.
    The two tables preceding the detailed program adjustments 
in Division D of this bill summarize the direct discretionary 
authorizations in the committee recommendation and the 
equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2018 defense 
programs. The first table summarizes the committee's 
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation 
account for fiscal year 2018 and compares these amounts to the 
request.
    The second table summarizes the total budget authority 
implication for national defense by including national defense 
funding for items that are not in the jurisdiction of the 
defense committees or are already authorized.

                 BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT (SEC. 4)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that the budgetary effects of this Act be determined in 
accordance with the procedures established in the Statutory 
Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (title I of Public Law 111-139).

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for procurement activities at the levels 
identified in section 4101 of division D of this Act.

                       Subtitle B--Army Programs

Transfer of excess High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles to 
        foreign countries (sec. 111)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV) 
designated for transfer as Excess Defense Articles (EDA) must 
be modernized and refurbished to like-new conditions by U.S. 
workers prior to transfer, so as not to create conditions that 
distort current and future costs to the U.S. Government.
    The committee is aware of the existing requirement of 
section 2321j(b)(1)(E) of title 22, United States Code, that 
the transfer of EDAs to U.S. allies and partner nations will 
not harm the U.S. industrial base. The committee is concerned 
that the current state of practice for proposed EDA transfers 
of HMMWVs does not comply with the title 22, United States 
Code, requirement and threatens the long-term viability and 
affordability of the Army fleet of wheeled vehicles, 
specifically Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicles.
    According to the Army's ``Tactical Wheeled Vehicle 
Strategy,'' the HMMWV will remain the Army's primary light 
tactical wheeled vehicle for the foreseeable future. Even after 
the planned procurement of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, 
the HMMWV is projected to comprise nearly two-thirds of the 
light tactical wheeled vehicle fleet until at least 2050. To 
carry out planned sustainment and modernization of the HMMWV 
fleet over this period, the Army relies upon the original 
equipment manufacturer and commercial supply chain and Army 
Organic Industrial Base (AOIB) facilities, including Red River 
Army Depot, Texas and Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois.
    U.S. Government procurement accounts for less than one-
quarter of current HMMWV production. As such, per unit costs to 
the Army for the repair, refurbishment, modernization, and new 
production of HMMWVs depend directly upon vehicle sales to 
foreign entities. These foreign sales drive demand signals for 
the commercial supply chain across 43 states, help meet core 
workload requirements for the AOIB, and are essential for the 
Army to retain a capable and affordable HMMWV fleet in the 
future.
    The committee strongly supports the transfer of excess 
HMMWVs to meet the operational needs of U.S. allies and 
partners and recognizes the potential for circumstances 
requiring exceptional urgency. Accordingly, the provision would 
include authority for the Secretary of Defense to waive the 
requirements of this section if doing so is in the national 
security interests of the United States, provided that such a 
waiver is received at least 30 days in advance of any planned 
transfer and complies with the requirements of section 060403 
of volume 3, chapter 6, of the Department of Defense Financial 
Management Regulation.
Limitation on availability of funds for Army Air-Land Mobile Tactical 
        Communications and Data Network, including Warfighter 
        Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) (sec. 112)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to report to Congress how the Army 
intends to implement the recommendations of the Director of 
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) for the Army's 
Air-Land Mobile Tactical Communications and Data Network to 
include the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) 
program. In accordance with section 237 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) CAPE 
conducted a comprehensive assessment of WIN-T to determine the 
technological feasibility, achievability, suitability, and 
survivability of a tactical communications and data network. 
This report is to be submitted with the budget request for 
Fiscal Year 2019. The provision would also prohibit the 
Secretary of the Army from obligating any funds available in 
Other Procurement, Army for the WIN-T, Increment 2 (Inc 2) 
program subject to the submission of the Army's report.
    The committee is aware that the Army's WIN-T is intended to 
be the foundation to the Army's tactical network modernization 
strategy and a critical component of the suite of tactical 
mission command systems being fielded now. The Army assesses 
this program as essential to warfighter communications 
capabilities and will continue to deliver incremental increases 
in command and control superiority over time. WIN-T is to 
introduce a mobile, self-forming/self-healing network using 
satellite and terrestrial on-the-move capabilities and high-
bandwidth radio systems to keep mobile forces connected, 
communicating, and synchronized. It has had two increments. 
WIN-T Increment 1 (Inc 1) provides networking ``at the halt.'' 
WIN-T Inc 2 is intended to provide the Army with on-the-move 
networking capability. The WIN-T Inc 2 network retains 
capabilities delivered by WIN-T Inc 1. WIN-T Inc 2 employs 
satellite communications while on-the-move to extend the 
network in maneuver brigade down to the company level for the 
first time. The program is in full rate production. Total WIN-T 
procurement costs to date are over $5.0 billion. The current 
program is intended to spend an additional $9.0 billion. The 
total procurement cost is estimated to be over $14.0 billion. 
However, total sunk and projected costs for the entire network, 
as estimated by the CAPE study, are in excess of $66.0 billion.
    The committee has observed many problems with the network 
in general and WIN-T in particular. This is especially so in 
regard to Inc 2. Many problems have occurred in integrating the 
``upper tactical network'' with the ``lower tactical network.'' 
These problems disrupt connectivity between brigade combat 
teams and battalions with companies. Integrating WIN-T hardware 
with armored vehicles has yet to be conclusively determined. It 
is unclear if the Army has fully defined the requirements for 
tactical close combat forces at company level. The committee 
understands that the Army is reassessing its total requirement 
and determining a new course of action in light of the above 
noted problems.
    The committee is concerned about the continued suitability, 
effectiveness, security, and survivability of Army Air-Land 
Mobile Tactical Communications and Data Network and WIN-T given 
demonstrated threat capabilities of peer adversaries in 
electronic warfare attack, electronic reconnaissance, and 
massed fire strikes.
    The committee continues to encourage the Army to repair 
identified problems and to more carefully redefine its 
requirements for the network and WIN-T program. The committee 
further encourages the Army to leverage its new acquisition 
authorities to seek non-developmental technologies to repair 
and improve the network. This effort is key given investments 
to date.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs

Multiyear procurement authority for Virginia class submarine program 
        (sec. 121)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to procure up to 13 Virginia-class 
submarines under one or more multiyear contracts subject to 
section 2306b of title 10, United States Code. The Secretary 
would also be authorized to enter into one or more contracts 
for advance procurement associated with such vessels and 
equipment beginning in fiscal year 2018. These authorities 
would be subject to the availability of appropriations or 
funds.
    The committee notes this would be the fourth multiyear 
contract for the Virginia-class program. The Navy estimates 
that the previous three multiyear procurement contracts (fiscal 
years 2003-2008, 2009-2013, and 2014-2018) achieved savings of 
greater than 10 percent, as compared to annual procurements. 
For the fourth contract for fiscal years 2019-2023, the Navy is 
estimating savings of 14 percent, or in excess of $5.0 billion, 
for the multiyear procurement of 10 ships as compared to annual 
procurement contracts.
    The committee believes that should additional funds become 
available for Virginia-class submarines, above what is planned 
in the fiscal year 2018 future years defense program, the Navy 
should obtain the benefits and savings of this authority for up 
to 13 submarines.
Arleigh Burke class destroyers (sec. 122)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to procure up to 15 Arleigh Burke-
class Flight III guided missile destroyers under one or more 
multiyear contracts subject to section 2306b of title 10, 
United States Code, beginning no earlier than the fourth 
quarter of fiscal year 2018. This authority would be subject to 
the availability of appropriations or funds. The committee also 
recommends modifying the authority to procure an additional 
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer provided in section 125(a)(1) of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92).
    The committee notes this would be the fourth multiyear 
contract for the Arleigh Burke-class program. The Navy 
estimates that each of the previous three multiyear procurement 
contracts (fiscal years 1998-2001, 2002-2005, and 2013-2017) 
achieved savings of greater than $1.0 billion, as compared to 
annual procurements. For the fourth contract for fiscal years 
2018-2022, the Navy is estimating savings of 9.3 percent, or in 
excess of $1.8 billion, for the multiyear procurement of 10 
ships as compared to annual procurement contracts.
    The committee believes that should additional funds become 
available for Arleigh Burke-class Flight III guided missile 
destroyers, above what is planned in the fiscal year 2018 
future years defense program, the Navy should obtain the 
benefits and savings of this authority for up to 15 ships.
    In authorizing procurement of an additional Arleigh Burke-
class destroyer in section 125(a)(1) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), the 
committee's intent was and continues to be use of a fixed-price 
contract with a fair and reasonable cost as determined by the 
Navy service acquisition executive, which is consistent with 
the contracts for Arleigh Burke-class destroyers awarded in 
fiscal years 2011-2017 and planned for fiscal year 2018.
Multiyear procurement authority for V-22 joint aircraft program (sec. 
        123)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Department of Defense authority to enter into multiyear 
procurement for the V-22 aircraft for up to five years.
Design and construction of amphibious ship replacement designated LX(R) 
        or amphibious transport dock designated LPD-30 (sec. 124)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to enter into and incrementally fund 
a contract for design and construction of the amphibious ship 
replacement designated LX(R) or the amphibious transport dock 
designated LPD-30.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of the Navy, the 
Chief of Naval Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine 
Corps support the LX(R) as a derivative of the San Antonio-
class (LPD-17) hull form. The committee further notes the 
latest ``Navy Force Structure Assessment,'' which was published 
in December 2016, increased the requirement for amphibious 
ships from 34 to 38.
Modification of cost limitation baseline for CVN-78 class aircraft 
        carrier program (sec. 125)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
$12.0 billion cost limitation for procurement of aircraft 
carriers after CVN-79.
    The committee notes the contract award and delivery dates 
of CVN-80 are approximately 3 years after those of CVN-79 and 
the ship authorizations are 5 years apart. The committee also 
notes the Secretary of the Navy certified to the congressional 
defense committees on April 22, 2016, that CVN-80 will repeat 
the design of CVN-79.
    The committee understands the budget request's CVN-80 cost 
estimate assumed between 2.0 and 2.5 percent in annual economic 
inflation from CVN-79 to CVN-80. The committee also understands 
the Navy's aircraft carrier program office is estimating a 9 
percent reduction in production man hours from CVN-79 to CVN-
80.
    The committee views the increase of $1.6 billion in the 
procurement cost from CVN-79 ($11.4 billion) to CVN-80 ($13.0 
billion) as unjustified. The committee believes $12.0 billion 
is an achievable procurement end cost for CVN-80, based on 5 
years between ship authorizations, inflation, man hour 
reductions, and other factors.
    The committee further believes the Navy should aggressively 
challenge economic inflation assumptions to drive down costs in 
each cost category. The committee notes the plans and ordnance 
cost elements for CVN-80 are less than CVN-79 after accounting 
for inflation. In contrast, the other cost, basic construction, 
change orders, and propulsion equipment cost elements are 
estimated to increase 14.4 percent, 19.8 percent, 27.1 percent, 
and 30.8 percent from CVN-79 to CVN-80, respectively.
    The committee also believes the cost growth between CVN-79 
and CVN-80, which the Navy largely attributes to inflation, 
should be at least partially offset by savings through ``design 
for affordability'' initiatives, Ford-class learning curve, 
CVN-80 repeating the design of CVN-79, man hour reductions, and 
increased competition.
Extension of limitation on use of sole-source shipbuilding contracts 
        for certain vessels (sec. 126)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend to 
include fiscal year 2018 the prohibition on funds from being 
used to enter into, or prepare to enter into, sole source 
contracts for one or more Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) or 
Expeditionary Fast Transports (EPF), unless the Secretary of 
the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees a 
certification and a report.
    The committee notes that since 2011 the Navy requirement 
for EPFs has been 10 ships, which was most recently validated 
in December 2016. In 2013, this requirement was met with the 
procurement of the tenth EPF, and the Navy planned to shut down 
the production line.
    Without an authorization or request in the President's 
budget request, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-235) included procurement 
of an eleventh EPF at a cost of $200.0 million. Again, without 
an authorization or request in the President's budget, a 
twelfth EPF was added at a cost of $225.0 million into the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-113). Both of these EPFs were awarded to a 
single shipbuilder, with no competition, using a sole source 
contract.

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

Inventory requirement for Air Force fighter aircraft (sec. 131)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 8062 of title 10, United States Code, by adding a new 
subsection requiring the Secretary of the Air Force to maintain 
a minimum total active inventory of 1,970 fighter aircraft, 
within which the Secretary would also have to maintain a 
minimum of 1,145 fighter aircraft as primary mission aircraft 
inventory (combat-coded).
    The provision would also provide additional limitations on 
fighter retirements by requiring the Secretary of the Air Force 
to certify to the congressional defense committees that:
          (1) The retirement of such fighter aircraft will not 
        increase the operational risk of meeting the National 
        Defense Strategy; and
          (2) The retirement of such aircraft will not reduce 
        the total fighter force structure below 1,970 fighter 
        aircraft or primary mission aircraft inventory below 
        1,145 and would require a report setting forth the 
        following:
                  (a) The rationale for the retirement of 
                existing fighter aircraft and an operational 
                analysis of replacement fighter aircraft that 
                demonstrates performance of the designated 
                mission at an equal or greater level of 
                effectiveness as the retiring aircraft;
                  (b) An assessment of the implications for the 
                Air Force, the Air National Guard, and the Air 
                Force Reserve of the force mix ratio of fighter 
                aircraft; and
                  (c) Such other matters relating to the 
                retirement of fighter aircraft as the Secretary 
                considers appropriate.
    Lastly, the provision would also require a notification at 
least 90 days prior to the date on which a fighter aircraft is 
retired that includes the following:
          (1) A list of each fighter aircraft proposed for 
        retirement, including for each such aircraft:
                  (a) The mission design series type;
                  (b) The variant; and
                  (c) The assigned unit and military 
                installation where such aircraft is based, and 
                how such unit and installation is affected.
          (2) For each military installation and unit affected 
        by the proposed retirement, changes, if any, to the 
        designed operational capability (DOC) statement of the 
        unit as a result of a proposed retirement.
          (3) Any anticipated changes in manpower 
        authorizations as a result of a proposed retirement 
        listed under (2) above.
    The provision would also provide for exceptions to the 
reporting requirements for individual fighter aircraft if the 
Secretary determines, on a case-by-case basis, they are 
nonoperational because of mishaps, other damage, or being 
uneconomical to repair.
    The committee understands the Air Force previously 
determined through extensive analysis that a force structure of 
1,200 primary mission aircraft and 2,000 total aircraft is 
required to execute the National Defense Strategy with 
increased operational risk. On March 29, 2017, in response to a 
question on the Air Force's actual total fighter aircraft 
requirement, Lieutenant General Jerry Harris, Deputy Chief of 
Staff for Strategic Plans, Programs, and Requirements, 
testified, ``. . . we think the 1,900 number is a bare minimum 
at the floor. We think it's probably closer to 2,100, a little 
above that for our fighter aircraft.'' At the same hearing, in 
response to a question on retiring the F-15C fleet, General 
Harris testified, ``It is something that we're looking at as we 
continue to bring in more fifth-gen capability, what assets do 
we push out at the bottom of that chain.''
    The Air Force currently fields 55 fighter squadrons in 
fiscal year 2017 and as of May 1, 2017, possesses 1,970 total 
fighter aircraft inventory and 1,145 primary mission aircraft 
inventory, otherwise known as ``combat-coded'' fighter 
aircraft. The committee is concerned that retiring entire 
fleets such as the F-15C and the A-10C, without acquiring 
sufficient replacement aircraft, will drive the fighter 
aircraft inventory further below the level the Air Force states 
is required.
    The committee believes further reductions in fighter force 
capacity below the levels that would be required by this 
provision would: (1) pose excessive risk to the Air Force's 
ability to execute the National Defense Strategy; (2) cause 
remaining fighter squadrons to deploy more frequently; and (3) 
drive readiness rates lower across the combat air forces. In 
light of ongoing operations in Iraq and Syria against the 
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and in Afghanistan, and the 
increasing military capabilities of China, Russia, North Korea, 
and Iran, such reductions would be ill-advised.
Comptroller General review of total force integration initiatives for 
        reserve component rescue squadrons (Sec. 132)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Comptroller General of the United States to review the Air 
Force's plan for fielding HH-60 helicopter replacement 
programs, and provide a briefing on such review, no later than 
March 1, 2018, to the congressional defense committees.

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

F-35 economic order quantity contracting authority (sec. 141)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Department of Defense authority to enter into economic order 
quantity contracts for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
    The committee remains highly supportive of the F-35 Joint 
Strike Fighter program and of efforts to procure increasing 
numbers of aircraft at the lowest possible price. However, the 
program is still in its System Design and Demonstration (SDD) 
phase and at least two years until it reaches Milestone C, 
typically the point at which the full rate production decision 
is made.
    The committee recognizes economic order quantity contracts 
can produce cost savings. However, the committee believes the 
Department should provide analysis similar to what is required 
by a multiyear procurement authority, particularly considering 
the significant level of funding expected to be expended under 
this authority.
Authority for Explosive Ordnance Disposal units to acquire new or 
        emerging technologies and capabilities (sec. 142)
    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of Defense to provide Explosive Ordnance Disposal 
(EOD) units with the authority to acquire new or emerging EOD 
technologies and capabilities not listed in the Table of 
Allowance or Table of Equipment.

                              Budget Items

                                  ARMY

AH-64 Apache Block IIIA Remanufacture
    The budget request included $935.9 million in line number 6 
of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for AH-64 Apache Block 
IIIA Remanufacture. The committee recommends an increase $39.0 
million in AH-64 Apache Block IIIA Remanufacture. This is on 
the Army unfunded priority list.
AH-64 Apache Block IIIB New Build
    The budget request included $446.0 million in line number 8 
of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for AH-64 Apache Block 
IIIB New Build. The committee recommends an increase of $273.7 
million in AH-64 Apache Block IIIB New Build. This is on the 
Army unfunded priority list.
Common Missile Warning System (CMWS)
    The budget request included $166.6 million in line number 
33 of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for Common Missile 
Warning System (CMWS). The committee recommends an increase 
$25.0 million in APA for CMWS. This is on the Army unfunded 
priority list.
Common Infrared Countermeasure (CIRCM)
    The budget request included $49.8 million in line number 34 
of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA), for Common Infrared 
Countermeasure (CIRCM). The committee recommends an increase 
$25.0 million in APA for CIRCM. This is on the Army unfunded 
priority list.
Indirect Fire Protection Capability
    The budget request included $57.7 million in line number 3 
of Missile Procurement, Army, for Indirect Fire Protection 
Capability Inc 2-1. The committee notes that there is prior 
year funds available that are in excess of program needs. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $19.0 million.
Joint Air-to-Ground Missile
    The budget request included $178.4 million in line number 6 
of Missile Procurement, Army, for Joint Air-to-Ground Msls 
(JAGM). The committee notes that there are available funds due 
to a delay in production decision. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $45.0 million.
Bradley program
    The budget request included $200.0 million in line number 1 
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, (WTCV) 
Army, for Bradley program. The committee notes an Army unfunded 
requirement. The committee recommends an increase of $111.0 
million in line item number G80718, specifically for the 
recapitalization of 1 infantry Battalion Set of M2A4 Bradley 
Fighting Vehicles.
Abrams Upgrade Program
    The budget request included $275.0 million in line 15 of 
Procurement of Wheeled and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army 
(WTCV), for the Abrams Upgrade Program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $561.0 million in the Abrams Upgrade 
Program. This recapitalization of 29 Abrams tanks into 
M1A2SEPv3, Trophy Active Protection Systems, and production 
base support is on the Army unfunded priority list.
Multi-Role Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon System
    The budget request included $6.5 million in line item 19 of 
Procurement of Wheeled and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army 
(WTCV), for Multi-Role Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon System. 
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for 
Multi-Role Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon System. This is on 
the Army unfunded priority list.
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV)
    The budget request included $53.0 million in line number 3 
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for High Mobility Multi-
purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). The committee recommends an 
increase of $15.0 million in OPA for HMMWV. This is on the Army 
unfunded priority list.
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical
    The budget request included $420.5 million in line number 
19 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Warfighter Information 
Network-Tactical (WIN-T). The committee notes an early to need 
requirement in the budget for fiscal year 2018. The committee 
is also aware that the WIN-T program is significantly 
challenged by dated requirements, vulnerabilities to electronic 
warfare, and cyber attacks and reliability issues. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $420.5 million in OPA for 
WIN-T.
Distributed Common Ground System-Army (Military Intelligence Program)
    The budget request included $314.3 million in line item 68 
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Distributed Common Ground 
System-Army (DCGS-A). The committee notes the program has 
changing tactical requirements for fiscal year 2018. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $150.0 million in OPA for 
DCGS-A.
Night Vision Test Equipment
    The budget request included $166.5 million in Other 
Procurement, Army (OPA), line number 84, for night vision 
devices.
    The committee urges all services to consider the use of 
next generation digital night vision test sets with a high-
resolution video camera to support mission critical night 
vision devices. The committee understands that the United 
States Air Force readily adopted the new digital test sets 
while continuing to assess the added benefits of the integrated 
high-resolution camera solution. When combined together, the 
test set and camera greatly improve test accuracy while 
eliminating the inherent subjectivity of the legacy test 
systems. The committee further understands that U.S. Special 
Operations Command is the first military organization to field 
the integrated high-resolution camera into the digital test 
set. The committee encourages the services to procure next 
generation digital night vision test devices with a high-
resolution camera.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million (in conjunction with other budget increases elsewhere 
in this Act) in OPA, line number 84, for a total of $231.5 
million for the procurement of 50 new night vision testing 
devices.
Data Processing equipment
    The budget request included $92.0 million in line number 
108 of Other Procurement Army, (OPA), for automated data 
processing equipment. The committee notes that the Army is 
moving towards adoption of more commercial information 
technology (IT) solutions, including commercial cloud and 
networking capabilities, and consolidating more IT purchases 
with other DOD elements and Services. The committee directs the 
Army to accelerate these efforts, and therefore recommends a 
reduction of $15.0 million for this effort.
Warfighter Information Network Tactical (WIN-T) Increment 2 Spares
    The budget request included $38.3 million in line number 
184 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Warfighter 
Information Network Tactical (WIN-T) Increment 2 Spares. The 
committee notes an early to need requirement in the budget for 
fiscal year 2018. The committee recommends a decrease of $23.9 
million in line item number BS9741 of OPA, for WIN-T Increment 
2 Spares.
Army Unfunded Requirements List
    The budget request included $18.4 billion for Procurement 
for the Army.
    The committee notes that the Army submitted an extensive 
Unfunded Requirements List totaling $12.7 billion. The 
committee believes that since the passage of the Budget Control 
Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by artificial 
constraints rather than the realities of the global strategic 
environment. This reality has continued for the fiscal year 
2018 budget request, which too relies on an arbitrary number 
determined six years ago in the Budget Control Act. Such 
constraints on the budget, along with a sustained high 
operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation in our 
military readiness in the near term, and the threat that we 
will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the last 
several years military leaders have highlighted these problems 
in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $6.4 billion to Procurement for the Army for items 
identified in the Army's Unfunded Requirements List. Some 
increases include missiles, helicopters, vehicles and equipment 
to support growth in the Army. Greater details of each increase 
can be found in the tables in Division D.

                                  NAVY

V-22
    The budget request included $677.4 million in line number 
10 of Aviation Procurement, Navy (APN) for V-22 (Medium Lift).
    The committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in 
line number 10 of APN.
Carrier replacement program
    The budget request included $4.4 billion in line item 2 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for the carrier 
replacement program.
    The committee understands the Comptroller General has 
identified $330.3 million in excess CVN-80 inflation costs. The 
committee also notes Navy officials have indicated an amended 
fiscal year 2018 budget request will be submitted to reduce the 
CVN-80 procurement end cost by $325.0 million. The committee 
believes further cost reductions are achievable through 
``design for affordability'' initiatives, Ford-class learning 
curve, man hour reductions, and increased competition.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $300.0 
million for this program.
Virginia-class submarine advance procurement
    The budget request included $1.9 billion in line item 5 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Virginia-class 
submarine advance procurement.
    The committee notes that $750.0 million in additional 
economic order quantity funding for the Block V Virginia-class 
submarines that begin procurement in fiscal year 2019 would 
enable greater cost savings across the program.
    The committee recommends an additional $450.0 million for 
the Secretary of the Navy to use for (1) procurement of a third 
Virginia-class submarine in fiscal year 2020; or (2) to expand 
second and third tier contractors in the submarine industrial 
base to support planned increased production requirements, 
which may include economic order quantity procurement for 
existing programs.
    If the Secretary pursues option (2), the Secretary shall 
notify the congressional defense committees within 30 days of 
obligating funds for such purpose of the: obligation date, 
contractor name or names, location, description of the 
shortfall to be addressed, actions to be undertaken, desired 
end state, usable end items to be procured, period of 
performance, dollar amount, projected associated savings 
including business case analysis if applicable, contract name, 
and contract number.
    The committee believes that utilizing economic order 
quantity procurement, procuring an additional submarine, and 
expanding the capabilities of the supplier base should lead to 
greater cost savings and improved efficiency as production 
increases to meet the Columbia-class schedule and higher 
requirement for attack submarines in the Navy's latest Force 
Structure Assessment.
    The committee also notes Virginia-class submarines will 
benefit from savings associated with missile tube continuous 
production and economic order quantity authorities. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $27.0 
million due to the associated savings.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a net increase of $1.2 
billion.
DDG-1000
    The budget request included $224.0 million in line item 8 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for the DDG-1000 
program. Following a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach in 2010, the 
committee understands the Navy was directed to fund the DDG-
1000 program to the higher cost estimate for fiscal years 2011 
through 2015 provided by the Director of the Office of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation, and to the Navy's cost 
estimate for fiscal year 2016 and beyond.
    While recognizing this cost estimating adjustment increased 
procurement costs, the committee is concerned by continued 
significant cost growth in this program across the fiscal year 
2016 to 2020 period. In the fiscal year 2016, 2017, and 2018 
budget requests, the Navy estimated $572.9 million, $914.3 
million, and $1.1 billion, respectively, remaining in 
procurement costs across the three-ship program. The committee 
notes the program unit cost has risen above $6.4 billion and 
urges the Secretary of the Navy to take further measures to 
regain cost control.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 
million for this program.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
    The budget request included $3.5 billion in line item 9 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Arleigh Burke-
class destroyers (DDG-51).
    The committee notes that the fiscal year 2016 budget 
request included funding for two Flight IIA DDG-51 ships and a 
Flight III engineering change proposal (ECP) to be applied to 
one of these two ships. The National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 
114-113) supported the budget request.
    The committee further notes that the Navy funded the two 
requested fiscal year 2016 Flight IIA DDG-51 ships on March 29, 
2016. However, the committee is unaware of a plan to award the 
fiscal year 2016 Flight III ECP.
    The committee therefore recommends a decrease of $225.0 
million for this program, because the fiscal year 2016 Flight 
III ECP funds can be applied to fiscal year 2018 Arleigh Burke-
class destroyer requirements.
    The committee also recommends an increase of $1.8 billion 
for one additional Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a net increase of 
$1.6 billion.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer advance procurement
    The budget request included $90.3 million in line item 10 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Arleigh Burke-
class destroyer advance procurement.
    The committee believes that utilizing economic order 
quantity procurement across the proposed fiscal year 2018 to 
2022 multiyear procurement contract should lead to greater cost 
savings and improved efficiency.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $300.0 
million.
Littoral Combat Ship
    The budget request included $636.1 million in line item 11 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement of 
one Littoral Combat Ship.
    The committee notes unjustified unit cost growth in the 
other cost ($37.0 million) and other electronics ($3.0 million) 
categories.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $40.0 
million for this program.
Amphibious ship replacement LX(R) or amphibious transport dock 
        designated LPD-30
    The budget request included no funding in line items 12 or 
13 for procurement or advance procurement associated with the 
amphibious ship replacement LX(R) or amphibious transport dock 
designated LPD-30.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of the Navy, the 
Chief of Naval Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine 
Corps support the LX(R) as a derivative of the San Antonio-
class (LPD-17) hull form. The committee further notes the 
latest Navy Force Structure Assessment, which was published in 
December 2016, increased the requirement for amphibious ships 
from 34 to 38.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
billion for construction of either an amphibious ship 
replacement LX(R) or the amphibious transport dock designated 
LPD-30.
Outfitting
    The budget request included $548.7 million in line item 24 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for outfitting.
    Based on planned delivery dates, the committee notes post-
delivery funding is early to need for SSN-791, LCS-15, LCS-17, 
LCS-19, LCS-20, LHA-7, and EPF-11.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $38.2 
million.
Ship to Shore Connector
    The budget request included $212.6 million in line item 25 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement of 
3 Ship to Shore Connectors.
    The committee notes unjustified unit cost growth in this 
program.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 
million.
Expeditionary Sea Base
    The budget request included no funding in line item 14 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Expeditionary Sea 
Bases.
    The committee recommends an increase of $661.0 million for 
one additional Expeditionary Sea Base.
Cable ship
    The budget request included no funding in line item 32 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for a cable ship.
    The committee recommends an increase of $250.0 million for 
procurement of one cable ship and directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to utilize an existing United States or foreign design, 
with modifications he deems necessary, to maximize 
affordability and expedite delivery.
Hybrid Electric Drive
    The budget request included $6.3 million in line item 4 of 
Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for Hybrid Electric Drive.
    The committee had insufficient budget justification to 
support this request. Specifically, the P-3a budget exhibit was 
omitted, which details ship modifications.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.3 
million for this program.
LCS support equipment
    The budget request included $48.0 million in line item 17 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for Littoral Combat Ship 
(LCS) support equipment.
    The committee notes this request includes procurement of 
two MT-30 engines, one Freedom variant main propulsion diesel 
engine (MPDE), and one Independence variant MPDE to serve as 
battle spares.
    The committee further notes the Navy has previously 
procured three MT-30s, two Freedom variant MPDEs, and two 
Independence variant MPDEs in this line item. The committee 
also notes the P-5a and P-21 budget exhibits were omitted, 
which detail procurement history and production schedules, and 
requests these exhibits be restored in the fiscal year 2019 
budget request.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $42.6 
million for this program due to procurement early to need.
LCS mine countermeasures mission modules
    The budget request included $55.9 million in line item 37 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for Littoral Combat Ship 
(LCS) mine countermeasures (MCM) mission modules.
    The committee notes this request included procurement of 
two Airborne Mine Neutralization Systems (AMNS). The committee 
further notes that the initial operational capability of the 
MCM mission module is planned for fiscal year 2021 and believes 
at least one AMNS is early to need.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.1 
million for this program.
Navy Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
    The budget request included $4.2 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN), BLI 8106 for Navy Enterprise Resource 
Planning (ERP) in Command Support Equipment. The committee is 
concerned about duplication among the military services in 
enterprise resource systems. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $4.2 million in BLI 8106.
Navy eProcurement System (Navy ePS)
    The budget request included $3.7 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN), BLI 8106 for the Navy eProcurement 
System in Command Support Equipment. The committee is concerned 
about duplication among the military services in contract 
writing systems. The committee recommends a decrease of $3.7 
million in BLI 8106.
Classified project
    The budget request included $23.7 million in line item 162 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for classified programs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 billion for 
project 0428.
Navy Unfunded Requirements List
    The budget request included $49.5 billion for Procurement 
for the Department of the Navy.
    The committee notes that the Navy and the Marine Corps 
submitted extensive Unfunded Requirements Lists totaling $8.5 
billion. The committee believes that since the passage of the 
Budget Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by 
artificial constraints rather than the realities of the global 
strategic environment. This reality has continued for the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined six years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $6.0 billion to Procurement for the Department of 
the Navy for items identified in the Navy and the Marine Corps' 
Unfunded Requirements Lists. Some increases include ten F/A-18 
Super Hornets, four F-35Bs and six F-35Cs, and munitions. 
Greater details of each increase can be found in the tables in 
Division D.

                               AIR FORCE

Acquisition of Air Force light attack/observation aircraft fleet
    The budget request included no funds in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for the acquisition of a fleet of 
light attack/observation aircraft.
    The committee believes while sustaining the A-10C fleet for 
close air support, the Air Force should procure a fleet of 300 
low-cost, light-attack/observation aircraft that would require 
minimal work to develop. These aircraft could conduct counter-
terrorism operations, perform close air support and other 
missions in permissive environments, and help season fighter 
pilots to mitigate the Air Force's growing and critical fighter 
pilot shortfall. The aircraft could also provide an affordable 
path to a light attack capability for allies, partners, and 
friends with limited financial resources. The Air Force could 
procure the first 200 of these aircraft by fiscal year 2022.
    The committee is concerned that continued reliance on the 
A-10, B-1, B-52, F-16, and F-15E fleets to conduct armed 
reconnaissance and close air support (CAS) missions in 
Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and other regions significantly 
reduces airframe lifespans due to utilization rates that are 
much higher than planned and programmed. Additionally, these 
operations will continue to reduce aircrew training focused on 
their primary designated operational capability tasked missions 
in high-end contested and degraded operations against near-peer 
potential adversaries.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.2 
billion in APAF, line number to be determined, for a total of 
$1.2 billion, for acquisition of a light attack/observation 
aircraft fleet. This effort will be informed by the Air Force's 
Light Attack Capabilities Experimentation Campaign conducted in 
fiscal year 2017 to evaluate capabilities for armed 
reconnaissance, strike control and reconnaissance, combat 
search and rescue, CAS, and other combat missions.
B-1B Squadrons
    The budget request included $155.6 million in line number 
19 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF).
    The committee notes that $34.0 million of that funding was 
included for F-101 Engine Service Life Extension Program. The 
committee notes that $34.0 million was appropriated in fiscal 
year 2017 for the same purposes and the fiscal year 2018 
request is thus excess to need.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $34.0 
million in line number 19 of APAF.
C-130 propulsion upgrades
    The budget request included $66.3 million in line number 47 
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF).
    The committee recommends an increase of $26.8 million in 
line number 47 of APAF.
Budget request realignment
    The Air Force requested that the committee make several 
realignments in their budget to correct various errors in their 
submission of the Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF). The 
table below reflects these adjustments:

                                      CHANGES TO CORRECT SUBMISSION ERRORS
                                                  [in millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Item                             Account     Line Item       Amount         Quantity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-130J................................................         APAF           88         -$102.1              -3
C-130J................................................         APAF            4         +$102.1              +3
C-130J................................................         APAF           37          -$10.7
C-130J Mods...........................................         APAF           48          +$10.7
Compass Call Mods.....................................         APAF           51       -$108.173
Compass Call..........................................         APAF          17A       +$108.173
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Force Unfunded Requirements List
    The budget request included $24.7 billion for Procurement 
for the Air Force.
    The committee notes that the Air Force submitted an 
extensive Unfunded Requirements List totaling $10.7 billion. 
The committee believes that since the passage of the Budget 
Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by 
artificial constraints rather than the realities of the global 
strategic environment. This reality has continued for the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined six years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.6 billion to Procurement for the Air Force for 
items identified in the Air Force's Unfunded Requirements List. 
Some increases include 14 F-35As, 2 KC-46s, and additional 
missiles. Greater details of each increase can be found in the 
tables in Division D.

                              Defense Wide

Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow Upper Tier Israeli cooperative 
        missile defense programs
    The budget request included $42.0 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide, PE 208866C, for Israeli Missile Defense 
Cooperative Programs in support of the Missile Defense Agency. 
The committee recommends an increase of $290.0 million in PE 
208866C, for a total of $332.0 million to continue procurement 
of Israel's multi-tiered missile defense systems. The 
additional funding shall be apportioned as follows: $50.0 
million for the Iron Dome Defense System (LIN MD83); $120.0 
million for the David's Sling Weapon's System (LIN MD 34); and 
$120.0 million for the Arrow Upper Tier (LIN MD20). Additional 
measures pertaining to this provision are contained in title 16 
of this Act.
Silent Knight Terrain Following Terrain Avoidance Radar
    The budget request included $159.0 million for Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), Rotary Wing Upgrades and Sustainment, line 
49, of which $44.1 million is for Silent Knight Terrain 
Following Terrain Avoidance Radar.
    The committee notes that during multi-ship interoperability 
flight testing, U.S. Special Operations Command identified 
close range formation radar performance issues that will 
require software modifications. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends a decrease of $7.5 million from PDW, Rotary Wing 
Upgrades and Sustainment, Line 49, for a total of $36.6 
million, and a corresponding increase of $7.5 million to 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide, 
Aviation Systems (PE1160403BB), for a total of $7.5 million, to 
address suitability and effectiveness issues associated with 
multi-ship formation interoperability of the Silent Knight 
Terrain Following Terrain Avoidance Radar program.
Degraded Visual Environment
    The budget request included $159.0 million for Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), Rotary Wing Upgrades and Sustainment, line 
49, of which $26.7 million is for the Degraded Visual 
Environment (DVE) program.
    The committee understands that collaboration between U.S. 
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and the Department of the 
Army on the development and fielding of DVE capabilities has 
resulted in efficiencies. As a result, SOCOM has requested the 
transfer of $6.0 million from PDW, Rotary Wing Upgrades and 
Sustainment to RDT&E (PE1160403BB) Aviation Systems, Line 251, 
to complete Special Operations Force-unique integration and 
qualification efforts for additional sensor technologies. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.0 
million to PDW, Rotary Wing Upgrades and Sustainment, Line 49, 
for a total of $20.7 million, and a corresponding increase of 
$6.0 million to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-wide, Aviation Systems (PE1160403BB), for a total of 
$6.0 million.
Shallow Water Combat Submersible
    The budget request includes $92.6 million for Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), Underwater Systems, line 62, of which $38.8 
million is for the Shallow Water Combat Submersible (SWCS).
    The committee understands that as a result of an 
intentional late fiscal year 2017 award to integrate design 
changes found during development testing, the proposed SWCS buy 
for fiscal year 2018 has been reduced by one vessel. As a 
result, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) has requested 
the transfer of $12.8 million from PDW, Underwater Systems, 
line 62, to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-wide, Maritime Systems (PE1160483BB) address 
developmental challenges with the Dry Combat Submersible (DCS) 
program. Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of 
$12.8 million to PDW, Underwater Systems, line 62, for a total 
of $26.0 million, and a corresponding increase of $12.8 million 
to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide, 
Maritime Systems (PE1160483BB), for a total of $34.3 million, 
for DCS capability enhancements.
Defense-Wide Unfunded Requirements List
    The budget request included $4.9 billion for Procurement 
for Defense-Wide.
    The committee notes that the Defense-Wide agencies 
submitted an extensive Unfunded Requirements List totaling 
$753.0 million. The committee believes that since the passage 
of the Budget Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been 
guided by artificial constraints rather than the realities of 
the global strategic environment. This reality has continued 
for the fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined six years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $347.5 million to Procurement for Defense-Wide for 
items identified in the Defense Wide Unfunded Requirements 
List. Increases include 24 additional THAAD interceptors. 
Greater details of each increase can be found in the tables in 
Division D.

                       Items of Special Interest

Air Force Low Density/High Demand assets
    ``Low Density/High Demand'' or ``LD/HD'' assets are defined 
as ``force elements consisting of major platforms, weapons 
systems, units, and/or personnel that possess unique mission 
capabilities and are in continual high demand to support 
worldwide joint military operations''. Air Force LD/HD assets 
are required by Combatant Commanders around the globe during 
contingency operations as well as critical to their war plans 
and include both the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar 
System (JSTARS) and Airborne Early Warning and Control (AWACS). 
Currently, the Air Force does not possess enough of these 
aircraft to meet wartime requirements due to low numbers 
driving higher required mission capability rates and a high 
operations tempo due to the constant demand in support of 
contingency operations around the globe. The committee is 
concerned that any reduction in these assets before a follow on 
system is in production puts our national security at high risk 
and will immediately create gaps in capability. Therefore, the 
committee recommends that the Secretary of the Air Force ensure 
replacement assets be in production before retirement of any 
LD/HD assets.
Aircrew Restraint
    The Committee is aware of aircraft mishaps where helicopter 
crewmembers have experienced injuries due to the type of 
restraints in use. The fiscal year 2017 NDAA directed the 
Secretary of Defense, in partnership with a federally funded 
research and development center, to study technologies designed 
to prevent and mitigate helicopter injuries to crewmembers and 
to improve survivability among individuals involved in such 
crashes. The Committee is aware of tested, off-the-shelf 
technology (MARS--Mobile Aircrew Restraint System) currently in 
use by the U.S. Air Force and planned for use by the U.S. Navy, 
that meets the goals of the fiscal year 2017 NDAA and provides 
dramatic reductions in injury probability as compared to the 
existing tether and gunner's belt solution. The U.S. Air Force 
has issued an Air Worthiness Release (AWR) for this device in 
HH-60 aircraft and while the Committee acknowledges that the 
Army has taken preliminary steps to publish its own AWR for 
fielding this technology in UH-60 aircraft, the two platforms 
are almost identical.
    The committee recommends the Army use the tests and 
approvals of the MARS system from the U.S. Air Force for the 
UH-60 aircraft and accelerate the issuance of Safe for Flight 
instructions.
Amphibious assault ship acceleration
    The committee is concerned with the Navy procurement 
profile for large deck amphibious assault ships, which includes 
a span of seven years until the next large deck amphibious 
assault ship (LHA-9) is procured in 2024.
    The committee notes efficiencies could be gained by 
reducing this span and thereby enabling a steadier workforce 
with an increased learning curve, material and equipment 
suppliers on more reliable and fixed delivery contracts and a 
more effective continuous improvement schedule.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to 
accelerate procurement of LHA-9 to not later than 2021.
Apache and Black Hawk Drive Train and Transmission Weapon System 
        Components Rapid Deployment
    The Committee recognizes that the Army has stated that 
their top aviation priority is the development of a turbine 
engine, drive train, and transmission, which increases power 
output and reduces fuel consumption of the engines fitted to 
Black Hawk and Apache helicopters. Section 806 of the fiscal 
year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act provides new 
funding and acquisition flexibility to experiment with, 
prototype, and rapidly deploy weapon system components and 
other technologies in order to outpace rapidly changing 
technologies and threats. In selecting prototype projects under 
Section 2447c, of title 10, the Committee urges the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition Logistics and Technology 
(ALT), Army Program Executive Officer (PEO) Aviation, and 
relevant Section 2447b oversight boards, to consult with the 
domestic drive train and transmission industry concerning 
innovative drive train and transmission component technologies 
which address one or more of the elements in subsection (c)(1) 
of section 2447b as applicable to the two rotorcraft systems.
Arctic Search and Rescue
    The committee is aware that growing international interest 
in the Arctic has led to increasing commercial and security 
activity in the High North. With this steady surge in demand, 
the committee remains concerned by the limited capabilities of 
the United States to conduct search and rescue operations 
throughout the Arctic region. The committee notes that the 
Department of Defense's Report to Congress on Strategy to 
Protect United States National Security Interests in the Arctic 
Region, a report required by this committee in Section 1068 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(P.L. 114-92), identified the need for additional personnel 
recovery capability in this region. Specifically, the report 
calls for ``forward deployed/based assets in a sustainable 
location and/or rapidly deployable air drop response/
sustainment packages suitable to remote land, cold water, or 
ice pack operating environments.''
    The committee understands that the Alaska National Guard 
currently possesses two air-dropped, palletized Arctic 
Sustainment Packages (ASPs) to enable the survival of fifty 
individuals for three or more days in extreme Arctic 
conditions. The ASP is rapidly deployable over varied terrain, 
and allows personnel to survive and operate in the High North. 
In light of emerging commercial and security requirements in 
the region, the committee believes that additional ASPs are 
needed to meet personnel recovery requirements, and urges the 
Secretary of Defense to prioritize their resourcing.
Army Force Structure--Retaining a Full BCT
    Since 2012, the U.S. Army had charted a course to reduce 
the Active component from 570,000 to 450,000 service members. 
In 2015, as a part of the reduction in end-strength, the Army 
recommended that the 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th 
Infantry Division (4/25 IBCT ABN) be converted to an airborne 
infantry battalion task force.
    The committee is aware that soon following his visit to 
Alaska, General Mark Milley, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, 
the U.S. Army announced on March 21, 2016, its intentions to 
``delay the reduction of an Alaska based combat unit [the 4th 
Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division or 4/
25], determining that such a move would continue to degrade its 
ability to respond to new threats in a rapidly changing global 
security environment.'' The committee understand that the 
delayed reduction of 4/25 was the only reduction delayed across 
the entire Active component of the U.S. Army.
    The committee is aware that in December 2016, the actual 
size of the Active component of the U.S. Army was approximately 
470,000. The committee understands that it was the U.S. Army's 
intention to continue the reduction of the active component by 
10,000 soldiers to 460,000 soldiers by the end of Fiscal Year 
2017.
    In December of 2016, both the House and Senate passed S. 
2943, the National Defense Authorization (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 
2017 and it was subsequently signed into law. Within this 
legislation was a new and increased authorized Active component 
size of 476,000.
    On April 7, 2017, the U.S. Army announced its intent to 
``retain 4/25 as a brigade combat team and not convert it to an 
airborne task force'' due to ``emerging mission requirements 
and increasing Army end strength as authorized in the [FY 2017 
NDAA.]''
    The committee strongly commends the U.S. Army's decision to 
first delay and then to fully retain 4/25 as a full brigade 
combat team. The committee affirms that forward-deployed and 
rapidly responsive ground forces, including the 4/25 IBCT 
(ABN), help deter aggression and provide reassurance to our 
allies and partners
Army M4 Modular Rail System Assessment
    The Committee notes that while the Army has made over 90 
upgrades to the M4 Carbine since first fielding, it still uses 
a legacy rail system compared to other readily available, 
government-provided rail systems that free-float the barrel. In 
the mid-2000s, SOCOM and the Army Marksmanship Unit fielded 
free-float rail systems for their M4 Carbines that placed zero 
weight on the barrel, ensured barrel harmonics are uninhibited, 
improved rifle accuracy, and increased durability. Over the 
last decade, the Army has spent over $2.9 billion dollars 
funding weapon enhancements (scopes, night vision, lasers, 
lights, slings, etc.) designed to increase soldier lethality. 
Utilizing a legacy rail can degrade shooting accuracy 
regardless of how well equipped and trained a soldier is.
    The Committee is aware that an Army unit tested the legacy 
rail against a free-float rail. In the commercial market, free-
float rails have become the industry standard. The committee 
notes further that the legacy rail remains the baseline Army 
requirement and that the Army has not developed an acquisition 
plan to replace the legacy rail. Therefore, the committee 
requires the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees by August 31, 2017, on the 
feasibility of adopting a free-float rail system for the M4 
carbine including an update on the Army's rail system 
requirement.
Army Position Navigation and Timing-GPS (A-PNT) Distribution and Anti-
        Jam Capability
    Military vehicles depend on precise positioning, 
navigation, and timing (PNT) data to enable critical command, 
control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, 
and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems. Exploitation of global 
positioning systems (GPS) risks U.S. forces ability to move, 
shoot, and communicate. The Army has determined that it must 
provide an Assured PNT (A-PNT) solution with distributed PNT 
architecture that support GPS anti-jam antennas and upgraded 
GPS signals (``M Code''). The committee is concerned that the 
A-PNT PoR is years from Initial Operating Capability, when 
technologies exist today that address the near-term requirement 
and are pathways to the A-PNT program of record (PoR), that 
will speed the capability to the warfighter, create 
efficiencies, and save costs.
    Specifically, the committee understands that the DAGR 
Distributed Device (D3/Enhanced D3) was selected by the Army as 
its lead Military GPS User Equipment (MGUE) platform. The D3 
provides near-term capability, supports the A-PNT PoR, anti-jam 
antenna technology, and is a firm path to fielding MGUE. This 
solution meets requirements and near-term fielding and upgrade 
timelines for Stryker CS21, AMPV, JLTV, Patriot Missile System, 
and efforts by the Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) to mitigate 
regional threats.
    To address the threat in GPS denied environments, the 
committee understands that the Army was planning to provide the 
D3 as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) to the platforms in 
the near term to align with platform upgrade efforts. However, 
the committee has been informed that the Army has revised the 
A-PNT acquisition program and is no longer planning to provide 
D3 to the vehicle platforms as GFE. The committee is concerned 
that this decision would delay fielding of the capability, 
eliminates the opportunity to establish the distributed 
architecture required for the upcoming A-PNT PoR, is contrary 
to the Rapid Capabilities Office PNT program, delays fielding 
of MGUE which conflicts with the congressional mandate, and 
does not support rapid implementation of anti-jam antenna 
technology.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, no 
later than September 29, 2017, detailing the revised A-PNT PoR 
acquisition plan, to include a detailed explanation of the 
current plans to address near-term interim A-PNT integration, 
test, fielding (as GFE) and follow-on logistics support of a 
distributed PNT system that supports M-Code in the time-frame 
required for critical platform upgrade and reset schedules.

AWACS Upgrade to Block 40/50

    The committee fully supports the ongoing efforts by the Air 
Force to upgrade its fleet of E-3 Airborne Warning and Control 
System (AWACS) aircraft and strongly encourages the Air Force 
to fully fund the Block 40/45 upgrade on the entire fleet of 
AWACS.

C-130H modernization

    The committee remains committed to the Air Force's Avionics 
Modernization Program (AMP), and urges the Air Force to pursue 
the most rapid upgrade possible of the 176 C-130H aircraft. The 
committee continues to support the current two-increment AMP 
upgrade strategy, but is concerned that extensive development 
needlessly delays completion of both AMP increments despite 
availability of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) and non-
developmental item (NDI) technologies, including glass cockpit 
and autopilot systems and components, that are available and in 
use on C-130 aircraft today.
    Achieving the best possible value/capability for the 
taxpayer and the Air Force is the goal. Therefore, the 
committee expects the Secretary of the Air Force to maximize 
efforts to procure COTS and NDI solutions and that minimize use 
of unnecessary military standard (MIL-STD) systems. This 
approach must adhere to the intent of Section 2377 of Title 10, 
United States Code, and comprehensively apply the tenets of 
DoD's Better Buying Power (BBP) 3.0 policy. COTS/NDI solutions 
are currently flying on both U.S. Government and civilian C-130 
aircraft that are lighter, less expensive, and have proven 
reliability at or above that of the MIL-STD solutions. Such 
cost-effective solutions should be embraced to the maximum 
extent possible and practical.
    Therefore, the Secretary of the Air Force is directed to 
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees 
within 180 days of enactment of this Act that details (1) how 
the intent of Section 2377 of Title 10, United States Code, and 
the prescribed processes of DoD BBP 3.0 have been vigorously 
applied to defining both the technical requirements and 
acquisition strategy for AMP Increments 1 & 2, including the 
Air Force's creation of incentives to offerors for accelerated 
and cost-capped implementation; (2) how the standards 
requirements applied to the C-130 cockpit modernization are not 
excessive given the operational mission profiles and 
considering other COTS technologies already operational these 
aircraft; and (3) how the proposed solution will reduce total 
ownership cost to the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve 
units that must then operate and maintain the aircraft.

Columbia-class submarines

    The budget request included $842.9 million in line item 1 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Columbia-class 
submarines advance procurement.
    The committee notes the cost estimate for the lead ship 
non-recurring engineering program support increased from the 
2014 Life Cycle Cost Estimate to the 2016 Milestone B cost 
estimate. The committee asked about this increase, but the Navy 
did not provide a timely answer to the questions. The committee 
is disappointed by the Navy's performance and expects the Navy 
to ensure robust, punctual explanations are provided whenever 
the committee asks for program clarifications.
    In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to conduct a comprehensive security classification review 
of the Columbia-class program to ensure all systems and 
capabilities are properly classified. The Secretary shall 
submit his findings at the appropriate classification level to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives not later December 1, 2017.

Composite technology in submarine construction

    The committee notes that the Navy has successfully 
integrated composite technology into different submarine 
classes and that composites can reduce procurement costs and 
lower overall lifecycle costs for certain components and 
subsystems. For example, a February 2016, Navy report to 
Congress found a composite technology alternative for Columbia-
class bow domes would save the Navy at least $6.6 million and 
avoid an additional $8.7 million in tooling.
    The committee believes the Navy should further explore 
opportunities to integrate proven composite technology, 
particularly for Virginia-class submarines, including the bow 
dome and Virginia Payload Module, and Columbia-class 
submarines, including the superstructure.
    Therefore, not later than November 1, 2017, the Secretary 
of the Navy shall deliver a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives on the 
feasibility and merits of further integrating proven composite 
technology into Virginia-class and Columbia-class submarines. 
The report shall:
          (1) Identify non-composite systems and components 
        planned for Block V Virginia-class submarines and 
        Columbia-class submarines for which a proven composite 
        alternative is in development or fielded; and
          (2) For those systems and components identified in 
        paragraph (1), provide the approximate cost and 
        schedule differences if such composite systems and 
        components were substituted for non-composite systems 
        and components.

Domestic supply of submarine missile launcher tubes

        The committee supports the Navy's ongoing efforts to 
        reduce cost and risk in development and production of 
        launcher tubes for both the Virginia Payload Module 
        (VPM) and the Columbia-class program, including the 
        Common Missile Compartment (CMC). In written testimony 
        for a hearing of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee on 
        June 7, 2017, Vice Admiral Terry Benedict, Director of 
        the Navy's Strategic Systems Programs, testified to the 
        importance of the CMC as a critical component for both 
        the U.S. Columbia-class and United Kingdom Dreadnought-
        class programs, with any delay to the joint CMC effort 
        having the potential to impact the ability of both 
        nations to maintain an effective sea-based deterrent.
    Missile tube construction is a critical and fragile subset 
of the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base that is regenerating 
after the last Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine was built 
in the 1990s. The committee is aware of the Navy's work to 
reduce risk in the restart of launcher system production at the 
surface test launch facility at the Naval Air Warfare Center 
Weapons Division, China Lake, to demonstrate that the launcher 
industrial base can replicate the successful performance of the 
Ohio-class Trident II (D5) launcher system.
    The committee urges the Navy to take every appropriate 
measure to ensure a viable supply of launcher tubes are 
available through the U.S. industrial base to meet the cost and 
schedule requirements facing both the Columbia-class program 
and the Virginia-class guided missile variant through VPM.

Eagle Passive Active Warning and Survivability System (EPAWSS)

    The committee is aware that the U.S. Air Force has reduced 
funding programmed for the Eagle Passive Active Warning and 
Survivability System (EPAWSS) modernization program for the F-
15C fleet in future fiscal years. The committee continues to 
strongly support EPAWSS modernization for both the F-15C and F-
15E fleet. The U.S. Air Force requires an integrated electronic 
warfare system for its air superiority aircraft in order to 
dominate current and future threats. EPAWSS provides radar 
warning, geo-location, situational awareness, and self-
protection solutions to detect and defeat surface and airborne 
threats in contested environments. The committee expects the 
Secretary of the Air Force to execute the EPAWSS modernization 
program for the F-15C and F-15E as previously planned.

Expedited testing, development and fielding for Paladin Integrated 
        Management

    The committee continues to support the Paladin Integrated 
Management (PIM) upgrade to the M109A6 Paladin, the primary 
indirect fire weapons platform in the U.S. Army's Armored 
Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT), and calls for the Secretary of the 
Army to prioritize and expedite PIM OT&E to include immediate 
tasking of a crew with required expertise to execute the OT&E. 
The PIM program is critical to the U.S. Army. It significantly 
improves force protection and survivability and reduces 
logistics burden for the Armored Brigade Combat team field 
artillery Soldiers.

F-16 Block 40/50 Mission Training Centers

    The Secretary of the Air Force has directed the Air Force 
to accelerate procurement of additional F-16 Mission Training 
Centers (MTC) suites for Air National Guard use in order to 
provide continuity of training between live and virtual 
scenarios, develop and maintain required combat readiness 
without dependence on the availability of off-station 
resources, reduce flight operations tempo and flying hour cost 
required to gain equal training readiness, reduce travel cost, 
reduce personnel tempo impacts for pilots, and increase dwell 
time for wings, allowing more deployment flexibility. 
Additional MTCs 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 40/50 pilots, resulting in enhanced 
readiness.

Future air-to-ground missile capability

    It has come to the committee's attention the Air Force 
lacks an air-to-ground missile capability sufficient to deter 
massed armor formations that may be encountered against near-
peer adversaries in both Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. 
Currently fielded air-to-ground missiles lack the ability to be 
launched en masse from fighter aircraft against multiple 
maneuvering armored targets.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide the congressional defense committees with a 
briefing 60 days following passage of this Act on the 
integration activities enabled by this authorization.

Health and Usage Monitoring Systems

    The Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act 
included directive report language (113-446) ``UH-72 Helicopter 
health monitoring system.'' This section encouraged the Army to 
engage in a demonstration of the Next Generation Health 
Monitoring System (NGHMS) on the UH-72 and directed the 
Secretary of the Army to report to Congress on the potential 
for integrating and demonstrating NGHMS. The Army response 
states, if ``savings and reduction of contractor logistics 
support (CSL) costs could be achieved . . . the Army will 
consider integrating NGHMS on the UH-72 fleet and changing the 
current aircraft maintenance construct.''
    The committee is aware that the Army conducted a 
preliminary design review (PDR) in December 2016 and a critical 
design review (CDR) in February 2017. Bench-testing and 
installation on an experimental aircraft was conducted in 
March-April 2016. This effort will conclude with installations 
on 8 Army UH-72 by December 2017. The committee understands 
that the program is on cost and schedule and that preliminary 
results are encouraging.
    NGHMS can achieve total platform state of awareness. Such 
advanced maintenance intelligence could enable early warning 
for failing platform systems, reduce emergency maintenance 
demands, provide predictable platform maintenance schedules, 
reduce cost and increase readiness. With this in mind, the 
committee is aware that Program Office Stryker is reviewing 
NGHMS for potential application on Ground Combat Vehicles.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
September 15, 2017, that provides the status and available 
results of the UH-72 NGHMS testing. The report should include 
the Army's plan for procuring and integrating NGHMS into the 
UH-72 fleet; to include a detailed description of the planned 
changes to the UH-72 aircraft maintenance construct, expected 
efficiencies and estimated annual cost savings. The report 
shall also include a summary of Program Office Strykers review 
of NGHMS for potential application on Ground Combat Vehicles.

HH-60 Combat Rescue Helicopter Program

    The committee understands the need to replace the current 
HH-60G Pave Hawk fleet to support the demanding personnel 
recovery missions for the Department. With the limited 
availability of the current combat rescue helicopter fleet and 
high usage, the need to accelerate deliveries of this new fleet 
is well understood. The committee supports incentivizing the 
contract to accelerate development and first flight, but is 
concerned that the Department is not taking action to ensure 
alignment of procurement funding with the activities that would 
support this acceleration. The committee urges the Department 
to take all actions necessary to ensure that if the contractor 
can meet the accelerated schedule to complete development that 
there is funding in place to transition to production without 
delaying first flight and early production activities.

HMMWV Rollover Mitigation

    The committee is concerned by the number of High Mobility 
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) rollover accidents that 
have occurred in recent years, after the vehicles were up-
armored to improve ballistic protection and resistance to mines 
and improvised explosive devices. The committee understands 
that commercial-off-the-shelf solutions are available to 
mitigate the problem of rollover accidents. The committee 
encourages the Army and Army National Guard to work 
expeditiously to mitigate the risk of HMMWV rollover accidents. 
In particular, HMMWV Modernization activities should be 
specifically directed to mitigate the risk of rollovers and 
loss of control accidents in the existing Army and National 
Guard fleet by supporting retrofit installation of antilock 
braking systems and electronic stability control kits. The 
committee requests that the Department of the Army provide a 
briefing on plans to mitigate rollover accidents within the 
HMMWV fleet.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS)

    The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System 
(JSTARS) aircraft has long provided significant joint air 
command and control in both land and maritime arenas. The 
committee is pleased that the budget request includes some 
funding to continue this program's essential warfighting 
function until the JSTARS Recapitalization Program reaches Full 
Operational Capability (FOC) in 2028. The committee expects 
that the Department of the Air Force will take no action to 
prematurely retire E-8C aircraft before the JSTARS Recap 
program reaches this milestone. The committee is greatly 
concerned that a lengthy JSTARS Recap acquisition program could 
result in a capabilities gap which will leave the combatant 
commanders without an acceptable level of ground moving target 
indicator and battle management command and control capability 
for several years. Accordingly, the committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Air Force to fund all necessary modifications, 
including, but not limited to, Prime Mission Equipment-
Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (PME-DMS) on all 16 E-8C 
aircraft and to maintain all E-8C aircraft in a singular 
configuration and deployable state to continue world-wide 
missions, avoid degradation of mission performance, and meet 
Combatant Commander requirements for operations during the 
period.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than 
November 1, 2017, that describes, in detail, a strategy to 
sufficiently address manning, sustainment, modernization, and 
viability deficiencies that would resolve capability gaps, 
shortfalls, and deficiencies of the E-8C fleet of aircraft. The 
briefing should include a strategy that addresses right-sizing 
and balancing unit manning among the Total Force; maintaining 
proficient and current aircrews to meet operational 
requirements; resolving obsolescence and diminishing 
manufacturing sources of parts and supply; necessary mission 
system upgrades and operational enhancements across the E-8C 
fleet to keep the aircraft viable and relevant until the JSTARS 
Recapitalization aircraft is fielded; resolving maintenance 
deficiencies; standardizing existing aircraft capabilities in 
areas such as imagery servers and the Automated Information 
System; and the associated cost, budget, and timeline required 
to implement the strategy.

Light Utility Helicopter Industrial Base

    The committee notes that the Army's Aviation Restructure 
Initiative repurposed UH-72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopters 
(LUH) to become the primary entry-level training helicopter at 
the United States Army Aviation Center of Excellence (USAACE) 
at Fort Rucker. The committee understands that the Army has a 
helicopter pilot shortage of about 700 pilots, which generates 
a need for additional LUHs to meet pilot training requirements.
    In addition to USAACE, the Army National Guard also 
utilizes UH-72A helicopters for Security and Support missions. 
The committee understands that unmet requirements for UH-72A 
exist presently at USAACE, Combat Training Centers, and the 
Army Test and Evaluation Command. The committee understands 
that the Army issued a Justification and Approval (J&A) for 16 
Lakotas without providing for full and open competition in 
December 2015. The pre-award J&A was subsequently protested in 
the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC). The committee further 
understands that the Army appealed the COFC's initial ruling in 
October 2016, but no exact timeline for a final ruling is 
known.
    The committee further understands that the Fiscal Year 2017 
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 115-31) appropriated 
funding for the Army to procure 28 UH-72A helicopters ``in 
support of ongoing mission requirements at the Army Aviation 
Center of Excellence at Fort Rucker, the Combat Training 
Centers, and the Army Test and Evaluation Center.'' In 
testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 25, 
2017, the Acting Secretary of the Army, Robert M. Speer, stated 
that ``the 2017 funding is held up in the same protest''. The 
committee understands the Secretary's statement to mean that 
the Army does not intend to obligate funding for the 28 Lakotas 
funded by Congress in P.L. 115-31 in a timely manner.
    The committee understands that there is dispute over the 
Army's interpretation of its obligations pursuant to P.L. 115-
31. The committee notes that the language on Lakota procurement 
contained in P.L. 115-31 is clear, directive, and legally 
binding. The committee is concerned about the impact of 
continued contracting delays on the Army's pilot training 
capability and the UH-72A industrial base.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to re-examine the Army's position on obligating funding for the 
28 Lakota helicopters appropriated in P.L. 115-31. The 
committee urges the Secretary to avoid conflating issues which 
may be legally separate and distinct. No later than 30 days 
after the enactment of this Act, the committee requires the 
Secretary to provide to congressional defense committees a 
report which includes a legal analysis on its position 
regarding obligating funding for Lakotas as directed by 
Congress in P.L. 115-31. The report shall also include a plan 
for the Army to mitigate its pilot shortage.

Light-weight polymer technologies for ammunition and small arms

    The committee continues to support the Department of 
Defense's efforts to decrease the weight of metal cartridge 
cases for ammunition in order to decrease burdens on the 
warfighter. Notable improvements include the potential for 
increased individual mobility, decreased logistical resupply 
burdens, and reduced fuel consumption in operations.
    In addition to weight reduction, the committee understands 
that polymers have the potential to act as better heat 
insulators, enable the firing of more ammunition, and provide 
cost savings compared to conventional metal cartridge cases. 
The committee remains encouraged by the ongoing research and 
potential for cased telescoped 5.56mm ammunition, which could 
decrease logistical weight by roughly 40 percent and reduce 
bulk storage volume by at least 12 percent.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the 
Department to expand its efforts beyond light-weight polymer 
ammunition casings and explore polymer magazines, ammunition 
pallets, rounds, and other advancements that could further 
reduce weight on the warfighter. For example, the Marine Corps 
estimates that a polymer .50 caliber pallet could reduce weight 
by 1,000 pounds per pallet.
    The committee continues to hold the view that any new 
ammunition must meet all specifications for pressure, velocity, 
and accuracy and must be a drop-in replacement in terms of 
training, weapon function, lethality, storage, and 
transportation.

Maintaining strategic deterrence

    The committee is concerned with the potential for delays in 
the development and fielding of Columbia-class submarines 
(SSBNs). The committee understands the Columbia-class is 
planned to replace Ohio-class submarines as they decommission 
to maintain 10 operational SSBNs. Although the Navy's schedule 
currently shows the Columbia-class program meeting required 
delivery dates, there is little to no margin for delay in the 
program schedule to address unforeseen first-of-class issues.
    The committee believes the strategic deterrence mission 
that SSBNs perform is too important and the consequences of a 
gap in SSBN capacity so great that the Department of Defense 
should develop contingency plans for how the U.S. Strategic 
Command (STRATCOM) Commander could mitigate the possibility of 
an insufficient number of SSBNs to perform required patrols.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on 
the options available to the Department of Defense for 
mitigating the risk of delays of various lengths, ranging from 
6 months to 5 years, in delivery of the 12 boats in the 
Columbia-class. For each of the various delay lengths, the 
Secretary shall identify specific mitigation options that could 
be available to STRATCOM or the Navy if the number of 
operational SSBNs were to drop below the required level. The 
Secretary shall submit this report no later than February 1, 
2018.

Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle Inventory Review

    The committee notes that the Mine Resistant Ambush 
Protected (MRAP) program has deployed more than 27,000 vehicles 
primarily in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation 
Iraqi Freedom, and follow-on operations in Afghanistan and 
Iraq. In 2013, the Army conducted the MRAP III study, the 
results of which influenced the Department of Defense's 
decision to retain about 8,600 vehicles (mostly placed in Army 
Prepositioned Stocks) and to divest the remainder. The 
committee believes the security environment in Iraq, 
Afghanistan, and the Middle East has changed considerably since 
the MRAP III was conducted and may have changed or invalidated 
the study's assumptions. In light of the new and emerging 
security environment, the committee believes that the DOD 
should thoroughly review the MRAP inventory.
    Therefore, not later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
deliver a report to the congressional defense committees which 
defines the near-, medium-, and long-term requirements for 
protected vehicles in Iraq, Afghanistan, and any other areas 
that the Secretary deems appropriate. The report shall examine 
the MRAP inventory and make recommendations regarding its 
continued management. These recommendations should include the 
number of MRAPs which should be retained in the inventory and 
whether any of those retained should undergo modifications.

Missile Warning Systems

    The committee is interested in efforts by the Army to field 
technology that can provide missile warning and laser warning 
capabilities for rotary and small fixed wing aircraft. As new 
threats proliferate, it is critical that future aircraft 
survivability equipment (ASE) be able to detect and defend air 
crews in a first-encounter scenario. Given the potentially 
transformational nature of such future ASE procurements, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army or his designee to 
brief the congressional defense committees on procurement of 
missile warning systems no later than 30 days after the 
enactment of this Act. The briefing should cover interim and 
future solutions, technology readiness, cost estimations, and 
fielding timeline.

Navy Air-to-Ground Rocket Program

    The Committee recognizes the work performed by the Navy to 
transform the standard 2.75-inch Hydra rocket into an 
affordable, laser-guided, precision strike munition. It is now 
qualified on manned and unmanned, fixed-wing and rotary-wing 
platforms. According to the Defense Department, the weapon's 
size, accuracy and weight have made it ideal for target 
engagements in urban terrain and where low-collateral damage is 
critical. These attributes have fostered adoption of the weapon 
system by the rest of the Joint Services. The Hydra rocket has 
also become a priority of international allies, further 
highlighting the importance of having a thorough acquisition 
done right.
    Accordingly, the committee encourages the Navy to: (1) 
consider additional platforms for employing Hydra; (2) 
streamline Hydra logistics; and (3) continue the program's 
efforts to qualify and integrate a single software variant for 
rotary and fixed-wing aircraft.

Navy large surface combatants

    The committee notes that the Navy's 2016 Force Structure 
Assessment (FSA) sets a requirement for 355 ships in the battle 
force. While the current fleet includes 87 large surface 
combatants, the committee understands that the FSA calls for 
104 large surface combatants. The committee believes that the 
Navy should maintain the two proven shipbuilding sources of 
large surface combatants. The committee emphasizes that the 
acquisition strategy for the next multiyear procurement 
contract should help sustain the dual-source large surface 
combatant shipbuilding base.

Primary aircraft assigned to Air National Guard rescue squadrons

    The committee finds that National Guard rescue squadrons in 
Alaska, California, and New York play a critical role in rescue 
response throughout the United States during times of disaster 
or crisis, a mission that prepares these units remarkably well 
for success in combat. The committee notes that certain rescue 
squadrons, in addition to civilian and deployment requirements 
conducted by all National Guard rescue squadrons, are tasked 
with alert requirements in support of active duty missions. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force 
to report to the congressional defense committees no later than 
180 days after the passage of this Act on the readiness of Air 
National Guard units to meet active duty alert mission 
requirements and whether such units have the appropriate number 
of primary aircraft assigned to fully execute all assigned 
missions.

SUSV Replacement Rapid Acquisition Strategy

    The committee understands that extreme cold weather 
conditions and difficult terrains like deep snow, tundra, mud, 
swamps, and wetlands create mobility challenges for U.S. ground 
forces. In fact, the Chosin Reservoir Campaign during the 
Korean War realistically depicted the adverse effects that 
extreme cold weather operating conditions had on U.S. Forces.
    The committee is aware that in 1983, the U.S. Army first 
began to field the M973 Small Unit Support Vehicle (SUSV)--a 
14-person, tracked, semi-amphibious vehicle capable of 
navigating a wide range of otherwise impassable terrain that 
traditional wheeled and tracked vehicles cannot traverse. The 
SUSV travels with a footprint of just 1.8 pounds per square 
inch--less pressure than the human foot exerts--and is much 
better equipped to traverse difficult terrains like deep snow, 
tundra, mud, swamps, and wetlands.
    The committee is concerned that due to a limited 
availability of repair parts and no Army program to help 
support or maintain them, many of these 30-plus year old SUSVs 
are being cannibalized for parts to keep the few functional one 
remaining running and the entire fleet has just five years left 
on their projected life cycle before they will be classified 
obsolete. Currently there are approximately 200 SUSVs spread 
across the U.S. Army and the National Guard in states such as 
Alaska, Colorado, Minnesota, and Vermont, and other states, 
such as Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, and New Hampshire 
have an articulated requirement for the SUSV' unique 
capabilities.
    The committee is also aware that on February 12, 2017, 
Headquarters, Department of the Army, G8, validated the 
requirement for a Joint All-Terrain/All-Weather Support Vehicle 
(JAASV) However, the committee is concerned that any program 
sourcing solution for the SUSV would not be sourced at this 
time and that the requirement will compete for funding in 
Program objective Memorandum 2019-2023. The committee is also 
concerned that allied and near peer Competitor countries are 
developing extreme cold weather ground transportation 
capabilities that far exceed U.S. military capabilities, 
notably the recent advances in all-weather/cross-country 
mobility being demonstrated by new Russian specialty vehicles.
    The committee believes that the U.S. Army, Air Force, 
Marine Corps, and National Guard forces currently need a 
tactical vehicle that will provide transportation for a squad-
sized element, emergency medical evacuation, command and 
control capability, and general cargo transportation on- and 
off-road in a wide range of otherwise impassable terrain, to 
include ice and extreme cold weather conditions to support 
year-round training and missions. The committee believes that 
the newly identified requirement--the JAASV--will enhance joint 
operations and facilitate interoperability under the adverse 
conditions that demand all-terrain, all-weather cross-country 
mobility that traditional wheeled and tracked vehicles cannot 
traverse.

Total force integration initiatives for rescue squadrons in the reserve 
        component of the U.S. Armed Forces

    The committee is aware that the National Commission on the 
Structure of the Air Force--a report requested by this 
committee in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2013 (Public Law 112-329)--recommended that ``new 
equipment will arrive at Air Reserve Component units 
simultaneously with its arrival at Active Component units in 
the proportional share of each component . . . The Air Force 
should no longer recapitalize by cascading equipment from the 
Active Component to the Reserve Components.'' Further, the 
Commission members testified to this committee that ``There is 
no more significant element to an integrated total force than a 
fully integrated fielding plan for all equipment, especially 
aircraft.''
    The committee notes that the Air Force concurred with this 
recommendation without reservation and highlighted the KC-46 
and F-35 Lightning II programs as examples of this commitment. 
While the committee is encouraged that the Air Force has 
prioritized the fielding of the HH-60G replacement programs, 
and reaffirms the need to field this critical capability to the 
total force as rapidly as possible, the committee remains 
concerned that the Air Force has not observed the principle of 
concurrent and proportional fielding for the fielding of the 
HH-60G replacement program.
    The committee is aware that the Air Force plans to field 
the HH-60G Ops Loss Replacement helicopter to National Guard 
Rescue Squadrons until the HH-60W is fielded to all components 
in 2030. However, the committee believes the Air Force's 
current fielding plan does not fulfill the letter or spirit of 
the Commission's recommendation of concurrent and proportional 
fielding, and that the Air Force has not provided sufficient 
grounds to justify an exception to this fundamental component 
of total force integration.
    The committee believes that the Air Force's fielding plan 
should prioritize the integrated fielding of the HH-60G 
replacement program to units that are scheduled to deploy 
overseas in support of contingency operations, that stand alert 
in support of active-duty missions, and that maintain high 
levels of readiness to rapidly deploy in support of alert 
missions overseas.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to review its fielding plan of the HH-60G replacement 
programs, and urges the Air Force to provide recommendations on 
how it intends to fulfill its commitment to comply with the 
Commission's recommendation.

Unmanned U-2

    Section 133 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) prevents the Air Force 
from retiring the U-2 aircraft unless the Department of Defense 
were to meet certain conditions. One of those conditions is 
that, prior to retirement, the Chairman of the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) would have to certify in 
writing that the capability to be fielded at the same time or 
before the U-2 aircraft retirement would result in equal or 
greater capability available to the commanders of the combatant 
commands. While the RQ-4 Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft 
(RPA) provides impressive capabilities, the committee believes 
it has not achieved a level of capability that would permit the 
Chairman of the JROC to make that certification.
    At various times, the Air Force has argued that the level 
of U-2 operating and support costs, particularly manpower 
costs, was the reason for wanting to retire the U-2. The 
committee understands that the Air Force has considered the 
possibility of modifying the U-2 aircraft to make it an RPA. 
Under such a plan, the avionics systems would be modified to 
allow the aircrews to remotely operate the U-2, thereby 
removing the pilot from the cockpit.
    While supportive of enhancing RPA capability, the committee 
would like to understand the ramifications of pursuing such an 
option, including the pros and cons of making such a 
modification. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Air Force to submit such a report with the budget request 
for fiscal year 2019.

USAF UH-1N Replacement

    The Committee recognizes the urgent need to replace the 
current Air Force fleet of UH-1N aircraft that protect our 
inter-continental ballistic missile (ICBM) sites and perform 
the continuity of government mission for the National Capitol 
Region (NCR), which are obsolete and inadequate to support 
their missions. The continued delay and changes in the 
acquisition approach to support this urgent need have led to a 
delay in fielding this critical capability to the warfighter. 
The committee believes that the Air Force user needs are well 
understood. The program requirements have been discussed since 
2001, and even though the Department has been buying combat 
aircraft for some time, there continues to be delays to this 
procurement.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to expedite procurement and delivery of replacement 
aircraft and urges the Department, if viable, to use existing 
production lines to field this capability as soon as possible. 
The committee further directs the Secretary to pursue a rapid 
acquisition strategy. The committee encourages the Air Force to 
consider the benefits of a common helicopter airframe across 
the Air Force to reduce supply, logistics, training, and 
lifecycle costs.

USNS Navajo

    The committee notes the Navy has a tradition of naming tug 
boats for Native American tribes. The committee further notes 
that over the next several years the Navy will be 
decommissioning all Powhatan-class fleet ocean tugs (T-ATF) and 
Safeguard-class salvage ships (T-ARS). The committee 
understands that these ships will be replaced by a single class 
of vessels with the designation T-ATS.
    In keeping with the tradition of naming U.S. Navy ships 
after Native American tribes, the committee urges the Secretary 
of the Navy to name the first T-ATS vessel the USNS Navajo.

USS Los Alamos

    The committee notes that 2018 will be the 75th anniversary 
of Los Alamos National Laboratory. The committee further notes 
that people of Los Alamos, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and 
the Navy, have a 74-year relationship that spans the Manhattan 
Project through the creation of a nuclear Navy and to the sea-
based leg of the strategic nuclear triad of the United States. 
The people of Los Alamos and surrounding communities have 
contributed to the Navy's offensive edge since World War II, 
through the Cold War, that continues today.
    The committee believes that naming a submarine USS Los 
Alamos will recognize and continue to forge the longstanding 
relationship between the Navy and Los Alamos. Therefore, the 
committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to name the next 
nuclear-powered fast attack submarine the USS Los Alamos.

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

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for research, development, test, and 
evaluation activities at the levels identified in section 4201 
of division D of this Act.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Mechanisms for expedited access to technical talent and expertise at 
        academic institutions to support Department of Defense missions 
        (sec. 211)

    The committee recommends a provision that would give the 
Secretary of Defense the authority to establish one or more 
multi-institution task order contracts, consortia, cooperative 
agreements, or other arrangements with universities that do not 
have similar existing constructs to facilitate expedited access 
to university technical expertise in support of Department of 
Defense mission areas, such as cybersecurity, explosives 
detection, modeling and simulation, microelectronics, unmanned 
systems, advanced materials, machine learning, and myriad 
others.
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
is not optimally positioned to capitalize on all cross-
functional aspects of emerging technologies that serve multiple 
purposes. Unfortunately, the majority of technological 
advancements exist under proprietary agreements unavailable to 
the academic research community at large. While existing 
programs are available in part, the committee believes a more 
streamlined construct must be available for expedited access to 
combine technical expertise and research efforts, reduce costs, 
and eliminate duplication of effort.
    The committee notes and supports the ongoing basic research 
activities that are funded by the Department of Defense at 
universities and government labs, which have led to the 
development of most of the operational capabilities used by our 
nation's military today, ranging from stealth to precision 
munitions to battlefield medicine, aircraft sustainment, and 
the Internet. The committee intends the authority in the 
recommended provision to supplement those basic research 
funding authorities and activities, and it expects the 
Department to issue guidelines as appropriate that reflect a 
streamlined, efficient process for components to have increased 
access to the technical expertise resident in our nation's 
universities to help address the technical, engineering, and 
management challenges facing the Department.
    In carrying out the mechanisms established in the 
recommended provision, the committee urges the Department to 
expand the number of individual institutions actively pursuing 
and demonstrating technical expertise in academic research that 
directly supports the efforts of the Department of Defense.

Codification and enhancement of authorities to provide funds for 
        defense laboratories for research and development of 
        technologies for military missions (sec. 212)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 139 of title 10, United States Code, to codify the 
research authorities of the defense laboratories originally 
established in section 219 of the Duncan Hunter National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-
417) and improved and made permanent in subsequent legislation. 
The committee notes that this authority allows Department of 
Defense laboratory directors to more efficiently and flexibly 
support innovative in-house research activities; support 
transition of technological innovations into operational use; 
support training and education of laboratory technical staff; 
and make minor improvements and repairs to critical research 
infrastructure and equipment.
    The committee notes that the House Armed Services Committee 
received testimony on January 7, 2016, from the Navy 
Acquisition Executive, Sean Stackley: ``Section 219 funding is 
lifeblood to our warfare centers, our science and technical 
community, and so everything that you all have done to support 
that is paying off huge dividends, and it is underpinning our 
efforts in terms of prototyping and experimentation.'' The 
committee commends the Defense Department on its use of the 
section 219 authority to date, and it urges the Department to 
continue to use the authority to support technological 
innovation and the productivity of the Defense laboratory 
system.
    The committee further encourages the Department to 
communicate the value of these types of laboratory activities 
in terms of their support for operational forces and improving 
outcomes of acquisition programs both to the public and to 
Pentagon decision-makers. Finally, the committee directs the 
Secretary to use this authority as one method to support joint 
research and development activities that connect the skills and 
expertise of laboratories from multiple services to meet common 
technical challenges.

Modification of laboratory quality enhancement program (sec. 213)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
Laboratory Quality Enhancement Program established in section 
211 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328). The committee has become aware that 
certain imprecise wording in the underlying statute has raised 
confusion within the Department of Defense and that 
interpretations of the statute different from what was intended 
by Congress have prevented certain aspects of the Laboratory 
Quality Enhancement Program from being implemented. The 
recommended provision would provide the clarifications 
necessary to proceed with implementation as envisioned in the 
original statute. The recommended provision would also add some 
new responsibilities for the panels created in the original 
statute and establish its relationship to the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Research and Engineering, established in section 
901 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328).

Prizes for advanced technology achievements (sec. 214)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2374a of title 10, United States Code, which authorizes 
the defense research enterprise to carry out programs to award 
prizes in recognition of outstanding achievements in basic, 
advanced, and applied research, technology development, and 
prototype development that have the potential for application 
to the performance of the military missions of the Department 
of Defense (DOD). The recommended provision would provide the 
Department with greater flexibility in conducting prize 
competitions to enhance the performance of the Department's 
military missions.
    The provision would expand the types of prizes that can be 
awarded in prize competitions. Under current law, only cash 
prizes may be awarded. The provision would remove this 
limitation, thereby allowing the Department to provide 
appropriate non-cash prizes. For example, appropriate non-cash 
prizes could include trophies, medals, plaques, and similar 
decorations for achievements in prize competitions. Other 
appropriate prizes could include personal property reasonably 
related to the purpose of the prize competition, such as a 
desktop or tablet computer or cellular phone. By providing the 
Department with the authority to award non-cash prizes, prize 
competition managers will have increased flexibility to design 
prize competitions that provide appropriate awards to recognize 
outstanding achievements that have potential application to the 
Department's mission.
    The provision would also authorize the Department to accept 
funds from the private sector to help fund prize awards and 
reduce the overall cost of prize competitions. In doing so, the 
provision would require that the Department not give any 
special consideration to a private entity in return for its 
donation. The added prohibition on giving special consideration 
to a private entity in consideration for its donation is 
intended to maintain public trust in the integrity of defense 
programs and personnel.

Expansion of definition of competitive procedures to include 
        competitive selection for award of research and development 
        proposals (sec. 215)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2302 of title 10, United State Code, to expand the 
definition of competitive procedures to include research and 
development proposals. The recommended provision would enable 
broad agency announcements to be used not only for soliciting 
science and technology (budget activities 1-3) but also other 
types of research and development, including test and 
evaluation (budget activities 4-7).
    The recommended provision would continue an effort to 
streamline and expedite acquisition in accordance with the 
Department's Better Buying Power 3.0 program. The authority 
that would be provided shall help to prepare research and 
development projects for solicitation and award of follow-on 
contracts for budget line items (or programs) funded across the 
future years defense program.
    Use of broad agency announcements across the entire 
spectrum of research and development will expedite the 
acquisition process, thereby decreasing the timelines required 
to make awards and enabling funding to reach those innovating, 
researching, and developing with increased efficiency, 
particularly small businesses.

Inclusion of modeling and simulation in test and evaluation activities 
        for purposes of planning and budget certification (sec. 216)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 196 of title 10, United States Code, to include 
modeling and simulation activities in the test and evaluation 
strategic plan and proposed test and evaluation budgets.
    The committee is concerned with the continued increasing 
costs of Department of Defense major weapon systems 
acquisitions. The committee believes that advanced modeling and 
simulation (M&S) can moderate the rising costs associated with 
test and evaluation of complex weapon systems.
    In the annual reviews of the test and evaluation 
infrastructure, undertaken by the committee, there has been no 
indication that the Department's test and evaluation 
organizations are involved in any organized effort to reduce 
the cost of test and evaluation through coordinated modeling 
and simulation efforts. The committee realizes that significant 
investments have been made by program offices for their 
particular weapon systems and training uses, but those models 
are either proprietary or specifically designed for that weapon 
system and cannot be easily integrated together in a complete 
warfighting fashion. The committee is concerned primarily with 
models being built with non-program-specific funds. The 
committee recommends that the Department aggressively pursue 
additional efforts to use modeling and simulation more 
effectively in the development and operational test and 
evaluation enterprises within the Department.
    The committee notes that using modeling and simulation for 
test and evaluation activities is a best practice for 
commercial private sector firms and that such practices can 
result in significant cost savings. In this regard, the 
committee expects the Department to incorporate modeling and 
simulation techniques with the primary goal of reducing overall 
test and evaluation costs.

Differentiation of research and development activities from service 
        activities (sec. 217)

    The committee recommends a provision that would 
differentiate between research and development activities and 
service activities through the establishment of clear 
definitions for each activity. The recommended provision would 
update the statute to account for the evolving nature of 
research and development contracts and eliminate confusion as 
to what types of contract actions should be included in 
contract services reports.
    Over the last couple decades, the main flow of federal 
contracting has made a dramatic shift away from supply 
purchases to the acquisition of services. Though supply 
acquisitions once comprised the vast majority of federal 
contracts and government employees performed most of the 
services necessary to fulfill the government's mission, 
acquisitions for a variety of support services contracts are 
now the most common subject of federal contracts.
    Unfortunately, no common definition of what constitutes a 
``service'' exists in law or regulation. As statutes have been 
passed and regulations written to address the myriad issues 
associated with service contracting, a diverse, and often 
conflicting, set of definitions has emerged that is creating 
conflict within the U.S. Government. Nowhere is this more 
apparent than in the handling of research and development (R&D) 
activities. For example, in section 2330 of title 10, United 
States Code, the definition of services specifically excludes 
research and development, while in 37.101 of the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation and elsewhere, research and development 
is mentioned in the list of potential activities that could 
qualify as services.
    At the most simplistic level, federal acquisition practice 
facilitates the acquisition of supplies and services for the 
direct benefit of the U.S. Government. Since the concept of 
``supplies'' has a long history and is generally well-
understood as including all physical property except for land, 
this analysis would then imply that if something is not an item 
of ``supply,'' then it must be a ``service.'' This conclusion 
fails to take into account the other possible choices if 
something is not a supply and fails to consider the 
government's implied position on what a service is that can be 
gleaned from a thorough reading of the statutes and 
regulations. Once these other sources are examined, it is clear 
that the guidance and direction on how to acquire services and 
manage services contracts is almost exclusively focused on 
service contractors who provide well-defined services directly 
to agencies to assist those agencies in the internal activities 
central to their missions. These types of services can include 
efforts such as maintenance and repair, housekeeping, security, 
communications, transportation, and advisory and assistance 
services. The sheer size, complexity, and value of these 
service contracts have generated a host of oversight activities 
dedicated to understanding and monitoring award frequency and 
adequacy of program oversight to ensure that taxpayer dollars 
are being properly spent and that inherently governmental 
functions are not being contracted out.
    Research and development activities are an entirely 
different type of endeavor. The government does not contract 
with research and development performers to support the 
government's internal mission but instead treats them akin to 
program performance efforts. Unlike service contracts, research 
and development efforts will end with the provision of a 
physical deliverable. While a typical performance effort would 
have a physical product that is delivered, research and 
development deliverables can run the gamut of reports or 
studies to prototype projects.
    Unlike a service contract, where the U.S. Government is 
effectively buying people's time to perform a defined function, 
research and development programs are concerned with the 
outcome of the research effort and the knowledge that is 
learned. Service contracts also tend to be quite detailed in 
the tasks to be performed and what constitutes the acceptable 
quality level of performance. In contrast, research and 
development efforts generally have a much more broad work 
statement, with the area of research and proposed approach 
outlined but subject to adjustment and evolution as the effort 
continues.
    Including research and development activities in the same 
category as services can subject such projects to the metrics, 
reports, and oversight responsibilities intended to give the 
Department a better picture of how much is being spent on 
internal support contractors. Including research and 
development contracts and their dollar value with service 
contract numbers severely skews those metrics and, in fact, 
makes it harder to achieve the Department's goal. While most 
defense research and development agencies have successfully 
argued that such work should not be included in these metrics 
and reports in the service context, it is an annual battle that 
consumes valuable agency time and resources with no value 
added. The simple solution to this problem is to clearly 
distinguish between research and development activities and 
services as being separate and distinct efforts, to create 
uniform definitions of research and development and services, 
and to include the clear definition of ``services'' in statute.

Designation of additional Department of Defense science and technology 
        reinvention laboratories (sec. 218)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
list of labs that are authorized to execute the special hiring, 
infrastructure recapitalization, technology transfer and 
industry partnership, research, and other authorities that have 
been previously authorized by Congress and by the Department of 
Defense. The committee notes that these authorities are 
intended to be executed by lab directors at the local lab 
level, so as to be better used to address local management and 
bureaucratic challenges and avoid the inefficiency and slowness 
of centralized control over organizations whose missions 
require agility and innovation. The committee expects that all 
authorities designed to ease bureaucratic burdens on the labs 
will be delegated to local lab directors and used, consistent 
with congressional intent, to the maximum extent practicable to 
support research efforts.

Department of Defense directed energy weapon system prototyping and 
        demonstration program (sec. 219)

    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering as 
the official with principal responsibility for development and 
demonstration of directed energy weapons, pursuant to section 
219(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). The recommended provision would 
also establish an initiative within the Department of Defense 
to accelerate the fielding of directed energy weapon systems 
that would help counter technological advance of potential 
adversaries of the United States.
    The committee remains supportive of directed energy weapon 
systems and believes that directed energy can fundamentally 
change warfare, much like precision-guided weapons did. The 
committee notes that, since 1960, the Department of Defense has 
invested more than $6.0 billion in directed energy science and 
technology initiatives but has limited operational systems to 
date. While the committee commends the Department for 
recognizing the potential of directed energy weapon systems by 
budgeting for the rapid procurement of five high-energy laser 
weapon systems to be deployed in an operational environment, it 
continues to urge the Department to resource directed energy 
initiatives at levels necessary to transition them to full-
scale acquisition programs.
    The committee realizes that directed energy weapons systems 
will not replace kinetic weapon systems nor are they an all-
purpose solution to every warfighting scenario. However, there 
are specific scenarios today in which directed energy weapon 
systems can, and should, provide our military with tactical and 
strategic advantages. Counter-Rockets, Artillery, and Mortar 
(C-RAM) and Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are specific 
missions in which directed energy could provide solutions to 
capability gaps of the military.
    A number of directed energy weapon systems have been 
developed but are awaiting funds in the out-years for testing 
and demonstration. While additional improvements can be made in 
the areas of size, weight, and power, the committee believes 
that many of the systems are fully capable now of providing our 
military with game-changing capabilities.
    The recommended provision would authorize $200.0 million 
for the Under Secretary for Research and Engineering to be used 
exclusively for high energy laser and high power microwave 
prototyping and demonstrations. As the senior official with 
principal responsibility for directed energy weapons, the Under 
Secretary for Research and Engineering would be entrusted with 
issuing guidelines for the operation of the program based on 
specific criteria limited to advanced technology development, 
prototyping, and demonstrations. The committee urges the Under 
Secretary to place increased priority on funding directed 
energy programs identified as unfunded priorities by the 
Services.
    The provision would also withhold 50 percent of the 
authorized funds until the Under Secretary develops the 
strategic plan required by section 219(a)(2)(A) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note) and submits the strategic plan to the 
congressional defense committees.
    Finally, the committee expects the Department to maintain 
management of the technical baseline with a primary emphasis on 
technology transition and evaluating military utility to 
enhance the likelihood that particular directed energy weapon 
systems will meet the Department end user's need. The committee 
encourages the Department, under the program, to develop the 
tactics, techniques, and procedures for the weapon systems and 
engage the warfighter in the use of operational systems and 
produce military utility assessments.
    The committee expects that the Under Secretary will keep 
the congressional defense committees regularly updated on the 
progress of activities regarding directed energy weapon systems 
prototyping and demonstration.

Authority for the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
        Engineering to promote innovation in the Department of Defense 
        (sec. 220)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
establishment of a process under which the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Research and Engineering would review and modify 
Department of Defense regulations that would adversely affect 
the innovative capacity of the DOD. The committee notes that 
the position of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering is charged with nurturing the technological 
innovative capacities of the Department and that often this 
capacity is crippled by bureaucratic processes and red tape 
promulgated by decision makers in organizations in the 
technology and innovation arena.

Limitation on availability of funds for F-35 Joint Strike Fighter 
        Follow-On Modernization (sec. 221)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
funds available for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Follow-On 
Modernization program until the Secretary of Defense submits 
the final report containing the basic elements of an 
acquisition program baseline for Block 4 Modernization as 
required by section 224 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
    The committee strongly supports the F-35 Joint Strike 
Fighter program and recognizes the urgent need to provide our 
warfighters with the planned capabilities of the Block 4 
modernization. However, the committee remains concerned about 
the executability and affordability of the Department of 
Defense's plan for Block 4. The country can ill afford a repeat 
of the substantial cost overruns and schedule slippages that 
have plagued this program since its inception.
    The committee believes the elements of the required 
report--including cost estimates for development, production, 
and modifications; projected key schedule dates; technical 
performance parameters; technology readiness levels; and annual 
funding profiles--are vital to establishing the transparency, 
accountability, and oversight necessary for a program as large 
and as important as Block 4 modernization. Proceeding without 
those attributes would risk future congressional support of the 
program and increase the likelihood of repeating past mistakes.

Improvement of update process for populating mission data files used in 
        advanced combat aircraft (sec. 222)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to refine the process of updating mission 
data files used in advanced combat aircraft so that they may be 
updated more quickly.

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters

Competitive acquisition plan for low probability of detection data link 
        networks (sec. 231)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
Logistics (or any successor to this position) and the Vice 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide written 
documentation and a briefing to the congressional defense 
committees, no later than February 15, 2018, on a plan for a 
competitive acquisition process to procure a secure, low 
probability of detection data link network capability, with the 
ability to effectively operate in hostile jamming environments 
while preserving the low observability characteristics of the 
relevant platforms, between existing and planned:
          (1) Fifth-generation combat aircraft;
          (2) Fifth-generation and fourth-generation combat 
        aircraft;
          (3) Fifth-generation and fourth-generation combat 
        aircraft and appropriate support aircraft and other 
        network nodes for command, control, communications, 
        intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
        purposes; and
          (4) Fifth-generation and fourth-generation combat 
        aircraft and their associated network-enabled precision 
        weapons.
    The provision would also require the plan to include:
          (1) A non-proprietary and open systems approach 
        compatible with the Rapid Capabilities Office Open 
        Mission Systems initiative of the Air Force and the 
        Future Airborne Capability Environment initiative of 
        the Navy;
          (2) A competitive acquisition process, to include 
        comparative flight demonstrations in realistic airborne 
        environments; and
          (3) Low risk and affordable solutions with minimal 
        impact or changes to existing host platforms and 
        minimal overall integration costs.
    Finally, the provision would also limit the obligation or 
expenditure to not more than 85 percent of fiscal year 2018 
funds for operations and maintenance for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense and the Office of the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff until 15 days after the Under Secretary 
and Vice Chairman submit the plan required in the provision.
    The committee remains concerned with the adequacy of the 
Department of Defense's focus on this issue and is disappointed 
by the failure to provide a sufficient plan for an advanced 
airborne data link capability as directed by section 239 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92). Meanwhile, Air Force and Navy data link 
development initiatives have shown limited technical progress, 
while potential adversary threat capabilities continue to 
increase. The committee believes a robust low probability of 
detection and jamming resistant data link network capability 
will be key to comprehensive situational awareness, cooperative 
electronic warfare, and cooperative fire control in contested 
and degraded operations environments.

Clarification of selection dates for pilot program for the enhancement 
        of the research, development, test, and evaluation centers of 
        the Department of Defense (sec. 232)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
clarifications and edits to the laboratory management 
demonstration program established in section 233 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328). The provision would clarify the date limitations 
for consideration of an application to join the pilot program, 
and it would also clarify that any proposals pursuant to the 
pilot program shall be submitted to the appropriate assistant 
secretary. The recommended provision would remove any further 
technical or legal obstacles to successful implementation of 
the underlying provision.

Requirement for a plan to build a prototype for a new ground combat 
        vehicle for the Army (sec. 233)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees detailing the Army's plan to build a 
prototype for a ground combat vehicle. The committee directs 
the Army to submit this report within 90 days of the enactment 
of this Act.
    The committee is concerned that the Army is operating a 
family of armored combat vehicles designed over 40 years ago. 
The committee is also concerned that the Army does not have a 
major armored combat vehicle currently under design.
    The committee is aware of ongoing efforts between the Tank 
Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) 
and the Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Georgia 
to identify requirements and existing enabling component 
technologies. The committee is also aware of the Army's 
progress in integrating existing active protection systems 
(APS) on existing combat platforms such as the M1A2 Abrams, the 
M2A3 Bradley, and the STRYKER.
    The committee is interested in how the Army intends to 
exploit the latest enabling component technologies that have 
the potential to dramatically change basic combat vehicle 
design and improve lethality, protection, mobility, range, and 
sustainment. This should include an analysis of capabilities of 
the most advanced foreign ground combat vehicles and whether 
any have characteristics that should inform the development of 
the Army's prototype vehicle, including whether any U.S. allies 
or partners have advanced capabilities that could be directly 
incorporated in the prototype. Such technologies would include 
APS with hard and soft kill capabilities, reactive armor, 
composite armor, thermal signature reduction, noise reduction, 
fuel cell propulsion, opposed-piston engines, 32 speed 
transmissions, suspension, power generation, voltage 
management, 3rd generation forward looking infrared sights, 
integrated hostile fire detection, manned-unmanned teaming, 
automatic loaders, munitions, and cannons.
    The committee is interested in the schedule, cost, key 
milestones, and leadership plan to rapidly design and build a 
prototype ground combat vehicle. The committee understands that 
TARDEC can develop concepts to meet emerging requirements, test 
developmental concepts with soldier involvement, model designs, 
virtually test and modify designs, integrate new technologies, 
manufacture prototypes, test prototypes, and demonstrate 
prototypes. The committee assesses that if TARDEC is employed 
to its potential, it may accelerate future efforts in 
acquisition and reduce developmental costs.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to use 
all acquisition authorities available to the fullest extent 
possible to plan to build a prototype for a new ground combat 
vehicle. In particular, the Secretary should aggressively use 
the latest authorities granted to him in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328).
    The committee acknowledges that an aggressive plan to build 
a prototype is not without risks. The committee fully supports 
this effort to exploit all available resources to expedite the 
construction of a combat vehicle prototype incorporating the 
latest technologies. The committee believes this effort will 
increase knowledge of available technologies, reduce risk to 
performance and cost, and set conditions for an accelerated 
development of a highly lethal and survivable vehicle that will 
ensure battlefield overmatch against potential adversaries.

Plan for successfully fielding the Integrated Air and Missile Defense 
        Battle Command System (sec. 234)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to report to the congressional defense 
committees a plan on how the Army will successfully field a 
suitable, survivable, and effective Integrated Air and Missile 
Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) program. The committee 
directs the Secretary to submit this plan within 180 days of 
the enactment of this Act. The provision would prohibit the 
Secretary from obligating any funds available in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, for the Army Integrated 
Air and Missile Defense and the Integrated Air and Missile 
Defense Battle Command System until the submission of this 
plan.
    The committee is concerned this developmental program is 
not meeting schedule and performance objectives after having 
become a program of record over 7 years ago. The committee is 
aware the Army has delayed a Milestone C decision for limited 
production, originally scheduled for the 4th quarter of fiscal 
year 2016, to the 1st quarter of fiscal year 2020. Like the 
Army's Warfighter Information Network-Tactical and the Air 
Force's Air Operations Center 10.2, this program is 
experiencing difficulty with immature software and software 
integration.
    Given that the Army has already expended over $1.2 billion 
on this program with the expected requirement to spend much 
more, the committee is concerned current software will soon 
become obsolete before a functional IBCS is fielded. Further, 
having experienced at least two re-baselinings, the committee 
is concerned this program is headed toward a critical change 
order.

Sense of the Congress on hypersonic weapons (sec. 235)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should 
expedite testing, evaluation, and acquisition of hypersonic 
weapon systems to meet the stated needs of the warfighter; that 
the United States cannot afford to lose its advantage over 
foreign countries in developing hypersonic weapons; and that 
the Department of Defense should focus on the next generation 
of weapon systems such as hypersonics. The recommended 
provision would also make a number of findings regarding the 
status of hypersonic technology in the Department of Defense 
and the potential for such weapons to change warfare and 
provide solutions to strategic problems.

                              Budget Items

Research, Development, Test & Evaluation Unfunded Requirements List

    The budget request included $82.7 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
submitted extensive Unfunded Requirements Lists totaling $33.1 
billion. The committee believes that since the passage of the 
Budget Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by 
artificial constraints rather than the realities of the global 
strategic environment. This reality has continued for the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined six years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.1 billion to Research, Development, Test and 
Evaluation for items identified in the Unfunded Requirements 
List. Some increases include acceleration for Cyber and Space 
capabilities. Greater details of each increase can be found in 
the tables in Division D.

                                  Army

Defense research sciences

    The budget request included $263.6 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 61102A, for defense 
research sciences. The committee notes that basic research 
activities focused in technical areas of interest to Department 
of Defense missions lay the foundation upon which other 
technology development and new defense systems are built. Basic 
research activities fund efforts at universities, small 
businesses, and government laboratories. These investments also 
serve to help train the next generation of scientists and 
engineers who may work on defense technology problems in 
government, industry, and academia.
    The committee also notes that this particular program 
builds fundamental scientific knowledge contributing to the 
sustainment of U.S. Army scientific and technological 
superiority in land warfighting capability and to solving 
military problems related to long-term national security needs. 
It also investigates new concepts and technologies for the 
Army's future force and provides the means to exploit 
scientific breakthroughs and avoid technological surprises.
    To further bolster basic research funding, the committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 61102A for a 
total of $273.6 million. The committee directs that these funds 
be awarded through well-established and competitive processes.

University and industry research centers

    The budget request included $87.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 61104A, for 
university and industry research centers. The committee notes 
that basic research activities focused in technical areas of 
interest to Department of Defense missions lay the foundation 
upon which other technology development and new defense systems 
are built. Basic research activities fund efforts at 
universities, small businesses, and government laboratories. 
These investments also serve to help train the next generation 
of scientists and engineers who may work on defense technology 
problems in government, industry, and academia.
    The committee also notes that this particular program 
fosters university and industry based research to provide a 
scientific foundation for enabling technologies for future 
force capabilities. In particular, this program funds 
collaborative technology alliances, which leverage large 
investments by the commercial sector in basic research areas 
that are of great importance interest to the Army.
    To further bolster basic research funding, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 61104A for a total 
of $92.4 million. The committee directs that these funds be 
awarded through well-established and competitive processes.

Army basic research

    The budget request included $430.0 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for basic research 
(budget activity 1). The committee recommends an increase of 
$10.0 million in basic research for a total of $440.0 million 
to support efforts at modernizing Army capabilities and 
supporting Third Offset strategies.

Strategic materials

    The budget request included $29.6 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 62105A, for 
materials technology research. The committee notes that in 
order to improve and accelerate the development of new 
materials, including more sophisticated and productive use of 
materials by design, and to address modern military needs in 
materials processing, additive manufacturing, and energy 
coupling to materials, the Army Research Laboratory has 
launched its Open Campus Initiative to improve collaboration 
with research universities and companies. There is a recognized 
need for targeted materials research and development to advance 
knowledge and design in materials processing, science and 
engineering, focused on transforming the affordability, 
performance, adaptability, and environmental sustainability of 
materials. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in PE 62105A for a total of $39.6 million to support 
these efforts.

Aviation technology

    The budget request included $65.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 62211A, for 
aviation technology. The committee notes that several of the 
programs contained within this program element, such as rotors 
and vehicle management technology, engine and drives 
technologies, and platform design and structures technologies, 
involve research activities that may overlap with aviation 
research being performed elsewhere in the Department of 
Defense. Given this potential for redundant work, the committee 
believes that the level of funds requested for this program 
element is not entirely justified. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a general program decrease of $5.0 million in PE 
62211A for a total of $60.9 million and recommends that the 
Army look for opportunities to increase collaboration and 
coordination with other services and research programs on 
aviation technology.

Command, control, communications technology

    The budget request included $33.1 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 62782A, for 
command, control, and communications technology. The committee 
encourages the Secretary of the Army to support the development 
and advancement of technologies that address the increasing 
gaps in position, navigation, and timing architectural and 
technological development that address GPS vulnerabilities and 
combatting navigation warfare. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase for position, navigation, and timing 
technologies of $5.0 million for these efforts in PE 62782A for 
a total of $38.1 million.

Army applied research

    The budget request included $889.2 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for applied research 
(budget activity 2). The committee recommends an increase of 
$15.0 million in applied research for a total of $904.2 million 
to support efforts at modernizing Army capabilities and 
supporting Third Offset strategies.

Aviation advanced technology

    The budget request included $160.7 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 63003A, for 
aviation advanced technology. The committee notes that of this 
amount, over $120.0 million is requested for platform design 
and structures system, which represents a more than doubling of 
this project's budget from fiscal year 2017. While the 
committee supports the continued air vehicle demonstration of 
critical new technologies, the committee is concerned that the 
large increase in funds is not justified by the project plans. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease for platform 
design and structures system of $20.0 million in PE 63003A for 
a total of $140.7 million.

High performance computing modernization program

    The budget request included $182.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, PE 63461A, for the 
high performance computing modernization program. The committee 
notes that this program is a Department-wide asset used by all 
of the Services and combat support agencies. Additional funding 
for this program would keep the research and development budget 
at a similar level to that appropriated in fiscal year 2017. 
The committee notes that research and development initiatives 
under this program support Defense supercomputing resource 
centers, the Defense Research and Engineering Network, and 
software applications. The U.S. government has spent over $7 
billion to develop and implement this unique, world-class 
national computing asset for DOD, which delivers approximately 
3.2 billion processor hours and over 3.5 quadrillion floating 
point operations per second, available and configured to 
support the Department's most challenging problems and analysis 
of massive and complex datasets. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a program increase of $40.0 million in PE 63461A for 
a total of $222.3 million.

Military engineering advanced technology

    The budget request included $32.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, PE 63734A, for 
advanced military engineering advanced technology. The 
committee notes that of this amount, $9.6 million is requested 
for map-based planning services under the combat engineering 
systems project line. This request represents a more than five-
fold increase of this effort's budget over the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 2017. The committee is concerned 
about the ability to absorb such a large increase in funding 
and believes the request level is an unjustified increase. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease for map-based 
planning services of $5.0 million in PE 63734A for a total of 
$27.4 million.

Army advanced technology development

    The budget request included $1,071.0 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for advanced 
technology development (budget activity 3). The committee 
recommends an increase of $20.0 million in advanced technology 
development for a total of $1,091.0 million to support efforts 
at modernizing Army capabilities and supporting Third Offset 
strategies.

Army armored systems modernization advanced development of advanced 
        fuel cell prototypes

    The budget request included $9.4 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $32.7 
million was for the PE 63645A Armored System Modernization 
Advanced Development.
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to expedite critical capabilities through rapid 
prototyping to meet the needs of combatant commanders. The 
committee believes that advanced fuel cell vehicles could 
provide to the Army considerable operational benefits, 
including reduced logistics burden, reduced acoustic and 
thermal signatures, and increased availability of mobile power 
for deployed forces. However, a robust program of prototyping 
and experimentation is required in order to field such tactical 
systems. The committee notes that the Army's Tank Automotive 
Research Development and Engineering Center has done 
significant work with the commercial automotive industry to 
develop and experiment with advanced fuel cell vehicle 
technologies and systems. The committee further believes that 
these activities are best executed through cross functional 
teams consisting of technology developers, operational users, 
testers, and commercial sector partners.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $70.0 
million, for a total of $102.7 million, in RDT&E Army, PE 
63645A, for the Armored System Modernization Advanced 
Development to prototype and test advanced fuel cell vehicles 
to support Army missions.

Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems--Active Protection System (APS)

    The budget request included $98.6 million in PE 64852A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Army, for 
Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems--Active Protection System 
(APS). The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in 
RDT&E Army for PE 64852A for a total of $118.6 million.

Army Contract Writing System

    The budget request included $20.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Army for PE 65047A for 
Army Contract Writing System. The committee is concerned about 
duplication among the military services in contract writing 
systems. The committee recommends a decrease of $20.3 million 
in RDT&E, Army for PE 65047A for a total of $0.0 million.

Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense (AIAMD)

    The budget request included $336.4 million in PE 65457A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Army, for 
Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense. The committee notes an 
early to need requirement in the budget for fiscal year 2018. 
The committee recommends a decrease of $200.0 million in PE 
65457A for a total of $136.4 million.

Accelerated development of the Hercules recovery vehicle

    The budget request included $343.2 million in PE 23735A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for Combat 
Vehicle Improvement Programs. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in PE 23735A for a total of $347.2 
million for accelerating the development of the M88A2E1 
Hercules recovery vehicle. This item is on the Army unfunded 
priority list.

Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs

    The budget request included $343.2 million in PE 23735A, 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDTEA), for 
Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs.
    The Committee is concerned with the Army's repeated 
decision to ignore the articulated requirement for a vehicle 
laser warning system as part of the Abrams 1B and the Bradley 
2B ECP improvements. The laser warning system provides critical 
protection and enhances current operational capabilities 
utilized by forward deployed units. Any additional delay in 
fielding will only continue to undermine effectiveness and 
prolong an increased risk to the Army's ground combat vehicles.
    The committee recommends that the Army realign its 
procurement plans and integrate the laser warning system onto 
the M1 Abrams Tank and any other forward deploying ground 
combat vehicles. The committee encourages the Army to 
concentrate on survivability and incorporate a laser warning 
sensor suite system to adequately address the growing threat of 
anti-tank guided missiles and laser beam riding guidance 
systems.
    The committee believes that by focusing on mature, field-
tested protective technology, the APS will provide a balanced 
framework that both increases lethality and protection for the 
warfighter. Therefore, as the Army transitions active 
protection systems (APS) onto ground combat vehicles through 
the Vehicle Protection System, the committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in PE 23735A, RDTEA, for a total of 
(including other budget increases elsewhere in this Act) $351.2 
million, for the incorporation of a laser warning sensor suite 
onto the system.

Missile/Air Defense Product Improvement Program

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 23801A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, for Missile/
Air Defense Product Improvement Program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $26.0 million in PE 23801A for a 
total of $37.2 million. Stinger Product Improvement Program is 
on the Army unfunded priority list.

Distributed Common Ground/Surface System

    The budget request included $24.7 million in PE 35208A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Army, for 
Distributed Common Ground/Surface System. The committee notes 
changing tactical requirements. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $20.0 million in PE 35208A for a total of $4.7 
million.

Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 2-Initial Networking 
        (WIN-T Inc. 2)

    The budget request included $4.7 million in PE 0310349A of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Army, for 
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 2-Initial 
Networking. The committee notes changing tactical requirements. 
The committee recommends a decrease of $4.0 million in PE 
0310349A.

                                  Navy

University research initiatives

    The budget request included $118.1 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 61103N, for 
university research initiatives. The committee notes that basic 
research activities focused in technical areas of interest to 
Department of Defense missions lay the foundation upon which 
other technology development and new defense systems are built. 
Basic research activities fund efforts at universities, small 
businesses, and government laboratories. These investments also 
serve to help train the next generation of scientists and 
engineers who may work on defense technology problems in 
government, industry, and academia.
    To further bolster basic research funding, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 61103N for a total 
of $123.1 million. The committee directs that these funds be 
awarded through well-established and competitive processes.

Ocean warfighting environmental applied research

    The budget request included $42.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 62435N, for ocean 
warfighting environment applied research. The committee notes 
that large research vessels, such as the AGOR-23 class, are 
vitally important to the U.S. oceanographic research effort due 
to their range payload, duration, and ability to effectively 
conduct scientific operations in remote areas and high-sea 
states. As the size and capability of the university-laboratory 
oceanographic laboratory system fleet have generally declined 
in recent years, the demand for research vessels like those in 
the AGOR-23 class has increased and has made that class among 
the highly-subscribed vessels in the fleet. These vessels and 
the research they conduct are critical to our national security 
and central to the Navy's anti-submarine warfare, mine warfare 
work, and operational warcraft efforts. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 62435N 
for a total of $57.2 million.

Undersea warfare applied research

    The budget request included $56.1 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 62747N, for 
undersea warfare applied research. The committee notes that the 
Navy has been researching the capacity of the shipyards that 
build our nation's nuclear submarine forces to maintain higher 
production rates for the Virginia-class submarines while also 
designing and then beginning construction of the first of the 
Columbia-class submarines in fiscal year 2021.
    The committee encourages the Navy to align their efforts 
with qualified higher education partners focusing on undersea 
vehicle applications related to several key fabrication and 
manufacturing process technologies including composites, 
metals, and electronics. In addition, investments should 
address the overall affordability challenge faced by current 
and future submarine and undersea vehicle programs, including 
fabrication process innovation and the ability to introduce 
continuous technology improvements at the Navy's existing 
undersea shipyard industrial base.
    The committee directs the Navy to closely coordinate this 
effort with its industrial base partners to ensure that funded 
research projects are relevant to specific engineering and 
manufacturing needs, as well as defined systems capabilities. 
Partnerships with academia should focus on specific, well-
defined short- and long-term submarine and autonomous undersea 
vehicle research needs and accelerated technology transition, 
and they should include a strong workforce development 
component. To bolster this effort, the committee recommends an 
aggregate increase of $25.0 million in PE 62747N for a total of 
$81.1 million.

Innovative naval prototypes applied research

    The budget request included $171.1 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 62792N, for 
innovative naval prototypes applied research. The committee 
notes that this program element is tasked with developing leap 
ahead technologies in game-changing areas such as cyber, 
directed energy, electromagnetic warfare, and autonomous 
systems. While the committee supports efforts in all of these 
research fields and believes that they are important to 
maintaining our military technological superiority, the 
committee notes that the other Services are also focusing 
research in all of these areas. As such, the committee believes 
that research costs can be reduced through better coordination 
and collaboration among the Services. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an aggregate decrease of $10.0 million in PE 62792N 
for a total of $161.1 million.

United States Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration

    The budget request included $154.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 63640M, for United 
States Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration. The 
committee notes that of this amount, $59.7 million is requested 
for the futures directorate, an organization tasked with 
identifying future challenges and opportunities, developing 
warfighting concepts, and comprehensively exploring options to 
inform the combat development process to meet the challenges of 
the future operating environment. This request represents more 
than a 25 percent increase over the appropriations for this 
project in fiscal year 2017. The committee is concerned that 
such an increase is unjustified and cannot be absorbed through 
the work identified in the project description. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an aggregate decrease of $5.0 million for 
the futures directorate in PE 63640M for a total of $149.4 
million.

Future naval capabilities advanced technology developments

    The budget request included $231.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, PE 63673N, for 
future naval capabilities advanced technology developments. The 
activities listed under this program element include capable 
manpower and enterprise and platform enablers. The committee 
believes that the work plans for fiscal year 2018 overlap 
significantly with activities and research in other services 
and in the commercial sector. The committee encourages the Navy 
to coordinate these research areas more closely with these 
other entities and, to the extent possible, take advantage of 
commercial off-the-shelf technologies to achieve these 
objectives. Therefore, the committee recommends an aggregate 
decrease of $5.0 million in PE 63673N for a total of $226.8 
million to be distributed appropriately from capable manpower 
and enterprise and platform enablers.

Mine and expeditionary warfare advanced technology

    The budget request included $116.0 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, PE 63782N, for mine 
and expeditionary warfare advanced technology. The committee 
notes that a Navy demonstration for a maritime enhanced sensor 
would provide the Navy with the capability to assess a full 
range of anti-surface unit warfare and anti-submarine warfare 
capabilities, as well as to gather needed intelligence against 
threats in the United States Pacific Command strategic 
environment. United States Pacific Command has previously 
identified a number of mission gaps an enhanced sensor can 
satisfy, and the Navy has the opportunity to leverage the Air 
Force's maritime target detection investments and long range 
imaging solution in a demonstration program to reduce 
procurement costs and expedite fielding. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for these 
efforts in PE 63782N for a total of $131.0 million for maritime 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance technology.

Innovative naval prototypes advanced technology developments

    The budget request included $108.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test, Evaluation, Navy, PE 63801N, for innovative 
naval prototypes advanced technology developments. The 
committee notes that undersea warfare capabilities are a key 
component of Navy modernization plans. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $15.0 million for underwater unmanned 
vehicle prototypes in PE 63801N for a total of $123.3 million.

Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures

    The budget request contained $154.1 million in PE 63502N 
for surface and shallow water mine countermeasures (MCM).
    The committee notes that, in the fiscal year 2017 budget 
request, the Barracuda MCM program was planned to be employed 
from an aircraft and was included in PE 64373N (Airborne Mine 
Countermeasures). In the fiscal year 2018 budget request, 
Barracuda was realigned to PE 63502N for employment from the 
MCM unmanned surface vessel and potentially other surface 
platforms. The committee lacks sufficient information on this 
fundamental change in Barracuda employment to support the 
budget request. The committee therefore recommends a decrease 
of $16.0 million in Barracuda product development (project 
2989).
    The committee further notes PE 63502N includes the 
Snakehead large diameter unmanned underwater vehicle in project 
2094. Compared to last year's budget request, Snakehead 
experienced a 1-year delay from fiscal year 2018 to 2019 for 
the Critical Design Review and planned fabrication start. The 
committee therefore recommends a decrease of $20.0 million in 
Snakehead product development (project 2094).
    The committee also notes this program included no funding 
for Persistent Littoral Undersea Surveillance (PLUS) product 
development, support, or fleet experimentation. The committee 
understands that the Office of Naval Research could conduct 
additional experimentation with an existing government-owned 
REMUS 1000 unmanned underwater vehicle. The committee supports 
utilizing this existing proven system for continued risk 
reduction, technology maturation, and concept development. The 
committee therefore recommends an increase of $10.0 million for 
continued REMUS 1000 activities (project 2094).
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an overall decrease 
of $26.0 million for a total of $128.1 million.

Aircraft carrier preliminary design

    The budget request included $12.0 million in PE 63564N for 
ship preliminary design and feasibility studies.
    The committee notes that all three future fleet platform 
architecture studies required by section 1067 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-
92) recommended the Navy pursue a class of aircraft carriers 
smaller than the Ford-class. The committee concurs and believes 
smaller aircraft carriers would both increase capacity and 
provide a more efficient means to conduct a range of missions 
with lower sortie requirements, including amphibious 
operations.
    The committee believes the Navy should leverage the fleet 
architecture studies, as well as the report on alternative 
aircraft carrier options required by section 128 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92), to complete preliminary design of a smaller 
aircraft carrier. The committee further believes that 
completing preliminary design would provide Department leaders 
with an option to supplement Nimitz- and Ford-class aircraft 
carriers.
    The committee understands that when the USS Midway (CV-41) 
was decommissioned in 1992, the ship was conventionally-
powered; weighed between 60,000 and 70,000 tons; and contained 
2 catapults and arresting gear to support up to 65 fixed wing 
aircraft. Based on the committee's review of relevant studies 
and reports, the committee views these attributes as desirable 
for a class of smaller aircraft carriers and believes more than 
one United States shipyard should be capable of building 
aircraft carriers.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0 
million, for a total of $42.0 million, in PE 63564N and directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to complete preliminary design of a 
smaller aircraft carrier. The Secretary shall submit the 
preliminary design to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives not later September 30, 
2019.

Littoral Combat Ship

    The budget request contained $41.0 million in PE 63581N for 
Littoral Combat Ships.
    The committee notes the Littoral Combat Ship project (3096) 
included no product development and a reduced level of test and 
evaluation activity.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $7.0 
million, for a total of $34.0 million, to align support costs 
with program activity.

Marine Corps Rapid Capabilities Office

    The budget request included $17.8 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, Evaluation, Navy, of which $7.1 million was 
for PE 64320M for Rapid Technology Capability Prototype.
    The committee notes the importance of the Marine Corps 
Rapid Capabilities Office (MCRCO) as part of the larger 
defense-wide acquisition system reform. The MCRCO will be 
housed inside the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab and should 
continue to improve the Corps' rapid prototyping capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million for PE 64320M for Rapid Technology Capability Prototype 
for a total of $17.1 million.

Extra large unmanned undersea vehicles

    The budget request included $66.5 million in PE 64536N for 
research, development, test, and evaluation of advanced 
undersea prototyping.
    The committee notes the budget request for this program 
element provides for the prototyping and testing of extra large 
unmanned undersea vehicles (XLUUV), including procurement of up 
to five vehicles and the lease of one vehicle, in project 3394. 
The committee further notes the contract for fabrication of up 
to five XLUUVs, battery energy sections, and mine warfare 
payloads is scheduled to be awarded in fiscal year 2019 with 
XLUUV deliveries to begin in fiscal year 2020.
    The committee is concerned with the Navy's concurrent 
approach to design, technology development, and integration, as 
well as the feasibility of the XLUUV concept of employment for 
envisioned missions.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $52.9 
million for project 3394, for a total of $13.6 million, due to 
fabrication funding being ahead of need and insufficient detail 
on program milestones necessary to deliver a system capable of 
achieving desired mission objectives.

Air Crew Systems Development

    The budget request included $13.2 million in PE 64264N of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN) for 
air crew systems development.
    The committee is concerned by repeated incidents of 
physiological episodes occurring in a number of Navy aircraft, 
particularly the F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet, EA-18G 
Growler, and T-45 Goshawk. Despite being Naval Aviation's 
number one safety priority and the existence of a physiological 
episode team since 2010, determining root causes and 
establishing adequate mitigations remain elusive. The committee 
is encouraged by the level of attention senior Navy leadership 
has shown towards this issue, but it believes more must be done 
to solve this danger to our Naval Aviators and Naval Flight 
Officers.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million, including $10.0 million to establish a prize 
competition designed to accelerate identification of the root 
cause or causes of physiological episodes, in PE 64264N of 
RDTEN for a total of $33.2 million.

F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Marine Corps

    The budget request included $152.9 million in PE 64800M, 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN), for 
the Marine Corps contribution to F-35 System Design and 
Demonstration (SDD).
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
is not budgeting the resources necessary to ensure that the SDD 
phase is completed in a timely, efficient, and effective 
manner. The committee believes that it is essential the program 
efficiently and effectively completes the SDD phase to ensure 
that the warfighter receives the required capabilities and that 
the program is established on a solid foundation, with minimal 
outstanding deficiencies that need to be corrected in later 
modifications. The committee further believes post-SDD software 
updates and testing resources will be necessary prior to 
introduction of the first increment of Block 4 Follow-on 
Modernization to correct any deficiencies either left over from 
SDD or discovered in Initial Operational Test & Evaluation. The 
committee does not believe these efforts are being properly 
resourced.
    The country can ill afford further delays to the F-35's 
necessary capabilities. However, it is equally essential to 
ensure the minimal number of deficiencies are deferred beyond 
SDD, both to deliver the necessary warfighting capabilities and 
to avoid further costly modifications later.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $91.2 
million, for a total of $244.1 million, in PE 64800M, RDTEN, 
for F-35 SDD. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends 
additional funding increases for F-35 SDD to aid in the 
development of this vitally important program.

F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Navy

    The budget request included $109.0 million in PE 64800N, 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN), for 
the Navy contribution to F-35 System Design and Demonstration 
(SDD).
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
is not budgeting the resources necessary to ensure that the SDD 
phase is completed in a timely, efficient, and effective 
manner. The committee believes that it is essential the program 
efficiently and effectively completes the SDD phase to ensure 
that the warfighter receives the required capabilities and that 
the program is established on a solid foundation, with minimal 
outstanding deficiencies that need to be corrected in later 
modifications. The committee further believes post-SDD software 
updates and testing resources will be necessary prior to 
introduction of the first increment of Block 4 Follow-on 
Modernization to correct any deficiencies either left over from 
SDD or discovered in Initial Operational Test and Evaluation. 
The committee does not believe these efforts are being properly 
resourced.
    The country can ill afford further delays to the F-35's 
necessary capabilities. However, it is equally essential to 
ensure the minimal number of deficiencies are deferred beyond 
SDD, both to deliver the necessary warfighting capabilities and 
to avoid further costly modifications later.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $66.7 
million, for a total of $175.6 million, in PE 64800N, RDTEN, 
for F-35 SDD. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends 
additional funding increases for F-35 SDD to aid in the 
development of this vitally important program.

Navy eProcurement (Navy ePS)

    The budget request included $11.2 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy for PE 65013N for 
Navy eProcurement in Information Technology Development. The 
committee is concerned about duplication among the military 
services in contract writing systems. The committee recommends 
a decrease of $11.2 million in RDT&E Navy for PE 65013N for a 
total of $0.0 million.

Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS)

    The budget request included $23.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy for PE 65013N for 
Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System in Information 
Technology Development. The committee is concerned about 
duplication among the military services in integrated personnel 
and pay systems. The committee recommends a decrease of $23.9 
million in RDT&E, Navy for PE 65013N for a total of $0.0 
million.

DDG-1000

    The budget request included $140.5 million in PE 24202N for 
the DDG-1000 program.
    The committee notes the budget request for this program 
element contains $121.2 million in cost growth in fiscal year 
2018 and $222.3 million in cost growth over the fiscal year 
2018 to 2020 period, as compared to the fiscal year 2017 budget 
request. The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to take 
further measures to regain cost control.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 
million in PE 24202N for the DDG-1000 program for a total of 
$90.5 million.

Management, technical, and international support

    The budget request included $94.6 million in PE 65853N of 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Navy for 
management, technical, and international support.
    The committee notes the following projects contain 
unjustified growth: 2221 ($4.0 million) and 3027 ($1.5 
million).
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.5 
million for a total of $89.1 million.

Classified project

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in PE 99999N of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy for 
classified programs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $200.0 million, for 
a total of $1.7 billion, for project 0428.

                               Air Force

Hypersonic wind tunnels

    The budget request included $124.7 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 62201F, for 
aerospace vehicle technologies. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 62201F to enhance efforts on 
advanced hypersonic wind tunnel experimentation and applied 
research for a total of $129.7 million. The committee notes 
that hypersonic technologies are a key component of Third 
Offset strategies but is concerned that investment has been 
insufficient to support test infrastructure, advanced testing 
techniques, and the testing workforce. Without these 
investments, it is unlikely that hypersonic systems will 
achieve operational status.

Human effectiveness applied research

    The budget request included $108.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 62202F, for 
human effectives applied research. The committee notes that the 
Air Force Research Laboratory started a multi-year Secure Live-
Virtual-Constructive Advanced Training Environment Advance 
Technology Demonstrator to develop and demonstrate a mixed 
live-and-synthetic air combat environment to train pilots for 
missions involving current and future anti-access/area denial 
and asymmetric threats at an affordable cost. Such training 
systems are higher fidelity, more realistic, and threat-
representative training. The introduction of these exercises 
will offer combat pilots substantially improved battlefield 
realism, and the committee urges the military services to apply 
the necessary focus and resources to support LVC training for 
combat pilots in the near-term.
    The committee notes that the demonstration needs additional 
funding for development activities which include ensuring 
multiple independent levels of security, encryption 
certification, development of a fifth generation advanced 
training waveform, and support for additional platform types. 
The lack of full funding puts at risk the ability to bridge the 
developmental effort into a program of record. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 62202F 
for a total of $133.8 million to support research on advanced 
training environments.

Aerospace propulsion

    The budget request included $192.7 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 62203F, for 
aerospace propulsion. The committee notes that the Air Force 
must continue development of critical next-generation engine 
programs that require both significant research and development 
funding and long-lead times for propulsion-system development. 
Advanced propulsion research is critical to meeting the 
requirement of advanced weapon systems concepts.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million in PE 62203F for a total of $200.7 million.

Electronic combat technology

    The budget request included $60.5 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 63270F, for 
electronic combat technologies. In order to support 
collaboration between the Defense Digital Service and the Air 
Force Research Laboratory to improve Air Force software 
engineering capabilities and to address high priority technical 
issues plaguing Air Force information technology acquisition 
programs and deployed systems, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63270F for a total of $65.5 
million.

Commercial Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Consortia/Testbed

    The committee is concerned about the increasingly contested 
environment in space and believes that commercial solutions, in 
some cases, are available to rapidly fill critical operational 
gaps and mitigate emerging threats.
    Therefore, the committee supports the funding of the Air 
Force's unfunded requirement of $15.0 million to establish a 
commercial Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Consortia/Testbed 
to help the Air Force field ``best of breed'' commercial space 
situational awareness and Battle Management Command and Control 
(BMC2) software. In an effort to normalize and better 
understand the many SSA investments underway or planned, the 
committee requests the Air Force provide a report itemizing the 
amounts the Air Force has requested on development, operations, 
and sustainment in the fiscal year 2018 budget request for each 
of the following three components, as well as funding requested 
in the unfunded requirements process: surveillance sensor 
systems, SSA software for operations centers, and BMC2 software 
for operations centers. In the report the Air Force should 
appropriately delineate investments in commercial capabilities 
versus Air Force research and development efforts and include a 
description for each including a discussion of how and where it 
plans to leverage commercial space situational awareness 
capabilities. The committee directs the Air Force to provide 
this information to the congressional defense committees within 
30 days.

Air Force Contracting Information Technology System

    The budget request included $15.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force for PE 91410F 
for Air Force Contracting Information Technology System. The 
committee is concerned about duplication among the military 
services in contract writing systems. The committee recommends 
a decrease of $15.9 million in RDT&E, Air Force for PE 91410F 
for a total of $0.0 million.

F-35 System Design and Demonstration--Air Force

    The budget request included $293.0 million in PE 64800F of 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF) 
for the Air Force contribution to F-35 System Design and 
Demonstration (SDD).
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
is not budgeting the resources necessary to ensure that the SDD 
phase is completed in a timely, efficient, and effective 
manner. The committee believes that it is essential that the 
program efficiently and effectively completes the SDD phase to 
ensure that the warfighter receives the required capabilities 
and that the program is established on a solid foundation, with 
minimal outstanding deficiencies that need to be corrected in 
later modifications. The committee further believes post-SDD 
software updates and testing resources will be necessary prior 
to introduction of the first increment of Block 4 Follow-on 
Modernization to correct any deficiencies either left over from 
SDD or discovered in Initial Operational Test and Evaluation. 
The committee does not believe these efforts are being properly 
resourced.
    The country can ill afford further delays to the F-35's 
necessary capabilities. However, it is equally essential to 
ensure the minimal number of deficiencies are deferred beyond 
SDD, both to deliver the necessary warfighting capabilities and 
to avoid further costly modifications later.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $172.2 
million, for a total of $465.2 million, in PE 64800F, for F-35 
SDD. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends additional 
funding increases for F-35 SDD to aid in the development of 
this vitally important program.

Restructure of Air and Space Operations Center--Weapons System upgrade 
        program

    The budget request contained $119.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), PE 
65458F, for the Air and Space Operations Center--Weapons System 
10.2 upgrade program.
    The committee is concerned with the length and cost of the 
Air and Space Operations Center Weapons System 10.2 upgrade 
program, especially after the program experienced a critical 
change in March 2016, where the Milestone C fielding decision 
was delayed for an additional 3 years and the cost for the 
development phase was estimated to double over the original 
estimate, increasing from $374.0 million to $745.0 million. 
This program, while complex in nature and complicated by 
emerging cyber assurance requirements, was originally 
established in fiscal year 2007. For such a core Air Force 
requirement in a system intended to enable its Combined Forces 
Air Component Commanders to effectively plan and execute air 
and space campaigns in support of combatant commander 
warfighting requirements, a 13-year program from inception to 
fielding is unacceptable.
    The committee is also concerned that the treatment of 
Department of Defense software production and sustainment 
activities in the same manner as traditional acquisition 
programs is an impediment to the faster delivery of required 
capabilities. Software production should be treated primarily 
as advisory and assistance services under indefinite delivery/
indefinite quantity contract structures, with specific contract 
lines to deliver increments of information technology from 
appropriate experts in a more rapid fashion. In today's rapidly 
changing technology environment, software production and 
sustainment activities represent a continuous and ongoing 
effort that do not conform well with current acquisition 
program cycles and milestones.
    The committee expects the Secretary of the Air Force, in 
the pursuit of restructuring how information systems are 
developed and sustained, to use a pathfinder approach on this 
program to:
          (1) Establish an Air Force Life Cycle Management 
        Center (AFLCMC)/Defense Innovation Unit--Experimental 
        (DIUx) modernization team;
          (2) Establish a change management initiative to 
        empower AFLCMC to run a multi-phase pathfinder pilot;
          (3) Deliver the initial capability of the pathfinder 
        pilot within 8 to 12 months;
          (4) Transition software management capability, 
        contracting vehicles, and hiring authority from DIUx to 
        the Air and Space Operations Center Program Management 
        Office over the next 24 to 36 months;
          (5) Demonstrate how executive leadership will 
        facilitate agile software production processes; and
          (6) Distribute lessons learned for incorporation into 
        other Department of Defense business information and 
        national security system software production efforts.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $104.8 
million in RDTEAF, PE 65458F, for the Air and Space Operations 
Center--Weapons System 10.2 upgrade program, for a total of 
$15.0 million, which is sufficient authorization of funds for 
residual contract liabilities.

Advanced weapons systems testing capabilities

    The budget request included $82.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test, Evaluation, Air Force, PE 64759F, for major 
test and evaluation investment. The committee notes that this 
bill supports and accelerates the Department's efforts to 
modernize military capabilities to meet the threats of the 
future, especially in advanced weapons systems, such as 
hypersonic missiles and directed energy. The committee notes 
that the successful development and deployment of the systems 
depends on robust testing capabilities including open air 
ranges with modern instrumentation and highly skilled technical 
workforce.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $15.0 
million in PE 64759F to improve open air range testing 
capabilities to support development of Third Offset advanced 
weapons systems, for a total of $97.9M.

Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS)

    The budget request included $21.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force for PE 65018F 
for Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS). 
The committee is concerned about duplication among the military 
services in integrated personnel and pay systems. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $21.9 million in RDT&E, Air Force for 
PE 65018F for a total of $0.0 million.

Minuteman III Squadrons

    The budget request included $210.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 11213F, for 
Minuteman III Squadrons, of which $20.0 million was incorrectly 
loaded across the related programs during the budget process. 
The committee supports the request by the Air Force to transfer 
funds between these subprograms and therefore recommends a 
decrease of $10.0 million in Minuteman Ground and Communication 
Equipment from $119.4 million to $109.4 million, a decrease of 
$10.0 million in Minuteman Support Equipment from $31.6 million 
to $21.6 million, and an increase of $20.0 million in ICBM 
Cryptography Upgrade II from no funding to $20.0 million, with 
the aggregate funding for Minuteman III Squadrons remaining at 
$210.9 million.

Pulsed solid rocket motor technology

    The budget request contained $35.0 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF) for PE 
27161F for Tactical AIM Missiles.
    The committee is aware that substantial advances are being 
made in the development of pulsed solid rocket motor 
technologies that could significantly increase the range and 
probability of kill for existing air-to-air and air-to-surface 
missiles. With the increasing capabilities of potential 
adversary air-to-air and air-to-surface munitions, successful 
transition of such technologies could be rapidly fielded into 
existing U.S. munitions inventories to maintain technological 
overmatch in air dominance against potential adversaries.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million in RDTEAF, for PE 27161F, for a total of $55.0 million, 
to support the development of pulsed rocket motor technologies 
for air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles.

Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network

    The budget request included $48.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, PE 33131F, for 
the Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network (MEECN), 
of which $10.0 million was requested for Global Aircrew 
Strategic Network Terminal (ASNT) Increment 1; $22.5 million 
was for Common VLF/LF Receiver (CVR) Increment 2; and $15.4 
million was for Global ASNT Increment 2. The committee notes 
that program delays in Global ASNT Increment 1 have further 
delayed Increment 2. The committee supports the Air Force's 
request to transfer funds between these subprograms and 
therefore recommends that CVR Increment 2 be decreased by $12.3 
million for a total of $10.3 million; Global ASNT Increment 2 
be reduced by $8.8 million for a total of $6.5 million; and 
Global ASNT Increment 1 be increased by $21.1 million for a 
total of $31.1 million, in order to support timely completion 
of Increment 1, with the aggregate funding for MEECN remaining 
at $48.8 million.

C-130J

    The budget request included $26.8 million in PE 41132F, 
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF) 
for the C-130J program.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $6.4 million in PE 
41132F for RDTEAF, for a total of $20.4 million, for the C-130J 
program due to the availability of prior year funds that are 
excess to program needs.

                              Defense Wide

National defense education program

    The budget request included $74.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 61120D8Z, 
for the national defense education program. The committee notes 
that that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) authorized a program the 
Department of Defense to engage in innovative and evidence-
based efforts to improve science, technology, engineering and 
mathematics (STEM) educational opportunities for military 
children. The committee notes that by this fall, 215 military-
connected high schools will be engaged in the program. The 
committee also notes that this program is yielding significant 
dividends and tangible results. For example, using the highly 
rigorous Advanced Placement exam qualifying score (3 or better 
on a 5-point scale) as the benchmark, program schools have seen 
an average of a 152 percent increase in successful math and 
science examinations after 3 years in the program. To support 
these efforts, the committee recommends an additional $5.0 
million in PE 61120D8Z for a total of $79.3 million to support 
evidence-based military child STEM education.

Manufacturing Engineering Education Program

    The budget request included $74.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 61120D8Z, 
for the National Defense Education Program. Improving the 
quality and availability of manufacturing engineering education 
is critically important to sustaining and advancing the 
manufacturing industrial base of the United States, which is 
vital for the economic and national security of the country, 
and specifically the Defense Industrial Base, on which the 
Department of Defense directly depends for its warfighting 
capabilities. Manufacturing engineering education suffered in 
proportion to the collapse of manufacturing employment in the 
last decade, and needs to be revitalized. The committee 
recommends an increase of $20.0 million for the Manufacturing 
Engineering Education Program established under section 
2196(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code in PE 61120D8Z for a 
total of $94.3 million.

Support for minority women in science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics fields at historically black colleges and 
        universities

    The budget request includes $25.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 61228D8Z, 
for research activities at Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities (HBCUs). The committee is aware of the need to 
increase participation of all American citizens in defense and 
related national security efforts. Students at HBCUs represent 
a largely untapped pool of U.S. citizens who have technical 
training and can obtain the security clearances needed to work 
on high priority national security challenges. The committee 
notes that the HBCU program at the Department of Defense has 
worked both to fund high priority university research, 
especially through the establishment of centers of excellence 
in key disciplines and activities, and to strengthen the 
pipeline of talent from HBCUs into technical positions within 
the Department. The committee urges the Department to engage 
HBCUs to support the training and education of minority women 
in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) 
fields that are of interest to the military, particularly 
through research funding, fellowships, and internships and 
cooperative work experiences at Defense laboratories. The 
committee recommends that the Department considering increasing 
investments in these kinds of activities in future budgets to 
support Administration initiatives on HBCUs. Consistent with 
the spirit and findings of the INSPIRE Women Act (Public Law 
115-7), the Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act (Public Law 
115-6), and Executive Orders promoting excellence and 
innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
(E.O. 13532 and E.O. 13779), the committee recommends an 
increase of $2.0 million to support merit-based and competitive 
awards to HBCUs in PE 61228D8Z for a total of $27.9 million.

Tactical technology

    The budget request included $343.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, PE 
62702E, for tactical technology, of which $33.5 million was 
requested for the multi-azimuth defense fast intercept round 
engagement system. The committee notes that this system, while 
potentially capable, faces an uncertain transition future due 
to the complexity involved with installation deployment, 
combined with practical limitations on its use. In addition, 
the committee notes that the Navy has not yet signed on as a 
transition partner despite the potential application to naval 
warfare.
    The committee also notes that a number of efforts in this 
program element are proposed for significant growth, at a time 
when similar activities in the Services and the Strategic 
Capabilities Office are also growing. At the same time, the 
committee is concerned that the agency appears to be 
undertaking some of these efforts without sufficient 
coordination with the defense research community. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in PE 
62702E for a total of $328.8 million and recommends that a 
portion of the decrease be applied to multi-azimuth defense 
fast intercept round engagement system.

Electronics technology

    The budget request included $295.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, PE 
62176E, for electronics technology. The committee notes that 
the request represents an increase of over 33 percent above the 
amount enacted for fiscal year 2017, which itself was 25 
percent above the amount enacted for fiscal year 2016. The 
committee notes that the completed projects in this program 
element did not for the most part transition to programs of 
records. As a result, the committee recommends a general 
program decrease of $10.0 million in PE 62176E for a total of 
$285.4 million.

Analytic assessments

    The budget request included $13.2 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, PE 
63288D8Z, for science and technology analytic assessments. The 
committee recommends a reduction of $5.0 million in PE 63288D8Z 
for a total of $8.2 million, reflecting an interest in 
supporting higher priority technology development activities. 
The committee also urges the Department to make use of a 
broader set of analytic capabilities, including those at not-
for-profit research organizations and think tanks, 
universities, and in-house laboratories to support these types 
of analyses.

Enhancement of Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership to 
        Department of Defense

    The budget request included $136.2 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 63680D8Z 
for Manufacturing Science and Technology Program. The National 
Institute for Standards and technology (NIST) conducts a 
nation-wide Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) to 
support small manufacturing companies to reduce costs, increase 
productivity, improve management, enhance their supply chains, 
and discover and adapt to new market and supply chain 
opportunities. The MEP already supports a large fraction of the 
small manufacturers in the Defense Industrial Base, and has 
already formed relationships with the Manufacturing USA 
Institutes established by the Department of Defense over the 
last five years. With additional funding, the MEP could provide 
services to a larger fraction of the small businesses already 
serving or seeking to become part of the Defense Industrial 
Base. In addition, the MEP could play a pivotal role in 
ensuring the success of the Manufacturing Institutes by using 
its dense network of small business relationships to promote 
exposure, networking, and collaboration between small 
manufacturers, the MEP centers (as defined in section 25(a) of 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 
U.S.C. 278k(a)), and the regional institutes of Manufacturing 
USA.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $35.0 
million in program element PE 63680D8Z for a total of $171.2 
million. Of this increase, $20.0 million would be to extend the 
support of the MEP to improve the productivity of the Defense 
Industrial Base, and $15.0 million would be to establish 
partnerships between MEP centers and the Manufacturing USA 
Institutes to enhance participation by small manufacturers, 
disseminate technology and know-how to small businesses, and 
enhance the supply chains of the Institutes' corporate members.

Sustaining Investment in Manufacturing USA Institutes

    The budget request included $136.2 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 63680D8Z 
for the Manufacturing Science and Technology Program. Over the 
last five years, the Department of Defense (DOD) established 
eight manufacturing technology institutes under the 
Manufacturing USA Initiative. The institutes are public-private 
partnerships between the government, industry, and academia to 
mature new, advanced manufacturing technology (technology 
readiness levels 3-7) in focused areas that are key to future 
economic growth and national security. After five years of 
government co-investment, the institutes must be self-
sustaining. Fiscal year 2017 is the fifth and final year of 
government funding for the original institute, America Makes, 
which is focused on additive manufacturing and 3D printing. In 
the next several years, Department of Defense seed funding for 
the institutes will cease. The committee agrees that the 
institutes should be self-sustaining, but believes that the 
institutes represent a valuable research and development 
resource that the Department should be using to advance its 
manufacturing technology agenda. The committee recommends and 
increase of $20.0 million in PE 63680D8Z for a total of $156.2 
million for the Department to enter into contracts with the 
institutes to address specific Defense manufacturing technology 
challenges and opportunities.
    The committee notes that there are tensions between 
elements of the institutes' designs and goals. The institutes 
bring together companies for collaborative purposes and common 
interests, but these companies compete with each other and are 
naturally cautious about exposing ideas about technical 
solutions that they believe could provide a competitive 
advantage. The Department of Defense, as a matter of policy, 
emphasizes the importance of open access among all institute 
members to intellectual property developed at the institute, 
but this can discourage companies from working at the 
institutes with their vertically aligned supply chains to 
create proprietary technological advances. More generally, the 
institutes are intended to mature manufacturing technology 
while at the same time remaining at the ``pre-competitive'' 
phase of maturation.
    These constraints deter the institutes from generating 
distinctive intellectual property or solutions to address 
specific manufacturing technology requirements. This in turn 
could limit the value of the institutes' work to the military 
services and the corporate members that support the institutes 
financially. This could handicap the institutes within DOD, 
because the metric used to evaluate manufacturing technology 
programs is the successful transition of technology directly to 
legacy or new programs.
    The committee recommends that the Joint Defense 
Manufacturing Technology Panel become an active participant in 
guiding the Department's work and engagement with the 
institutes and the metrics that are developed to assess them, 
to ensure greater insights into the military services' actual 
defense/supply chain needs. The committee urges the Department 
to encourage institutes to support institute members desiring 
to work at the institutes with supply chain partners on 
proprietary advances. It is vital for the Department to ensure 
that the companies that financially support the institutes 
realize measurable returns on their investment. The committee 
further encourages exploration of new collaborative institute 
models being explored by the services outside the Manufacturing 
USA framework, such as the Army Research Laboratory's new 
Center for Agile Materials Manufacturing Science.

SERDP and ESTCP increases

    The budget request included $20.4 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Defense-wide, of 
which $71.8 million was for the PE 63716D8Z Strategic 
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and 
$54.5 million for the PE 63851D8Z Environmental Security 
Technology Certification Program (ESTCP).
    The committee notes that both SERDP and ESTCP demonstrate 
and validate the most promising innovative technologies that 
can meet the Department's most urgent environmental 
requirements, provide a return on investment, and are executed 
through a free and open competition.
    The committee remains very concerned with the rising number 
of military installations across the country that have tested 
positive for contaminated drinking water with the presence of 
per- and polyfluoroakyl substances, which have a lifetime 
health advisory of 70 parts per trillion according to the 
Environmental Protection Agency. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in RDT&E, PE 63716D8Z, 
for SERDP, and an increase of $10.0 million in RDT&E, PE 
63851D8Z, for ESTCP, for totals of $81.8 million and $64.5 
million respectively.
    Lastly, the committee directs the Department to use the 
increases in SERDP and ESTCP to address the following urgent 
concerns: (1) The safety and welfare of the servicemembers and 
their dependents by eliminating or reducing the generation of 
pollution and use of hazardous materials and reducing the cost 
of remedial actions and compliance with environmental laws and 
regulations, specifically as it relates to per- and 
polyfluoroakyl substances; (2) Improved munitions response and 
unexploded ordnance mitigation and removal; and (3) Long-term 
threats to sustain training and testing ranges.

Microelectronics technology development and support

    The budget request included $219.8 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 63720S for 
microelectronics technology development and support. The 
committee remains concerned about manufacturing supply chain 
assurance against counterfeit parts and ensuring ready access 
to trusted microelectronics. The committee notes its desire for 
a long-term strategy for the development of trusted 
microelectronics that can withstand any future problems with an 
international supply chain. To support efforts in 
microelectronics technology development and support, the 
committee recommends an increase of $80.0 million in PE 63720S 
for a total of $299.8 million.

Operational energy capability improvement

    The budget request included $20.4 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $38.4 million was for the PE 64055D8Z Operational Energy 
Capability Improvement Fund (OECIF).
    The committee recognizes the urgent requirement to 
constantly innovate and improve combat capability and 
operational effectiveness for the warfighter, via targeted and 
competitive operational energy science and technology 
investments.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $48.4 million, in RDT&E, PE 64055D8Z, 
for OECIF.
    Specifically, the committee directs the Department to use 
the OECIF and increase in funding to address the following 
urgent concerns: deployable technologies that can harvest water 
from air, tactical microgrids, hybrid energy storage modules, 
waste to energy technologies given the continual challenge of 
open-air burn pits, joint infantry company prototypes, long-
endurance unmanned aerial vehicles, and other technologies 
deemed appropriate.

Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Program

    The budget request included $105.3 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense Wide, PE 603913C, 
for Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Programs. The committee 
recommends an increase of $268.5 million in PE 603913C, for a 
total of $373.8 million, to reduce development risk and 
continue the modernization of Israeli's multi-tiered missile 
defense systems. The additional funding shall be apportioned as 
follows: $28.1 million for the Arrow-3 Upper Tier system; 
$105.0 million to conduct flight tests of the Arrow-3 Upper 
Tier system at a U.S. test range; $71.5 million for the Arrow 
System Improvement program; and $63.9 million for the David's 
Sling program. The committee urges the Government of Israel to 
avoid any additional, unnecessary costs in further tests of the 
Arrow-3 program and to leverage these and any other U.S. funds 
already appropriated to plan for such future tests.

Corrosion control and prevention funding increase

    The budget request included $20.4 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $3.8 million was for PE 64016D8Z Department of Defense 
(DOD) Corrosion Program.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the Department 
has consistently underfunded the DOD Corrosion Program since 
fiscal year 2011. The DOD estimates that the negative effects 
of corrosion cost approximately $22.9 billion annually to 
prevent and mitigate corrosion of its assets, including 
military equipment, weapons, facilities, and other 
infrastructure.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $13.8 million, in RDT&E Defense-wide, 
PE 64016D8Z, for the DOD Corrosion Program.

Defense technology offset

    The budget request included $0.0 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 64342D8Z 
for defense technology offset. The committee notes that 
insufficient funds have been put towards directed energy, 
inconsistent with the intent of Congress to bolster directed 
energy technologies. In addition, a provision elsewhere in this 
Act establishes a directed energy weapon system prototype and 
demonstration initiative and authorizes $200 million for these 
efforts. The committee underscores that directed energy systems 
are still critical areas of work in need of greater support and 
attention. The committee believes that the Department needs to 
focus in particular on the transition from lab development to 
deployment and fielding. Consequently, the committee recommends 
a general increase of $200.0 million in PE 64342D8Z for a total 
of $200.0 million to be used only for the purposes of directed 
energy weapon systems prototyping and demonstration in 
conjunction with the new program established elsewhere in this 
Act. Of this increase, the committee recommends that an 
appropriate amount be made available for the Joint Directed 
Energy Transition Office to carry out additional authorities 
and responsibilities, including the development of the 
strategic plan, pursuant to section 219 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). 
The committee notes that this increase builds on the efforts in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92), which established a new technology offset 
program that included a strong focus on directed energy 
technologies.

Ground-Launched Intermediate-Range Missile

    The budget request included no funding for a Ground-
Launched Intermediate-Range Missile in Research, Development, 
Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide. The committee recommends an 
increase of $65.0 million for this initiative. A provision 
related to the authorization for the use of such funds is 
included in title XVI of this Act.

Government-unique Tracking and Reporting Tool

    The budget request included $21.4 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, PE 65027D8Z, 
for IT Development Initiatives including $2.0 million for a 
Financial Management and Certification Tracking and Reporting 
Tool. Given that colleges and universities exist, and nearly 
every federal agency, and every company has some kind of 
mandatory training program for employees, the tracking of 
certification and reporting for training initiatives is a 
solved technical problem in the commercial market. The 
Department does not need to award a contract to develop a new 
system from scratch, and instead should develop an approach 
that considers modernizing the existing system to optimize its 
performance using expertise resident in the Department, or 
ordering an off-the shelf solution from the commercial market 
and configuring it. Therefore the committee recommends a 
reduction of $2.0 million from this account.

Defense-Wide Electronic Procurement Capabilities

    The budget request included $11.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide (RDT&E DW), for PE 
65210D8Z for Defense-Wide Electronic Procurement Capabilities. 
The committee is concerned about duplication among the military 
services in contract writing systems. The committee recommends 
a decrease of $11.9 million in RDT&E DW for PE 65210D8Z for a 
total of $0.0 million.

Software developmental testing

    The budget request include $20.6 million in PE65804D8Z for 
Development Test and Evaluation in Research, Development, Test, 
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to 
improve capabilities for the agile testing of software to 
support more efficient development of advanced information 
technologies and systems.

MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

    The budget request included $37.9 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), PE 
1105219BB, for the development, integration, and testing of 
special operations-unique mission kits for the Medium Altitude 
Long Endurance Tactical (MALET) MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 
(UAV). U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) is responsible 
for the rapid development and acquisition of special operations 
capabilities to, among other things, effectively carry out 
operations against terrorist networks while avoiding collateral 
damage.
    The committee understands that the budget request only 
partially addresses technology gaps identified by SOCOM on its 
fleet of MQ-9 UAVs. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
additional $13.0 million in RDTEDW for the MQ-9 UAV for a total 
of $50.9 million.
    The committee strongly supports SOCOM's efforts to 
accelerate fielding of advanced weapons, sensors, and emerging 
technologies on its fleet of MQ-9 UAVs. The committee has 
authorized additional funds above the budget request in each of 
the last 5 years to enhance these efforts and understands that 
SOCOM has successfully developed and acquired a number of new 
capabilities, including improved weapon effectiveness, target 
location and tracking, image resolution, and video transmission 
during that time. The committee expects SOCOM to update the 
committee periodically on its development efforts under the 
MALET MQ-9 UAV program.

                       Items of Special Interest

Active electronically scanned array radar improvements

    The committee notes that Air Force and Navy fighter 
aircraft are equipped with active electronically scanned array 
(AESA) types of radars, and all services are actively pursuing 
retrofit of these types of radars on legacy aircraft. The Air 
Force has identified threats from adversaries operating at 
frequencies where AESA radar's capability can be further 
improved, and has tasked the Air Force Research Laboratory to 
lead the development of technologies that address these 
capability gaps, in order to develop hardware that can be used 
across the services to address spectrum threats to radars, 
weapons, missile seekers, and other airborne platforms. The 
Committee encourages the Air Force to continue these efforts 
and provide resources as needed to develop newer, more capable 
arrays which will provide significant performance advantages.

Advanced airlift airship technology

    The committee has continuing interest in advanced lighter-
than-air (LTA) logistic airship technology and remains eager to 
see practicability, operating utility, and cost benefits 
proven, believing that advanced technology in this area can 
provide a transformational logistic capability for the 
Department of Defense by adding particular value to a range of 
airlift missions. Advanced airships have the potential to 
effect significant changes in atmospheric flight; however, 
fostering government involvement and leadership remains the 
vital catalyst to help advanced airships emerge.
    To this end, the Senate report accompanying S. 2943 (S. 
Rept. 114-255) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 directed the Secretary of Defense to stand up 
leadership responsibility for an advanced airship initiative. 
The goal was to encourage the successful development of outsize 
airlift technology that could release revolutionary capability 
for defense logistics, particularly with respect to long range 
``point of need delivery'' and outsize or extreme weight 
airlift to facilitate humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, 
and non-combatant evacuation operations.
    Airship efforts during the past 20 years or more have 
failed to make a breakthrough as viable cargo carriers. The 
committee has determined that a more deliberate approach to the 
development of future airship technology is evidently required. 
The transformational potential for outsize cargo airlift is not 
in doubt: the committee notes that the United States 
Transportation Command has stated previously that airships 
possess the key to a substantial strengthening of military air 
mobility. However, effective developmental execution has been 
missing.
    The committee believes that this can be changed and the 
technology successfully matured through robust engagement by 
the Defense Department. Simple ``blimp'' technology is not the 
basis of a successful program. The goal must be an advanced air 
vehicle that is consistent with 21st century military 
transportation needs. The demand for structured experimentation 
and development leading to demonstration appears best suited to 
be undertaken by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 
where there is a history of advanced airship work, notably, the 
heavy-lift Walrus program.
    The introduction of a system of integrated advanced airship 
lift technologies is the key to addressing the hard issues of 
in-flight buoyancy control, vertical take-off and landing 
capability, and ballast generation. In this way, airships 
operating with extreme outsize payloads can achieve the 
operating standards that are typical of modern air 
transportation. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 
working with the military, industry, and commercial sector, is 
uniquely agile and fitted to manage this type of approach.
    The Department must take the lead to explore advanced 
airship outsize cross-modal airlift to meet the emerging needs 
of the Air Force, United States Transportation Command, and the 
other combatant commands. In this regard, the committee directs 
that, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall:
          (1) Identify a senior leader to reaffirm defense 
        leadership and responsibilities for airship technical 
        initiatives;
          (2) Provide an outline for a future Department of 
        Defense airship technology strategy that takes 
        ownership of maturation efforts consistent with 
        military outsize airlift capability to identify:
                  (a) Critical technology challenges and 
                demonstrations required to provide proof of 
                viability;
                  (b) Development risks and important lessons 
                learned; and
                  (c) Impediments to successful demonstration, 
                including gaps in Department of Defense 
                understanding of airship technology; and
          (3) Lay out notional estimates for time, costs, and 
        other necessary resources to conduct an incremental 
        demonstration for technical viability with suitable 
        decision points and off-ramps.

Aircraft battery cost-savings technology improvements

    The committee believes all proven and relevant technologies 
should be investigated for application to existing platforms if 
such an application would greatly reduce the cost to the 
government. In particular, lithium-ion battery technology, a 
proven commercial technology, would bring better, more 
efficient power storage capability to military aircraft.
    Because all military aircraft rely on effective batteries 
for systems starting and emergency power, a durable and 
reliable battery is a key component to an effective fighting 
asset. Any power-density increases or battery life improvements 
lead directly to cost savings through reductions in maintenance 
cycles, purchasing costs, and space and weight requirements. 
Estimates show that leading lithium-ion batteries can offer 2 
to 3 times the service life of traditional nickel-cadmium 
aircraft batteries at 50 percent of the weight.
    Given these circumstances surrounding the latest battery 
technology improvements, the committee recommends all service 
aviation program research offices review available battery 
solutions for cost savings through alternate battery sourcing 
options, capitalizing on available lithium-ion battery 
technologies for longer battery life and reduced costs.

Botulinum Toxin Type A countermeasures

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense and more 
specifically DTRA is managing efforts to develop a vaccine to 
counter botulinum toxin types A and B. There is evidence and 
discussion in the scientific community stating that the use of 
the BoNT/A vaccine which the department is pursuing can limit 
future medical treatments for military personnel in that it 
would prevent immunized warfighters and veterans from receiving 
the benefit of the rapidly growing number of important medical 
uses of botulinum toxin type A. Several of these medical uses 
are critically important to the military veteran population, 
including treatments for PTSD-associated migraine and 
amputation pain.
    Within 60 days of enactment of this act, DTRA shall brief 
the congressional defense committees on their research and 
development plans to counter botulinum toxin type A. This would 
include any projected impact and/or potential drawbacks in 
using the BoNT/A vaccine.

Briefings on autonomy, robotics, and artificial intelligence

    The committee recognizes the importance of technologies 
such as autonomy, robotics, and artificial intelligence for the 
future of military capabilities. Accordingly, the committee 
requests that the secretary of each military service and 
offices of the Department of Defense as selected by the 
Secretary of Defense provide briefings to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the House and the Senate on planned and 
potential research, development, testing, and evaluation of 
such technologies. The briefings should discuss what entities 
within the service or office have responsibility for robotics, 
autonomy, and artificial intelligence issues and existing plans 
for research, development, testing, and engineering of these 
technologies as well as plans to incorporate these technologies 
into doctrine and strategy.

Clarification of definition of small business for purposes of prototype 
        project authority

    The committee notes that Other Transactions authority has 
proven to be successful in helping the Department of Defense 
attract nontraditional performers, including small businesses. 
These performers carry out prototype projects that enhance the 
mission effectiveness of military personnel. The committee 
encourages and supports the Department of Defense to expand its 
use of Other Transactions authority for funding agreements 
under the Small Business Innovative Research program and Small 
Business Technology Transfer program.
    The mission of these two small business programs is to 
support scientific excellence and technological innovation 
through the investment of federal research funds in critical 
American priorities to build a strong national economy. 
Encouraging and supporting the Department of Defense to use 
proven innovative procurement processes such as Other 
Transactions authority for funding agreements under the small 
business programs will both enhance the mission effectiveness 
of the Department of Defense and help accomplish the mission of 
the programs.

Common data environment for modeling and simulation

    Modeling, training, and simulation efforts require 
significant amounts and different types of data in order to 
adequately simulate the operational environment. Each community 
and military service within the Department of Defense currently 
independently develops data for modeling and simulation 
purposes to support their own training, operations, analysis, 
test and development. The committee believes that this approach 
is not optimal, with independent data solutions increasing 
costs and inhibiting interoperability across the Department. 
The committee recognizes that some investment has been made to 
create capability to improve data sharing, reduce costs, and 
eliminate duplicative data collection and processing efforts. 
The committee further recognizes that additional investment and 
coordinated strategy may be needed to maintain and advance 
better use of data by the modeling and simulation community. 
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to take actions 
to identify and address data collection, analysis, and sharing 
issues that are limiting development of more robust modeling 
and simulation capabilities.

Comptroller General review of Next Generation Air Dominance

    The Navy and Air Force are both in the process of analyzing 
alternative system concepts to address future capability gaps 
described in the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) Initial 
Capabilities Document. The NGAD analysis of alternatives is 
expected to be completed in fiscal year 2018. At that time, the 
Services will have identified their preferred system concept(s) 
and will likely begin significantly increasing investments to 
mature critical technologies, begin early design work, and 
refine system requirements with the expectation of fielding an 
NGAD system capable of penetrating anti-access/area-denial 
operating environments by the 2030 timeframe. Both services are 
considering a family of systems approach with the potential 
acquisition of a new advanced fighter aircraft for replacing F/
A-18, EA-18, F-15C, and F-22 as a major element of their NGAD 
investment plans. Given the likely size of the potential future 
investment for this capability, the complexity and risk 
inherent in the family of systems approach, and the strategic 
importance of successfully acquiring next generation air 
dominance capabilities, independent perspective and oversight 
will be vital to achieving a successful effort.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States, on an annual basis until the Milestone C or 
full rate production decision for any resulting program of 
record, to review the Department's NGAD investment plans and 
associated acquisition program(s) and to provide periodic 
briefings to the congressional defense committees on the 
findings of the reviews. The Government Accountability Office's 
(GAO) initial review should include an assessment of the 
Department's NGAD requirements, concept alternatives, and risk 
reduction efforts. Future reviews should also include an 
assessment of the relevant NGAD acquisition programs': (1) 
acquisition strategies; (2) technology, design, and production 
readiness; (3) development, testing, and fielding progress; and 
(4) overall cost, schedule, and technical performance.
    The committee believes that in order to support the GAO's 
efforts, it is necessary to ensure timely access to 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. 
Given the classified nature of some of the information, the GAO 
is directed to advise the committee of any assistance GAO 
personnel will need to secure access to information related to 
this review.

Executive agent for printed circuit board technology

    The committee is aware of ongoing efforts through the 
Department of Defense Executive Agent for Printed Circuit Board 
Technology (PrCB EA) to develop and execute a strategy to 
address the declining printed circuit board industrial base and 
gaps identified in the 2015 Department of Defense Executive 
Agent for Printed Circuit Board and Interconnect Technology 
Roadmap. According to a PrCB EA industrial base capability 
assessment, between 1980 and 2014, the printed circuit board 
manufacturing base declined 86 percent from over 2,000 
manufacturers to just 280. The committee is concerned that what 
remains of the U.S. printed circuit board industrial base is 
becoming less capable of sustaining the superiority of 
Department of Defense systems and growing increasingly 
dependent on foreign suppliers, particularly China. This poses 
a risk to the Defense supply chain in terms of the quality and 
trustworthiness of the products it acquires. The committee 
supports continued execution of PrCB EA functions addressing 
trust, supply chain, organic capability, and research 
activities, including the continued development of a network of 
trusted suppliers and leveraging the DoD Trusted Supplier 
Program to include PrCB designers, manufacturers, and 
electronic assemblers.

Facility leasing authority for Department of Defense science and 
        technology laboratories and test and evaluation centers

    The committee notes that a lack of modern and adequate 
facilities and infrastructure is likely the single biggest 
challenge facing Department of Defense science and technology 
laboratories and test and evaluation centers. Being forced to 
work in old, outdated, and potentially dangerous laboratories 
and facilities not only affects the pace and output of 
scientific achievement, but it also harms morale and retention 
among a highly-skilled group of government employees. In 
addition, aging facilities often present serious safety 
considerations that further impact the ability of the 
laboratories and centers to carry out their missions. All of 
these issues hamper the productivity and efficiency of the 
defense research, development, test, and evaluation enterprise 
and ultimately hurt the development of technology for our Armed 
Forces.
    The committee further notes that section 2812 of title 10, 
United States Code, authorizes the secretary of a military 
service or the Secretary of Defense to enter into lease 
agreements for a wide range of facilities. However, this 
authority has seldom been used for defense laboratories and 
test centers, despite the obvious need for newer and more 
modern laboratory facilities.
    In recognition of the existing needs and authorities, the 
committee directs the secretary of each military service to 
delegate down the authority to enter into lease agreements to 
the respective director of each Department of Defense science 
and technology laboratory and test and evaluation center. By 
delegating this authority, the committee expects that the 
directors of laboratories and centers would have the authority 
to enter into lease agreements with private contractors for 
certain kinds of facilities, pursuant to section 2812 of title 
10, United States Code. The committee further expects that use 
of the authority by respective directors would significantly 
expedite the usage of modern and safe facilities.

Human simulation

    The Committee recognizes a foundational research effort 
that couples applied research in human simulation with physics-
based survivability analysis models will lead to substantial 
information and insight that lowers costs to enhance warfighter 
mobility, survivability, welfare and training. The committee 
believes that funding for research and integration of physics-
based human simulation with existing government models of 
survivability/lethality analysis and human performance to 
create a holistic model will support: (1) the research and 
development of more realistic avatars that can ``feel'' the 
forces of the environment, have strength, can exhibit fatigue, 
and have natural behavior like their human counterparts; (2) 
integration of the models; and (3) model verification and 
validation.

Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP)

    The committee commends the Army for moving forward with 
research and development of the Improved Turbine Engine Program 
(ITEP), the service's stated top aviation modernization 
program. The Army is further commended for its efforts in 
exploring initial ways to accelerate development and fielding 
of this critical program that is intended to develop a more 
fuel efficient and powerful engine for the current UH-60 and 
AH-64 helicopter fleets. This new engine will substantially 
increase operational capabilities in high or hot environments, 
increase range, and improve fuel efficiency while reducing the 
logistics footprint, resulting in dramatically reduced 
operating and support costs. Given the positive progress of 
this key program, the Committee fully funds ITEP in fiscal year 
2018 and encourages the Army to ensure ITEP is robustly funded 
in future years.

Improving aerospace materials performance

    The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts 
to develop new capabilities to improve structural metallic 
materials used in high priority aerospace and other defense 
missions. The committee notes that advanced materials 
processing and characterization techniques, available in 
industry, academia, and government labs, including using high-
energy X-rays and other techniques, can help design engineers 
better understand which materials are best suited for stressing 
military performance requirements and develop optimal and 
efficient manufacturing processes for these unique materials. 
It is critical that Department of Defense scientists engage in 
hands-on experiential learning to train a new generation of 
materials scientists and engineers in these new capabilities, 
including the creation and implementation of high-fidelity 
simulations and advanced data-science methods to support 
development of next generation weapons systems. The committee 
recommends that the Department encourage and establish 
partnerships with industry and academic centers of technical 
expertise, as well as leveraging unique, world-class research 
infrastructure best suited to support Department of Defense 
technology goals.

Joint directed energy test center

    The committee notes that next generation weapon systems are 
being developed by the Department of Defense and industry, but 
the nation's infrastructure for testing those weapon systems is 
antiquated and in need of modernization. The Department of 
Defense established the nation's first High Energy Laser System 
Test Facility (HELSTF) in 1975, but the technology has seen 
significant advancements over the course of four decades. As 
directed energy weapon systems mature, the need to validate 
their performance becomes increasingly important.
    The committee applauds the Air Force for proposing a Joint 
Directed Energy Test Center, which could potentially 
concentrate government expertise and reduce duplication of 
effort across the Department of Defense in order to support 
more rapid and cost effective testing and fielding of directed 
energy weapon systems. The committee believes that doing so 
could also allow the broad, standardized collection and 
evaluation of data to establish test references and support 
policy decisions in a more reliable fashion.
    The committee is aware that the Test Resource Management 
Center and the High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office 
produced a report in 2009 recommending funding over the future 
years defense program to develop and maintain adequate 
personnel, resources, and facilities to test current and future 
high energy laser systems. Despite these recommendations, the 
Department has submitted budget requests that have resulted in 
a 75 percent cut in budget and personnel at HELSTF. With this 
in mind, the committee directs the Director of Operational 
Testing and Evaluation to review and update the 2009 report and 
to identify infrastructure and personnel needs at HELSTF to 
accommodate the growth and maturity of directed energy weapon 
systems across the military services. The Director should 
consult with the services and reference the Air Force Directed 
Energy Flight Plan when updating the report. The committee 
directs the Department to submit and brief the updated to the 
defense committees on the updated report within 90 days.

Live, Virtual, and Constructive Training

    The ability of the services to effectively and efficiently 
train to real world threats in realistic environments is being 
increasingly challenged by a variety of factors, including 
security concerns, airspace limitations, and a lack of 
representative threats. As the gap widens between what our 
forces would likely face in a conflict with a near-peer 
adversary and what they can train to, U.S. combat effectiveness 
will atrophy. However, advances in technology for simulator 
systems, including fidelity, synthetic inputs, and other 
technologies, have allowed the services to expand opportunities 
for realistic and effective training. The migration to more 
live, virtual, and constructive (LVC) training has the 
potential to fill training gaps and enhance the services' 
overall training programs. While strongly supportive of the 
services' efforts to develop LVC capabilities, the committee is 
concerned the services are executing the various development 
programs to deliver training solutions that are insufficiently 
integrated and interoperable, inhibiting the potential for 
taking full advantage of these systems for invaluable joint 
force training.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the Air 
Force, Army, and Navy, not later than March 1, 2018, to provide 
to the congressional defense committees a report on their 
respective plans for LVC training. The reports should include: 
(1) a description of the warfighter requirement(s) that LVC 
training programs are meant to fulfill; (2) a description of 
programs for fielding LVC training; (3) an identification of 
costs associated with each of the LVC programs; (4) an estimate 
of the projected timelines for fielding the LVC training 
systems; (5) a discussion of any challenges to development, 
integration, and fielding of LVC capabilities; (6) a 
description of the extent to which interoperability with the 
LVC architectures of the other services has been included in 
the requirements, development, integration, and fielding of 
their respective LVC programs; and (7) an identification of who 
in the services' organization is responsible for ensuring the 
interoperability of their LVC capabilities with the other 
services. The required report shall be unclassified, but may 
include a classified annex.

Low cost unmanned aerospace systems development

    Future anticipated military threats and tighter defense 
budgets combine to drive the need for new and innovative 
solutions towards the development of future low cost unmanned 
aerospace systems (UAS). As manned aircraft costs have 
continued to escalate, so has the need for UAS concepts that 
offer dramatic reductions in cost in order to bring ``mass'' to 
the engagement and to achieve a cost imposing effect on future 
adversaries, has grown. UAS performance, design life 
reliability and maintainability drive the cost of today's 
systems, and need to be traded to achieve the optimum 
capability and cost effects. Thus, the committee believes the 
development of an attritable UAS, with fighter like capability, 
whereby virtue of its cost, loss of aircraft could be 
tolerated, is necessary in order to change the cost curve of 
war. This concept should provide long range, runway independent 
launch and recovery, transonic, strike capability in remote, 
contested regions where forward basing is difficult or 
prohibited. Therefore, the committee urges the Department of 
Defense to further research and development activities into 
fighter-like, low-cost, attritable UAS with the intent of 
creating a program of record and encourages the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council to consider this capability when 
updating UAS related requirements.

Machine learning for national security

    The committee commends the Department's focus on machine 
learning in its Third Offset Strategy as a means of enhancing 
the safety of our men and women in uniform, lowering costs, 
streamlining processes, and informing strategic decision 
making. The committee is aware that the exponential growth in 
data available for collection globally as well as the evolving 
machine learning techniques and growing computational resources 
are both an opportunity and a necessity. Countries that make 
effective use of these data and tools will have strategic and 
tactical advantages over those that do not. As such, the 
committee urges the Department to continue to expand its 
exploration of commercial machine learning offerings and, in 
particular, to consider the promise of machine learning applied 
to non-traditional data sets, including financial markets, the 
Internet of things, and global supply chains. These and other 
like data sets encapsulate the actions and decisions of wide 
swaths of the world's population and thus may provide enhanced 
situational awareness as well as anticipatory signals of future 
events.

Management innovation at Department of Defense labs and test ranges

    On May 3, 2017, the committee received testimony indicating 
that bureaucratic processes, procedures, regulations, and other 
internal hurdles are stifling the innovative capacity of the 
Department of Defense laboratories and test centers. Former 
officials from all three service research enterprises, as well 
as from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, indicated that 
these challenges were pervasive in their services and 
organizations. The committee was frustrated to learn not only 
that innovation is being stifled but also that authorities 
granted by this committee in previous years have not yet been 
utilized.
    This situation both drives up costs and slows the 
development of advanced technologies and systems to support 
operational needs. The committee is concerned that Department 
general counsels and other management officials are narrowly 
interpreting authorized flexibilities and policies that would 
streamline bureaucratic processes and increase the 
effectiveness and efficiency of labs and test ranges. 
Furthermore, the committee notes that some organizations, such 
as the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the Strategic 
Capabilities Office, have been given special management 
attention to overcome bureaucratic barriers and support their 
mission execution.
    The committee expects the Department to create incentives 
for its workforce. The committee highlights that authorities to 
increase local control of management processes at its 
laboratories and test ranges, identify and eliminate burdensome 
processes and policies, and streamline internal business 
practices to support innovation missions have already been 
granted in section 233 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). As such, the 
committee reiterates its expectation that these authorities 
will be implemented this fiscal year.
    The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to pay 
similar attention to the needs of the vast majority of the 
Department's innovation workforce, namely the personnel at the 
labs and test ranges, and provide them with similar support and 
relief from bureaucratic barriers. Further, the committee 
expects the Secretary to develop a set of awards and other 
incentives for personnel or teams who identify bureaucratic 
issues in the Department's innovation organizations and develop 
solutions to address them.

Marine Corps nano-sized vertical takeoff and landing small unmanned 
        aircraft

    The committee supports the United States Marine Corps 
(USMC) Requirements Oversight Council's (MROC) nano-sized and 
Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) Small Unmanned Aircraft 
Systems (SUAS) approved program, and the MROC's determination 
that nano-sized VTOL SUAS are critical at the squad level to 
help Marines in small units enhance situational awareness. This 
capability has received the support of the Commandant of the 
Marine Corps and was further supported in the 2017 USMC Land 
Systems Investment Plan. The committee is also supportive of 
the USMC $14.2 million unfunded request in fiscal year 2017 for 
this effort. For squad level missions, pocket-sized sensors 
provide soldiers with improved intelligence, situational 
awareness, and enhanced targeting capability. The committee 
understands that this technology has been successfully 
demonstrated by allies during operations and believes it holds 
promising potential for USMC operations.
    The committee urges the Commandant of the Marine Corps to 
advance development and implementation of nano-sized VTOL SUAS 
capability at the squad level. The committee directs the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees by December 15, 2017 providing 
the status of the nano-sized and Vertical Takeoff and Landing 
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems program, a detailed discussion 
of the technologies being reviewed, and the acquisition plan 
for implementing this capability into the standard USMC squad 
inventory.

Maritime barriers

    The Secretary of the Navy provided a report on May 10, 2016 
in response to the Senate report accompanying S. 1376 (S. Rept. 
114-49) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2016. The Navy concluded that a commercial-off-the-shelf 
maritime security barrier ``has the potential to provide 
greater operational capability compared to the current port 
security barriers against current and projected threats.'' The 
business case analysis showed a significant decrease in 
sustainment cost for a commercial system.
    Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of the 
Navy to continue development, testing, and evaluation of next 
generation water barriers.

Minerva special interest area on information operations

    The committee notes that the Minerva Research Initiative 
provides the Department of Defense with valuable research that 
enhances the Department's understanding of the social forces 
shaping national security challenges. The committee also notes 
that the Department's understanding of information operations, 
such as those detailed in the Director of National 
Intelligence's report titled, ``Assessing Russian Activities 
and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections,'' would benefit from 
additional research and findings. Therefore, the committee 
encourages the Secretary of Defense to provide the Minerva 
Research Initiative with additional support to preform greater 
research on information operations, including ways to identify 
and counter fake media, identify automated misinformation 
spreading techniques, and other technical aspects to include 
short-term factors. The committee directs the Secretary to 
provide a report on the status of this new research area to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives no later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act.

Next Generation Jammer

    The committee believes the Navy's Next Generation Jammer 
(NGJ) is a critical element of Airborne Electronic Attack that 
is required to meet both current and emerging electronic 
warfare gaps. The committee understands that the Navy will 
field NGJ capabilities in three increments covering different 
radio frequency bands. Each increment will be designed as 
separate podded systems and each system will cover a different 
segment of the electromagnetic spectrum. Increment 1 focuses on 
the mid-band threat and Increment 2 will cover low-end 
frequency ranges to counter emerging threats from ``low band'' 
radar systems. While the Increment 1 program is well underway, 
the Navy's request for fiscal year 2018 includes $66.7 million 
for Increment 2 (low band). The FY18 funding will be used to 
collect data from technology demonstrations to confirm 
assertions of technical maturity that may be used in the 
Increment 2 podded solution in order to support potential 
program entry at Milestone B.
    While the committee supports the Navy's plan to thoroughly 
examine options early in the program, the committee believes 
the Navy should investigate whether Increment 1 hardware could 
be leveraged to reduce the overall cost of Increment 2 and 
reduce schedule risk.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of the 
Navy to consider leveraging Increment 1 investments and design 
elements for Increment 2. The committee believes that, if it 
were possible to do so, leveraging proven technology may allow 
unique Increment 2 development efforts to focus on items 
specific to the low band jamming capability, such as antenna 
development and other discriminating technology.

Radiation detection technology

    The committee remains concerned that shortfalls in fielding 
the most current radiation detection devices, specifically 
personal dosimeters, continue to exist, and most notably within 
the Active Army force structure. To ensure our troops and 
domestic first responders are provided with the best possible 
protection to monitor against nuclear exposure, the committee 
strongly encourages the Department to expedite and complete the 
fielding of modern radiation detection equipment, specifically 
personal dosimeters, across the force.

Report on defense manufacturing and technology supply chain

    The committee is concerned that the domestic manufacturing 
and industrial base has weakened to the point that it may no 
longer be able to support the needs of the Department of 
Defense, especially in delivering low cost goods and systems to 
operational forces, responding to demands for surge production, 
and manufacturing next generation military technologies. The 
committee notes that the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental 
and the Pentagon's Office of Manufacturing and Industrial Base 
Policy have both begun analyses on coordinated foreign 
investment strategies in U.S. defense manufacturing sectors and 
in those U.S. companies developing military-relevant emerging 
technologies. Combined with the United States' own lack of 
strategies, industrial policies, and funded programs to address 
existing and developing weaknesses in the domestic 
technological and industrial base, this situation presents a 
clear threat to the national security interests of the United 
States.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to prepare a report examining the extent to which large-
scale outsourcing of manufacturing activities to China, Chinese 
investments in manufacturing capabilities, and Chinese 
investments in emerging technologies are leading to the 
hollowing out of the U.S. defense industrial and technology 
base. This report should also detail the national security 
implications of a diminished domestic industrial base, 
including assessing any impact on U.S. military readiness, 
compromised U.S. military supply chains, and reduced capability 
to manufacture and develop new state-of-the-art military 
systems and equipment. The committee directs the Comptroller 
General to submit this report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 1 year after the enactment of this 
Act.

Review of policies on use of directed energy weapon systems

    The committee notes that Department of Defense policies 
exist that limit the use of high energy lasers (HEL) and high 
power microwaves (HPM) in testing and in combat. While it is 
necessary to examine unintended consequences of potential 
weapon systems, current restrictions and approval processes for 
directed energy weapon systems may be overly burdensome and 
prevent the deployment and usage of those systems. The 
committee therefore directs the Department of Defense to 
identify policies that may hinder the approval process and 
usage of directed energy weapon systems, intentional and 
unintentional, and to propose possible remedies. The committee 
encourages the Department to place an emphasis on risk 
mitigation measures as opposed to risk avoidance when proposing 
solutions, similar to other weapon systems, and to brief the 
congressional defense committees on its findings.

Small engine technologies

    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
adequately resource efforts to identify low-cost, efficient, 
small engine technologies capable of powering missiles and 
unmanned aerial vehicles, and directs the Secretary of Defense, 
or an appropriate subordinate in the Department of Defense, to 
provide a briefing to the defense committees on current 
research and development efforts and the industrial base that 
supports this technology not later than 180 days after 
enactment of this Act.

Streamlined acquisition practices to support innovation at Department 
        of Defense laboratories

    The committee notes that expert witnesses during a 
Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities hearing on 
May 3, 2017, identified a number of acquisition management and 
bureaucratic burdens that both slowed the process of 
incorporating new technologies into Department of Defense 
systems and drove up costs of development and adoption. 
Similarly, the leadership of the Defense Innovation Board has 
indicated that the Department does not have ``an innovation 
problem'' but rather ``an innovation adoption problem.''
    The committee is concerned that acquisition processes 
hinder the ability of the defense laboratories to invest in 
leading edge research and technology development efforts at 
small business and commercial companies and also to execute the 
contracting transactions necessary to run the laboratories 
themselves in the most efficient manner. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, working through the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the 
Laboratory Quality Enhancement Panel, to develop a set of 
recommendations for a pilot program on streamlined acquisition 
that could be executed by the defense laboratories. The pilot 
could include waivers of processes, regulations, and 
directives, as well as recommendations on relief from statutory 
restrictions and requirements. The committee directs that these 
recommendations be delivered to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives no 
later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act.

Ultra Low Power Deployable Radar

    The Committee is aware of efforts undertaken by U.S. 
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to develop an ultra-low 
power, rapidly deployable radar to enhance surveillance and 
reconnaissance missions and to provide small team force 
protection in austere locations such as mountainous, foliage, 
and riverine environments. The Committee understands that 
requirements for such a capability may be finalized in the near 
future and looks forward to the results of SOCOM's 
deliberations.

University science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs 
        with the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps

    The committee is aware that many Junior Reserve Officer 
Training Corps (JROTC) programs have developed summer 
leadership camps focusing on science, technology, engineering 
and mathematics (STEM). These residential programs offer a 
unique exposure to and hands on experience in technology 
focused fields for many students in school districts with 
limited STEM education. The committee understands that 
partnerships with local universities have been critical to 
provide the infrastructure, curriculum, and connections with 
industry and STEM educators needed for these programs to be a 
success. The committee strongly supports the continuation of 
the JROTC STEM leadership camps and other STEM learning 
opportunities that promote STEM education experiences that 
prioritize hands-on learning to increase student engagement and 
achievement. Furthermore, the services are encouraged to 
develop ways to share best practices for STEM curriculum across 
the JROTC regions.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for operation and maintenance activities at 
the levels identified in section 4301 of division D of this 
Act.

                 Subtitle B--Logistics and Sustainment

Sentinel Landscapes Partnership (sec. 311)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Defense to participate in Sentinel 
Landscapes. The committee encourages the Department of Defense, 
Departments of Agriculture, and the Department of Interior to 
work together to align resources and implement a comprehensive, 
multiple-tool approach to promoting and sustaining compatible 
land uses in a manner that protects nearby military test and 
training needs and can benefit landowners and partners.
Increased percentage of sustainment funds authorized for realignment to 
        restoration and modernization at each installation (sec. 312)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant 
temporary permissive authority to the Secretary of Defense to 
authorize an installation commander to realign up to 7.5 
percent of that installation's sustainment funds to restoration 
and modernization. The committee notes that this authority 
would expire on September 30, 2022.

                          Subtitle C--Reports

Plan for modernized, dedicated Department of the Navy adversary air 
        training enterprise (sec. 321)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Chief of Naval Operations and Commandant of the Marine Corps to 
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2018, a 
resource ready and executable plan for developing and emplacing 
a modernized dedicated adversary air training enterprise to 
support the full spectrum air combat readiness of the United 
States Navy and Marine Corps.
    The committee believes the threat that our combat air 
forces face is steadily increasing, both in capacity and 
advanced capability. Potential foes have made rapid 
technological advances, increased the size of their air forces, 
and postured those forces more aggressively. As a result, air 
superiority is no longer a given for U.S. forces, renewing the 
urgency for high-end adversary air training. However, the 
committee is concerned the Navy and Marine Corps are not 
currently positioned to provide the necessary training in 
either an effective or efficient manner. While the Navy Fleet 
Fighter Composite and Marine Fighter Training Squadrons provide 
invaluable training to the fleet, they are limited in capacity 
and their aircraft are old, limiting their ability to replicate 
high-end threat representations that our forces are likely to 
encounter in any conflict with a near-peer adversary. Indeed, 
the 2017 Marine Aviation Plan states the adversary capacity gap 
is growing and the F-5s flown by the adversary squadrons do not 
meet the requirements for F/A-18 and F-35 aircraft. The 
training gap will only increase as the Navy and Marine Corps 
transition to the F-35, increasing the need for high-end threat 
representations.
    To meet training requirements, Navy and Marine Corps 
squadrons are forced to rely on organic adversary (or ``red'') 
air, using up valuable hours on operational aircraft and 
providing limited training for pilots who are already receiving 
insufficient flight hours. While the committee believes that 
advances in Live, Virtual, and Constructive training will help 
alleviate some of the training gaps, no amount of constructive 
or simulated training can match actual flying against real 
world airborne threats with advanced sensors, electronic 
warfare, and advanced performance parameters.
    The Department of the Navy needs to develop a comprehensive 
plan to provide our aviators the advanced adversary air 
training they need to ensure the United States' ability to 
control the air when and where it chooses.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Defense Siting Clearinghouse (sec. 331)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 7 of title 10, United States Code, to ensure the proper 
assessment of energy projects by the Department of Defense's 
Siting Clearinghouse.
Temporary installation reutilization authority for arsenals, depots, 
        and plants (sec. 332)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
pilot program to grant permissive authority to the Secretary of 
the Army to authorize leases and contracts up to 25 years under 
section 2667 of title 10, United States Code, if the Secretary 
determines that a lease or contract will promote the national 
defense to maintain the viability of an arsenal, depot, plant, 
or military installation on which such facility is located. The 
committee further notes that any lease is subject to a 90-day 
hold period for the purposes of review by the Army real 
property manager. The committee finally notes that this 
authority would expire on September 30, 2020.
Pilot program for operation and maintenance budget presentation (sec. 
        333)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
3-year pilot program for the operating tempo, flying hour, 
depot maintenance, and base operating support subactivity 
groups for each service to be submitted as an annex or annexes 
in conjunction with the President's budget requests beginning 
with fiscal year 2019 and ending with the submission for fiscal 
year 2021. The committee believes that the operation and 
maintenance budget, which comprises about 40 percent of the 
Department of Defense's annual budget submissions, requires 
additional transparency.
Servicewomen's commemorative partnerships (sec. 334)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to provide not more than $5.0 million 
for the acquisition, installation, and maintenance of exhibits, 
facilities, historical displays, and programs at military 
service memorials and museums that highlight the role of women 
in the military.
Authority for agreements to reimburse states for costs of suppressing 
        wildfires on State lands caused by Department of Defense 
        activities under leases and other grants of access to state 
        lands (sec. 335)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2691 of title 10, United States Code, to grant 
permissive authority to the Secretary of Defense to reimburse a 
state for reasonable costs when that state incurs costs to 
suppress wildland fires that were caused by the activities of 
the Department of Defense.
Repurposing and reuse of surplus Army firearms (sec. 336)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to transfer all excess firearms, related 
spare parts and components, small arms ammunition, and 
ammunition components currently stored at Defense Distribution 
Depot, Anniston, Alabama that are no longer actively issued for 
military service and not commercially available to Rock Island 
Arsenal for melting and to be reforged into new firearms and 
force protection barriers.
    The committee notes that M-1 Garand rifles, caliber .45 
M1911/M1911A1 pistols, and caliber .22 rimfire rifles are 
exempt.
Department of the Navy marksmanship awards (sec. 337)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 40728 of title 36, United States Code, to grant 
permissive authority to the Secretary of the Navy to transfer 
to the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice & 
Firearms Safety M-1 Garand and caliber .22 rimfire rifles 
within the inventories of the Navy and Marine Corps stores at 
Defense Distribution Depot, Anniston or Naval Surface Warfare 
Center, Crane for the sole purpose as awards for competitors in 
marksmanship competitions held by the Navy or Marine Corps. The 
committee notes these awards cannot be resold.

                   Subtitle E--Energy and Environment

Authority to carry out environmental restoration activities at National 
        Guard and Reserve locations (sec. 341)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2701(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the secretary to carry out environmental restoration activities 
at the National Guard and Reserve locations, in light of the 
cleanup challenges with respect to perfluorooctane sulfonate 
and perfluorooctanoic acid.

Special considerations for energy performance goals (sec. 342)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2911(c) of title 10, United States Code, to include 
goals to reduce the future demand and the requirements for the 
use of energy, to enhance energy resilience to ensure the 
Department has the ability to prepare for and recover from 
energy disruptions that impact mission assurance on military 
installations, and leverage third-party financing to address 
installation energy needs.

Centers for Disease Control study on health implications of per- and 
        polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination in drinking water 
        (sec. 343)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services in consultation with the 
Department of Defense to conduct a human health study through 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assess the 
human health effects of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in 
sources of drinking water.

Environmental oversight and remediation at Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage 
        Facility (sec. 344)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
sense of Congress that the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility 
is a national strategic asset.

                              Budget Items

Army support reduction

    The budget request included $38.9 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $1.0 billion was for SAG 435 
Other Service Support.
    Based on analysis by the Government Accountability Office, 
the committee understands this subactivity group has 
historically under executed its appropriated funding.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $45.0 
million in OMA to SAG 435 Other Service Support.

Navy information technology reduction

    The budget request included $45.4 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $914. million was for SAG 
BSIT Enterprise Information.
    Based on analysis by the Government Accountability Office, 
the committee understands this subactivity group has 
historically under executed its appropriated funding.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $32.0 
million to SAG BSIT Enterprise Information due to low execution 
in prior years.

Naval History and Heritage Command reduction

    The budget request included $45.4 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $1.9 billion was for SAG BSM1 
Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization.
    The committee understands that within this request was 
$29.0 million for an increase to the Naval History and Heritage 
Command. The committee believes these funds can be better 
aligned for other sustainment, restoration, and modernization 
priorities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $29.0 
million in OMN to SAG BSM1 Sustainment, Restoration and 
Modernization.

Air and Space Operations Center--Weapons System

    The budget request included $39.4 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $1.3 billion was for 
SAG 011C Combat Enhancement Forces.
    The committee recommends an increase of $104.8 million in 
OMAF, SAG 011C Combat Enhancement Forces, for a total of $1.4 
billion, for the purpose of software production and sustainment 
activities for rapid incremental improvements to the Air and 
Space Operations Center--Weapons System.

Air National Guard advertising reduction

    The budget request included $6.9 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG), of which $97.2 million 
was for SAG 042J Recruiting and Advertising.
    The committee understands that within the Recruiting and 
Advertising request was an increase of $60.5 million to fund 
additional marketing and advertising efforts. The committee 
notes this request would nearly triple the Air National Guard's 
advertising budget. The committee believes these funds can be 
better aligned for other readiness priorities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $45.0 
million in OMANG to SAG 042J Recruiting and Advertising.

Defense Acquisition University

    The budget request included $42.4 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), of which $145.0 million was 
for SAG 3EV2 for the Defense Acquisition University (DAU).
    The committee notes that of this request, $7.9 million is 
requested for curriculum development. This amount is almost 
$5.0 million lower than the reported estimate for fiscal year 
2017, which is $12.5 million. In light of the committee's 
recent acquisition reforms and the reforms included in this 
Act, the committee believes it is important that DAU have the 
resources necessary to engage with ongoing efforts to improve 
the acquisition system, culture, and workforce and to be better 
equipped to manage the reforms in this Act. Specifically there 
are provisions in this Act that task DAU with creating or 
collaborating on new curricula related to Other Transaction 
Authority and procurement of commercial items.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase in OMDW 
of $5.0 million to SAG 3EV2 Defense Acquisition University.

STARBASE increase

    The budget request included $34.7 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), of which $183.0 million was 
for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
    The committee notes the STARBASE Program is a highly 
effective program that improves the knowledge and skills of 
students in kindergarten through 12th grades in science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics.
    The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million for 
SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs for the STARBASE program.

Funding for impact aid

    The budget request included $2.7 billion in the Operation 
and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTJ) for the operations of the 
Department of Defense Education Activity. The amount authorized 
to be appropriated for OMDW includes the following changes from 
the budget request. The provisions underlying these changes in 
funding levels are discussed in greater detail in title V of 
this committee report.

                    [Changes in millions of dollars]
 
 
 
Impact aid for schools with military dependent                     +25.0
 students.............................................
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities......             +10.0
    Total.............................................             +35.0
 

Defense environmental international cooperation program

    The budget request included $34.7 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW) 030, of which $960,000 was for 
the Defense Environmental International Cooperation (DEIC) 
program.
    The committee notes that the Army National Guard and other 
military units are frequently called upon to respond to 
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR) crises 
around the world. The DEIC enables the Army National Guard to 
share best practices and lessons learned from its own HA/DR 
missions and promote the sustainment of mission capability 
among our allies, in order to develop and enhance their own 
self-sufficient HA/DR capabilities with a limited amount of 
funding.
    For example, given the ongoing readiness challenges of the 
United States Southern Command and its limited resources to 
conduct its HA/DR mission, the Army National Guard has used the 
DEIC to provide training and capability development to 
countries within the region so that they can remove debris and 
otherwise respond in the event of an earthquake or hurricane.
    Accordingly, in order to continue the enhancement of the 
Department's readiness and HA/DR capabilities, including those 
of the Army National Guard, the committee recommends an 
increase of $1.0 million in OMDW for the DEIC program.

Studies on aircraft inventories for the Air Force

    The budget request included $1.6 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW) for SAG 4GTN Administration 
and Service-wide Activities.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a provision 
that would direct the Secretary of Defense to commission three 
studies to be submitted to the congressional defense committees 
on potential future aircraft inventories and capability 
mixtures no later than March 1, 2019. These studies would 
provide competing visions and alternatives for a future set of 
choices regarding Air Force aircraft capabilities and 
capacities. One study would be performed by the Department of 
the Air Force, with the participation of the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense, Office of Net Assessment. The second 
study would be performed by a federally funded research and 
development center. The third study would be conducted by a 
qualified independent, non-governmental institute selected by 
the Secretary of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN Administration and Service-wide 
Activities for the performance of these studies, for a total of 
$1.6 billion.

CDC study increase

    The budget request included $34.7 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), of which $1.6 billion was for 
SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense.
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense to conduct a Center for 
Disease Control (CDC) nationwide health study on PFAS for 
contamination in drinking water.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0 
million in OMDW to SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense 
for the CDC study.

Bulk fuel savings

    The budget request included $38.9 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), $45.4 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), $6.9 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), $39.4 billion for Operation 
and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), and $69.2 billion for 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW).
    The committee understands that as of May 2017, the 
Department has overstated its projected bulk fuel costs for 
fiscal year 2018.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an undistributed 
decrease of $396.3 million for excess projections in fuel 
costs.

Foreign currency fluctuations

    The budget request included $38.9 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), $45.4 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), $6.9 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), $39.4 billion for Operation 
and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), and $34.7 billion for 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW).
    The committee believes that when foreign currency 
fluctuation (FCF) rates are determined by the Department of 
Defense, the balance of the FCF funds should be considered, 
particularly if the balance is close to the cap of $970.0 
million. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has 
informed the committee that as of March 2017, the Department 
does not plan to transfer in any prior year unobligated 
balances to replenish the account for fiscal year 2017. GAO 
analysis projects that the Department will experience a net 
gain in fiscal year 2018 due to favorable foreign exchange 
rates.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an undistributed 
decrease of $313.3 million for FCF.

Operation and Maintenance Unfunded Requirements List

    The budget request included $223.3 billion for Operation 
and Maintenance.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
submitted extensive Unfunded Requirements Lists totaling $33.1 
billion. The committee believes that since the passage of the 
Budget Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by 
artificial constraints rather than the realities of the global 
strategic environment. This reality has continued for the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined 6 years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.8 billion to Operation and Maintenance for items 
identified in the Unfunded Requirements List. Some increases 
include funding greater home station training and depot 
maintenance. Greater details of each increase can be found in 
the tables in Division D.

                       Items of Special Interest

Availability and Readiness of Special Operations Forces to Support 
        Geographic Combatant Commander Requirements

    The Department of Defense (DOD) continues to rely heavily 
upon U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) in the effort to 
counter violent extremist groups including ISIS and al Qaeda. 
According to testimony by General Raymond Thomas, Commander of 
U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), there are 
approximately 8,000 SOF forces deployed across over 80 
countries at any given time, the majority of whom are deployed 
to the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility. 
General Thomas also testified that most SOF units are employed 
to their sustainable limit and reiterated the importance of 
preserving SOF's high state of full-spectrum readiness to 
support a range of missions.
    The high rate of deployments has raised concerns regarding 
the readiness and availability of SOF to conduct operations 
other than those focused on counterterrorism and in support of 
Geographic Combatant Commands (GCC) other than CENTCOM. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to evaluate the following issues:
          1. What challenges, if any, has DOD faced in 
        providing SOF to meet the requirements of the 
        Geographic Combatant Commands?
          2. To what extent does DOD consider operational tempo 
        in prioritizing and tasking SOF deployments in support 
        of CENTCOM operations, including determining tradeoffs 
        between conventional and SOF capabilities and the 
        requirements of other GCCs?
          3. What challenges, if any, has DOD faced in 
        providing deployed SOF forces with key enablers 
        including, but not limited to, airlift, medical 
        evacuation, intelligence, expeditionary base operating 
        support, logistics, and airfield operations?
          4. To what extent has DOD assessed the impact of SOF 
        mission and deployment rates on unit readiness and the 
        availability of SOF forces to conduct other missions 
        and support the requirements of other GCCs?
          5. To what extent has the reliance on Overseas 
        Contingency Operations (OCO) funding impacted the 
        readiness of SOF and how will it continue to impact SOF 
        if funding isn't shifted to the base defense budget in 
        future years?
          6. Any other issues the Comptroller General 
        determines appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
not later than November 1, 2017, on the Comptroller General's 
preliminary findings and submit a final report to the 
congressional defense committees on a date agreed to at the 
time of the briefing.

Basic Expeditionary Airmen Skills Training and Base Camp Integration 
        Lab

    The committee remains encouraged by efforts of the Air 
Force and Army Research Laboratories, and is strongly 
supportive of their commitment to improving combat capabilities 
for the warfighter through projects like the Basic 
Expeditionary Airman Skills Training (BEAST) site at Joint Base 
San Antonio-Lackland in Texas, and the Basic Camp Integration 
Lab (BCIL) and Force Provider at Fort Devens and Natick Soldier 
Systems Center in Massachusetts. Notably, the BEAST site in 
Texas allows roughly 39,000 recruits per year to train and 
experience the program, while Natick scientists continue to 
demonstrate and evaluate new advanced, energy-efficient 
shelters and shelter components. Efforts like BEAST and BCIL 
leverage existing and openly competed technologies to 
demonstrate the ``FOB of the future'', to improve combat 
capabilities with items like deployable and secure microgrids, 
smart power controllers, advanced batteries, better shelter 
insulation, light emitting diode lighting systems, and others. 
The committee notes that these kinds of advanced technologies 
when combined into a deployable package can lead to proven 
increases in capability as well as cost decreased, not only in 
combat zones, but in support of humanitarian assistance and 
disaster response missions, such as when the Army deployed to 
Africa during its Ebola response mission.
    Consequently, the committee strongly encourages the 
Department to continue the progress made towards improving 
combat capabilities through its investments in FOB efficiencies 
that reduce logistical burdens on the warfighter, like BEAST 
and BCIL.

Cyber-secure microgrids and energy resilience for installations

    The committee remains concerned regarding the 
vulnerabilities of cyber-attacks, physical attacks, and severe 
weather, which threaten the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
ability to recover from multi-day utility disruptions on its 
installations. Improving energy resilience helps decrease 
utility disruptions and grid outages that negatively impact 
operations and compromise readiness.
    Accordingly, the committee believes the Department could 
better utilize and integrate existing authorities such as 
military construction, facilities sustainment restoration and 
modernization accounts, energy savings performance contracts 
(ESPCs), power purchase agreements (PPAs), and utility energy 
saving contracts (UESCs) to ensure installations have 
resilient, reliable, and continuous power during disruptions to 
the electrical supply though deployment of cyber-secure 
technologies like microgrids. Notably, microgrids are fuel 
agnostic, so they can operate on fossil fuels, fuel cells, 
batteries, combined heat and power, and renewables. When 
distributed energy generation is combined with control systems 
like cyber-secure microgrids, DOD has a significant opportunity 
to maintain readiness.
    In pursuing such actions and investments the Department 
should recognize and factor in the current costs of achieving 
energy assurance. In assessing a microgrid's cost 
effectiveness, the Department should view the life cycle costs 
of stand-alone backup generators that could produce equivalent 
energy resilience and assurance as an avoided cost and thus 
available for financing third party investments through ESPCs, 
PPAs, or UESCs. For example, recent analysis has shown that 
replacing standalone generators with a microgrid could save 
$8.0 to $20.0 million over the life cycle, depending on 
location. As such, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to provide a summary of actions taken to pursue 
microgrid deployments through third party financing in the 
Department's next Annual Energy Management Report.
    Additionally, the committee notes that DOD continues to 
experience multiple utility grid outages every year. The 
committee strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to consider 
the appropriate use of the Department's existing exemption from 
section 591 of title 40, United States Code to address frequent 
utility outages and negative impacts to readiness, especially 
as it relates to the use of cyber-secure microgrids and 
advanced infrastructure controls.

Cybersecurity risk to Department of Defense facilities

    The committee remains concerned that as Department of 
Defense facilities are transitioning to smart buildings 
increasingly utilizing wireless controls for heating, 
ventilation and air conditioning, security systems, lighting, 
electrical power, fire alarms, elevators, visitor controls, 
cellular communications, Wi-Fi networks, first responder 
communications, and other systems are increasing interconnected 
and online. This higher connectivity has increased the threat 
and vulnerability to cyber attacks, particularly in ways 
existing DOD regulations were not designed to consider.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to deliver to the congressional defense committees a 
report, as was specified in the Senate report on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 that: (1) 
Delineates the structural risks inherent in control systems and 
networks, and the potential consequences associated with a 
system compromise through a cyber event; (2) Assesses the 
current vulnerabilities to cyber attack initiated through 
Industrial Control Systems (ICS) at Department of Defense 
installations worldwide, for the purpose of determining risk 
mitigation actions for current and future implementation; (3) 
Proposes a common, Department-wide implementation plan to 
upgrade and improve the security of control systems and 
networks to mitigate identified risks; (4) Assesses the extent 
to which existing Department of Defense military construction 
directives, regulations, and instructions require the 
consideration of cybersecurity vulnerabilities and cyber risk 
in preconstruction design processes and requirements 
development processes for military construction projects; and 
(5) the capabilities of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Naval 
Facilities Engineering Command, the Air Force Civil Engineer 
Center, and other construction agents, as well as participating 
stakeholders, to identify and mitigate full-spectrum cyber-
enabled risk to new facilities and major renovations.
    For the purposes of this legislation, ICS include, but are 
not limited to, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 
Systems, Building Automation Systems Utility Monitoring, and 
Energy Management and Control Systems. Such report shall 
include an estimated budget for the implementation plan.

Defense Media Activity IP Streaming

    The committee notes the pilot program by Defense Media 
Activity (DMA) to transition from an antiquated satellite-based 
media delivery system to an Internet-based ``IP streaming'' 
platform. The committee is supportive of this enhanced 
distribution of media and the associated delivery of expanded 
programming and reduction of the costs associated with 
delivering this content. The committee encourages DMA to 
utilize private sector methods to track the outcomes (e.g., 
viewership) associated with this pilot, and the rest of its 
programming, to better understand the Department's demand for 
programming and to be responsive to this feedback.

Defense threat assessment and master plan for climate

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
must be able to execute its missions effectively and 
efficiently by adapting to the full spectrum of current and 
future threats. Secretary Mattis stated to the committee, 
``where climate change contributes to regional instability, the 
Department of Defense must be aware of any potential adverse 
impacts'', ``climate change is impacting stability in areas of 
the world where our troops are operating today'' and ``the 
Department should be prepared to mitigate any consequences of a 
changing climate, including ensuring that our shipyards and 
installations will continue to function as required.''
    The committee notes that a series of climate-related events 
have cost DOD significant resources, measured in funding and 
negative impacts on readiness. Specifically, the committee 
notes that in January, a tornado caused over $320.0 million in 
damages at Marine Corps Depot at Albany, Georgia. At Lackland 
Air Force Base in Texas, there were 81 black flag training days 
in 2012, and 226 in 2016. In Alaska, three locations of early 
warning radar infrastructure have been damaged and moved due to 
coastal erosion that was not expected to occur until 2030. 
Wildfires postponed the launch of a satellite in California and 
led to training range closures for multiple months in North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Idaho, Florida, and New Mexico. 
Researchers at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln found that 
wildfires have tripled between 1985 and 2014, growing from 33 
to 117 per year. At Laughlin Air Force Base, a hail storm 
damaged 39 pilot training aircraft, costing roughly $80.0 
million in repairs which won't be completed until June of 2018. 
Warehouses containing hazardous materials flood 24 inches on a 
regular basis in Norfolk and Portsmouth, Virginia. In South 
Carolina, private citizens near Fort Jackson have filed seven 
lawsuits seeking $20.0 million in damages, alleging the Army 
failed to maintain a dam that ruptured during historic rainfall 
and flooding. In Louisiana, the railroad system at Fort Polk's 
Joint Regional Training Center requires major repairs due to 
``epic rains.'' In Virginia, high water flooding creates 
``significant damage'' to pier infrastructure at Norfolk Naval 
Shipyard creating reliability and safety issues. Warming Arctic 
temperatures at Thule Air Force Base in Greenland have caused 
extensive airfield pavement repairs at over $30.0 million, 
which is roughly the cost of one Army Combat Training Center 
rotation. In Arizona, a heat wave caused over 40 flights to be 
canceled, with clear implications that DOD aircraft, ships, and 
vehicles must be able to continue to operate in extreme hot and 
cold temperatures. The Congressional Budget Office has 
concluded ``costs associated with hurricane damage will 
increase more rapidly than the economy will grow'' resulting in 
$39.0 billion annually by 2075. Lastly, the Government 
Accountability Office found that ``weather effects associated 
with climate change pose operational and budgetary risks'' to 
DOD.
    Accordingly, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a comprehensive threat 
assessment and implementation master plan no later than March 
1, 2018 on the risks and vulnerabilities to DOD missions and 
infrastructure associated with climate-related events. The 
assessment and master adaptation plan shall include: (1) 
Effects and mission impacts of a changing climate, if any, on 
DOD operations, testing and training ranges, readiness, basing, 
acquisition, contingency basing, command and control, supply 
chain, logistics, stockpiles, and the associated costs; (2) 
Plans and procedures to continue missions in the event of loss 
or damage to critical energy and water infrastructure; (3) 
Guidance for combatant commanders to address regional-specific 
theater campaign plan impacts in order to mitigate climate-
related events that contribute to instability; (4) Anticipated 
impacts from increased global operations tempo as a result of 
greater numbers of humanitarian assistance and disaster 
response events; (5) Guidance for the military services and 
Joint Staff to integrate climate impact scenarios and long-term 
projections into planning; (6) Adaptation plans and procedures 
to ensure military investments with taxpayer dollars are 
constructed to better withstand flooding and extreme weather 
events; (7) Updates to built and natural infrastructure design, 
changes to military construction standards, Unified Facilities 
Code, and encroachment procedures; (8) Improved modeling 
techniques and data sources to better predict future erosion, 
flooding, and other extreme weather events; (9) Opportunities 
to pursue public-private partnerships under existing 
authorities with any non-DOD entity in order to mitigate 
climate-related impacts; (10) Adaptation progress metrics and 
recommendations for further research and development; (11) 
Strategies and recommendations to alleviate climate 
vulnerabilities, including timelines and resource requirements; 
and (12) Any other aspects deemed appropriate.
    The threat assessment and implementation master plan may 
include a classified annex, if necessary.

Defense-wide Working Capital Fund cash management practices

    The committee notes that recent analysis of the Defense-
wide Working Capital Fund (DWWCF) cash management practices 
conducted by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found 
that the Department of Defense needs to improve its cash 
management practices. Notably, the DWWCF monthly cash balances 
were outside the upper and lower cash requirements as defined 
by the Department's Financial Management Regulation for 87 of 
120 months during fiscal years 2007 through 2016 and for more 
than a year on 3 separate occasions.
    The committee commends the Department for taking actions 
outside the normal budget process during the 10-year period to 
bring the monthly cash balances within the cash requirements 
such as cash transfers and fuel price adjustments. However, 
these actions were not sufficient to bring the monthly cash 
balances within the cash requirements. The GAO found this 
occurred because the Department's Financial Management 
Regulation did not contain guidance on when managers should use 
available cash management tools.
    Accordingly, no later than October 1, 2017, the committee 
directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to provide 
guidance in the Department's Financial Management Regulation on 
the timing of when managers should use available cash 
management tools and provide the congressional defense 
committees with the guidance once it is developed.

Department of Defense and Department of Energy collaboration to improve 
        energy resilience

    Earlier this year, the Secretary of Defense told the 
committee during combat operations in Iraq ``our efforts to 
resupply the force with fuel made us vulnerable in ways that 
were exploited by the enemy.'' The Secretary also stated the 
importance of ``relieving the dependence of deployed forces on 
vulnerable fuel supplies''' and ``the purpose of such efforts 
should be to increase the readiness and reach of our forces.''
    Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the 
Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE) 
to continue to exercise the existing Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) signed by both parties in 2010 by 
partnering to enhance DOD's energy resilience. The partnership 
between DOD and DOE has successfully driven the research and 
development of technologies that have improved DOD's energy 
resilience posture at military installations. For example, 
under a research agreement the Army, an aerospace laboratory, 
and the DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory developed 
the Consolidated Utility Base Energy (CUBE) system.
    The CUBE system is an integrated power distribution 
platform that delivers power for a solar-battery-diesel hybrid 
system to reduce the use of diesel-fueled generators at forward 
operating bases (FOBs). Roughly 40 percent of a FOB'S total 
energy demand is typically powered by diesel generators.
    The committee notes the CUBE system has demonstrated to 
decrease fuel use by 31 percent and diesel generator run time 
by 42 percent when compared to diesel-only, while maintaining 
reliable and high-quality power output. When combined with 
other advanced and efficient FOB technologies like rigid wall 
and net zero shelters, solar roofs, and solar-powered targeting 
systems for fire control missions, the potential to save fuel 
consumption adds up to another 50 percent in reduced demand.
    Notably, the CUBE system is suitable for off-the-grid 
operations in remote areas, like FOBs, as well as humanitarian 
assistance and disaster relief operations in Africa and 
elsewhere around the world.
    The committee strongly encourages the DOD to continue the 
development and fielding of technologies like the CUBE system 
which can help reduce the risk of lives lost transporting 
fueling a combat zone, enhance combat capability, all with the 
added benefit of reducing costs to the taxpayer.

Eastern Gulf Test and Training Range

    The committee notes that the Air Force Development Test 
Center's mission is to plan, conduct, and evaluate testing of 
U.S. and allied non-nuclear munitions, electronic combat, 
target acquisition, weapon delivery, base intrusion protection, 
and supporting systems. That mission is executed at Eglin Air 
Force Base in Florida, whose land test areas encompass 463,000 
acres and water test areas, including the Eastern Gulf Test and 
Training Range (EGTTR), which cover 86,500 square miles in the 
Gulf of Mexico, making it the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
largest test and training area in the world.
    The committee is concerned that the open-air range test-
data gathering instrumentation infrastructure on EGTTR is not 
keeping pace with the advanced capabilities of modern weapons 
systems and munitions. The committee is further concerned that, 
with a growing volume of test and training requirements, more 
instrumentation throughout the EGTTR is required for efficient 
use of air, surface, and subsurface test areas to reduce the 
competition for range space between operational readiness 
priorities and fielding new system capabilities.
    The committee understands that emerging technologies such 
as hypersonics, autonomous systems, and advanced sub-surface 
systems could require enlarged testing and training footprints. 
The committee further understands that the potential 
development of energy projects have the potential to encroach 
and negatively impact military training and operations. The 
committee also supports the Department's view that ``national 
security and energy security are inextricably linked and the 
DOD fully supports the development of our nation's domestic 
energy resources in a manner that is compatible with military 
testing, training, and operations.'' The committee is also 
aware of the Department's current position that ``[t]he 
moratorium on oil and gas `leasing, preleasing, and other 
related activities' ensures that these vital military readiness 
activities may by conducted without interference and is 
critical to their continuation.''
    Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to modernize and expand open-air range test 
capabilities operation and maintenance in the EGTTR and 
continue to work with the other Departments to ensure that the 
test and training missions conducted in EGTTR are protected 
from activities incompatible with successful mission 
completion.

Encouraging the use of the Innovative Readiness Training program

    The committee is aware that readiness challenges continue 
to face the Armed Forces due to budgetary constraints. The 
committee continues to recognize the value of the Innovative 
Readiness Training (IRT) program, which allows Military 
Services realistic, joint training opportunities for National 
Guard, Reserve, and Active-Duty members.
    The committee values the IRT program for its low cost and 
high benefit to achieving measurable military readiness. The 
committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to 
continue utilizing IRT programs to provide mission-essential 
training, prioritizing programs that directly support Active-
Duty missions.
    Examples of IRT activities include, but are not limited to, 
constructing rural roads and airplane runways, small building 
and warehouse construction in remote areas, transportation of 
medical supplies, and military readiness training in the areas 
of engineering, health care and transportation for under-served 
communities.
    The committee understands the IRT program offers complex 
and challenging training opportunities for domestic and 
international crises. The committee is also aware that states 
that utilize the IRT program include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, 
California, Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, 
Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, 
North Dakota, Wyoming, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North 
Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.
    The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense 
to continue to fully utilize IRT programs that provide hands-on 
and mission-essential training and that are available to 
active, reserve, and National Guard forces.

Energy assurance on military installations

    In order to assess the current statutory authorities and 
their appropriateness and flexibility to support energy 
resilience on military installations, the Secretary of Defense 
is directed to report to the defense committees within 180 days 
of enactment of this Act the following: (1) authorities used in 
award of energy resilience projects during fiscal years 2015-
2017 and (2) challenges experienced during fiscal years 2015-
2017 in the execution of energy resilience projects due to 
limitations in existing statutory authorities.

Energy efficient military shelters

    The committee is aware of requirements that the Department 
of Defense has to leverage current technologies that will 
deliver energy efficient returns on investments. The committee 
believes that such efficient technologies will reduce the 
tactical demand on the warfighter while also make current 
billeting structures more energy efficient. Additionally, these 
efficiencies mean greater reduction in fuel consumption, and 
can ultimately lead to improved quality of life conditions for 
our warfighters.
    The committee also understands that these efficient 
technologies can lead to a 35 percent reduction in demand for 
heating ventilation and air conditioning requirements, in order 
to maintain 70 degree interior temperatures in extreme cold and 
hot environments. The committee notes that by ensuring that our 
deployed warfighters have adequate living conditions, the 
Department also ensures that our forces are more combat 
effective, more prepared on the battlefield, and better able to 
perform their mission.
    The committee further encourages the Department of the Air 
Force to leverage currently available energy-saving 
supplemental insulation technologies that will lead to reduced 
environmental control units in a deployed environment, further 
leading to cost savings with respect to total cost of ownership 
of billeting and shelters in the Basic Expeditionary Airfield 
Resources (BEAR) Base program. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends the Department continue to support and allocate the 
appropriate resources for energy efficient insulation systems, 
solar protection, and more efficient medium shelters procured 
through the BEAR Base program.

Energy savings performance contracts and combined heat and power

    The committee notes the importance for the Department of 
Defense (DOD) to enhance installation readiness and resilience 
through energy infrastructure improvements. The committee 
recognizes the efforts by the DOD to use third-party financing, 
such as Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC), to provide 
cost-effective efficiency improvements to military 
installations.
    The committee is strongly supportive of these efforts by 
the DOD and strongly encourages the use of these contracts and 
other third-party financing methods to improve energy 
infrastructure, resilience, and facilities important to the 
mission on military installations.
    For example, the committee is very supportive of the ESPC 
task order which will build a site-wide and secure microgrid 
integrating 10 megawatts of new onsite power generation and 
battery storage at Marine Corps Recruit Depot (MCRD) Parris 
Island, South Carolina. The committee is encouraged that the 
ESPC will reduce MCRD's energy demand by 79 percent and water 
consumption by 27 percent through infrastructure upgrades that 
will improve installation resilience, and provide the ability 
to operate in island-mode during the event of a commercial grid 
outage, or simply reduce utility purchases during peak demand 
periods. The ESPC upgrades at 121 buildings on Parris Island 
will also reduce operation and sustainment costs, address 
potentially cost-intensive military construction requirements, 
include a solar carport array, a battery storage system, and 
replace the currently end-of-life steam plant with a new fully 
automated natural gas-fueled combined heat and power (CHP) 
plant.
    More broadly, the committee is also strongly supportive of 
the Army's goal to double the amount of energy production from 
combined heat and power (CHP) facilities on its installations 
in the next two years to 200 MW, and to triple it by the end of 
2020 to 300 MW. The committee looks forward to the forthcoming 
development and release of the Army's overarching CHP 
deployment strategy that appropriately considers CHP and other 
ESPC methods as a key element of the Army's energy and 
sustainability strategy. Similarly, the committee strongly 
encourages the Department of the Navy to exceed its current 
inventory of nine CHP projects at roughly 90 MW and for the Air 
Force to exceed its roughly 15-20 MW of CHP.

Energy savings performance contracts assessment

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
an assessment to the congressional defense committees no later 
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. The 
assessment shall include but not be limited to: (1) 
recommendations on the use of energy savings performance 
contracts (ESPCs) for savings achieved through training 
improvements; (2) identification of potential savings that 
could be achieved through improvements to training; (3) pros 
and cons of using those savings as part of a long term ESPC; 
(4) any new authorities that would be needed if a decision was 
made to use savings as part of additional ESPC; and (5) any 
other recommendations deemed appropriate.

Fabric and membrane technology

    The committee expresses its ongoing support for Department 
of Defense research and testing of cutting-edge fabric and 
membrane technologies to improve service members' comfort, 
effectiveness and mission readiness. The Senate report 
accompanying S. 1376 (S. Rpt. 114-49) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 included a requirement 
for the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the 
committee on fabric-based respiratory protective equipment, 
including evaluations of emerging technologies to minimize 
service member exposure to inhalation of particulate and 
pollutants. Additionally, in the Senate report accompanying S. 
2943 (S. Rpt. 114-255) of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017, the committee further directed the 
Secretary of the Army to report similarly on footwear 
technologies that incorporate new polytetrafluoroethylene 
(ePTFE) and other membrane technologies. In light of these 
directives, the committee understands that the Army is 
currently evaluating the referenced technologies and that the 
evaluations are yielding positive results.
    Recognizing the importance of these technologies to 
warfighter readiness, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Army to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, no later 
December 15, 2017, on the suitability of the above-mentioned 
technologies to military applications. Specifically, the report 
should provide an evaluation of the fabric-based respiratory 
protective equipment technologies reviewed under the 
requirement in Senate Report 114-49, identification of specific 
applications for integration of the technology, and a plan for 
transitioning the technology into such applications and 
programs. In line with the Army's review of footwear 
technologies as required in Senate Report 114-255, the report 
should provide a detailed evaluation of new ePTFE membranes, 
laminates, and other membrane technologies. Additionally, the 
report should include suggested revisions to current 
requirements and product descriptions that could be implemented 
to expand access to these membrane technology advancements. 
Finally, the report should include a plan for transitioning 
membrane technologies into military applications, including the 
Army Boot Modernization Programs such as the jungle combat boot 
program, the cold weather and extreme cold weather boot 
programs, and future cold weather clothing systems.

Foreign language training

    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
continue placing a high priority on foreign language 
proficiency programs to ensure warfighters and national 
security professionals receive the language and culture 
training needed to complete their missions effectively, to 
include partnerships with K-12 schools and universities.
    The committee is also aware of efforts already underway 
across the Department of Defense (DOD) and the intelligence 
community to review language training platforms in an effort to 
develop a more streamlined, efficient, customizable, and 
economic way to provide foreign language training DOD-wide. In 
order to achieve these goals, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with agency directors and 
the intelligence community to review current language training 
platforms and explore options to jointly develop a single 
language training platform to increase efficiency and cost 
savings.

Implementation of Defense Science Board Task Force on energy systems 
        for forward/remote operating bases

    The committee notes the Defense Science Board (DSB) Task 
Force on Energy Systems for Forward/Remote Operating Bases 
recently identified a number of recommendations to help the 
Department ``meet this challenge of providing reliable, 
abundant, and continuous energy.''
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
and the military departments to implement a number of the DSB's 
recommendations: (1) Conduct a gap analysis of energy 
requirements for future capabilities; (2) In conjunction with 
the Joint Staff, ensure that future operational energy 
requirements are an explicit part of the Joint Requirements 
Oversight Council process and Defense Acquisition Board 
process; (3) Ensure operational units are involved in 
developing and managing energy requirements and standards for 
their mission in order that requirements and standards are both 
realistic and meaningful for improved operations; (4) Ensure 
the Combatant Commands include in their future requirements the 
need for abundant, reliable, and efficient energy technologies 
to enable future capabilities; (5) Incentivize the military 
services to collaboratively develop future considerations for 
remote and forward operating bases and expeditionary forces 
that address energy demands and the alternative sources to meet 
demand, reduce risk, and improve efficiency; (6) Establish 
metrics to evaluate effectiveness to improve efficiency of 
current deployable energy systems and drive efficiencies for 
future deployable energy systems through standards and 
integration, contracting, measuring data, training, and 
operating behavior; (7) Establish evaluation criteria to 
determine an enduring or non-enduring base; (8) Invest in 
research, development, test, and evaluation of alternative 
energy technologies with the potential to offer improved combat 
capabilities in remote and forward areas--in particular--
technologies should be measured in terms of reduced logistics 
and reduced tactical signature during operations, reduced 
health and safety risk to warfighters, reliability and cost; 
(9) Establish a policy requiring all wargames, major unit field 
training, and joint exercises to include fuel and fuel 
logistics; (10) The DOD shall work with the DOE's Office of 
Nuclear Energy to engage in research, development, 
demonstration, and deployment of micro-reactor concepts, also 
known as very small reactor concepts, with electric power 
generation of 10 megawatts or less, for meeting the strategic 
needs of the DOD, including, where appropriate, powering remote 
bases and forward operating bases, and for commercial 
applications in remote areas. In conjunction with the DOE's 
Office of Nuclear Energy, the DOD should produce a 
manufacturability feasibility report within 24 months, and 
should focus efforts to enable the deployment of a functioning 
prototype reactor within 7 years; and (11) Any other 
recommendations deemed relevant and appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Department to update the 
committee no later than February 1, 2018, on the status of 
implementing these DSB recommendations.

Implementation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup

    Earlier this year, the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) reported that the Department of Defense (DOD) has 
improved its reporting on the cost of environmental cleanup for 
installations closed under the Base Realignment and Closure 
process, but recommended that DOD include estimates of cleaning 
emerging contaminants in future reports to Congress and develop 
a process for collecting and sharing lessons learned on 
environmental cleanup.
    The committee is encouraged that DOD concurred with both 
recommendations and identified specific actions the Department 
will take to implement the recommendations. The committee looks 
forward to receiving the more detailed environmental 
remediation cost estimates that will include remediation cost 
for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances compounds and other 
emerging contaminants to help ensure that adequate resources 
are being devoted to this important initiative.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to implement the GAO's recommendation to share lessons 
learned from environmental remediation among the military 
services to promote the redevelopment of closed military bases.

Increasing contracting efficiency through commercial off-the-shelf 
        solutions for personal protective equipment

    The committee commends the Department of Defense (DOD) for 
continuing efforts to make acquisition and procurement of 
personal protective equipment (PPE) and organizational clothing 
and individual equipment (OCIE) more efficient. Programs such 
as the Army's Rapid Equipping Force (REF) and Soldier 
Enhancement Program result in shorter procurement processes to 
field critical items of PPE and OCIE faster and more 
effectively. Approved items such as ballistic eye protection, 
armor plate carriers, load carriage, footwear, helmets, 
clothing items, and replacement parts and supplies are often 
readily available as commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions.
    The committee is concerned that PPE and OCIE procurements 
continue to be slower than necessary due to administrative 
delays and burdensome requirements processes. Therefore, the 
committee believes that DOD and the military departments, as 
part of the broader acquisition reform effort, should 
accelerate the use of COTS solutions to meet the evolving PPE 
and OCIE needs of our servicemembers.

Individual soldier equipment acquisition strategy

    The committee is aware and supportive of recent 
determinations by the Secretary of Defense have opened all 
combat positions to female warfighters. This significant change 
to Department policy creates several opportunities to better 
serve the needs of both female and male warfighters.
    For many years, the Department of Defense has acquired 
individual equipment for soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines 
in a piecemeal manner, purchasing equipment such as boots, 
helmets, combat clothing, and body armor with insufficient 
focus on the seamless integration of these essential, 
lifesaving products. The committee is concerned that currently 
available items of personal protective equipment (PPE) and 
organizational clothing and individual equipment (OCIE) do not 
meet the specific and unique requirements for female 
warfighters and further improvements could be made to reduce 
the weight of PPE and OCIE.
    The committee believes that the new Department of Defense 
policy presents an opportunity for the military departments to 
focus on the ``Warfighter as a System'' and properly address 
the unique needs of our female warfighters through a holistic 
acquisition strategy. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to produce a report delivered to the 
Senate Armed Services Committee no later than 90 days after the 
enactment of this Act outlining plans to provide innovative, 
lifesaving PPE and OCIE developed specifically for female 
warfighters. The report should include plans for budgeting, 
requirements, and procurement of female-specific equipment 
including helmets, combat uniforms, body armor, footwear, and 
other critical equipment categories. The report should include 
detailed plans on integrating the latest commercially available 
materials and advanced product design to lighten the load for 
all warfighters.

Item unique identification implementation and verification

    The committee remains very concerned that the Department of 
Defense (DOD) has failed to enforce its own policy and strategy 
for improving asset tracking and in-transit visibility. 
Furthermore, the committee remains concerned that the DOD has 
failed to deliver its required report to the committee on the 
Defense Contract Management Agency's (DCMA) plan to foster the 
adoption, implementation, and verification of the Department's 
revised item unique identification (IUID) policy across the 
Department and the defense industrial base.
    The committee continues to support the DOD's goal of 
enhancing asset visibility with IUID, automatic identification 
technology, and automatic identification and data capture 
processes.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to certify to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives no later than September 1, 
2018, that the DCMA is complying with its own new policies, 
timelines, procedures, staff training, and equipment issuance 
to ensure contract compliance with the IUID policy for all 
items that require unique item level traceability at any time 
in their life cycle, to support counterfeit material risk 
reduction, and to provide for systematic assessment and 
accuracy of IUID marks as set forth by DOD Instruction 8320.04.

KC-46A aerial refueling tanker emergent requirements

    The KC-46A will serve as the backbone of the Air Force's 
critical aerial refueling mission for the next several decades, 
replacing the aging 1950s-era KC-135 Stratotanker fleet. The 
committee is aware that the Air Force has provided funding for 
numerous military construction projects at installations across 
the country to prepare for the delivery and bed down of the 
aircraft.
    However, the committee is concerned that as the KC-46A 
program matures and requirements become better defined, 
additional military construction and facilities, sustainment, 
restoration and modernization (FSRM) funding is necessary to 
properly support the fielding of the aircraft, house additional 
personnel, and meet unforeseen requirements of the tanker 
mission. The committee strongly encourages the Air Force to 
review and validate new and emergent requirements and prepare 
to provide additional military construction and FSRM funding in 
its budget request for fiscal year 2019.

Lithium-ion powered devices

    The committee commends the Navy's steps to limit the 
possession, use, and stowage of certain devices containing 
lithium-ion batteries aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, 
boats, craft, and heavy equipment. This policy change is in 
response to reports of lithium-ion batteries overheating and 
igniting--causing dangerous explosions that lead to physical 
harm and material damage. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to extend the Navy's policy, which 
prohibits the possession, use, and stowage of certain lithium-
ion powered devices aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, boats, 
craft, and heavy equipment, across the services to include 
other relevant weapon systems to ensure servicemembers' and 
equipment are protected from unnecessary harm. The committee 
recommends that the Department establish similar policies for 
other potentially damaging lithium-ion powered devices that may 
threaten readiness.

Marine Corps cold-weather and high altitude training

    The committee understands the United States Marine Corps 
has a nearly 70-year history with cold-weather and mountain 
warfare training at the Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training 
Center (MCMWTC) at Bridgeport, California. The committee 
further understands that the MCMWTC--which spans 46,000 acres 
in the Toiyabe National Forest--provides U.S. servicemembers 
and allied partners with the critical training and basic skills 
needed to conduct combat operations as a component of a Marine 
Air Ground Task Force or other task force in mountainous, high 
altitude, and cold weather environments. The committee notes 
that in a first of its kind operation in January of 2017, the 
Marine Corps deployed approximately 300 Marines to Norway to, 
among other things, improve their ability to fight in the 
Arctic cold.
    Following a visit in July of 2016 by General Robert Neller, 
the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the committee is aware that 
the Marine Corps is now examining the rotational deployment of 
up to a battalion of U.S. Marines to Alaska for similar cold-
weather, high-altitude, and mountainous training. The committee 
is aware that the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC) 
has 2,490 square miles of land space, 65,000 square miles of 
available airspace, and 1.5 million acres of maneuver land. The 
committee is further aware that the JPARC allows for robust 
ground training including Air Assault, Deploy/Redeploy, 
Electronic Warfare, Full Spectrum, Individual and Small Unit, 
Large-Scale Joint Force, Live Fire, and Mounted and Dismounted 
Maneuver operations, among many others. The committee 
recognizes that Alaska's unique strategic location and its 
existing aerial ports of debarkation/seaports of debarkation 
provide deployed and stationed forces with power projection and 
rapid contingency response capabilities into three geographic 
combatant commands--U.S. Northern Command, U.S. European 
Command, and U.S. Pacific Command.
    The committee, recognizing the unique training 
opportunities offered in the JPARC, applauds this effort by the 
Marine Corps to augment and diversify its existing cold-
weather, high-altitude, and mountainous training.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the Marine 
Corps to complete its examination of the deployment of Marines 
to Alaska and directs the Marine Corps to brief the 
congressional defense committees upon completion of its 
examination.

Master plan and investment strategy for the modernization of public 
        shipyards under jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy

    The committee notes that in April 2013, the Department of 
the Navy submitted a report to Congress pursuant to the 
requirements in section 2865 of the Fiscal Year 2012 National 
Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 112-81) with an 
investment plan to address the facilities and infrastructure 
requirements at each public shipyard under the jurisdiction of 
the Department of the Navy.
    The report included analysis that the $3.5 billion total 
maintenance backlog consisted of over 1,000 buildings at the 
four public shipyards. Of those, 53 mission-essential 
facilities were in poor condition and consisted of $1.2 billion 
of the total value, with an additional 30 mission-essential 
facilities on the verge of being rated as in poor condition. 
The committee also notes that the $3.5 billion facility 
maintenance backlog does not include the cost of modernizing 
shipyard utilities, which have been experiencing unplanned 
outages that can disrupt aircraft carrier and submarine 
availability schedules.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy is 
investing in existing facilities that may not be ideally 
designed, placed, sized, or configured to support the current 
work processes, leading to inefficiencies in ship repair 
functions. The 2013 Navy report states that, ``Much of the 
naval shipyard infrastructure was designed for World War II-era 
ship construction rather than modern nuclear-powered ship 
repair processes, which reduce their efficiency in repairing 
today's ships.'' Yet, 27 of the 29 projects listed for the 
Naval shipyards are repairs of existing, inefficient 
facilities. More than half are simple repairs that address only 
one component of a building without addressing overall 
renovations to improve the mission effectiveness of the 
facility. In order for resources to be expended prudently for 
maximum benefit for shipyard operations, the Department must 
first review industrial processes, logistics streams, and 
workload distribution to develop a facilities plan, which 
consolidates and optimizes ship repair processes.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to submit a report by February 1, 2018, on an engineering 
master plan for the optimal placement and consolidation of 
facilities and major equipment to support ship repair functions 
at each shipyard and an investment strategy to address the 
facilities, major equipment, and infrastructure requirements at 
each public shipyard under the jurisdiction of the Department 
of the Navy. The report shall include, but not be limited to, 
the following elements: (1) A review of current and projected 
workload requirements for ship repairs to assess efficiencies 
in the use of existing facilities including consideration of 
new ship characteristics, obsolescence of facilities, siting of 
facilities and equipment, and various constrained process 
flows; (2) An analysis of life-cycle costs to repair and 
modernize existing mission-essential facilities versus the cost 
to consolidate functions into modern, right-sized waterfront 
facilities to meet current and programmed future mission 
requirements; (3) A review of the progress made in prioritizing 
and funding projects that facilitate implementation of the hub 
concept for ship repair in order to improve process 
efficiencies, consolidate, and contribute to availability cost 
and schedule reductions; (4) A master plan for each shipyard 
incorporating the results of a review of industrial processes, 
logistics streams and workload distribution required to support 
ship repairs at each shipyard and the facilities requirements 
to support optimized processes; and (5) An updated investment 
strategy planned for each public shipyard, including timelines 
to complete the master plan for each shipyard, a list of 
projects and brief scopes of work, and cost estimates necessary 
to complete projects for mission essential facilities.

Military training for operations in densely populated urban terrain

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to 
the congressional defense committees a report no later than 
March 1, 2018 on plans and initiatives to enhance existing 
urban training concepts, capabilities, and facilities that 
could provide for new training opportunities that would more 
closely resemble large, dense, heavily populated urban 
environments. The report shall include specific plans and 
efforts to provide for a realistic environment for the training 
of large units with joint assets and recently fielded 
technologies to exercise new tactics, techniques, and 
procedures, including consideration of anticipated urban 
military operations in or near the littoral environment and any 
relevant cyber vulnerabilities.
    The report shall also include consideration of multiple 
training facility options and the costs and benefits associated 
therewith, including non-traditional options, such as leased 
facilities and National Guard facilities or other facilities 
owned or operated by a state government. The committee notes 
that there has been sustained congressional interest in 
improving joint urban training strategies and capabilities for 
more than two decades and encourages the Department to draw 
upon the results of past studies on this matter.
    The report shall be submitted in unclassified form but may 
include a classified annex.

Navy dry dock capacity

    No later than September 30, 2018, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees that assesses depot-level ship maintenance 
capacity in the public shipyards. The report should capture any 
projected capacity shortfall and evaluate potential strategies 
to match the industrial capacity of the public shipyards to 
future fleet maintenance requirements. Further, the report 
should recommend courses of action that include timeframes and 
funding requirements.

Organic depot capacity and interoperability

    The committee remains concerned that significant 
maintenance backlogs exist in the organic industrial base, 
particularly in the case of the F/A-18 Hornet A-D legacy 
models. The committee believes that additional capacity for 
such backlogs could be achieved through the expansion of cross-
service depot maintenance operations.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to assess the feasibility of expanding cross-service depot 
maintenance within the organic industrial base to avoid future 
backlogs, particularly in the case of the F/A-18 Super Hornet 
E-F models. The committee recommends the Department to consider 
using the F/A-18 Hornet A-D legacy models as a test case for 
this assessment, along with any other platforms the Department 
deems appropriate.

Paint training programs

    The committee believes that maximum efficiency is critical 
for more than 350 military paint facilities that perform 
painting and coating operations, including corrosion prevention 
and control, radar absorption, and camouflage. The committee 
understands that the Department's operations require stringent 
specifications for the coating of each piece of equipment.
    The committee understands paint training programs provide 
training for military painters and coating operations. The 
committee notes paint training programs can save the Department 
time and funding resources by using advanced technology and 
equipment along with hands-on training to effectively apply 
coatings and reduce waste. Additionally, increasing coating 
transfer efficiency and preventing corrosion and rework can 
improve asset readiness. Furthermore, the committee understands 
that paint training programs consistently update to the latest 
advancements in coatings, application equipment, and 
technology. Lastly, the committee notes that the paint training 
programs have trained hundreds of military and contract 
painters, serving all of the military departments.

Processes for translating strategy into force structure and readiness 
        decisions

    The committee notes that the Defense Planning Guidance 
(DPG) outlines the Department of Defense's (DOD) priority 
missions, force-sizing construct, major force planning 
assumptions, and key capabilities to help size and shape the 
future joint force to meet the National Military Strategy. The 
DPG's main objectives are to ensure that sufficient 
capabilities essential to the success of future operations are 
being developed by the components and reflected in the 
President's budget request.
    In 2010, DOD began bundling scenarios into Integrated 
Security Constructs (ISCs), which were intended to allow the 
services to make trade-off decisions when faced with competing 
demands. The 2015 National Military Strategy suggested that DOD 
has consumed readiness as quickly as it has been generated for 
nearly a generation and that DOD is taking action to better 
balance achieving immediate operational goals with improving 
readiness for future operations. Over time, DOD has varied the 
way it applies plans and scenarios to determine readiness 
requirements. These different approaches to making force 
structure and readiness decisions can directly affect, among 
other things, the funding for weapons systems, maintenance, 
personnel, and training that are needed.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States not later than May 1, 2018 to evaluate the 
extent to which DOD is translating strategy into guidance and 
force structure from a joint versus service-specific approach. 
The Government Accountability Office review should assess: (1) 
In the absence of approved ISCs and scenarios, what approaches 
are the military services using for force structure planning 
and sizing; (2) How are the military services applying plans 
and scenarios to determine readiness requirements and what are 
the associated assumptions and business rules; (3) To what 
extent do DOD and the Joint Staff have visibility over the 
services' approaches for making force structure and readiness 
decisions in order to weigh potential tradeoffs, mitigate 
risks, and become more efficient across the joint force; and 
(4) How the DPG gives guidance on doctrine, required 
capabilities and shortfalls, force structure, and training to 
ensure the service secretaries are meeting their title 10 
responsibilities of man, train, and equip.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to brief the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate 
and House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2018, on 
its preliminary findings.

Report on F-35 Joint Strike Fighter sustainment affordability and 
        transparency

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense's 
(DOD) sustainment strategy for the Joint Strike Fighter is not 
linked closely to the military services' budgets that provide 
the necessary funding for the projected $1.0 trillion in 
operating and support costs of the program, thus contributing 
to the lack of transparency and misalignment of responsibility 
and accountability that has plagued the program from its 
inception. In 2014, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
reported that while DOD has begun some cost-savings efforts and 
established sustainment affordability targets for the F-35 
program, DOD did not use the military services' budgets to set 
these targets. Therefore, these targets may not be 
representative of what the services can realistically afford 
and do not provide a clear benchmark for DOD's cost-savings 
efforts. While the committee is encouraged by the Department's 
attention on cost reduction efforts, until the budgets of the 
services actually inform the affordability targets the 
Department is trying to achieve, there is no way to ensure that 
any cost savings will actually result in a sustainment strategy 
that will be affordable. The current strategy lacks the 
transparency necessary for an efficient and effective use of 
taxpayer dollars by the services that are actually operating 
and funding sustainment. Continuing the current practice of 
having the F-35 Joint Program Office handing a bill to the 
services during execution fails to incorporate the services' 
budgetary input to guide sustainment decisions, prioritize 
requirements, and identify potential areas for savings.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2018, a 
report on the Department's plan for improving the transparency 
and affordability of the sustainment strategy for the F-35 
Joint Strike Fighter. The required report shall include the 
following elements: (1) a description of affordability 
constraints linked to, and informed by, military service 
budgets to help guide sustainment decisions, prioritize 
requirements, and identify additional areas of savings; (2) an 
explanation of the processes in place and steps taken to ensure 
that the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air 
Force have full transparency of the F-35 sustainment costs that 
they are funding, and the corresponding capabilities provided, 
in order to support their own affordability initiatives; and 
(3) any other matter deemed relevant by the Secretary of 
Defense.

Report on required training capabilities of the Fallon Range Training 
        Complex

    The committee recognizes the undeniably vital contribution 
the Fallon Range Training Complex (FRTC) makes to the readiness 
of our nation's forces, especially our Naval Strike Warfare and 
Naval Special Warfare units. As the only location where an 
entire carrier air wing can train together as they fight, the 
Fallon ranges are irreplaceable for Naval Aviation. However, 
current land and airspace restrictions limit the realism of the 
training environment. The Navy is in the early stages of 
developing a plan to address the looming 2021 expiration of the 
current Fallon Range land withdrawal. During this transition, 
the committee believes that it is necessary to modernize the 
FRTC, particularly the expansion of usable land and airspace.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Naval 
Operations to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees, by February 1, 2018, describing the required 
training capabilities of the Fallon Range Training Complex. The 
required report should include: (1) an overview of current 
training capabilities of the FRTC; (2) the training 
requirements that need to be met by the FRTC; (3) proposed 
improvements to the land and airspace of the FRTC; (4) proposed 
capability upgrades for the FRTC; and (5) the impacts of not 
modernizing the FRTC, in terms of both space and capabilities. 
The required report shall be unclassified, but may contain a 
classified annex.

Report on small arms industrial base

    In 2010, the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2011 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 small arms production 
industrial base (SAPIB).
    In 2015, the committee included directive report language 
entitled ``Small Arms Production Industrial Base'' within the 
report to accompany the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). This directed the 
Secretary of Defense in coordination with the senior military 
services acquisition executives, to provide a briefing to the 
Committees on Armed Services on the current state of the SAPIB, 
as well as on the effect the repeal is having on the current 
SAPIB.
    The committee believes the briefing provided by the Army 
was insufficient. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with senior military 
services acquisition executives, to submit a report to the 
Armed Services Committees of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives no later than January 15, 2018, on the state of 
the SAPIB. At a minimum, this report shall: (1) identify 
critical small arms systems and items; (2) describe the 
department's strategy for preserving a stable SAPIB in the 
areas of development, production, maintenance and competitive 
contracting; (3) describe the use of science and technology, 
small business programs, and organic depot activities to 
improve and enhance quality, delivery, competition, engineering 
and capability.

Review of corrosion control and prevention in the Department of Defense

    The committee notes that the negative effects of corrosion 
continue to cost the Department of Defense (DOD) over $22.0 
billion annually. The committee is concerned that the military 
departments have not adequately funded their corrosion control 
and prevention activities nor have all the military services 
placed the appropriate emphasis on their corrosion executives.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate the: (1) Results of resourcing 
efforts for corrosion executives in the military departments; 
(2) Corrosion prevention office and the corrosion control and 
prevention executives' oversight roles in implementing 
corrosion prevention and control planning on acquisition and 
sustainment programs; (3) Extent of interagency working groups 
to include DOD that are focused on the potential application 
and implementation of infrastructure corrosion prevention and 
mitigation technologies government-wide.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to brief the committee not later than March 1, 2018, on 
its preliminary findings.

Review of minimum capital investment for certain depots

    The committee notes that section 2476 of title 10, United 
States Code, requires that each fiscal year, the Secretary of a 
military department shall invest in the capital budgets of the 
covered depots of that military department a total amount equal 
to not less than 6 percent of the average total combined 
maintenance, repair, and overhaul workload funded at all the 
depots of that military department for the preceding three 
fiscal years. Under the statute, the capital budget of a depot 
includes investment funds spent to modernize or improve the 
efficiency of depot facilities, equipment, work environment, or 
processes in direct support of depot operations, but does not 
include funds spent for sustainment of existing facilities, 
infrastructure, or equipment.
    However, exactly how the military departments determine the 
funds available for both investment and sustainment is unclear 
to the committee. If they are, for example, using the capital 
budget on sustainment, the military services may be 
substantially underfunding both their investment and 
sustainment requirements at the depots. The committee notes 
that the military depots should be receiving not less than 6 
percent of their total workload funding for investment actions 
alone; and funding for sustainment actions should be budgeted 
separately.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate to what extent the military 
departments are complying with the requirement in section 2476 
of title 10, United States Code, to invest in the capital 
budgets of covered depots a total amount equal to not less than 
6 percent of the average total combined maintenance, repair, 
and overhaul workload funded at all the depots for a military 
department for the preceding three fiscal years; and the extent 
to which the amounts identified for capital budget activities 
by the military departments were spent on sustainment of 
existing facilities, infrastructure, or equipment. The 
Comptroller General may also include other related matters as 
appropriate.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to brief the committee not later than March 30, 2018, on 
its findings.

Review of training for commanders that consult and interact with 
        federally recognized tribes

    The committee recognizes the significant effort and 
institutional knowledge required to maintain healthy working 
relationships between many domestic Department of Defense 
installations and the federally recognized tribes in the 
communities in which these installations are based.
    The committee recommends that the Department review the 
preparation given to Command Select List Designees, 
Installation Commanders, Garrison Commanders, and General 
Officers with assignment at installations that regularly engage 
with at least one geographically proximate federally recognized 
tribe.
    Specifically, the committee recommends that the Department 
review the pre-command course training provided to these 
leaders, specifically the training pertaining to the cultural 
history of any relevant federally recognized tribes to the 
installation, the treaty rights, if any, of such tribes and the 
legal implications for the installation, and the history of 
military and United States Government engagement with such 
tribes, and best practice communication and engagement 
strategies used for maintaining healthy working relationships 
with these tribes.

Ship and submarine depot maintenance

    The committee is concerned by challenges with maintaining 
the current Navy fleet of 276 ships. For example, the committee 
notes the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77) availability was 
scheduled for an eight-month availability that required 13 
months in 2016; USS Albany (SSN-753) took over 48 months to 
complete its 22-month maintenance availability and missed a 
deployment as a result; and the USS Boise (SSN-764) was 
originally scheduled for a 2016 public shipyard availability 
that was recently shifted to a 2019 private shipyard 
availability. In addition to the USS Boise, the Navy has also 
recently shifted the USS Montpelier (SSN-765) and USS Columbus 
(SSN-762) availabilities from public shipyards to private 
shipyards.
    The committee understands insufficient public shipyard 
capacity has led to cost inefficiency and delay, and the 
rescheduling of some submarine maintenance availabilities to 
private shipyards. The committee further understands the Navy 
does not anticipate eliminating the current maintenance backlog 
of 5.5 million man-days at public shipyards until 2023. The 
committee notes the latest Navy shipbuilding plan indicates the 
fleet will grow by 33 ships to 309 ships in 2023. The committee 
is concerned by the task of accomplishing the increased 
maintenance requirements while simultaneously eliminating a 
maintenance backlog that has continued to grow since 2011.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
House of Representatives a detailed plan to accomplish surface 
ship and submarine maintenance through fiscal year 2023. For 
this period, by fiscal year, this plan shall include: the 
planned maintenance workload by ship class, public and private 
shipyard workforce capacity based on recent demonstrated 
performance (i.e., performance factor), comparison of workload 
to workforce (adjusted for performance) for public and private 
shipyards by ship class, plans to shift maintenance from public 
to private shipyards, estimated costs, and budgeted costs in 
the fiscal year 2018 budget request. This plan shall be 
submitted with the fiscal year 2019 budget request.

Technology roadmap and comprehensive water strategy

    The committee remains concerned that the Department will 
continue to face long-term challenges related to its water 
requirements, coupled with the increased potential for security 
risks and destabilization impacts requiring the Department's 
response around the globe. While there has been much attention 
placed on the cyber vulnerabilities of energy use and the 
fragility of the electric grid, the committee believes a secure 
and reliable supply of water is essential to the Department's 
ability to perform its critical missions on its installations 
and in support of operational deployments.
    The Department has repeatedly informed the committee that 
roughly 80 percent of a logistical resupply convoy's weight 
consists of water and fuel in support of combat operations. On 
military installations, water demand can compete with the 
economies of local communities, especially in rural areas that 
experience drought and increased risk of wildfires. The 
Department needs to ensure it fully understands local water 
rights and access to sources of water.
    The committee strongly encourages the Department to develop 
the advanced technologies necessary to meet its requirements 
for water production, treatment, and purification, as well as 
capitalize on commercially available capabilities. For example, 
the Army has been able to reduce installation water use by 
roughly 4.4 billion gallons, save $11.0 million per year, and 
reduce total water requirements by roughly one-third through 
utilities privatization programs at 23 locations.
    Notably, university researchers at the Massachusetts 
Institute of Technology were recently able to develop a small 
device that harvests an individual's daily drinking water 
requirement from the atmosphere in arid environments, with no 
energy input other than natural sunlight. The committee 
strongly encourages the Department to pursue and field these 
types of advanced technologies to meet its water requirements.
    Accordingly, the Secretary of Defense shall, in 
coordination with the military departments and combatant 
commands, submit a technology roadmap to address capability 
gaps for water production, treatment, and purification and a 
comprehensive water strategy addressing research, acquisition, 
training, and organizational issues to the committee not later 
than May 1, 2018.
    The roadmap and strategy shall include but not be limited 
to identifying: (1) The projected global security impacts the 
Department will face in 2025 and beyond due to diminishing 
amounts of potable water; (2) Technologies and capabilities to 
produce, purify, and treat water on site from groundwater, 
surface water, or recycling used water, in order to reduce or 
eliminate demand for water resupply and distribution; (3) 
Technologies and capabilities for water production, 
purification, and treatment that are compact, portable, and use 
a low energy demand, to the maximum extent possible; (4) 
Technologies and capabilities that have the ability to readily 
provide potable water for distributed operations in remote 
areas and in the event of humanitarian assistance and disaster 
response (HA/DR) missions; (5) Holistic approaches to maximize 
water efficiencies on military installations and forward 
operating bases through the use of advanced technologies and 
capabilities; (6) The expanded use of third party financing and 
utilities privatization to sustain and recapitalize aging water 
infrastructure; (7) Lessons learned from previous utilities 
privatization contracts that will be used in future contract 
negotiations to ensure long-term water rights, security, 
conservation, and market opportunities; (8) Metrics to track 
water use and quantify savings to include the expanded use of 
water meters; (9) Risk mitigations to address the testing, 
identification, and remediation requirements for emerging 
contaminants and other water source vulnerabilities to ensure 
human health and safety standards are met; (10) Ways to 
incorporate lessons learned and best practices drawn from the 
past 15 years of combat operations and HA/DR missions; (11) 
Cooperation and collaboration opportunities with other 
agencies, non-government entities, academia, local communities, 
and foreign nations; (12) Infrastructure and other development 
funding requirements; (13) Policies and methods to monitor 
water market trends and how water market mechanisms are 
evolving over time to minimize the fully burdened cost of water 
to the Department; (14) Opportunities to acquire more subject 
matter expertise on water issues to identify future threats to 
mission performance; and (15) Any necessary legislative or 
policy change recommendations.
    The comprehensive strategy may also include a classified 
annex, if deemed appropriate.

Textile decisions

    As the Department of Defense continues its work to 
streamline military uniforms, both combat and dress uniforms, 
the committee recognizes the significant importance of a stable 
and domestic textile industrial base to produce garments for 
the country's warfighters.
    Therefore, the committee strongly encourages the Department 
to take into consideration such an impact upon the industrial 
base and its suppliers, including the small businesses that 
provide critical contributions, while making such decisions.

Third-party financed energy projects

    The committee continues to be strongly supportive of the 
Department's efforts to use third party financing mechanisms 
and other appropriate authorities for energy projects that 
improve installation resilience, increase the readiness and 
ability of the military services to deploy, and balance the 
stewardship of taxpayer funding since third-party financed 
projects have little upfront cost to the Department.
    Accordingly, the committee continues to strongly encourage 
DOD to continue to use third party financing mechanisms and 
other appropriate authorities to take full advantage of private 
sector financing for renewable and distributed energy projects 
that improve installation resilience, increase readiness and 
mission assurance, and offer cost savings. Lastly, the 
committee continues to strongly encourage DOD to prioritize 
resilience in its pursuit of projects and to leverage payment 
in kind options for black start capability in the event of grid 
outages whether through technologies like cyber-secure 
microgrids, additional feeder lines, islanded operations, or 
other appropriate assets.

Use of proximate airfields to support undergraduate pilot training 
        installations

    The committee is aware that Air Force Undergraduate Pilot 
Training (UPT) installations utilize nearby civilian airfields 
to accomplish parts of their training syllabus and as emergency 
landing sites. Partnerships with organizations operating 
civilian airfields already increase training opportunities and 
overall pilot training capacity. However, the committee 
believes there may be additional opportunities to improve 
cooperation and partnership covering proximate civilian 
airfields that could be beneficial to both Air Force and local 
communities.
    Therefore, not later than 90 days after the enactment of 
this act, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force 
to provide the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives a study on the feasibility of 
obtaining increased access to proximate civilian aviation 
facilities to: (1) expand Undergraduate Pilot Training capacity 
at civilian aviation facilities where cooperation agreements 
already are being used to meet throughput requirements; (2) to 
create additional surge capacity at such facilities; and (3) 
extend such agreements to additional proximate civilian 
aviation facilities.

Wargame for operations in the Arctic

    The committee supports the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
2016 Arctic Strategy, including the desired end-state for a 
``secure and stable region where U.S. national interests are 
safeguarded, the U.S. homeland is defended, and nations work 
cooperatively to address challenges.'' Given the continued 
involvement and expanding footprint of Russia and other 
nations, including U.S. allies in the Arctic, harsh weather 
conditions, and the potential for increased oil and gas 
exploration, the committee remains concerned that the rapidly 
changing strategic waterway is a potential driver of 
instability, requiring the Department to be prepared to 
incorporate any changes in the comprehensive domain awareness 
in DOD planning.
    Additionally, the committee is concerned that a lack of 
icebreaker ships and the challenges of constructing other 
permanent infrastructure in the Arctic may limit DOD's ability 
to operate and ensure regional access given the evolving 
security threats, icebreaker capabilities of Russia and other 
nations, and the evolving physical environment.
    The committee believes that DOD, other U.S. federal 
agencies, and U.S. allies and partners need to ensure they can 
operate with sustainable proficiency in the high latitudes of 
the Arctic region, just as they prepare for operations in every 
other region around the world. The committee is also concerned 
that coastal erosion rates that were projected by the Air Force 
not to occur until 2030 and 2040 have already been observed, 
which threatens DOD's existing early warning radar 
infrastructure.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to conduct an Arctic wargame to assess the strategy, 
assumptions, and capabilities of the United States Northern 
Command to secure, stabilize, and assure access to all 
international waters, airspace, and homeland approaches in the 
Arctic. The wargame and appropriate tabletop exercises shall 
include, but not be limited to: (1) Necessary infrastructure 
and regional-specific capabilities for DOD operations in the 
Arctic, to include icebreakers and communications improvements; 
(2) Potential mechanical and maintenance constraints of the 
current class of U.S. Navy and Coast Guard ships, submarines, 
ground vehicles, equipment, and aircraft, to include unmanned 
systems, operating in the Arctic, given the temperatures, 
weather, and opening of new transportation routes; (3) Regional 
implications of American icebreakers and other allied and 
partner forces operating in the region in the event of new 
commercial ship traffic transiting the Arctic during 30 to 60 
days of free water access; and (4) Necessary updates to 
concepts of operations, tactics, techniques, and procedures, 
rules of engagement, protections for regional-specific 
indigenous communities, potential new navigation routes, and 
search and rescue requirements.
    Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary shall convey to the congressional 
defense committees the findings of the Arctic wargame.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Active-Duty end strengths for fiscal year 2018, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2018                  Change from
                                                  FY 2017  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2018       FY 2017
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army..........................................     476,000    476,000         481,000     +5,000          +5,000
Navy..........................................     323,900    327,900         327,900          0          +4,000
Marine Corps..................................     185,000    185,000         186,000     +1,000          +1,000
Air Force.....................................     321,000    325,100         325,100          0          +4,100
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................   1,305,900  1,314,000       1,320,000     +6,000         +14,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2018, as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2017                  Change from
                                                  FY 2017  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2018       FY 2017
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................     343,000    343,000         343,500       +500            +500
Army Reserve..................................     199,000    199,000         199,500       +500            +500
Navy Reserve..................................      58,000     59,000          59,000          0          +1,000
Marine Corps Reserve..........................      38,500     38,500          38,500          0               0
Air National Guard............................     105,700    106,600         106,600          0            +900
Air Force Reserve.............................      69,000     69,800          69,800          0            +800
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................     813,200    815,900         816,900     +1,000          +3,700
Coast Guard Reserve...........................       7,000      7,000           7,000          0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the reserves 
        (sec. 412)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2018, as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2018                  Change from
                                                  FY 2017  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2018       FY 2017
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................      30,155     30,155          30,155          0               0
Army Reserve..................................      16,261     16,261          16,261          0               0
Navy Reserve..................................       9,955     10,101          10,101          0            +146
Marine Corps Reserve..........................       2,261      2,261           2,261          0               0
Air National Guard............................      14,764     16,260          16,260          0           +1496
Air Force Reserve.............................       2,955      3,588           3,588          0            +633
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................      76,351     78,626          78,626          0           +2275
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military technicians (dual status) for the reserve components 
of the Army and Air Force for fiscal year 2018, at the 
following levels: Army National Guard: 22,294; Army Reserve: 
6,492; Air National Guard: 19,135; and Air Force Reserve: 
8,880. These authorizations reflect the conversion of 12.6 
percent of the technician population, as requested in the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, to civilian employees under 
section 3101 of title 5, United States Code, or section 1601 of 
title 10, United States Code as authorized elsewhere in this 
Act to reflect the requirements of section 1084 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328).
    The committee notes that the same number of personnel are 
available for full-time support of the reserve components of 
the Army and the Air Force through the combination of military 
technicians (dual status) and employees under section 3101 of 
title 5, United States Code, or section 1601 of title 10, 
United States Code. The budgetary authorization for full-time 
support remains the same. Further, the committee has not 
reduced either the overall Selected Reserve end strength or 
budgetary authority for civilian personnel relative to this 
conversion.
Fiscal year 2018 limitation on number of non-dual status technicians 
        (sec. 414)
    The committee recommends a provision that would set the 
limit on the number of non-dual status technicians who may be 
employed in the Department of Defense as of September 30, 2018, 
at zero to reflect the requirements of section 1084 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) converting non-dual status technicians to civilian 
employees under section 3101 of title 5, United States Code, or 
section 1601 of title 10, United States Code, by no later than 
October 1, 2017.
Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for 
        operational support (sec. 415)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
limits on the number of reserve personnel authorized to be on 
Active Duty for operational support under section 115(b) of 
title 10, United States Code, as of September 30, 2018, as 
shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2018                  Change from
                                                  FY 2017  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2018       FY 2017
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................      17,000     17,000          17,000          0               0
Army Reserve..................................      13,000     13,000          13,000          0               0
Navy Reserve..................................       6,200      6,200           6,200          0               0
Marine Corps Reserve..........................       3,000      3,000           3,000          0               0
Air National Guard............................      16,000     16,000          16,000          0               0
Air Force Reserve.............................      14,000     14,000          14,000          0               0
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................      69,200     69,200          69,200          0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of members of the National Guard on full-time duty in support of 
        the reserves within the National Guard Bureau (sec. 416)
    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
number of personnel authorized to be on full-time duty in 
support of the reserves within the National Guard Bureau to not 
exceed the number equal to six percent of the number authorized 
by section 412 of this Act.

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Military personnel (sec. 421)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for military personnel at the levels identified 
in section 4401 of division D of this Act.

                              Budget Items

Military personnel funding changes
    The amount authorized to be appropriated for military 
personnel programs include the following changes from the 
budget request:

                    [Changes in millions of dollars]
 
 
 
Military Personnel Underexecution.....................          -1083.37
Public-Private partnership on military spousal                      +1.0
 employment...........................................
Defense Innovation Board software development review..              +1.0
    Total.............................................         -1,081.37
 

    The committee recommends a total reduction in the Military 
Personnel (MILPERS) appropriation of $1,081.37 million. This 
amount includes: (1) A reduction of $1083.37 million to reflect 
the Government Accountability Office's most recent assessment 
of the average annual MILPERS underexecution; (2) An increase 
of $1.0 million to support a pilot program for a public-private 
partnership venture on military spousal employment overseas; 
and (3) An increase of $1.0 million for the Defense Innovation 
Board to conduct an analysis of software development and 
acquisition regulations for the Department of Defense.

Military Personnel Unfunded Priorities List

    The budget request included $141.7 billion for Military 
Personnel.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
submitted extensive Unfunded Requirements Lists totaling $33.1 
billion. The committee believes that since the passage of the 
Budget Control Act in 2011, budget requests have been guided by 
artificial constraints rather than the realities of the global 
strategic environment. This reality has continued for the 
fiscal year 2018 budget request, which too relies on an 
arbitrary number determined six years ago in the Budget Control 
Act. Such constraints on the budget, along with a sustained 
high operational tempo, have led to a significant degradation 
in our military readiness in the near term, and the threat that 
we will fall behind our adversaries in the long-term. For the 
last several years military leaders have highlighted these 
problems in great detail.
    In order to address the degraded state of our military and 
to stop the erosion of U.S. military advantage, the committee 
believes that the budget should be based on requirements, 
rather than arbitrary budget caps. The committee recommends an 
increase of $627.8 million to Military Personnel for items 
identified in the Unfunded Requirements List. Increases include 
growing the Army by 6,000 soldiers and the Marine Corps by 
1,000 Marines. Greater details of each increase can be found in 
the tables in Division D.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

Clarification of baselines for authorized numbers of general and flag 
        officers on active duty and in joint duty assignments (sec. 
        501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 526 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
Active-Duty and joint-duty assignment baselines for general and 
flag officers.
Authority of promotion boards to recommend officers of particular merit 
        be placed at the top of the promotion list (sec. 502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 616 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize an 
officer promotion board to recommend Active-Duty officers of 
particular merit be placed at the top of the promotion list to 
better incentivize talent by recognizing top performing 
officers with promotion timing based on merit rather than based 
solely on seniority.
Clarification to exception for removal of officers from list of 
        officers recommended for promotion after 18 months without 
        appointment (sec. 503)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 629 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
the requirement to remove officers from a list of officers 
recommended for promotion after 18 months without appointment 
does not apply when the military department concerned is not 
able to obtain and provide to the Senate the information the 
Senate requires to give its advice and consent to the 
appointment concerned because that information is under the 
control of a department or agency of the Federal Government 
other than the Department of Defense.
Flexibility in promotion of officers to positions of Staff Judge 
        Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps and Deputy Judge 
        Advocate General of the Navy (sec. 504)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 5046 and 5149 of title 10, United States Code, to 
retain prior flexibility in the promotion of officers to 
positions of Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the 
Marine Corps and Deputy Judge Advocate General of the Navy.
Repeal of requirement for specification of number of officers who may 
        be recommended for early retirement by a Selective Early 
        Retirement Board (sec. 505)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 638a of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the 
requirement that Service secretaries specify the number of 
officers who may be recommended for early retirement. This 
change would allow more effective management of retirement-
eligible senior officers who are not competitive for future 
promotion. Officers who have been passed over for promotion or 
who have at least 2 years time-in-grade and whose names are not 
on a list of officers recommended for promotion would be 
eligible for selective early retirement.
    The committee intends this authority to be used to ensure a 
high-quality senior officer population. Selective retirement 
authority allows the military services to create vacancies in 
the control grades of O-5 and O-6, thereby allowing high-
performing younger officers to promote more quickly in specific 
cases where the needs of the service dictate such authority to 
be used.
Extension of service-in-grade waiver authority for voluntary retirement 
        of certain general and flag officers for purposes of enhanced 
        flexibility in officer personnel management (sec. 506)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1370 of title 10, United States Code, to extend to 2025 
the authority to waive the time-in-grade requirement for 
certain general and flag officers for voluntary early 
retirement without reduction in grade of up to 10 percent of 
the authorized Active-Duty strength for officers in those 
grades for purposes of enhanced flexibility in officer 
personnel management.
Inclusion of Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of 
        the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics among 
        officers subject to repeal of statutory specification of 
        general officer grade (sec. 507)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3016 of title 10, United States Code, to remove the 
requirement that the Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics shall be a lieutenant general.
Clarification of effect of repeal of statutory specification of general 
        or flag officer grade for various positions in the Armed Forces 
        (sec. 508)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 502 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to clarify that the grade 
of an officer serving as of the date of the enactment of that 
Act in a position whose statutory grade is affected by an 
amendment made by section 502 may not be reduced after that 
date by reason of such amendment as long as the officer remains 
in continuous service in such position after that date.
    The committee also recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3084 of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the 
requirement that an officer appointed as Chief of the 
Veterinary Corps of the Army who holds a lower grade shall be 
appointed in the grade of brigadier general.
Grandfathering of retired grade of Assistant Judge Advocates General of 
        the Navy as of repeal of statutory specification of general and 
        flag officers grades in the Armed Forces (sec. 509)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that officers holding certain positions as of December 23, 
2016, whose statutory grade is affected by amendments made by 
section 502 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) may be retired in such 
grade with the retired pay of such grade, unless entitled to 
higher pay under another provision of law.
Service credit for cyberspace experience or advanced education upon 
        original appointment as a commissioned officer (sec. 510)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 12207 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
service secretaries to credit any person receiving an original 
appointment as a reserve commissioned officer with a period of 
constructive service. Constructive service would be credited to 
an individual for special experience or training in a 
particular cyberspace-related field or for any period of 
advanced education in a cyberspace-related field beyond the 
baccalaureate degree level. Constructive service credit can not 
exceed one year for each year of special experience, training, 
or advanced education, and not more than three years total 
constructive service may be credited. This authority is 
intended to allow the Defense Department to better recruit 
individuals with cyberspace-related skills into vacant critical 
cyberspace positions.
Authority for officers to opt-out of promotion board consideration 
        (sec. 510A)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
service secretaries to provide that an active and reserve 
component officer may, upon the officer's request, be excluded 
from consideration by a promotion selection board. The 
committee intends this authority be used to enable an officer 
to complete a desirable career broadening assignment or to 
develop additional technical expertise without harming future 
promotion potential.

Reauthorization of authority to order retired members to active duty in 
        high-demand, low-density assignments (sec. 510B)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 688a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
service secretaries to order retired military service members 
to active duty on a voluntary basis to meet critical manning 
needs. The period of active duty would be in accordance with an 
agreement between the member and the Secretary concerned. 
Activation under this authority is limited to 1,000 members. 
The authority to use section 688a of title 10, United States 
Code, expired on December 31, 2011. This authority would be 
reinstated for a 5-year period and would expire on December 31, 
2022. The committee expects that this authority will be used to 
address the pilot shortage.

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

Consolidation of authorities to order members of the reserve components 
        of the Armed Forces to perform duty (sec. 511)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 515 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to require the Secretary 
of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives by April 30, 2019, 
legislative proposals designed to implement alternative 
approaches to reducing the number of statutory authorities by 
which members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces may 
be ordered to perform duty to not more than eight statutory 
authorities grouped into four duty categories to which specific 
pay and benefits may be aligned.

Establishment of Office of Complex Investigations within the National 
        Guard Bureau (sec. 512)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 1101 of title 10, United States Code, to establish the 
Office of Complex Investigations within the National Guard 
Bureau under the authority, direction, and control of the Chief 
of the National Guard Bureau. The office would be organized, 
trained, equipped, and managed to conduct administrative 
investigations in order to assist the States in the 
organization maintenance, and operation of the National Guard 
for the following types of investigations: (1) allegations of 
sexual assault involving members of the National Guard; (2) 
circumstances involving members of the National Guard in which 
other law enforcement agencies within the Department of Defense 
do not have jurisdiction or authority to investigate; and (3) 
other circumstances as the Chief of the National Guard Bureau 
may direct.
    The committee remains highly concerned that the Office of 
Complex Investigations, as it currently operates, has a high 
level of investigative staff turn-over that exceeds 50 percent 
of its full-time support manning requirements on an annual 
basis. Therefore, it is the intent and expectation of the 
committee that the Office of Complex Investigations should be 
staffed in a manner that allows for multi-year tours for 
members of the National Guard on active duty or full-time 
National Guard duty for the purposes of service with the Office 
of Complex Investigations. The committee directs the Chief of 
the National Guard Bureau to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, no 
later than April 1, 2018, a status report on the official 
establishment of the Office of Complex Investigations that lays 
out the manning documents and turn-over rates for such office.

                Subtitle C--General Service Authorities

Report on policies for regular and reserve officer career management 
        (sec. 516)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
no later than March 1, 2018, with recommendations for 
mechanisms that would: (1) Increase the ability of officers to 
repeatedly transition between Active-Duty and Reserve active-
status throughout the course of their military careers; (2) 
Provide additional flexibility in managing the populations of 
officers in the grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and 
colonel and Navy grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and 
captain; (3) Utilize the modernized retirement system provided 
by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92) to encourage officers to pursue careers of 
lengths that vary from the traditional 20-year military career; 
(4) Create alternative career tracks for officers that 
encourage and facilitate the recruitment and retention of 
officers with technical expertise; (5) Develop a career and 
promotion path for officers in cyber-related officer 
specialties; (6) Ensure the officer corps does not become 
disproportionately weighted in the field grade officer ranks; 
and (7) Any other matters the Secretary considers appropriate 
to improve the effective recruitment, management, and retention 
of regular and reserve officers of the Armed Forces.
    This report is the committee's first step in a 
comprehensive review of the military officer personnel system 
for both the active and reserve components. The committee 
recognizes that military officer careers today are largely 
managed according to regulations, laws, and traditions 
established many decades ago, which may no longer be effective 
in recruiting and retaining the high-quality talent required to 
succeed against future threats. The Defense Officer Personnel 
Management Act (DOPMA) of 1980 (Public Law 96--513) and the 
Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) of 1995 
codified Active-Duty and Reserve officer management based on 
fixed career- and promotion-time parameters that inhibit 
flexibility and the adoption of modern talent management 
principles. DOPMA and ROPMA mandate predetermined promotion 
timelines and statutory limits on the number of officers 
serving in field grade ranks. This results in an up-or-out 
promotion structure and an, oftentimes, one-size-fits-all 
officer career.
    Additionally, the committee notes that DOPMA and ROPMA 
advanced important reforms that helped to build an officer 
corps that remains exceedingly capable. These statutes imparted 
crucial discipline into the management of field grade officers, 
which ensures the officer corps does not become 
disproportionately represented by senior ranking officers. 
DOPMA had the laudable goal of simplifying and standardizing 
officer promotion practices across all military departments, 
while also ensuring adequate and competitive opportunities for 
continued officer advancement. These goals remain important, 
but as the nature of military service has evolved, particularly 
over the last 16 years of extended overseas engagement, the 
committee believes the policies dictated by DOPMA and ROPMA 
should be carefully reviewed to ensure that they do not 
unnecessarily complicate officer career management and dissuade 
some highly talented officers from joining or continuing their 
military service.
    In particular, as a result of maintaining separate active 
and reserve officer management statutes, the committee notes 
the challenge of creating a truly integrated active and reserve 
total force. Under DOPMA and ROPMA, separate, oftentimes 
duplicative, personnel bureaucracies manage two distinct 
populations of officers (active and reserve) who are 
increasingly likely to serve alongside each other when deployed 
to a combat zone or when training for future conflicts. The 
committee plans to assess whether a more integrated approach 
would better serve the entire officer population and encourage 
a continuum of service among those officers who wish to 
continue to wear the uniform on Active Duty or in the reserves.
    The newly implemented blended retirement system presents an 
important opportunity for the military departments to 
reevaluate their personnel needs and supporting policies. As 
nearly every service member will now leave the military with 
some form of retirement benefit, the military should evaluate 
the necessity of the more-traditional 20-year military career. 
It is possible that the military would benefit from some 
officer careers extending far beyond 20-years while others 
should be much shorter. One of the key concerns of Congress in 
passing DOPMA was ensuring that those officers not selected for 
promotion, but close to the 20 years of service required for a 
military pension, be generally allowed to remain on Active Duty 
in their current grade. This resulted in some officers being 
retained on Active Duty beyond the military's requirement, 
solely so they could receive retirement benefits. The new 
blended retirement system allays that concern, as now nearly 
all new officers will receive some form of retirement benefit.
    The requirement to stand for promotion according to 
predetermined timelines is one of the hallmarks of DOPMA and 
ROPMA. To be competitive for promotion, officers frequently 
must serve in a variety of assignments for relatively short 
periods of time. This produces officers with great breadth of 
experience but who sometimes lack important depth. In some 
career fields, like aviation, cyber, and acquisition it may be 
more desirable for officers to develop their technical skills 
rather than sprinting to gain the required breadth of 
experience required to be competitive for promotion. New career 
tracks dedicated to producing officers with great technical 
expertise could be an important recruiting and retention tool 
for those personnel who possess valuable skills but are not 
well-suited to more traditional DOPMA-driven officer career 
paths.
    One of the principle features of DOPMA and ROPMA is the 
creation of strict quotas for the number of officers allowed to 
serve in the field grade ranks of major, lieutenant colonel, 
and colonel (lieutenant commander, commander, and captain for 
the Navy). These quotas ensure the military departments 
maintain a healthy balance of experienced and junior officers. 
However, to achieve the DOPMA-required field grade quotas and 
to make room for younger officers to continue to advance, some 
officers may be forced out of the military prematurely. This 
dynamic could be particularly damaging to more technically 
oriented career fields like cyber, acquisition, or aviation. 
Imparting some degree of flexibility in managing the field 
grade officer population could allow the military departments 
to retain both valuable experienced officers and promote 
deserving younger officers.
    The committee recognizes that the enduring success of the 
U.S. military, an all-volunteer force with a global mission, 
depends on its ability to harness the dynamism of American 
society to meet evolving strategic threats. As the United 
States confronts an increasingly challenging security 
environment, the military cannot afford to rely upon an overly 
prescriptive officer personnel system designed for a bygone 
era. The threats facing the nation are too unpredictable and 
complex to rely on one-size-fits-all officer management 
policies designed to win the Cold War.

Responsibility of Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces for standards and 
        qualifications for military specialties within the Armed Forces 
        (sec. 517)

    The Committee recommends a provision that would vest in the 
Chief of Staff of each of the Armed Forces the responsibility 
for establishing, approving, and modifying the criteria, 
standards, and qualifications for military specialty codes 
within that Armed Force. The Secretary of Defense will still 
retain oversight authority.

Confidential review of characterization of terms of discharge of 
        members of the Armed Forces who are survivors of sexual assault 
        (sec. 518)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 79 of title 10, United States Code, to establish a new 
section 1554b that would codify section 547 of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) that required 
service secretaries to establish a confidential process by 
which an individual who was the victim of a sex-related offense 
during military service may challenge, through boards for the 
correction of military records, the terms or characterization 
of the discharge or separation of the individual from the 
military on the grounds that the terms or characterization were 
adversely affected by the individual being the victim of such 
an offense. The provision also changes the terminology of the 
provision by substituting ``survivor'' for ``victim'' 
throughout.

Improvements to certain authorities and procedures of discharge review 
        boards (sec. 519)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1553 of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the 15-
year statute of limitations on filing claims for review of a 
discharge or dismissal by service discharge review boards. The 
provision would also authorize presentation of evidence to the 
boards by telephone or video conference, to the extent 
reasonable and technically feasible.

Public availability of information related to disposition of claims 
        regarding discharge or release of members of the Armed Forces 
        when claims involve sexual assault (sec. 520)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1552 and 1553 of title 10, United States Code, to 
require boards for the correction of military records and 
discharge review boards to make publicly available on an 
internet website the number and disposition of decided claims 
in which sexual assault is alleged to have contributed in whole 
or in part to the characterization of a claimant's discharge or 
release from the military.

                  Subtitle D--Military Justice Matters

Revision to Manual for Courts-Martial with respect to dissemination of 
        visual depictions of private areas or sexually explicit conduct 
        without the consent of the person depicted (sec. 521)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
President, not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, to amend part IV of the Manual for 
Courts-Martial to include as an enumerated offense under 
section 934 of title 10, United States Code (article 134 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice), the distribution of a visual 
depiction of the private area of a person or of sexually 
explicit conduct involving a person that was (1) Photographed, 
videotaped, filmed, or recorded by any means with the consent 
of such person; and (2) Distributed by another person who knew 
or should have known that the depicted person did not consent 
to such distribution.

Technical and conforming amendments in connection with reform of the 
        Uniform Code of Military Justice (sec. 522)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical and conforming amendments in connection with the 
reform of the Uniform Code of Military Justice contained in 
division E of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).

Priority of review by Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces of 
        decisions of Courts of Criminal Appeals on petitions for 
        enforcement of victims' rights (sec. 523)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 806b of title 10, United States Code (article 6b(e)(3) 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), to prioritize the 
review of a decision on a petition for a writ of mandamus in 
the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, as determined under 
the rules of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

Assistance of defense counsel in additional post-trial matters for 
        accused convicted by court-martial (sec. 524)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 838 of title 10, United States Code (article 38 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), to clarify that in 
any court-martial proceeding resulting in a conviction, the 
defense counsel may assist the accused in the submission of any 
matter under section 860, 860a, or 860b of title 10 (article 
60, 60a, or 60b, UCMJ).

Enumeration of additional limitations on acceptance of plea agreements 
        by military judges of general or special courts-martial (sec. 
        525)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 853a of title 10, United States Code (article 53a of 
the Uniform Code of Military Justice), as added by section 5237 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328), to enumerate additional limitations on 
the acceptance of plea agreements by military judges of general 
or special courts-martial.

Additional proceedings by Courts of Criminal Appeals by order of United 
        States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (sec. 526)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 866 of title 10, United States Code (article 66 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice), as amended by section 5330 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328), to require the Court of Criminal Appeals 
to order a hearing or other proceeding if the Court of Appeals 
for the Armed Forces determines that additional proceedings are 
warranted.

Clarification of applicability and effective dates for statute of 
        limitations amendments in connection with Uniform Code of 
        Military Justice reform (sec. 527)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
applicability and effective dates for statute of limitations 
amendments in connection with the reform of the Uniform Code of 
Military Justice contained in division E of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328).

Modification of year of initial review by Military Justice Review Panel 
        of Uniform Code of Military Justice reform amendments (sec. 
        528)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 946 of title 10, United States Code (article 146 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice), as amended by section 5521 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328), to modify the year of initial review by 
the Military Justice Review Panel of Uniform Code of Military 
Justice reform amendments.

Clarification of applicability of certain provisions of law to civilian 
        judges of the United States Court of Military Commission Review 
        (sec. 529)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 950f of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
civilian judges appointed to the United States Court of 
Military Commission Review are authorized to engage in outside 
business activities, including the practice of law, when not 
performing the duties of a judge on the court.

Enhancement of effective prosecution and defense in courts-martial and 
        related matters (sec. 530)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 542 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to include an additional 
element in the program for effective prosecution and defense in 
courts-martial in order to ensure adequate supervision and 
oversight of trial and defense counsel. The provision would 
authorize assignment of civilian employees to provide such 
supervision. The provision would also require service 
secretaries to assess the feasibility of a military justice 
career track for judge advocates that leads to judge advocates 
with military justice expertise in the grade of colonel, or 
Navy captain. This pilot program would also include the use of 
skill identifiers to identify judge advocates for the program 
and guidance for promotion boards to ensure that judge 
advocates in the program have the same opportunity for 
promotion as other judge advocates being considered by such 
boards.

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces jurisdiction to review 
        interlocutory appeals of decisions on certain petitions for 
        writs of mandamus (sec. 531)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 806b of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to review for legal error 
a grant or denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus by a 
service Court of Criminal Appeals.

Punitive article on wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate 
        visual images or visual images of sexually explicit conduct 
        under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (sec. 532)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
subchapter X of chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code, to 
establish a new punitive article in the Uniform Code of 
Military Justice that would prohibit the wrongful broadcast or 
distribution of intimate visual images of another person or 
visual images of sexually explicit conduct involving a person.

   Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, Transition, and Resilience

Ready, Relevant Learning initiative of the Navy (sec. 541)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
certification, not later than October 1, 2017, and each year 
thereafter, regarding the Navy's Ready, Relevant Learning (RRL) 
initiative.
    The committee understands the Navy's RRL initiative, which 
will alter training for 76 of 87 Navy enlisted ratings, 
consists of three stages. The first stage, ``Block Learning,'' 
is intended to reorganize current Navy training and delivery 
methods into blocks that will be delivered closer to the time 
of actual use in a sailor's career. The second stage, 
``Enhanced, Accessible Learning,'' will modernize training 
content to deliver new content and media methods. The third 
stage, ``Anytime, Anywhere Learning,'' will align processes, 
standards and resources, as well as provide rapid, responsive 
training content.
    While recognizing the potential of the RRL initiative, the 
committee is concerned with the associated fiscal year 2017 
through 2021 savings of $1.3 billion, which is achieved through 
a reduction in student billets and results in 6,000 fewer 
student billets in fiscal year 2021. The committee understands 
the savings are largely attributable to a 30 percent reduction 
in time spent at ``A'' schools (i.e. initial rating training) 
and a 70 percent reduction in time spent at ``C'' schools (i.e. 
advanced rating training). The committee further understands 
that more than $1.0 billion of this reduction is being shifted 
to the Operations and Maintenance, Navy (OMN) account to 
procure modernized delivery material.
    The committee views Navy's RRL initiative as a fundamental 
transformation in training, based on more than 87 percent of 
Navy enlisted ratings being affected and the shift of more than 
$1.0 billion from traditional training billets to developmental 
software-based training applications (i.e. modernized 
delivery).
    Accordingly, the committee recommends the Secretary of the 
Navy provide an annual certification attesting that the 
transition to modernized delivery methods is complying with 
best practices, as well as meeting or exceeding the existing 
training delivery approach for all associated training 
requirements.

Element in preseparation counseling for members of the Armed Forces on 
        assistance and support services for caregivers of certain 
        veterans through the Department of Veterans Affairs (sec. 542)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1142(b) of title 10, United States Code, to include an 
element in servicemembers' preseparation counseling describing 
the assistance and support services for family caregivers of 
eligible veterans under the program conducted by the Secretary 
of Veterans Affairs pursuant to section 1720G of title 38, 
United States Code. Additionally, the provision would require 
the service secretaries, within 180 days of the date of the 
enactment of this Act, to permit a caregiver, at the election 
of the servicemember who may require caregiver services, to 
participate in appropriate sessions of the servicemember's 
preseparation counseling to become informed of assistance and 
support services available to caregivers and to understand 
better how the servicemember's transition to civilian life may 
impact the caregiver.

Discharge in the Selected Reserve of the commissioned service 
        obligation of military service academy graduates who 
        participate in professional athletics (sec. 543)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 4348(a), section 6959(a), and section 9348(a) of title 
10, United States Code, to provide for a graduate of a military 
service academy who is selected to participate in professional 
athletics to accept an appointment as a commissioned officer as 
a member of the Selected Reserve until completion of the 
commissioned service obligation.

Pilot programs on appointment in the excepted service in the Department 
        of Defense of physically disqualified former cadets and 
        midshipmen (sec. 544)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of each military department to carry out a pilot 
program for the purpose of evaluating the feasibility and 
advisability of allowing eligible individuals who cannot accept 
a commission or complete a period of Active Duty due to 
physical disqualification to fulfill an Active Duty service 
obligation through service as Department of Defense civilian 
employees in the excepted service. This pilot authority would 
sunset 4 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

Limitation on availability of funds for attendance of Air Force 
        enlisted personnel at Air Force officer professional military 
        education in-residence courses (sec. 545)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation or expenditure of funds for the purpose of Air 
Force enlisted personnel attending Air Force officer 
professional military education courses until the later of: (1) 
The date on which the Secretary of the Air Force submits to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, and to the Comptroller General of the United 
States, a report on the attendance of such personnel at such 
courses; (2) The date on which the Comptroller General of the 
United States submits to such committees a report setting forth 
an assessment of such report; or (3) 180 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    The committee is aware that the first group of enlisted 
airmen, four Chief Master Sergeants, graduated in Academic Year 
2016-2017 from the Air University's Air War College in-
residence program at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. The Air 
War College is the United States Air Force's premier officer 
professional military education program. The Air Force 
justifies its decision to allow in-residence attendance by 
senior enlisted personnel at officer professional military 
education courses by rationalizing a need for these enlisted 
personnel to attend a ``strategic-level school'' to get 
exposure to the same learning environment as officers. However, 
the committee has learned the four graduated Chief Master 
Sergeants are all being assigned to wing-level command chief 
positions rather than to strategic-level staff or agency 
positions.
    The committee understands that Chief Master Sergeants 
already gain ``strategic-level'' knowledge at the Chief's 
Leadership Course. By allowing senior enlisted personnel to 
attend officer professional education courses in-residence, the 
Air Force effectively reduces in-residence advanced 
professional military education opportunities for deserving 
officers.
    The committee is disappointed that even with the Congress' 
historically deep interest in professional military education, 
the Air Force failed to consult or even notify the 
congressional defense committees prior to directing the 
inclusion of enlisted members at a senior officer professional 
military education course. In addition, the committee 
understands the commandant of Air War College recently 
announced the attendance of 16 Chief Master Sergeants for the 
Academic Year 2017-2018 Air War College class; notification for 
which has also not yet been provided to the defense committees.

Pilot program on integration of Department of Defense and non-Federal 
        efforts for civilian employment of members of the Armed Forces 
        following transition from Active Duty to civilian life (sec. 
        546)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program, of 2 years 
duration, to assess the feasibility and advisability of 
assisting certain members of the Armed Forces transitioning 
from Active Duty to civilian life by accelerating and improving 
their access to employment through coordination, integration, 
and leveraging existing programs and authorities of the 
Department of Defense with programs and resources of state and 
local agencies, higher education institutions, employers, and 
other public, private, and nonprofit entities.

Two-year extension of suicide prevention and resilience program for the 
        National Guard and Reserves (sec. 547)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 10219(g) of title 10, United States Code, to extend the 
authority for suicide prevention and resilience programs for 
the National Guard and Reserves until October 1, 2020.

Sexual assault prevention and response training for all individuals 
        enlisted in the Armed Forces under a delayed entry program 
        (sec. 548)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
service secretaries, insofar as practicable, to provide 
training on sexual assault prevention and response to enlistees 
in a delayed entry program before they begin basic training or 
initial active duty for training in the Armed Forces.

Use of assistance under Department of Defense Tuition Assistance 
        Program for non-traditional education to develop cybersecurity 
        and computer coding skills (sec. 549)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
briefing by the Secretary of Defense, no later than 60 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on the feasibility and advisability of the 
enactment into law of using the Department of Defense Tuition 
Assistance Program for courses or programs of education in 
cybersecurity skills or related skills and computer coding 
skills or related skills.

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

             Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters

Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 551)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$10.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for 
impact aid payments for children with disabilities (as enacted 
by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-77; 20 U.S.C. 7703a) 
using the formula set forth in section 363 of the Floyd D. 
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-398), for continuation of Department of Defense 
assistance to local educational agencies that benefit eligible 
dependents with severe disabilities. Subsection (b) of the 
provision would allow the Secretary of Defense to use $5.0 
million, of the total amount authorized, for payments to local 
educational agencies with higher concentrations of military 
children with severe disabilities, at his discretion and 
without regard to the formula set forth in section 363 of the 
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).
    The committee directs the Secretary to develop a plan for 
the distribution of the funds authorized under subsection (b) 
of the provision and to provide to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
report on that plan by no later than December 31, 2017. The 
report shall identify those local educational agencies that 
would receive funding under that subsection along with a 
description of the unmet need of military children with severe 
disabilities in those locations, accounting for any funding 
such local educational agencies receive pursuant to the formula 
set forth in section 363 of the Floyd D. Spence National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398).

Continuation of authority to assist local educational agencies that 
        benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and 
        Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 552)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$25.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for 
continuation of the Department of Defense (DOD) assistance 
program to local educational agencies impacted by enrollment of 
dependent children of military members and DOD civilian 
employees.

One-year extension of authorities relating to the transition and 
        support of military dependent students to local educational 
        agencies (sec. 553)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 574(c)(3) of the John Warner National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364 (20 
U.S.C. 7703b note)) to extend the authorities relating to 
transition and support of military dependent students to local 
educational agencies from September 30, 2017, to September 30, 
2018.

               Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters

Housing treatment for certain members of the Armed Forces, and their 
        spouses and other dependents, undergoing a permanent change of 
        station within the United States (sec. 556)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations that permit 
certain servicemembers undergoing permanent change of station 
relocations within the United States to request special housing 
treatment for spouses and dependents. Under this provision, 
certain spouses and dependents would be: (1) Eligible to 
continue living in government-owned or government-leased 
housing; and (2) Eligible for early housing in government-owned 
or government-leased housing. This provision would also 
authorize a servicemember to be eligible, on a space-available 
basis, either for temporary use of government-owned or 
government-leased housing or an equitable basic allowance for 
housing if a spouse or other dependent relocates at a different 
time from the member. This provision would be effective on 
October 1, 2018.

Direct hire authority for Department of Defense for childcare services 
        providers for Department child development centers (sec. 557)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense with direct hire authority to recruit and 
appoint qualified childcare services providers to positions 
within the Department of Defense Child Development Centers. The 
Secretary shall prescribe the regulations required and commence 
implementation of such direct hire authority no later than May 
1, 2018.

Report on expanding and contracting for childcare services of the 
        Department of Defense (sec. 558)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
no later than March 1, 2018, on the feasibility and 
advisability of the following: (1) Expanding the operating 
hours of childcare facilities of the Department of Defense in 
order to meet childcare services requirements for swing-shift, 
night-shift, and weekend workers; (2) Using contracts with 
private-sector childcare services providers to expand the 
availability of childcare services; (3) Contracting with 
private-sector childcare service providers to operate childcare 
facilities of the Department on military installations; and (4) 
Expanding childcare services to members of the National Guard 
and Reserves if such expansion does not substantially increase 
costs of childcare services for the military departments or 
conflict with others who have higher priority for space in 
childcare services programs.

Report on review of General Schedule pay grades of childcare services 
        providers of the Department of Defense (sec. 559)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
no later than March 1, 2018, on a review of the General 
Schedule pay grades for childcare services provider positions 
within the Department of Defense. The committee remains 
concerned with the propensity of individuals to serve as 
childcare providers at Department of Defense facilities. 
Conducting a review of the General Schedule pay grades is 
required to ensure that the Department is offering a fair and 
competitive wage for these important force-enabling civilian 
positions.

Pilot program on public-private partnerships for telework facilities on 
        military installations outside the United States (sec. 560)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to assess the 
feasibility and advisability of providing telework facilities 
for military spouses on military installations outside the 
United States to the extent that space is available for such 
facilities. The provision would require the pilot program be 
conducted at no less than two military installations outside 
the United States selected by the Secretary for up to 3 years 
in duration, in consultation with the host nation. The pilot 
program shall be conducted as one or more public-private 
partnerships between the Department of Defense and a private 
corporation or partnership of private corporations with up to 
$1.0 million authorized to be available to carry out the pilot 
program. The committee expects the pilot programs to be 
conducted consistent with existing status of forces agreements 
with host nations or pursuant to appropriate modifications of 
such agreements.

Report on mechanisms to facilitate the obtaining by military spouses of 
        professional licenses or credentials in other States (sec. 561)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
no later than March 1, 2018, on the feasibility and 
advisability of the following: (1) The development and 
maintenance of a joint federal-state clearing house to process 
the professional license and credential information of military 
spouses; (2) The establishment of a joint federal-state 
taskforce dedicated to the elimination of unnecessary or 
duplicative professional licensure and credentialing 
requirements among the states; (3) The development and 
maintenance of an Internet website that serves as a one-stop 
resource on professional licenses and credentials for military 
spouses that sets forth license and credential requirements for 
common professionals in the states and provides assistance and 
other resources for military spouses seeking to obtain 
professional licenses or credentials in other States.

Additional military childcare matters (sec. 562)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to set and maintain the hours of 
operation of childcare development centers in a manner that 
considers the demands and circumstances of military service. In 
addition, the provision would require service secretaries to 
provide childcare coordinators at each military installation 
where significant numbers of servicemembers with accompanying 
dependent children are stationed.

                   Subtitle G--Decorations and Awards

Authority of Secretary of the Army to award the Personnel Protection 
        Equipment award of the Army to former members of the Army (sec. 
        571)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to award the Personnel Protection 
Equipment award of the Army to former members of the Army.

Authorization for award of Distinguished Service Cross to Specialist 
        Frank M. Crary for acts of valor in Vietnam (sec. 572)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the President to award the Distinguished Service Cross to 
Specialist Frank M. Crary for acts of valor while serving in 
Vietnam with Company D, 1st Battalion (Airborne), 12th Cavalry 
Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division on April 7, 1966.

                       Subtitle H--Other Matters

Modification of submittal date of Comptroller General of the United 
        States report on integrity of the Department of Defense 
        whistleblower program (sec. 581)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 536 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to revise the due date 
for the report required of the Comptroller General of the 
United States in that section concerning the Department of 
Defense whistleblower program to December 31, 2018.

Report to Congress on accompanied and unaccompanied tours of duty in 
        remote locations with high family support costs (sec. 582)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to initiate a comprehensive review of the 
policies for determining which posts are accompanied, which are 
unaccompanied, and the extent to which the costs to the 
taxpayers and security risks to family members are considered.
    The committee is concerned with the significant costs 
associated with maintaining accompanied tours at remote 
locations. The proposed new 52 family housing units on 
Kwajalein would cost over $1.3 million each. The proposed 
$250.0 million replacement hospital at Guantanamo Bay would 
cost $50.0 million per bed. Costs for school construction and 
support are also significantly higher at these remote locations 
than they are in the United States, which is a primary reason 
why locations such as Diego Garcia are unaccompanied.
    A report would be due to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 1 year after the enactment of this 
Act.

                       Items of Special Interest

Addressing challenges in remotely piloted aircraft community

    The committee has repeatedly expressed concern in the past 
regarding the projected shortfalls of pilots and sensor 
operators for remotely piloted aircraft (RPA). The committee 
notes that the Air Force provides the majority of RPA pilots 
and commends the Air Force for working aggressively to address 
this need.
    Department of Defense policy states personnel cannot be 
deployed at a ratio of more than one to one, deploy-to-dwell, 
without explicit approval by the Secretary of Defense. The 
policy also establishes a goal of a one-to-two deploy-to-dwell 
ratio when possible. Most RPA crew personnel are not considered 
``deployed'' under the current definition, yet they effectively 
fight in combat every day. Establishing a ``combat-to-dwell'' 
ratio for the RPA community has consistently been cited as a 
key means to reduce stress and create career opportunities for 
RPA personnel.
    Similarly, the committee is concerned about the promotion 
rates of RPA officers. The Government Accountability Office's 
2014 report, Actions Needed to Strengthen Management of 
Unmanned Aerial System Pilots, showed that RPA pilots were 
promoted at below average rates from 2006-2013 on most boards 
and on only 3 of the 24 boards were RPA pilots ``promoted in 
the top 50 percent of the career fields that competed.''
    The committee reiterates its commitment to ensuring the Air 
Force continues implementing initiatives identified by the RPA 
Culture and Process Improvement Program (CPIP). Therefore, not 
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a 
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives on the implementation of CPIP 
initiatives, progress toward meeting the 10:1 crew-to-combat 
line ratio and the 1:0.5 combat-to-dwell ratio, as well as 
future plans to ensure access to mental health professionals, 
childcare, housing, and other services at RPA bases meets the 
needs of the airmen stationed there.
    The committee also directs the Comptroller General of the 
United States to provide an update, with a report to follow, to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on the promotion rates of RPA pilots and sensor 
operators since its 2014 study. The update should determine if 
promotion rates have improved, factors leading to any current 
disparities in promotion rates of RPA officers, and 
recommendations to alleviate any disparity. Specifically, the 
update should include recommendations for how to increase (a) 
the selection of RPA officers for intermediate developmental 
education programs, and (b) the number of billets assigned to 
RPA pilots and sensor operators in the Rated Staff Allocation 
Plan (RSAP) to proportions comparable to that of fighter pilots 
and other fields.

DANTES program for members of the Armed Forces applying for tuition 
        assistance

    The committee remains supportive of the Department of 
Defense's Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education 
Support (DANTES) program. For servicemembers utilizing DANTES, 
there is a demonstrated record of success. DANTES provides 
servicemembers and their families access to additional 
financial aid resources and helps them obtain education 
support. The program also identifies credit-by-examination and 
entrance examination education programs for higher education. 
Most importantly, servicemembers using tuition assistance in 
combination with DANTES have a higher completion rate than 
those who are either unaware of the DANTES program or choose 
not to use it. The committee strongly encourages the Department 
to ensure that servicemembers who apply for tuition assistance 
receive information about this program during the tuition 
assistance application process.

Department of Defense collaboration with educational institutions on 
        cybersecurity education and training

    The committee remains concerned about the pipeline for 
cybersecurity professionals who can assist the Nation with 
cyber deterrence and operations. The committee strongly urges 
the Department of Defense to consider developing plans for a 
pilot program for the educational support offices at 
installations to partner with liberal arts institutions to 
provide transitioning military personnel cybersecurity degrees 
that focus on ethics, character, leadership, national security 
law, and communication. Additionally, the committee encourages 
the institutions within this network to work with the service 
academies to continue the curriculum development in 
cybersecurity to insure that current demands are met.

Department of Defense review of overseas assignment policy for civilian 
        and contractor personnel in support of Department of Defense 
        operations

    The committee remains highly concerned with the 
inconsistent overseas assignment policies that exist among the 
military, civilian, and contractor employee populations. 
Servicemembers assigned to accompany overseas tours must 
complete medical evaluations and obtain certifications that 
they and their dependents can live and work in environments 
where many specialized medical capabilities may not exist to 
meet their needs. Under current policy, however, there is no 
requirement for civilian and contractor employees to undergo 
the same medical screening policy. This inconsistency in policy 
overburdens the Department of Defense's finite medical, 
educational, and other family support resources when civilian 
and contractor personnel and their dependents with exceptional 
needs transfer overseas. This practice of inconsistent 
assignment policies strains the defense budget and impacts 
readiness.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
review of overseas assignment policies pertaining to civilian 
and contractor personnel in support of Department of Defense 
operations and to provide a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives no 
later than March 1, 2018, with the following information: (1) 
Policy changes the Secretary has made to align and clarify 
overseas assignment policies to ensure the medical screening 
requirements are the same for military members, civilian 
employees, contractors, and dependents of each category of 
employees; (2) Legislative changes necessary to match the 
policies pertaining to the medical screening of civilian and 
contractor personnel and their dependents to those pertaining 
to military personnel and their dependents; and (3) Any other 
information the Secretary determines to be relevant to medical 
screening of Department of Defense employees and dependents 
prior to overseas assignments.

Encouraging more flexibility in changes of station

    The committee remains concerned about the impact that 
frequent permanent changes of station can have on 
servicemembers and their families. The committee believes these 
moves--often tied to promotion criteria for servicemembers--can 
pose great challenges for military families. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Department to consider measures that 
would allow servicemembers who seek them to lengthen tours of 
duty and lessen the frequency of their permanent change of 
station moves without harming their promotion prospects to 
enhance military readiness and benefit retention of 
servicemembers.

Ensuring military borrowers receive appropriate benefits

    The committee notes that service members are exempt from 
paying interest on their federal student loans for the length 
of time served in an area of hostilities. Unfortunately, since 
2008, eligible service members have avoidably overpaid $100 
million dollars in federal student loan interest payments due 
to a lack of communication between the Department of Education, 
Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, and 
federal student loan servicers. Additionally, the committee 
notes that in accordance with the Higher Education Relief 
Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, service members 
enrolled in an income-driven repayment programs are eligible 
for a waiver from annual recertification obligations of their 
income. Service members with federal Perkins Loans are also 
eligible for a cancellation of a percentage of their debt, 
based on qualifying years of military service, in accordance 
with Section 465 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 
2008. Again, in both of these instances, too many eligible 
service members have not taken advantage of these benefits due 
to a lack of communication between the Department of Education, 
Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, and 
federal student loan servicers.
    The committee also notes that in recent years, the 
Departments of Defense and Education have proven that through 
additional coordination and information sharing with student 
loan servicers, the federal government can automate the 
benefits for which servicer members are eligible under the 
Servicemember Civil Relief Act and dramatically increase the 
number of service members who receive the benefits Congress 
intended them to receive--as demonstrated by the recent 
automation of the six percent rate cap for servicemembers. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of Education (including its 
student loan servicers), and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 
to make every practical effort to automate the application of 
student loan benefits available to eligible servicemembers 
using information in existing federal databases at the 
Departments of Education and Defense in a timely manner so 
service members can receive the benefits due under the law. The 
committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the 
Senate Committee on Armed Services on the plan of action for 
implementing this automation process by December 1, 2017.

Greater discretion to garrisons for Family, Morale, Wellness, and 
        Recreation programs

    The committee is concerned about the process by which 
Family, Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (FMWR) programs are 
being selected for termination, particularly in the Army, as it 
relates to the needs of remote and isolated installations. 
Installation commanders should play a greater role in 
identifying programs and facilities worthy of MWR investment or 
sustainment. The committee urges the Installation Management 
Command (IMCOM) to provide greater discretion and to consult to 
the maximum extent practicable with garrison commanders, 
especially those at remote and isolated installations, to 
ensure that servicemembers and dependents stationed at such 
installations have access to appropriate FMWR programs and 
facilities. The committee urges IMCOM to consider adopting a 
funding model that accounts for revenue earned at an 
installation versus the performance of its individual 
enterprises to allow services critical to the long-term well-
being of remote and isolated installations to continue 
operating as long as the aggregate revenue remains a net 
positive. The committee acknowledges that identifying savings 
is important, especially in budget-constrained times, but they 
should not come at the expense of programs that are most 
important to garrison commanders at the local level.

Leadership training

    The committee continues to recognize the importance of 
protecting the rights of conscience of members of the Armed 
Forces, consistent with the maintenance of good order and 
discipline. The Congress has expressed this view in title 42, 
United States Code, section 2000bb, et seq. and in section 533 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
(Public Law 112-239) as amended by section 532 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-
66). Complying with this law requires an intentional strategy 
for developing and implementing a comprehensive training 
program on religious liberty issues for military leadership and 
commanders. The committee urges the Department, in consultation 
with commanders, chaplains, and judge advocates, to ensure that 
appropriate training on religious liberty is conducted at all 
levels of command on the requirements of the law, and to that 
end the committee directs the Secretary, in consultation with 
the Chief of Chaplains for the Army, Navy, and Air Force, to 
develop curriculum and implement training concerning religious 
liberty in accordance with the law. Recipients of this training 
should include commanders, chaplains, and judge advocates.

Quality of instruction in schools of the Department of Defense 
        Education Activity

    The committee has received disturbing anecdotal reports 
from military parents of poor quality instruction in certain 
overseas schools of the Department of Defense Education 
Activity (DODEA). As a result, the committee requested data 
from DODEA to understand better the quality of instruction 
provided by DODEA's teachers, but the Department of Defense 
failed to provide such data. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to provide the following data to the 
committee by no later than August 1, 2017: (1) A de-identified 
list of teachers, by school location, who were placed under 
performance improvement plans (PIP) over the last 5 years; (2) 
Course subjects taught by each such teacher, duration of the 
PIP for each such teacher, outcome of the PIP for each such 
teacher, and course subject qualifications of substitute 
teachers hired to back-fill teachers under PIPs; and (3) An 
assessment of the impact of the instructional ability of such 
teachers on students' educational outcome measures.

Report on credentialing program utilization

    In order to evaluate the current progress of past and 
ongoing military credentialing improvement efforts and 
opportunities, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives by no later than December 
1, 2017, on the utilization of the program to assist members in 
obtaining professional credentials authorized by section 2015 
of title 10, United States Code, by each military service, 
including the types of credentials obtained and the cost to the 
Government, as of the date of enactment of June 1, 2017, along 
with any recommendations for regulatory or statutory change the 
Secretary considers appropriate to ensure members are able to 
obtain such credentials relating to their military training and 
skills from appropriately qualified entities.

Report on joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs 
        suicide prevention

    Suicide continues to plague the military Services, and the 
problem is exacerbated as servicemembers separate from the 
Department of Defense and enter a new system of care provided 
by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee encourages 
the Secretary of Defense to work with the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs to assess the feasibility of establishing a joint 
office to house an interagency task force on suicide 
prevention. This office would facilitate the sharing of best 
practices between the agencies' respective suicide prevention 
offices and collaborate and share resources where appropriate, 
such as with the joint use of the Suicide Crisis Hotline. The 
Secretary of Defense shall report the results of its assessment 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House 
of Representatives within 180 days of this report.

Report on measures to prevent retaliation against survivors of sexual 
        assault and harassment in the performance evaluation process

    Professional reprisal against servicemembers who report 
sexual assault or harassment undermines readiness, depresses 
recruitment and retention, and erodes unit cohesion. The 
Department of Defense has made some progress in addressing 
retaliation in recent years. In February 2016, the Judicial 
Proceedings Panel (JPP)--established by section 576 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public 
Law 112-239)--published recommendations to reduce retaliation 
related to sexual assault offenses. On April 28, 2016, the 
Secretary of Defense announced the Department of Defense 
Retaliation Prevention and Response Strategy Regarding Sexual 
Assault and Harassment, as required by section 539 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92). The committee commends the Department on these 
efforts, and encourages it to continue to incorporate the JPP 
and other expert recommendations into its global strategy. 
Nevertheless, one-third of female servicemembers who report 
unwanted sexual contact indicated experiencing a negative 
outcome they perceived to be professional reprisal. One form of 
professional reprisal is retaliation in performance reports.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House 
of Representatives not later than 180 days after enactment a 
report on measures undertaken to:
          (1) Monitor the performance evaluations, duty 
        assignments, receipt of awards, and progression toward 
        promotion of complainants who make unrestricted reports 
        for signs of retaliation;
          (2) Ensure that evaluators subject to a recent 
        complaint of sexual misconduct do not conduct 
        performance appraisals of the complainant;
          (3) Provide guidance to unit leaders and others on 
        the potential effects of sexual harassment and assault 
        on performance after a servicemember in their unit 
        makes an unrestricted report; and
          (4) Instruct those who investigate retaliation 
        complaints to consider the totality of the 
        circumstances, including, but not limited to, the 
        survivor's performance, assessments, or feedback from 
        peers or third parties of his or her own performance, 
        and language, however subtle, that may indicate 
        decreased enthusiasm for the survivor's work or career 
        progression.
    The committee further recognizes the Air Force policy 
granting servicemembers, including survivors, the option to 
authorize a non-rated performance period. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a review of this policy, 
including its effects on career progression, and include its 
findings and the potential for replication across the service 
branches in the required report.

Review of United States Marine Corps recruit training policies

    The committee recognizes the importance of integrated 
training for building unit cohesion, improving readiness, and 
cementing trust and respect among service members; in short, 
the Committee accepts the maxim that the military services 
should train as they fight. The committee is also aware of the 
long-standing practice within the Marine Corps to keep certain 
parts of initial recruit training gender-specific, while the 
majority of initial recruit training is fully integrated with 
male and female marines training side-by-side. The committee 
directs the Commandant of the Marine Corps to review Marine 
Corps policies concerning the integration of male and female 
marines during recruit training and the effects that the 
current training structure has on individual performance, unit 
cohesion, and furthering the goal of fostering an environment 
of respect among fellow marines and to report to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives 
the results of this review by no later than October 1, 2017.

ROTC Cyber Institute

    There remains a nationwide shortage of 500,000 cyber 
professionals and correspondingly a universal need for an 
increase in cybersecurity education and training. The Army 
Cyber Branch created in 2015 and formed 41 total Cyber Mission 
Force teams, as well as 21 United States Army Reserve and Army 
National Guard Cyber Protection Teams. The first 33 teams began 
deploying once reaching minimum competency. There remains an 
urgent need to commission lieutenants into cyber branch and 
there is significant competition for talent with the private 
sector.
    A program to establish ROTC Cyber Institutes for purposes 
of accelerating the development of foundational expertise in 
critical cyber operational skills for future military and 
civilian leaders of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense 
of the United States including such leaders of the Reserve 
Components could help address these shortfalls. Ideal programs 
should include: instruction and practical experiences that lead 
to accredited cyber certifications in the field; targeted 
strategic foreign language proficiency training for such future 
leaders designed to significantly enhance critical cyber 
operational capabilities; mathematical foundations of 
cryptography and courses in cryptographic theory, and; programs 
to expand the pool of qualified cyber instructors necessary to 
support cyber education.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
feasibility study of establishing ROTC Cyber Institutes, 
including an assessment of the suitability of one or more 
Senior Military Colleges hosting such an institute, for the 
purposes of accelerating the development of foundational 
expertise in critical cyber operational skills for future 
military and civilian leaders of the Armed Forces and 
Department of Defense of the United States including such 
leaders of the Reserve Components. This study should include an 
assessment of existing partnerships at the colleges or 
universities under consideration, and if or at what level they 
meet the above program recommendations, a description of 
current curriculum that advances cyber competency, additional 
authorities needed, costs associated with implementing new 
partnerships and any existing plans to establish such 
institutes. This study should be submitted to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by no 
later than December 1, 2017.

Service-specific history courses as a core curriculum requirement of 
        the military service academies

    The committee is concerned that the United States military 
service academies may be overemphasizing core academic 
curriculum course requirements that mirror civilian 
universities, rather than educating cadets on the unique 
culture and history of their individual services, with such 
emphasis as the original rationale for establishing separate 
service academies. It is vital to the strength of joint force 
operations that American military officers from each branch of 
the Armed Services understand and comprehend the history, 
doctrine, and capabilities of their respective Services to 
better provide options for the optimal execution of joint force 
operations in support of meeting U.S. national security 
objectives.
    ``Jointness'' means that among the four United States 
military Services, a separately developed and highly 
specialized array of capabilities is provided through service 
or functional components to a joint force commander--with the 
commander's responsibility to assemble a plan from among this 
``menu'' of capabilities, applying the appropriate ones for the 
contingency at hand. What is often misunderstood about joint 
operations is that its strength resides in the separateness of 
the service components.
    Joint force operations create synergies because they 
capitalize on each Services' core functions--skill sets that 
requires lengthy time, effort, and focus to cultivate. It can 
take as many as twenty years to develop a competent division, 
Surface Action Group, Marine Expeditionary Force, or Aerospace 
Expeditionary Force commander. The committee believes these 
skill sets require a strong foundation in Service history.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives, no later than March 1, 2018, 
a report detailing the core academic and military curriculum 
requirements of each United States military service academy, to 
include a detailed description and length of core history and 
military studies courses that specifically cover the 
principles, founders, formative events, organization, 
capabilities, and major engagements of their respective Service 
in their support and execution of America's national security 
objectives.

Shortfall of United States Air Force aircraft maintenance personnel

    The committee remains concerned with the current aircraft 
maintenance personnel shortfall in the United States Air Force. 
The Air Force has indicated as many as 4,000 additional 
aircraft maintenance personnel are required to achieve the 
necessary manning level and that rebuilding this critical 
workforce is a long-term project due to the extensive training 
required. The committee notes the significant value that the 
Department of Defense achieves through the use of Air Force 
Community Partnerships and recommends the Air Force examine 
additional public-private options to help alleviate this 
critical shortfall. The committee encourages the Air Force to 
pursue partnerships with local and regional educational 
institutions utilizing existing authorities contained in title 
10, United States Code. The Air Force should explore creative 
options, such as creating an aircraft maintainer training 
program pipeline, to help achieve the required level of 
aircraft maintenance personnel at United States Air Force 
installations.

Transition Assistance Program challenges for the National Guard and 
        Reserves

    The committee is concerned about uneven participation rates 
by eligible members of the National Guard and Reserves in the 
Department of Defense's Transition Assistance Program (TAP). To 
help ensure greater participation of eligible servicemembers in 
TAP, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Personnel and Readiness to collect information on any 
challenges facing demobilizing members of the National Guard 
and Reserves regarding the timing and location of TAP courses. 
Additionally, the Secretary should consider the addition of 
related questions to the TAP online assessment tool, which are 
specific to members of the National Guard and Reserves.

Transition Assistance Program information for unit commanders

    The Department of Defense's Transition Assistance Program 
(TAP) provides information, tools, and training to ensure 
servicemembers and their spouses are well-prepared to 
transition into civilian life. To ensure servicemembers' 
completion of TAP, the committee encourages the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to require that all 
Services provide military commanders information on the TAP 
participation levels of servicemembers under their commands. 
The Services may use such information to hold commanders 
accountable for ensuring that servicemembers complete TAP.

Use of Post-9/11 GI Bill for technical schools and institutes

    The committee notes that many transitioning servicemembers 
desire a career in technical and mechanical fields to build 
upon the skills and knowledge attained during service rather 
than pursuing a traditional degree-granting academic program. 
The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to 
ensure that information on technical schools and institutes be 
offered to transitioning servicemembers during the transition 
counseling provided by the Department of Defense so that 
servicemembers are aware of all options for which they can 
apply their Post-9/11 GI bill.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Fiscal year 2018 increase in military basic pay (sec. 601)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
pay raise of 2.1 percent for all members of the uniformed 
services effective January 1, 2018.
Extension of authority to provide temporary increase in rates of Basic 
        Allowance for Housing under certain circumstances (sec. 602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority of the Secretary of Defense to temporarily 
increase the rate of the Basic Allowance for Housing in areas 
impacted by natural disasters or experiencing a sudden influx 
of personnel.
Adjustment to Basic Allowance for Housing at with-dependents rate of 
        certain members of the uniformed services (sec. 603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 403 of title 37, United States Code, to eliminate the 
with-dependents rate for the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) 
in the case of married members of the uniformed services who 
are collocated and who have dependents. Under current law, one 
such member is eligible for the with-dependents rate, while the 
other must receive the without-dependents rate. A recent audit 
report from the United States Army Audit Agency (USAAA) found 
that BAH entitlements paid to married servicemembers collocated 
in the same military housing area significantly exceeded the 
local housing costs for these servicemembers. For fiscal year 
2014, USAAA estimated that 13,220 collocated married 
servicemember couples received about $471.8 million in combined 
BAH payments. However, local housing costs for these 
servicemember couples were about $267.0 million, a difference 
of about $204.8 million. This occurred because Department of 
Defense policy, specifically the Joint Travel Regulation, 
allows collocated married servicemembers to receive two 
separate BAH payments despite occupying a single residence in 
the same military housing area. The USAAA found that reducing 
BAH for the 13,220 couples who receive the with-dependents rate 
to the without-dependents rate would bring housing allowance 
entitlements more in line with their actual costs of housing. 
While it would not entirely eliminate the disparity between the 
benefit paid and the cost of housing, the adjustment would save 
the Department an estimated $52.0 million annually and $311.8 
million over the next 5 years. The provision further includes a 
preservation of current BAH for members with uninterrupted 
eligibility for such BAH.
Modification of authority of President to determine alternative pay 
        adjustment in annual basic pay of members of the uniformed 
        services (sec. 604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1009(e) of title 37, United States Code, to remove the 
justification of serious economic conditions affecting the 
general welfare from the waiver authority of the President to 
make an alternative pay adjustment.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for 
        reserve forces (sec. 611)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay 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, travel expenses for certain inactive-duty 
training, and income replacement for reserve component members 
experiencing extended and frequent mobilization for Active-Duty 
service.
One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for 
        health care professionals (sec. 612)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the nurse officer candidate 
accession bonus, education loan repayment for certain health 
professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve, accession and 
retention bonuses for psychologists, the accession bonus for 
registered nurses, incentive special pay for nurse 
anesthetists, special pay for Selected Reserve health 
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.
One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear 
        officers (sec. 613)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the special pay for nuclear-
qualified officers extending period of active service, the 
nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear career annual 
incentive bonus.
One-year extension of authorities relating to title 37 consolidated 
        special pay, incentive pay, and bonus authorities (sec. 614)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the general bonus authority for enlisted members, the 
general bonus authority for officers, special bonus and 
incentive pay authorities for nuclear officers, special 
aviation incentive pay and bonus authorities for officers, and 
special bonus and incentive pay authorities for officers in 
health professions, and contracting bonus for cadets and 
midshipmen enrolled in the Senior Officers' Training Corps. The 
provision would also extend for 1 year the authority to pay 
hazardous duty pay, assignment or special duty pay, skill 
incentive pay or proficiency bonus, and retention incentives 
for members qualified in critical military skills or assigned 
to high priority units.
One-year extension of authorities relating to payment of other title 37 
        bonuses and special pays (sec. 615)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the aviation officer retention 
bonus, assignment incentive pay, the reenlistment bonus for 
active members, the enlistment bonus, precommissioning 
incentive pay for 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.
Aviation bonus matters (sec. 616)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 334 of title 37, United States Code, to require the 
Department of Defense and the military services to justify 
aviation bonus levels through a business case analysis for such 
levels, establish a tiered limitation on maximum amounts of 
aviation bonuses, and require additional budget justification 
materials to accompany the President's fiscal year budget 
submission to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, 
United States Code. Such justification shall include the 
following elements: (1) The amount requested for the payment of 
aviation bonuses using amount authorized to be appropriated for 
the fiscal year concerned by aircraft type category; (2) The 
business case analysis supporting the amount so requested by 
aircraft type category; (3) Whether or not the amount requested 
for each aircraft type category will permit the payment of the 
maximum amount of the aviation bonus authorized; and (4) A 
description of any plans the secretary concerned has to address 
manning shortfall by non-monetary means. The tiered limitation 
on maximum amounts of aviation bonuses shall vary by 
anticipated manning shortfalls for each fiscal year by aircraft 
type category. In no event may all the agreements entered into 
during a fiscal year by a secretary concerned provide for the 
maximum amount payable.
Special aviation incentive pay and bonus authorities for enlisted 
        members who pilot remotely piloted aircraft (sec. 617)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, to create a new 
authority to pay aviation incentive pay and bonuses to enlisted 
member remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) pilots with statutory 
caps of $1,000 per month for aviation incentive pay and $35,000 
per year for aviation bonus pay, which is equivalent to the 
current caps under section 334 of title 37, United States Code, 
for pilots who are officers. This authority will also include 
the same business case analysis requirement for setting bonuses 
that is required under section 334 of title 37, United States 
Code, for pilots who are officers. The committee intends this 
authority to be a companion to the efforts precipitated by this 
committee to begin the training pipeline for enlisted RPA 
pilots in the United States Air Force. This authority would 
also be available for enlisted pilots in the other services, 
such as the Army, where enlisted pilots are already utilized in 
the unmanned aerial vehicle community.
Technical and clerical amendments relating to 2008 consolidation of 
        certain special pay authorities (sec. 618)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical and clerical corrections to titles 10, 14, 24, 26, 
37, and 42, United States Code, as part of the Department of 
Defense transition to the consolidated authorities authorized 
in section 661 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), which provided eight 
consolidated statutory special and incentive pay authorities 
for future use to replace those currently in use.

     Subtitle C--Disability Pay, Retired Pay, and Survivor Benefits

        Part I--Amendments in Connection With Retired Pay Reform

Adjustment to the Survivor Benefit Plan for members electing lump sum 
        payments of retired pay under the modernized retirement system 
        for members of the uniformed services (sec. 631)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
section 1447 of title 10, United States Code, and section 1452 
of title 10, United States Code, to ensure equitable treatment 
under the Survivor Benefit Plan of members of the uniformed 
services covered by the modernized retirement system who elect 
to receive a lump sum of retired pay, as authorized under 
section 1415 of title 10, United States Code.
Technical correction regarding election to participate in modernized 
        retirement system for non-regular component members 
        experiencing a break in service (sec. 632)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that the election period for the modernized retirement system 
authorized by section 631 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) is extended for up 
to 30 days in the case of regular component members returning 
to service after a break in service that occurs during the 
election period.

                         Part II--Other Matters

Authority for the Secretaries of the military departments to provide 
        for care of remains of those who die on Active Duty and are 
        interred in a foreign cemetery (sec. 636)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1482(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize a 
service secretary to provide for the enduring care of the 
remains of Active-Duty servicemembers interred in foreign 
cemeteries if the burial location was designated by the 
secretary concerned.
Technical corrections for use of member's current pay grade and years 
        of service in a division of property involving disposable 
        retired pay (sec. 637)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
section 1408(a)(4) of title 10, United States code, to allow 
the Department of Defense to implement section 641 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) by clarifying that the division of property is to 
be calculated based on the date of the divorce decree, 
dissolution, annulment, or legal separation.
Permanent extension and cost-of-living adjustments of Special Survivor 
        Indemnity Allowances under the survivor benefit plan (sec. 638)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1450 of title 10, United States Code, to permanently 
extend the authority to pay the Special Survivor Indemnity 
Allowance and would require inflation adjustments to that 
Allowance by the amount of the military retired pay cost-of-
living adjustment for each calendar year beginning in 2019.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Construction of domestic source requirement for footwear furnished to 
        enlisted members of the Armed Forces on initial entry into the 
        Armed Forces (sec. 651)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
requirements to furnish footwear to enlisted members of the 
Armed Forces on initial entry if the Secretary of Defense 
determines that there would be only a sole certified source of 
supply. The Secretary of Defense would also be required to 
ensure that all procurement of athletic footwear to which this 
subsection applies are made using firm fixed price contracts. 
Consistent with section 418 of title 37, United States Code, 
the committee directs the Secretary to establish practices and 
take all necessary steps to protect service members in initial 
entry training from unnecessary injuries.
Inclusion of Department of Agriculture in Transition Assistance Program 
        (sec. 652)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
subsection (a) of section 1144 of title 10, United States Code, 
to require inclusion of information provided by the Department 
of Agriculture in the Transition Assistance Program.
Review and update of regulations governing debt collectors interactions 
        with unit commanders (sec. 653)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, no later than 180 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, to review and update Department of 
Defense Instruction 1344.09 and any associated regulations to 
ensure that such regulations comply with Federal consumer 
protection laws with respect to the collection of debt.

                       Items of Special Interest

Report on base pay of senior enlisted members performing special 
        advisory duties
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives no later than March 1, 2018, analyzing whether 
senior enlisted positions in advisory roles with 
responsibilities equivalent to those identified in footnote 
four of the military basic pay tables should receive an 
increase in basic pay under footnote four of the military pay 
tables as a result of their special advisory and representation 
duties.
United States Air Force civilian pay budgeting process
    The Inspector General for the Department of Defense 
released a report (DODIG-2017-039) on January 5, 2017, finding 
that that the Air Force civilian pay requirements in the 
Operations and Maintenance appropriation did not capture the 
funding needed to pay Air Force civilian personnel because the 
Air Force did not have written procedures that described the 
process and course data to use for developing its civilian pay 
requirements. The Air Force had incorrectly calculated pay for 
civilian positions based on positions filled (end-strength) 
rather than full-time equivalents (FTEs) as required by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance for calculating 
civilian work-year cost. The Inspector General also found that 
the Air Force based its programming decision on flawed civilian 
work-year cost data. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Air Force to issue a report no later than 
February 1, 2018, to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives with the following 
information: (1) Written procedures for the Air Force civilian 
pay budget process; (2) A certification that the written 
procedures comply with the guidance on civilian FTEs as 
prescribed by OMB Circular A-11, ``Preparation, Submission, and 
Execution of the Budget''; (3) A certification that all budget 
calculations and decisions will be documented and maintained by 
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management 
and Comptroller); and (4) An explanation of steps the Air Force 
has taken to correct budget deficiencies in civilian pay 
stemming from the fiscal year 2016 Budget Estimate Submission, 
which led to a $212.0 million reprogramming request from 
Congress to correct the budget shortfall created by the Air 
Force.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

           Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits

TRICARE Advantage demonstration program (sec. 701)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services, to establish a demonstration 
program, not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, to enable eligible beneficiaries to enroll in 
Medicare Advantage plans. The Secretary would carry out the 
demonstration program for a minimum of 5 years. In conducting 
the demonstration program, the Secretary would competitively 
select, in market areas with large concentrations of 
beneficiaries eligible for TRICARE for Life, one or more 
Medicare Advantage plans from which the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services has waived or modified requirements under 
section 1857(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
27(i)). The Secretary would use risk-bearing, capitated 
contracts with Medicare Advantage organizations to administer 
the demonstration program, and only those Medicare Advantage 
plans with minimum quality star ratings of four or higher could 
participate in the program.
    Under the demonstration program, the Secretary may include 
medical services provided by military medical treatment 
facilities and pharmaceutical agents provided by the TRICARE 
Pharmacy benefits program as additional services provided by 
the Department. The provision would require enrollment of all 
applicable eligible individuals located in an area 
participating in the demonstration program, but individuals 
could opt out of the program if desired. The provision would 
require the Secretary and the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to determine jointly the appropriate distribution of 
costs and potential savings that result from the demonstration 
program. Finally, the provision would require the Secretary to 
submit: (1) An initial report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, within 
1 year of the date of the enactment of this Act, on 
implementation of the demonstration program; and (2) A final 
report to the same committees not later than 4 years after the 
date of the enactment of this Act.
    Upon becoming eligible for Medicare, TRICARE beneficiaries 
gain Medicare wrap-around coverage through the Department's 
TRICARE for Life (TFL) program. Currently, there are over 2 
million beneficiaries enrolled in the TFL program. Estimated 
federal spending on health care services for this population 
totaled about $16.0 billion last year with Medicare paying 
about $12.0 billion and TFL paying about $4.0 billion. The 
committee believes that a TRICARE Advantage demonstration 
program, customized for the TFL population, would result in 
better health outcomes for TFL beneficiaries with costly 
chronic health conditions and help to prevent utilization of 
high-cost, unnecessary health care services. Additionally, a 
TRICARE Advantage demonstration program should improve the 
experience of care while reducing government spending in both 
the Medicare and TRICARE programs.
Continued access to medical care at facilities of the uniformed 
        services for certain members of the reserve components (sec. 
        702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1076d(f) and 1076e of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify the eligibility for medical services for beneficiaries 
enrolled in TRICARE Reserve Select and TRICARE Retired Reserve.
Modification of eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select and TRICARE 
        Retired Reserve of certain members of the reserve components 
        (sec. 703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1076d(a) and 1076e(a) of title 10, United States Code, 
to authorize enrollment in TRICARE Reserve Select or TRICARE 
Retired Reserve of a servicemember who is enrolled, or is 
eligible to enroll, in a health benefits plan under chapter 89 
of title 5, United States Code.
Expedited evaluation and treatment for prenatal surgery under the 
        TRICARE program (sec. 704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to implement processes and procedures to 
ensure a covered beneficiary under the TRICARE program, whose 
pregnancy is complicated with a fetal condition or suspected 
fetal condition, receives at the discretion of the covered 
beneficiary, expedited evaluation, non-directive counseling, 
and treatment from a perinatal or pediatric specialist capable 
of providing surgical management and intervention in utero.
Specification that individuals under the age of 21 are eligible for 
        hospice care services under the TRICARE program (sec. 705)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1079(a)(15) of title 10, United States Code, to 
authorize hospice care services for eligible beneficiaries 
under the age of 21.
Modifications of cost-sharing requirements for the TRICARE Pharmacy 
        Benefits Program and treatment of certain pharmaceutical agents 
        (sec. 706)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
paragraph 6 of 1074g(a) of title 10, United States Code, to 
modify cost-sharing amounts for the TRICARE pharmacy benefits 
program for years 2018 through 2026. After 2026, the Department 
could establish cost-sharing amounts equal to the cost-sharing 
amounts for the previous year adjusted by an amount, if any, to 
reflect increases in costs of pharmaceutical agents and 
pharmacy dispensing fees. With this provision, beneficiaries 
would continue to receive pharmaceuticals at no cost in 
military medical treatment facilities. For years 2018 through 
2020, the cost-share amount for up to a 90-day supply of a 
generic pharmaceutical agent dispensed through the mail order 
pharmacy would be $10, which would partially cover the 
Department's administrative costs for the drug and would result 
in a consistent drug cost-share with generic drugs dispensed in 
retail pharmacies. Under this provision, there would be no 
changes to cost-sharing amounts for survivors of members who 
died on Active Duty or for disabled retirees and their family 
members.
    To encourage use of pharmaceutical agents that provide the 
greatest value to beneficiaries and the Department, the 
provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense, upon 
recommendation from the Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee and 
review by the Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel, to 
exclude from the pharmacy benefits program any pharmaceutical 
agent that the Secretary determines provides little or no value 
to covered beneficiaries and the Department. Additionally, the 
Secretary would give preferential status to any non-generic 
pharmaceutical agent on the uniform formulary by treating it, 
for the purposes of cost-sharing, as a generic product under 
the TRICARE retail pharmacy and mail order programs. Finally, 
the provision would amend section 1079 of title 10, United 
States Code, to authorize the Secretary to adopt special 
reimbursement methods, amounts, and procedures in medical 
contracts to encourage physicians to use high-value 
pharmaceutical agents and to discourage use of low-value 
agents.
Consolidation of cost-sharing requirements under TRICARE Select and 
        TRICARE Prime (sec. 707)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1075 of title 10, United States Code, to consolidate 
cost-sharing requirements under TRICARE Prime and Select. This 
provision would eliminate the grandfathering of cost-sharing 
requirements for beneficiaries enrolled in the TRICARE program 
prior to January 1, 2018, as authorized in section 701 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328). The amendments under this provision would take 
effect on January 1, 2018.
TRICARE technical amendments (sec. 708)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
several technical amendments to statutory language regarding 
the TRICARE program.
Contraception coverage parity under the TRICARE program (sec. 709)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1074d of title 10, United States Code, to require 
coverage of contraception services for all female covered 
beneficiaries under the TRICARE program. The provision would 
prohibit cost-sharing for certain contraception services, 
including all methods of contraception approved by the Food and 
Drug Administration, contraceptive care, sterilization 
procedures, and education and counseling, provided to 
beneficiaries covered by TRICARE.

                 Subtitle B--Health Care Administration

Modification of priority for evaluation and treatment of individuals at 
        military treatment facilities (sec. 721)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 717(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to waive the priority of covered 
beneficiaries to receive evaluation and treatment at military 
treatment facilities in order to provide evaluation and 
treatment for the following individuals: (1) Persons severely 
wounded or injured by acts of terror in the United States; or 
(2) Residents of the United States severely wounded or injured 
by acts of terror outside the United States.
Selection of directors of military treatment facilities and tours of 
        duty of such directors (sec. 722)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, not later than January 1, 2019, to 
develop common qualifications and core competencies required 
for selection of directors of military medical treatment 
facilities. The provision would also establish a minimum length 
of 3 years for tours of duty, with limited exceptions, for 
those directors to ensure greater stability in health system 
executive management at each facility and throughout the 
military health system.
Clarification of administration of military medical treatment 
        facilities (sec. 723)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1073c(a) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
that the individual responsible for ensuring readiness of the 
members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of a 
military medical treatment facility and for furnishing the 
health care and medical treatment at that facility can be 
either a military or civilian director under the authority, 
direction, and control of the Defense Health Agency. 
Additionally, the provision would authorize, if the Secretary 
of Defense determines it appropriate, that a military director 
(or other senior military officer or officers) of a military 
medical treatment facility (MTF) may be a commanding officer 
for purposes of Chapter 47 of this title (the Uniformed Code of 
Military Justice) with respect to military personnel assigned 
to the MTF.
Modification of execution of TRICARE contracting responsibilities (sec. 
        724)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
subsection (b) of section 705 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to 
clarify the execution of contracting responsibility for 
acquisition of managed care support contracts under the TRICARE 
program initiated after the date of the enactment of this Act. 
Under this provision, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment would serve as the acquisition 
decision authority and be responsible for approving the 
acquisition strategy and conducting pre-solicitation, pre-
award, and post-award acquisition reviews.
Pilot program on establishment of integrated health care delivery 
        systems (sec. 725)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, within 1 year of the date of the 
enactment of this Act, to conduct a pilot program of not less 
than 5 years duration to establish integrated health care 
delivery systems among the military health system, other 
federal health systems, and private sector integrated health 
systems. In consultation with the Secretaries of Veterans 
Affairs and Health and Human Services, the Secretary would 
establish a multi-disciplinary task force to develop a plan to 
implement the pilot program. Not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the task force would submit 
an implementation plan for the pilot program to the Secretary 
that would: (1) Create high-value integrated health systems; 
(2) Empower health care providers with real-time advanced 
information technology solutions; (3) Empower patients with 
transparent information on health care costs, quality outcomes, 
and safety within health care provider networks; and (4) 
Provide incentives to patients and health care providers to 
prevent overuse of low-value health care services. The 
provision would require the Secretary to submit a report on the 
implementation plan to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 270 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act. Finally, the 
Secretary would submit a final report on the pilot program to 
the same committees not later than 4 years after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters

Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-Department of 
        Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund (sec. 731)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority for the joint Department of Defense-Department of 
Veterans Affairs Demonstration Fund from September 30, 2018, to 
September 30, 2019.
Additional emergency uses for medical products to reduce deaths and 
        severity of injuries caused by agents of war (sec. 732)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1107a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to approve the emergency use of medical 
products, outside the United States, in situations in which an 
emergency use of an unapproved product or an emergency 
unapproved use of an approved product cannot be authorized 
under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
(21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3) because the emergency does not involve an 
actual or threatened attack with a biological, chemical, 
radiological, or nuclear agent.
    The committee understands that hemorrhage is a leading 
cause of survivable death from battlefield wounds, and complex 
blood components, when used in a battlefield environment, can 
quickly control hemorrhage and save lives. Traditional pathways 
to the Food and Drug Administration's approval and licensure of 
critical medical products, like freeze dried plasma, for 
battlefield use are too slow to allow for rapid insertion and 
use of these products on the battlefield. The committee 
believes this provision could lead to even higher survival 
rates from severe battlefield wounds suffered by 
servicemembers.
Prohibition on conduct of certain medical research and development 
        projects (sec. 733)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense and each service secretary from 
funding or conducting a medical research and development 
project unless the secretary concerned submits a written 
certification to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives that the project is directly 
designed to protect, enhance, or restore the health and safety 
of members of the Armed Forces. Additionally, the secretary 
concerned could not initiate the funding or conduct of any such 
project until 90 days after submission of written certification 
to the committees.
Modification of determination of average wait times at urgent care 
        clinics and pharmacies at military medical treatment facilities 
        under pilot program (sec. 734)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
subsections 744(c)(2) and 744(d)(2) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to 
require the Secretary of Defense to utilize a formula derived 
from health care industry best practices in determining the 
average wait times to display under such paragraphs.
Report on plan to improve pediatric care and related services for 
        children of members of the Armed Forces (sec. 735)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
report setting forth a plan of the Department to improve 
pediatric care and related services for children of members of 
the Armed Forces.
Inclusion of gambling disorder in health assessments and related 
        research efforts of the Department of Defense (sec. 736)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to incorporate medical screening questions 
specific to gambling disorder into the Annual Periodic Health 
Assessment (DD Form 3024) conducted by the Department for 
members of the Armed Forces. Additionally, the provision would 
require the Secretary to incorporate questions on gambling 
disorder into its ongoing research survey efforts.

                       Items of Special Interest

Aircraft medical kits on rotary aircraft responding to mass casualty 
        incidents
    The committee recognizes that rotary wing aircraft are the 
most common platforms to respond first to mass casualty 
incidents even if they are not fully capable medical evacuation 
aircraft. Updating aircrew equipment and helicopter medical 
kits to the latest standards will enhance patient and aircrew 
survivability. The committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to ensure that survival medical equipment on these 
aircraft is consistent with the most current standards for U.S. 
military tactical combat casualty care for all casualty 
evacuation capable platforms.
Assessment of ability of Department of Defense to use modeling and 
        simulation capabilities to address medical training 
        requirements
    The committee recognizes the importance of technological 
developments that allow the Department of Defense (DOD) to use 
modeling and simulation capabilities to improve medical 
training requirements. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the 
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine under 
which the National Academies assess the ability of DOD to use 
modeling and simulation capabilities to address medical 
training requirements of the Department.
    In conducting the assessment, the National Academies of 
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine shall assess, but not be 
limited to: (1) The modeling and simulation technology 
available to the Federal Government and the private sector; (2) 
Research and development programs that the Department could 
undertake to enhance the modeling and simulation technology 
available to the Department; (3) Programs to transition 
modeling and simulation technology into operational use by the 
Department; (4) The advantages and disadvantages of using 
modeling and simulation, including fiscal and educational 
advantages and disadvantages; and (5) Any other aspects deemed 
relevant and appropriate.
    The assessment shall also include recommendations to the 
Secretary on: (1) Improvements to policies and programs of the 
Department to increase the use of modeling and simulation 
technology; (2) Research and development priorities of the 
Department that will enhance modeling and simulation 
capabilities; (3) The development of specific technical metrics 
to improve modeling and simulation training; and (4) Any other 
recommendations deemed relevant and appropriate. The committee 
further directs that the assessment shall be delivered not 
later than June 1, 2018.
Comptroller General report on Department of Defense measures to 
        maintain critical wartime medical readiness skills and core 
        competencies of health care providers
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit a report, not later than 90 days after the 
Secretary of Defense submits the report required by section 
721(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
that contains: (1) An assessment of the methodology used by the 
Secretary of Defense, under section 721 of the NDAA for Fiscal 
Year 2017, to define and determine the medical and dental 
personnel requirements necessary to meet operational medical 
force readiness requirements; (2) A determination of whether 
the list of medical and dental personnel requirements necessary 
to meet operational medical force readiness requirements, 
submitted in the report by the Secretary, reflects the 
methodology described above; (3) A determination of whether the 
Secretary has developed and implemented measures described in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of section 725 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328); and (4) An assessment of the methodology used by the 
Secretary in developing and implementing measures described in 
section 725 to maintain the critical wartime medical readiness 
skills and core competencies of health care providers within 
the Armed Forces.
Comptroller General review of the Department of Defense's recruitment 
        and retention programs for military dentists
    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) experiences challenges in the recruitment and retention 
of certain dental specialists due in part to an increasingly 
competitive civilian dental health care job market and 
projected future nationwide shortages of dentists as the demand 
for dental care in the United States exceeds supply. To address 
these challenges, the Services offer a variety of recruitment 
and retention programs to encourage dentists to serve, 
including accession bonuses, scholarship programs, special 
pays, loan repayment programs, retention bonuses, and advanced 
training and education programs. The extent to which the DOD's 
approach to identify military dental requirements and to 
achieve recruitment and retention goals for military dentists 
is unclear to the committee. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a 
review of DOD's approach to recruit and retain military 
dentists and to provide a briefing on preliminary observations 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House 
of Representatives not later than January 24, 2018. At that 
time, a date for the final product will be determined. The 
review shall address, at a minimum, the following:
          (1) What are the Services' processes for developing 
        the military health system's requirements for dentists 
        and to what extent are the Services' authorizations 
        filled to meet requirements?
          (2) To what extent has DOD examined the effectiveness 
        of its programs for recruiting and retaining dentists?
          (3) To what extent have the Services developed plans 
        to address any identified gaps in military dental corps 
        officer specialties?
Comptroller General review of workforce mix within the military health 
        system
    The Department of Defense (DOD) has estimated that an 
inefficient medical workforce mix--the combination of military 
personnel, federal civilian employees, and contractors--costs 
the department about $3 billion over the future years defense 
program. In addition, a recent study sponsored by DOD found 
that the complete cost to the taxpayer of military medical 
personnel far exceeds the cost of civilian health care 
providers with comparable skills. Due to concerns about these 
and other inefficiencies within the military health system, 
Congress enacted a series of reforms in the National Defense 
Authorization for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), 
including a provision authorizing conversions of military 
health care provider positions to civilian or contractor 
positions. Given DOD's potential for realizing substantial 
financial benefits by implementing such conversions and for 
optimizing its mix of medical personnel, DOD's careful 
attention toward medical workforce management will be important 
as it moves forward with health system reforms.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct a review of DOD's approach to 
assess and determine its workforce mix within the military 
health system and to provide preliminary observations to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by the end of February 2018. At that time, a 
final product date will be determined. The review shall 
address, at a minimum, the extent to which: (1) The military 
departments have policies and procedures in place for 
periodically evaluating their health care workforces to ensure 
efficient and effective use of personnel resources; (2) The 
composition of healthcare workforces within each of the 
military departments is based on analyses of alternative 
populations--including active and reserve military personnel, 
civilians, contractors, and a mix thereof--and their related 
costs and benefits; and (3) The military departments have 
developed long-range strategies and workforce plans for 
ensuring that an appropriate number and mix of personnel are 
maintained within their healthcare workforces.
Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense electronic health 
        record interoperability
    The committee applauds the decision by the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs (VA) to adopt the electronic health record 
(EHR) of the Department of Defense (DOD), MHS Genesis, which 
consists of a commercial off-the-shelf EHR system, Cerner 
Millennium. The Secretary's bold decision will ensure seamless 
transition of real-time medical records information between 
healthcare providers of the DOD and the VA. The committee 
encourages the VA to work closely with DOD to leverage the 
platform, architecture, tools, and processes established for 
MHS Genesis to ensure successful implementation of its new EHR 
throughout VA's hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the 
committee expects both DOD and VA to work collaboratively to 
establish seamless interoperability among MHS Genesis, the VA's 
EHR, and private sector EHRs.
Epidemiological study on the association between certain cancers and 
        military aircraft operations
    The committee is aware of anecdotes of potentially 
increased occurrences of certain cancers in military personnel 
associated with military aircraft operations. For example, 
acute myeloid leukemia may occur at higher rates for personnel 
involved in military aircraft operations, such as U.S. Air 
Force F-15 pilots, than for the general U.S. population because 
of long-term exposure to microwave radiation. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
retrospective epidemiological study on personnel involved in 
military aircraft operations: (1) To measure the frequency and 
assess the distribution of certain cancers in this population; 
and (2) To determine if there is a correlation between 
environmental exposures associated with military aircraft 
operations and the development of certain cancers in this 
population.
Impact of medical care referrals on servicemembers assigned to remote 
        and isolated military installations in the United States
    The committee notes with concern that military operational 
capabilities may be degraded when military medical treatment 
facilities refer Active-Duty servicemembers and their families, 
assigned to remote and isolated military installations in the 
United States, for specialty care services provided only in 
large metropolitan areas. For example, the minimum travel time 
to and from a specialty care referral appointment can be 5 
hours or more in remote locations like Cannon Air Force Base. 
Excess travel times for medical appointments remove 
servicemembers from their duty locations for lengthy periods, 
which degrades operational capabilities and ultimately harms 
readiness. Therefore, the committee directs the Department to 
explore additional opportunities to develop military-civilian 
integrated health systems near remote and isolated military 
installations in the United States to provide a comprehensive 
range of primary and specialty medical care services for 
servicemembers and their families where they live and work.
Improper medical claims payments
    Section 725 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) required the Comptroller 
General of the United States to examine the similarities and 
differences between TRICARE and Medicare regarding how each 
program identifies and recovers improper medical claims 
payments. In a February 2015 report, the Comptroller General 
found that the Department of Defense uses a less comprehensive 
methodology than the methodology Medicare uses to measure 
improper payments. The Department's methodology fails to 
examine the medical records documentation underlying medical 
claims, an important process step that can help determine 
whether claims were improperly paid. As a result of the 
findings and recommendations of the Comptroller General, the 
committee directs the Department to implement a robust 
methodology to monitor medical claims for improper payments.
Licensed mental health counselors
    The committee is aware of varying standards within the 
Department of Defense regarding the practice authorities of 
licensed mental health counselors. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs 
to review existing policies and guidance regarding licensed 
mental health counselors throughout the military health system 
and make recommendations regarding the establishment of a 
uniform Department-wide standard regarding privileging and 
independent practice authority.
Licensing of federally owned medical inventions
    The committee directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to 
exercise its rights under sections 209(d)(1) or 203 of title 
35, United States Code, to authorize third parties to use 
inventions that benefited from DOD funding whenever the price 
of a drug, vaccine, or other medical technology is higher in 
the United States than the median price charged in the seven 
largest economies that have a per capita income at least half 
the per capita income of the United States.

Military dental research

    The Military Dental Research Program (MDRP) focuses on 
developing successful procedures and technology to reconstruct 
and restore function of craniofacial (face and skull) tissues 
and structures of severely wounded warfighters. No other 
federal dental program duplicates this research. Craniofacial 
injuries cause significant physical and emotional challenges 
for servicemembers and often result in difficulty breathing, 
eating, and speaking.
    Additionally, research at the MDRP seeks to develop 
improved methods to contain and eliminate antibiotic-resistant 
infections resulting from severe burns. The MDRP also maintains 
its traditional focus on troop readiness by conducting research 
to target preventive efforts to reduce the incidence of dental 
disease, thereby, improving overall combat effectiveness. The 
committee believes that the MDRP deserves greater priority 
within the Department of Defense's efforts to advance combat 
trauma research.

Novel drug therapies for PTSD

    The committee has long supported the development of new 
therapies for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder 
(PTSD). The committee urges the Department to prioritize the 
development and approval of novel drug therapies for the 
treatment of PTSD. To accomplish this task, the committee 
encourages the Department to consider the Food and Drug 
Administration's (FDA) Breakthrough Therapy Designation 
program. This program is one of four FDA programs intended to 
help ensure rapid approval and availability of beneficial 
therapies for serious medical conditions. The Committee directs 
the Department to consider carefully any guidance that the 
FDA's Breakthrough Therapy program may provide for the 
identification, development, and approval of novel therapies 
for the treatment of PTSD.

Report on action to address mental health of remotely piloted aircraft 
        community

    The Air Force is pursuing efforts to improve the quality of 
life and quality of service of the remotely piloted aircraft 
(RPA) community. This plan seeks to address the burden on RPA 
crews due to significant demand for persistent intelligence, 
surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike capabilities. The 
committee is concerned about the potentially unique impacts on 
RPA pilots and airmen who are stationed in the United States 
while operating aircraft engaged in combat abroad.
    Section 1712A of title 38, United States Code, provides for 
counseling and mental health services for a veteran or member 
of the Armed Forces who engaged in combat by ``remotely 
controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle, notwithstanding whether 
the physical location of such veteran or member during such 
combat was within such theatre of combat operations or area.'' 
A 2011 School of Aerospace Medicine report titled 
``Psychological Health Screening of Remotely Piloted Aircraft 
Operators and Supporting Units,'' found ``there is a high 
incidence of emotional exhaustion/fatigue among RPA operators 
as a group in comparison to noncombatant airmen'' and that 
``efforts to reduce occupational burnout should focus on 
operational stressors and be equally devoted to weapon- and 
non-weapon-deploying RPA operators.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives on steps the Air 
Force, Air Force Reserve, and Air National Guard are taking to 
address the mental health of RPA pilots and airmen supporting 
RPA operations, particularly those stationed in the United 
States flying missions with aircraft assigned operationally to 
Combatant Commands. This report should also include detailed 
efforts the Air Force is taking to retain these pilots, given 
the potential for exhaustion and occupational stress.

Traumatic brain injury research

    Servicemembers and veterans can experience immediate and 
latent symptoms of traumatic brain injury (TBI), including 
headaches, mental confusion, memory loss, impulsivity, and 
depression. The committee commends the Department's efforts to 
promote research addressing symptoms of TBI in the acute stages 
after injury and the prevention of such injuries. Key 
challenges facing the Department of Defense, however, are: (1) 
Understanding how to reverse neurodegeneration in the brain to 
restore lost brain function; and (2) Understanding the short 
and long-term effects of mild TBI on the brain to develop 
therapies that improve the function of those regions of the 
brain that may have escaped damage. The committee encourages 
the Department to continue its collaboration with public and 
private partners to accelerate the development of 
pharmaceutical therapies to reverse the latent and delayed-
onset effects of TBI and to support clinical grade research of 
directly reprogrammed autologous neural precursor cells.

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

Implementation of acquisition reforms
    The committee notes that with the passage of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (Public Law 114-92), the Department of Defense has been 
provided with the most expansive legislative reform agenda on 
acquisition in a generation. While such reforms will take time 
to fully implement, the committee is disappointed with the 
Department's slow rate of implementation and apparent 
unwillingness to embrace meaningful change in order to improve 
its acquisition outcomes.
    The Department of Defense has suffered under a cumbersome 
acquisition bureaucracy for the majority of its existence. 
However, over the course of its history, the Department has 
still been able to increase the United States' military 
technical advantage over the nation's adversaries and 
competitors. In recent years, however, the Department has 
presided over a diminution of military technical advantage due 
to an inability to adapt to the global proliferation of 
technology, particularly in the commercial sector. The self-
imposed and congressionally driven bureaucratic processes that 
have slowed the acquisition system have provided current and 
potential adversaries an opportunity to challenge our military 
today and in the future. The Department's current acquisition 
challenge, and the threats that it enables, therefore, goes 
beyond important traditional concerns of efficiency and 
financial stewardship.
    All elements of the Department of Defense's acquisition 
enterprise must innovate in order to increase the United 
States' military technical advantage. This innovation cannot be 
limited to the kinds of technology the Department seeks to 
acquire. The methods by which such technologies are acquired 
are of equal significance in providing our Armed Forces with a 
timely technical edge. It is the responsibility of all elements 
of the Department's acquisition system to drive such innovation 
and to recognize that different types of innovation are 
required for an office such as the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Research and Engineering than for the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.
    It is the intent of the committee that the Department of 
Defense pursue military technical advantage through multiple 
pathways. Basic research, experimentation, prototyping, rapid 
acquisition, acquisition and adaptation of commercial items, 
middle tier acquisition, and major defense acquisition programs 
all play vital roles in developing and fielding the capability 
required by our Armed Forces. These pathways require different 
approaches to risk management, requirements development, 
contracting, and governance. The committee therefore expects to 
see the Department align acquisition methods with the nature of 
the capability being acquired. This will require, for example, 
making use of flexible tools like Other Transaction Authorities 
to speed early research and prototyping efforts to transition 
into production while using firm-fixed price contracts to 
manage costs of large-scale acquisition of systems with lower 
technical risk.
    Allowing for more nuanced approaches to supporting multiple 
acquisition pathways requires a workforce that is well-
educated, trained, and provided with incentives to apply 
judgement in tailoring acquisition approaches while 
appropriately managing risk. The committee notes the success of 
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund in allowing 
the Department to recruit, educate, and retain the talent it 
needs. Provisions elsewhere in this Act seek to raise awareness 
of additional acquisition methods, such as the use of Federal 
Acquisition Regulation Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items, 
Other Transaction Authorities, and Agile Acquisition while also 
supporting the development of tools to enable easier tailoring 
of the acquisition process.
    The committee is particularly concerned about the 
Department's approach to developing, acquiring, and managing 
software and software-intensive systems. The Department's 
acquisition processes are too cumbersome to develop traditional 
military hardware effectively, let alone modern software 
systems. Accordingly, this Act directs the Department to 
commence pilot activities to restructure struggling software-
intensive programs and start new programs in a more effective 
manner. The committee will provide strong oversight on 
software-intensive acquisitions to ensure that the Department 
of Defense adopts effective methods of developing and managing 
its software.
    In conclusion, this Act clarifies and reinforces the 
reforms of previous years. It is the intent of the committee to 
provide the Department of Defense with as much flexibility as 
possible to develop its own processes, organizational 
structures, and initiatives to improve its acquisition view and 
culture. The committee expects, and will support to the maximum 
extent possible, innovative initiatives from the Department 
that improve acquisition outcomes. In the meantime, the 
committee will continue to perform oversight over the 
Department's efforts to reform and improve its acquisition 
culture and practices, and hold senior leaders responsible and 
accountable for those efforts and their success.

             Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

Repeal of temporary suspension of public-private competitions for 
        conversion of Department of Defense functions to performance by 
        contractors (sec. 801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 325 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2253), one year 
after the date of enactment of this Act.
Technical and conforming amendments related to program management 
        provisions (sec. 802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical and conforming amendments related to program 
management provisions from the National Defense Authorization 
Act of 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
Should-cost management (sec. 803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, within 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, to amend the Defense Supplement to the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation to provide for the appropriate 
use of the should-cost review process in a manner that is 
transparent, objective, and provides for the efficiency of the 
systems acquisition process in the Department of Defense. The 
committee remains concerned that the current process utilized 
by the Department of Defense does not meet basic elements of 
transparency or define objective criteria by which should-cost 
determinations are made. Further, the committee expects that 
the Department will incorporate elements that prioritize 
efficiency into the regulations required by this provision.
    The regulations required should incorporate, at a minimum, 
the following elements: (1) a description of the feature 
distinguishing a should-cost review and the analysis of program 
direct and indirect costs; (2) establishment of a process for 
communicating with the contractor the elements of a proposed 
should-cost review; (3) a method for ensuring that identified 
should-cost savings opportunities are based on accurate, 
complete, and current information and are associated with 
specific engineering or business changes that can be quantified 
and tracked; (4) a description of the training, skills, and 
experience, including cross functional experience, that 
Department of Defense and contractor officials carrying out a 
should-cost review should process; (5) a method for ensuring 
appropriate collaboration with the contractor throughout the 
review process; (6) establishment of review process 
requirements that provide for sufficient analysis and minimize 
any impact on program schedule; and (7) a requirement that any 
separate audit or review carried out in connection with the 
should-cost review be provided to the prime contractor under 
the program.

Clarification of purpose of Defense acquisition (sec. 804)

    The committee recommends a provision that would create 
consistency between the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 
and current Department of Defense policies and instructions 
with respect to the purpose of the defense acquisition system. 
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is 
constantly forced to balance equities related to the near and 
far term defense needs as well as defense and national security 
goals and broader national and public policy goals. The 
Department also struggles to align goals relative to improving 
the speed and response to threats with public transparency and 
fiscal stewardship and in executing a growing set of missions 
within a defined budget. The committee remains concerned that 
these balances and goals sometimes drive the Department into 
practices that drive up costs, slow down the acquisition 
process, and result in sub-optimal capabilities being developed 
and deployed to operational forces.

Defense policy advisory committee on technology (sec. 805)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a committee of senior 
executives from U.S. firms in the national technology and 
industrial base who would meet with the Secretary, the 
secretaries of the military departments, and members of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff. The committee would meet annually with 
the Department of Defense from fiscal years 2018 to 2022 to 
discuss technology threats to the national security of the 
United States and emerging technologies that could be used to 
counter such threats. This committee would be exempt from the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) due to the 
sensitive and, at times, classified nature of its work.

Report on extension of development, acquisition, and sustainment 
        authorities of the military departments to the United States 
        Special Operations Command (sec. 806)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a review of the acquisition 
authorities available to the secretaries of the military 
departments and the acquisition executives of the military 
departments to determine the feasibility and advisability of 
providing such authorities to the Commander of the United 
States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and the acquisition 
executive of the Command for the development, acquisition, and 
sustainment of special operations-peculiar technology, 
equipment, and services. The provision would further require 
the Secretary, not later than 120 days after the enactment of 
this Act, to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the 
required review, including the results of the review, an 
identification of the authorities the Secretary recommends be 
extended to SOCOM, recommendations for any modifications of 
such authorities the Secretary considers appropriate for SOCOM, 
recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the 
Secretary considers appropriate for the specified authorities, 
and any other matters the Secretary considers appropriate.
    The committee notes that under section 167 of title 10, 
United States Code, the Commander of SOCOM and the acquisition 
executive of the Command have responsibility for the 
development and acquisition of special operations-peculiar 
equipment and the acquisition of special operations-peculiar 
material, supplies, and services in support of Special 
Operations forces, which have been commonly referred to as 
SOCOM's ``service-like'' responsibilities. However, the 
committee understands that there is a lack of clarity about the 
applicability of acquisition and sustainment authorities 
provided to the secretaries and acquisition executives of the 
military departments to the Commander and acquisition executive 
of SOCOM, which could result in unnecessary bureaucratic burden 
and delays to SOCOM's rapid research and development, 
prototyping, and fielding of technology, equipment, and 
services that are critical to ensure the success of the Command 
in carrying out its missions. As such, the committee believes 
that to the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary should 
provide to the Commander and the acquisition executive of SOCOM 
acquisition and sustainment authorities that are equivalent to 
those provided to the secretaries and acquisition executives of 
the military departments for such purposes.

Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures, 
                            and Limitations

Waiver authority for purposes of expanding competition (sec. 811)

    The committee recommends a provision that would add a new 
subsection to section 2304 of title 10, United States Code, 
that would grant discretionary authority to the Secretary of 
Defense to expand competition for Department of Defense (DOD) 
contracts where there is only one responsible bidder for any 
provision of law other than subsection 2304(c) of title 10, 
United States Code. The committee notes that this provision is 
not intended to affect the authorities of current set aside 
programs including those under the Small Disadvantage Business 
(8(a)) program, the Ability One program, the Berry amendment, 
and small business programs. It is intended to enhance 
opportunities for competition in traditional solicitations for 
DOD goods and services.

Increased simplified acquisition threshold applicable to Department of 
        Defense procurements (sec. 812)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 137 of title 10, United States Code, to set the 
simplified acquisition threshold at $250,000 for the Department 
of Defense in order to reflect a modest increase in inflation 
due to the erosion of purchasing power under the current 
threshold. This will expand opportunities for Small 
Disadvantaged Businesses, Women-Owned Small Businesses, Service 
Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business, and businesses in 
Historically Underutilized Business Zones to contract with the 
Department of Defense to provide innovation and rapid solutions 
and services to the Department.

Increased threshold for cost or pricing data and truth in negotiations 
        requirements (sec. 813)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2306a of title 10, United States Code, to increase the 
threshold for certified cost or pricing data and truth in 
negotiation requirements to $1.0 million. Section 824 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) sets goals for the Secretary of Defense to follow 
in reducing reimbursable costs pertaining to bid and proposal 
submissions. This provision would aid the Department of Defense 
in realizing that goal.

Contract authority for advanced development of initial or additional 
        prototype units (sec. 814)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 137 of title 10, United States Code, and would add a 
new section related to the contract authority allowed for 
advanced development of initial or additional prototype units.

Treatment of independent research and development costs on certain 
        contracts (sec. 815)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2372 of title 10, United States Code, to modify the 
requirements for the Secretary of Defense to create an Advisory 
Panel Related to the Goal for Reimbursable Bid and Proposal 
Costs. The panel should be established if the amount of 
reimbursable bid and proposal costs paid by the Department of 
Defense for a fiscal year exceeds 0.75 percent of the total 
aggregate industry sales to the Department for the fiscal year 
and it should be created by the Secretary within 180 days of 
exceeding such threshold.

Non-traditional contractor definition (sec. 816)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2302(9) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
definition of a non-traditional contractor to better align with 
the definition of an entity, which was intended to be 
interpreted as allowing specific business units within a 
corporation to be considered as non-traditional contractors.

Repeal of domestic source restriction related to wearable electronics 
        (sec. 817)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that the domestic source restrictions authorized under the 
Berry Amendment do not apply to wearable electronics. The 
committee notes that these technologies will provide advanced 
communications, sensing, and medical diagnostics capabilities 
to operational forces.

Use of outcome-based and performance-based requirements for services 
        contracts (sec. 818)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
justification requirement for use of personnel and labor hours 
for the procurement of services valued in excess of $10.0 
million based on specific descriptive personnel and labor hour 
requirements unless the program manager and contracting officer 
first submit to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Sustainment a written justification including the reasons 
for basing the contract on those requirements instead of 
outcome- or performance-based requirements. This authority 
would sunset at the close of September 20, 2022.
    Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States should 
submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
House of Representatives a report on justifications submitted 
pursuant to this provision. The report should review the 
adequacy of the justifications and identify any recurring 
obstacles to the use of outcome- and performance-based 
requirements instead of specified personnel and labor hour 
requirements for purposes of awarding services contracts.

Pilot program for longer term multiyear service contracts (sec. 819)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to use the existing authority under 
subsection (a) of section 2306c of title 10, United States 
Code, to enter into up to 5 contracts for periods of not more 
than 10 years for services described in subsection (b) of such 
section, which may be extended for up to 5 additional 1-year 
terms. This authority would be subject to a reporting 
requirement for the Secretary of Defense to submit a progress 
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives no later than 1 year after the 
date of enactment of this Act. The provision would also require 
a review by the Comptroller General of the United States, who 
would be required to submit a report of to the congressional 
defense committees not later than 2 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act.
    The Secretary of Defense would also be required to enter 
into an agreement no later than 90 days after enactment of this 
Act with an independent organization with relevant expertise to 
study best practices and lessons learned from using services 
contracts for periods longer than 5 years by commercial 
companies, foreign governments, and state governments, as well 
as service contracts for periods longer than 5 years used by 
the Federal Government, such as Energy Savings Performance 
Contracts. Such Energy Savings Performance Contracts provide an 
existing example of longer term multiyear service contracts and 
are an alternative financing mechanism designed to accelerate 
investment in cost effective energy conservation measures in 
existing federal buildings.

Identification of commercial services (sec. 820)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 876 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-283) to require the Secretary 
of Defense to identify those industry subcategories in 
facilities-related services, knowledge-based services 
(excluding engineering services), construction services, 
medical services, or transportation services in which there are 
significant numbers of commercial services providers able to 
meet the requirements of the Department of Defense.

Government Accountability Office bid protest reforms (sec. 821)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 137 of title 10, United States Code, to require 
contractors who file bid protests with the Government 
Accountability Office on a contract with the Department of 
Defense to pay to the Department of Defense costs incurred for 
processing a protest at the Government Accountability Office 
and the Department of Defense when such a protest is filed by a 
party with revenues in excess of $100.0 million during the 
previous year where all of the elements of such protest are 
denied in an opinion by the Government Accountability Office.
    The provision would also require contractors who file a 
protest on a contract on which they are the incumbent to have 
all payments above incurred costs withheld on any bridge 
contracts or temporary contract extensions awarded to the 
contractor as a result of a delay in award resulting from the 
filing of such protest. Such withheld funds should be released 
to a protesting incumbent contractor if: (1) the solicitation 
that is the subject of the protest is cancelled and no 
subsequent request for proposal is released or planned for 
release; or (2) the Government Accountability Office issues an 
opinion that upholds any of the protest grounds filed under the 
protest. If the protested contract for which payments are 
withheld is not awarded to a contractor, the withheld payments 
should be released to the Department of Defense and deposited 
into an account that can be used by the Department to offset 
costs associated with Government Accountability Office bid 
protests.

Enhanced post-award debriefing rights (sec. 822)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, no later than 120 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, to revise the Department of Defense 
Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation to require 
that all mandatory post-award debriefings must provide details 
and comprehensive statements of the agency's rating for each 
evaluation criterion and of the agency's overall award 
decision. The revision would encourage the release of all 
information that would otherwise be releasable in the course of 
a bid protest challenge to an award to protect the confidential 
and proprietary information of other offerors. This provision 
would allow for the opportunity for follow-up questions for a 
disappointed offeror within 2 business days of receiving a 
post-award debriefing to be answered in writing by the agency 
within 5 business days.

Limitation on unilateral definitization (sec. 823)

    The committee recommends a provision that would apply 
limitations and a notice and wait period to all undefinitized 
contractual actions of $50.0 million or greater. Such 
limitations would require that if an agreement is not reached 
on contractual terms, specifications, and price by a date 
certain, the contracting officer may not unilaterally 
definitize those terms, specifications, and price over the 
objection of the contractor until the head of the agency 
approves the definitization in writing, the contracting office 
provides the written approval to the contractor, and the head 
of the agency notifies the congressional defense committees of 
the approval. The contract modification unilaterally 
definitizing the action should not take effect until 60 
calendar days after the congressional defense committees have 
been notified.

Restriction on use of reverse auctions and lowest price technically 
        acceptable contracting methods for safety equipment (sec. 824)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 814 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) in order to restrict the 
Department of Defense (DOD) from the use of reverse auctions 
and lowest price technically acceptable contracting methods 
when procuring critical safety equipment.

Use of lowest price technically acceptable source selection process 
        (sec. 825)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) in order to ensure that 
the Department of Defense is acquiring goods that are providing 
valuable solutions and technology and not just offering 
contracts to bidders with the lowest cost.

Middle tier of acquisition for rapid prototype and rapid fielding (sec. 
        826)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 804(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114--92) to eliminate the cost-
sharing requirement for the rapid prototyping and fielding for 
middle tier acquisition programs.

Elimination of cost underruns as factor in calculation of penalties for 
        cost overruns (sec. 827)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 828(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92; 10 U.S.C. 2430 note) to 
remove the use of cost underruns to offset cost overruns and 
avoid the cost overrun penalty, beginning in fiscal year 2018.

Contract closeout authority (sec. 828)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 836(b)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to extend contract 
closeout authority to those contracts entered into at least 17 
years before the current fiscal year.
    Service contracts of the Department of Defense (sec. 829)
    The committee recommends a provision to require the 
Department of Defense to include certain information on 
services contracts in annual future years defense programs. The 
amendment prohibits initiation of public-private (A-76) 
competitions until this information is provided or until the 
Secretary of Defense certifies that a plan to provide such 
information by the next fiscal year has been developed.

Department of Defense contractor workplace safety and accountability 
        (sec. 830)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
contracting officers, prior to awarding or renewing covered 
contacts, to consider any identified violations of the 
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 or equivalent State 
laws by the offeror or covered subcontractors using publicly 
available information. Contractors would have the right to 
protest bids and appeal actions taken pursuant to this 
provision.
    The Comptroller General of the United States would also be 
required to submit a report not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act to the Department of Defense and 
the congressional defense committees on the following elements: 
(a) A description of the Department of Defense's existing 
procedures to evaluate the safety and health records of current 
and prospective contractors; (b) An evaluation of the 
Department's adherence to those procedures; (c) An assessment 
of the current incidence of health and safety violations by 
Department Contractors; (d) An assessment of whether the 
Department of Labor has the resources to investigate and 
identify safety and health violations by Department of Defense 
contractors; and (e) An assessment of whether the Department of 
Labor should consider assuming an expanded investigatory role 
or a targeted enforcement program for ensuring the safety and 
health of workers under Department of Defense contracts.

Department of Defense promotion of contractor compliance with existing 
        law (sec. 831)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Congress that: (1) the Department of Defense 
should aim to ensure that parties contracting with the Federal 
Government abide by existing law, including worker protection 
laws; (2) worker protection laws, including chapter 43 of title 
38, United States Code and the American with Disabilities Act 
of 1990 were enacted to ensure equitable workplace practices; 
(3) identifying and helping to improve the compliance of 
contractors with worker protection violations will help avoid 
setbacks and delays stemming from contracting with non-
compliant contractors; and (4) the Secretary of Defense has the 
authority to ensure contractors' compliance with existing laws 
and should establish a goal to work with responsible 
contractors who are in compliance with worker protection laws.

 Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Revisions to definition of major defense acquisition program (sec. 835)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 430(a) of title 10, United States Code, to prevent 
programs formerly designated as major automated information 
systems and programs currently designated as business systems 
from being designated as major defense acquisition programs.

Prohibition on use of lowest price technically acceptable source 
        selection process for major defense acquisition programs (sec. 
        836)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 144 of title 10, United States Code, to add a new 
section that would prohibit the use of a lowest price 
technically acceptable source selection process for the 
development contract of a major defense acquisition program 
(MDAP), beginning with programs requested for fiscal year 2019. 
The Secretary of Defense would be required to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a notification of the source 
selection process that the Department of Defense plans to use 
for the development contract of an MDAP, with the budget for 
which authority is requested for the development contract of an 
MDAP, or within 30 days before release of the request for 
proposals for the development contract.
    Federal acquisition regulations provide for a best value 
continuum where the relative importance of cost or price may 
vary. Where the requirement is clearly definable, cost or price 
may play a dominant role. The less definitive the requirement, 
the more development work is required. The greater the 
performance risk, the more technical or past performance may 
play a dominant role. The lowest price technically acceptable 
source selection approach is appropriate when best value is 
expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable 
proposal with the lowest evaluated price. By contrast, a trade-
off process is appropriate when best value is expected to 
result in selecting other than the lowest price or other than 
the highest technically rated proposal and when the process 
allows the government to make trade-offs among cost or price 
and non-cost factors.
    The committee believes that a contract to develop a MDAP 
does not lend itself to a strictly lowest price technically 
acceptable source selection approach. The source selection 
approach used for the development contract for the B-21 long-
range strike bomber, an MDAP, was not characterized by the 
Department of Defense as a lowest price technically acceptable 
process. However, the committee believes that the Department's 
source selection approach more resembled a lowest price 
technically acceptable process rather than a trade-off process. 
Given the high degree of development work required for the 
program and the high degree of performance risk for the vendor, 
as evidenced by the fact that the Department awarded a cost 
plus contract for this effort, the committee believes that a 
source selection process that allowed the government to make 
trade-offs among cost or price and non-cost factors was 
warranted. Going forward, the committee expects the Department 
to use a trade-off source selection process for the development 
contract of a major defense acquisition program.

        Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce

Training in commercial items procurement (sec. 841)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
President of the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) to 
establish a training program on part 12 of the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
    The committee believes that since enactment of the Federal 
Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA), the Congress has 
articulated a policy of favoring commercial procurements, 
including commercial ``of a type'' items. However, 2 decades 
after passage of the FASA, acquisition workforce training in 
the use of FAR Part 12 remains deficient. One of the guiding 
principles of the FAR is to ``maximize the use of commercial 
products and services,'' and section 2377 of title 10, United 
States Code, requires market research to determine what 
commercial items or commercial items ``of a type'' are 
available in the marketplace. FAR part 12 implements the 
Federal Government's preference for the acquisition of 
commercial items contained in sections 1906, 1907, and 3307 of 
title 41, United States Code, and sections 2375-2377 of title 
10, United States Code, by establishing acquisition policies 
more closely resembling those of the commercial marketplace and 
encouraging the acquisition of commercial items and components.
    Despite this, the committee believes that DAU courses have 
very little content involving the training of the acquisition 
workforce in matters related to FAR part 12 and the procurement 
of commercial items. The 2014 Defense Business Board report, 
``Innovation: Attracting and Retaining the Best of the Private 
Sector,'' noted that acquisition training by DAU was 
``insufficient to meet the needs of the Department'' and ``an 
example of training deficiency is the lack of training on 
market research . . . [causing] acquisition and contracting 
personnel [to] fall back on cost-based judgments for 
contracting decisions.'' Accordingly, this provision would aim 
to provide comprehensive training to the acquisition workforce 
on the use of part 12.

Modification of definition of acquisition workforce to include 
        personnel engaged in the acquisition or development of 
        cybersecurity systems (sec. 842)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1705(h)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, to 
include personnel who are engaged in the acquisition of systems 
related to cybersecurity to the list of personnel who may be 
trained under the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce 
Development Fund.

Training and support for programs pursuing agile acquisition methods 
        (sec. 843)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the President of the 
Defense Acquisition University, to establish an in-resident 
targeted training course at the Defense Acquisition University 
on agile acquisition.

Credits to Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund 
        (sec. 844)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1705(d)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify that the Secretary of Defense may adjust the amount for 
a fiscal year to an amount that is more than $600.0 million or 
less than $400.0 million if the Secretary determines that the 
amount is greater or less than reasonably needed for the 
purposes of the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce 
Development Fund for such fiscal year to assist with 
acquisition workforce planning and development.

           Subtitle E--Provisions Related to Commercial Items

Modification to definition of commercial items (sec. 851)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2376 of title 10, United States Code, to amend the 
definition of ``commercial item'' for minor modifications 
ensure that government-unique systems and technologies are not 
treated as commercial items.

Revision to definition of commercial item (sec. 852)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 103(8) of title 41, United States Code, to clarify that 
nondevelopmental items are commercial items when the procuring 
agency determines, in accordance with conditions in the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation, that the item was developed exclusively 
at private expense and has been sold in substantial quantities 
on a competitive basis to multiple local, state, or foreign 
governments.

Commercial item determinations (sec. 853)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2380 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that a 
contract or sub-contract relating to the prior acquisition of 
an item using commercial item acquisition procedures under part 
12 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) should serve as 
a prior commercial item determination under this section of 
title 10.
    Additionally, the committee notes that a significant 
barrier to retaining commercial item determinations occurs when 
a determination is made by a prime contractor as part of the 
acquisition of a major weapons system. The Department of 
Defense (DOD) contracting officers and Defense Contracting 
Activity officials have recently not recognized prime 
contractor commercial item determinations for sustainment 
contracts, despite the fact that these items have been sold 
under FAR part 12 to prime contractors for years. Accordingly, 
this provision would also amend section 2306a(b)(4)(A) of title 
10, United States Code, to clarify the current statute to 
provide that previous commercial item determinations made by a 
prime contractor in the acquisition of a commercial item for 
DOD will be afforded the same presumption as if that 
determination were made by a contracting officer.

Preference for acquisition of commercial items (sec. 854)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2377(b) of title 10, United States Code, to ensure that 
the acquisition of commercial items and nondevelopmental items 
take priority over any small business set-aside program that 
would result in a non-commercial offering but to clarify that 
contracts for commercial items may be set aside for small 
business.

Inapplicable laws and regulations (sec. 855)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to review and, if necessary, revise the 
Procedures by which the Department of Defense applies 
government-unique regulations to the process by which it buys 
commercial items. It further eliminates all regulations not 
required by law that were promulgated after the Federal 
Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1996 (Public Law 103-355) that 
create government-unique clauses in contracts or subcontracts 
for the acquisition of commercial items and commercial off the 
shelf (COTS) items, except for regulations that the Secretary 
determines are vital to national security or required by law.

                  Subtitle F--Industrial Base Matters

Review regarding applicability of foreign ownership, control, or 
        influence requirements of national security industrial program 
        to national technology and industrial base companies (sec. 861)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to review whether companies whose 
ownership is based in countries that are part of the national 
technology and industrial base (as defined by section 2500 of 
title 10, United States Code) should be exempted from the 
foreign ownership, control, or influence (FOCI) requirements of 
the National Security Industrial Program. This provision would 
also allow the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of 
the Secretary of State, to maintain a list of companies whose 
ownership is based in countries that are part of the national 
technology and industrial base that are eligible for such an 
exemption from FOCI.

Pilot program on strengthening manufacturing in defense industrial base 
        (sec. 862)

    The committee recommends a provision that would create a 
pilot program that would authorize the Department of Defense to 
use existing authorities to support investments that enhance 
the ability of the defense industrial base to meet military 
needs. The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
depends on a strong manufacturing and industrial base, 
especially as it seeks to modernize weapons systems to address 
global threats. This base is increasingly tied to the 
commercial manufacturing and industrial base, and a growing 
number of defense systems are dependent on dual-use commercial 
technologies and systems.
    The provision authorizes the Department to invest in the 
manufacture of these kinds of technologies and systems, 
especially through the use of contracts, loan guarantees, 
direct loans, and purchases of equipment to support the startup 
of needed production lines. Further, the provisions allows the 
Department to engage with private sector financing and 
investment instruments, including instruments that take equity 
stakes in concerns--so as to support needed advanced 
manufacturing capabilities. The committee believes that these 
kinds of activities will improve the return on investment of 
government research programs, as well as helping critical 
defense suppliers maintain domestic manufacturing capabilities 
in the face of global competition.

Sunset of certain provisions relating to the industrial base (sec. 863)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2534 of title 10, United States Code, to sunset the 
miscellaneous limitation on the procurement of goods other than 
United States goods at the close of September 30, 2018 relating 
to photovoltaic devices.

             Subtitle G--International Contracting Matters

Procurement exception relating to agreements with foreign governments 
        (sec. 865)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2533a of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
the requirement pertaining to procurement of items grown, 
reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States does not 
preclude the acquisition of items as part of a weapon system if 
the acquisition is necessary in furtherance of an agreement 
with a foreign government in which both governments agree to 
remove barriers to purchases of supplies produced in the other 
country or services performed by sources of the other country.

Applicability of cost and pricing data certification requirements (sec. 
        866)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2306a(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
that additional certification is not required for a foreign 
military sale where there is already an existing U.S. 
Government contract for the same or similar item or service for 
which the U.S. Government has current cost and pricing data and 
insights into the reasonableness of price.

Enhancing program licensing (sec. 867)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State, to establish a structure implementing a revised program 
export licensing framework in order to provide comprehensive 
export licensing authorization to support large international 
cooperative defense programs between multiple nations and 
determine what, if any, regulatory authorities require 
modification.

                     Subtitle H--Other Transactions

Use of Other Transaction Authority

    The passage of section 815 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) 
created the authority to use Other Transaction Authority (OTA) 
for prototyping and production purposes. The committee is 
pleased to see new and longstanding users of other transactions 
make additional use of this important and flexible contracting 
method. However, the committee remains frustrated by an ongoing 
lack of awareness and education regarding other transactions, 
particularly among senior leaders, contracting professionals, 
and lawyers. This lack of knowledge leads to an overly narrow 
interpretation of when OTAs may be used, narrow delegations of 
authority to make use of OTAs, a belief that OTAs are options 
of last resort for when Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 
based alternatives have been exhausted, and restrictive, risk 
averse interpretations of how OTAs may be used. These behaviors 
force innovative projects and programs into unnecessarily 
restrictive contracting methods, needlessly adding bureaucracy, 
cost, and time.
    The statutory authority for other transactions as 
delineated in section 2371 and 2371b of title 10, United States 
Code, is written in an intentionally broad manner. The 
Department of Defense (DOD) should interpret these authorities 
accordingly, recognizing that it has authority to use OTAs with 
the most flexible possible interpretation unless otherwise 
specified in those particular sections. Making use of OTAs, and 
their associated flexibility, may require senior leaders and 
Congress to tolerate more risk. The committee is willing to 
tolerate that risk, as long as it is well understood and 
communicated to oversight officials, and when responsibility 
for such risk is assigned to appropriate, accountable 
officials. Such risks can, and should, be mitigated through 
various means from oversight to program design and acquisition 
strategies. Importantly, any such risk must be viewed as lesser 
than the risks of stymieing innovation or slowing the 
development and fielding of critical new capabilities.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee removes additional 
barriers to the use of OTAs while also requiring DOD to 
increase education and awareness of these authorities. The 
committee does not wish to add further explicit authorities for 
specific functions under section 2371 or section 2371b of title 
10, United States Code, as doing so may lead to the incorrect 
impression that all potential functions that may be executed 
under OTAs must be stated in statute. However, two common 
misinterpretations deserve clarification here.
    First, it is necessary to clarify the definition of small 
business for purposes of prototype project authority. The 
committee notes that OTAs have proven to be successful in 
helping the Department attract nontraditional performers, 
including small businesses. These performers carry out 
prototype projects that enhance the mission effectiveness of 
military personnel. The committee encourages and supports DOD's 
efforts to expand its use of OTA for funding agreements under 
the Small Business Innovation Research program and Small 
Business Technology Transfer program.
    The mission of these two small business programs is to 
support scientific excellence and technological innovation 
through the investment of federal research funds in critical 
American priorities to build a strong national economy. 
Encouraging and supporting the Department of Defense to use 
proven innovative procurement processes such as OTAs for 
funding agreements under the small business programs will both 
enhance the mission effectiveness of the Department and help 
accomplish the mission of the programs.
    Second, it is necessary to clarify the follow-on production 
contracts using OTA. The committee notes that there has been 
some uncertainty about the proper interpretation of the 
requirements for follow-on production when using a consortium 
OTA model. Paragraph (f)(2) of section 2371b of title 10, 
United States Code, detailing the authority created in section 
815, states that follow-on production ``may be awarded to the 
participants in the transaction without the use of competitive 
procedures . . . if
                  (A) competitive procedures were used for the 
                selection of parties for participation in the 
                transaction; and
                  (B) the participants in the transaction 
                successfully completed the prototype project 
                provided for in the transaction.''
    ``Competitive procedures'' refers to a competition for 
award of an OTA to a consortium or a competition for a 
particular project. Follow-on production contracts and 
transactions entered into pursuant to this section should be 
structured to maximize access to the participant's products, as 
appropriate, from any organization within DOD. Accordingly, 
contracting officers should use a variety of established 
acquisition tools, including a modification to the original 
consortium-based or individual prototype project award, a 
separate OTA, or a FAR acquisition instrument. This will allow 
for a swifter, seamless transition of cutting-edge technologies 
to the warfighter throughout the acquisition process.

Other transaction authority (sec. 871)

    The committee recommends a provision to streamline the 
process by which authorized officials may enter in ``other 
transaction agreements'' by removing the requirement for the 
specific approval by senior acquisition officials for the use 
of such agreements for large projects. This provision would 
also amend this authority to allow for the required one-third 
cost share to be supplied by third party private investment.

Education and training for transactions other than contracts and grants 
        (sec. 872)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
subsection (g) of section 2371 of title 10, United States Code, 
to require the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the 
Department of Defense provides sufficient education and 
training in the use of transactions other than contracts and 
grants.
    The committee is pleased with the successful use of Other 
Transactions to support acquisition speed and innovation. 
However, those seeking to make use of Other Transaction 
Authorities are too frequently stymied in their efforts by an 
acquisition workforce unfamiliar with the use of those 
authorities. Accordingly, the committee directs the United 
States Army Contracting Command, U.S. Navy Research Laboratory, 
United States Air Force Office of Transformational Innovation, 
and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to develop, 
in collaboration with the Defense Acquisition University, an 
Other Transaction Authority curriculum of education, training, 
and experiential learning for executives, program managers, 
contracting officers, lawyers, and other relevant stakeholders. 
This curriculum may be developed and executed using funds from 
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund.

Preference for use of other transactions and experimental authority 
        (sec. 873)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a preference for using 
transactions other than contracts, contracts, cooperative 
agreements, and grants for science and technology, prototyping, 
and experimental purposes pursuant to sections 2371, 2371b, and 
2373 of title 10, United States Code. This preference should 
include funds expended from 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, and other 
accounts used for the purposes of science and technology, 
prototyping, and experimental purposes.

Methods for entering into research agreements (sec. 874)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2358 of title 10, United States Code, to explicitly 
authorize the use of Other Transactions Authority and 
Experimental Procurement Authority as methods for entering into 
research agreements with industry, academia, and other 
researchers and technology developers.
    The committee supports Department efforts to improve the 
pace of technological development of advanced military systems 
to meet current and future threats, and it believes that these 
types of research agreements can be effective in improving the 
speed of development and operational use of technologies and 
can reduce program costs. The committee believes that the use 
of these approaches for research efforts is already authorized 
and legal under existing law, but there is bureaucratic and 
cultural resistance to using these methods that limits their 
use by the bulk of the defense research and engineering 
enterprise. The committee notes that this provision is intended 
to provide more encouragement for the Department to use these 
types of approaches as it seeks to speed the process of 
technological innovation.

   Subtitle I--Development and Acquisition of Software Intensive and 
                     Digital Products and Services

Digitizing the Department of Defense business, enterprise, and 
        warfighting capabilities

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense's 
warfighting, business, and enterprise capabilities are 
increasingly reliant on or driven by software and information 
technology. The committee notes with concern that the 
Department is behind other federal agencies and industry in 
implementing best practices for acquisition of software and 
information technology capabilities, to include agile and 
incremental development methods and associated training, tools, 
and infrastructure.
    The committee notes that existing law and acquisition 
regulation provide significant flexibility to the Department 
and that the Department has explicitly provided for tailoring 
in its acquisition directives and instructions. The committee 
is concerned, however, that, despite the aforementioned, the 
organizational culture and tradition of acquiring capabilities 
using a hardware-dominant approach remains the status quo and 
as such represents a significant impediment to effectively 
tailoring acquisition approaches to incorporate agile and 
incremental development methods suited to software-intensive 
business, enterprise, and warfighting capabilities.
    The committee contends that the implementation of such 
methods--which represent best practices for both industry and 
government--is absolutely vital to delivering capabilities. To 
ensure the adoption of such practices, the committee expects 
the Department to:
          (1) Strengthen the Chief Information Officer's role 
        in software intensive and information technology 
        reliant business, enterprise, and warfighting 
        capabilities as described elsewhere in this Act, by 
        establishing and enforcing information technology 
        policies and standards, planning and programming, and 
        budget formulation and execution;
          (2) Make use of existing flexibilities via, through 
        two pilot programs described elsewhere in this Act;
          (3) Push forward in implementing agile development 
        methods via additional flexibilities in conducting a 
        third pilot described elsewhere in this Act; and
          (4) Invest in tools and training through efforts 
        described elsewhere in this act to better support the 
        acquisition workforce.

Rights in technical data (sec. 881)

    The committee recommends a provision what would amend 
section 2302 of title 10, United States Code, to define 
technical data with respect to software acquired by, and the 
means by which that data is provided to, the Department of 
Defense. The committee is concerned that the Department of 
Defense does not have access to, or make use of, all the data 
associated with software required to develop, configure, adapt, 
or maintain its software assets.
    The technical data required to effectively manage and 
maintain software assets goes well beyond documentation to 
include source code and also the data associated with the 
development, configuration, and testing of that code. The 
Department of Defense must ensure that it maintains access to 
such data as a prerequisite for improving its software 
practices and outcomes.

Defense Innovation Board analysis of software acquisition regulations 
        (sec. 882)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Defense Innovation Board to complete an analysis of software 
development and acquisition regulations for the Department of 
Defense. The committee is concerned about the state of software 
development and acquisition within the Department of Defense 
and is seeking recommendations on authorities and regulations 
the committee might create or remove in order to better enable 
the Department to improve its software outcomes. The committee 
is particularly interested in the Defense Innovation Board's 
recommendations on methods by which to enable the use of 
industry best practices within the Department of Defense. The 
Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Defense Innovation 
Board has access to any information it requires to undertake 
this analysis.
    This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to 
report to the congressional defense committees on the 
preliminary findings no later than 150 days after the enactment 
of this Act. No later than 1 year after the Secretary tasks the 
Defense Innovation Board with the study, the Board should 
submit its report to the Secretary; no later than 30 days after 
receipt, the Secretary should submit the final report, together 
with such comments as the Secretary determines appropriate, to 
the congressional defense committees. The committee has 
authorized $1.0 million to be spent on personnel conducting 
this review, as reflected in the military personnel budget 
item.

Pilot to tailor software-intensive major programs to use agile methods 
        (sec. 883)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Department of Defense to identify one major program per service 
and one major program acquired by a defense agency or other DOD 
component and use tailoring to realign those programs into 
smaller increments to deliver meaningfully useful capability 
within 180 days of realignment.
    To achieve this objective the Department shall use the 
tools, resources, and expertise of digital and innovation 
organizations, such as the Defense Innovation Board; Defense 
Innovation Unit Experimental; Defense Science Board; Defense 
Digital Service; federally funded research and development 
centers, research laboratories, and other technical, 
management, and acquisition experts; the General Services 
Administration's Office of 18F; and the science, technology, 
and innovation activities established pursuant to section 217 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92).

Review and realignment of defense business systems to emphasize agile 
        methods (sec. 884)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of 
investments in business systems and use tailoring to realign 
those programs to emphasize agile methods. The committee is 
encouraged by the flexibility outlined in the Department of 
Defense's (DOD) recent instruction DOD 5000.75 regarding 
categorization, development, and acquisition of defense 
business systems. Recognizing the Department's efforts to 
challenge the limitations of traditional approaches to 
developing and acquiring defense business systems, in executing 
section 2222(b)(4) of title 10, United States Code, via the 
Department's new instruction, the committee encourages the 
Department to act swiftly and boldly to implement tailoring of 
existing investments to reflect best practices in software-
intensive programs and portfolio and category management of 
such programs.
    In conducting this review, the Secretary should use: the 
tools, resources, and expertise of digital and innovation 
organizations, including the Defense Innovation Board, Defense 
Innovation Unit Experimental, Defense Science Board, Defense 
Digital Service, federally funded research and development 
centers, research laboratories, and other technical, 
management, and acquisition experts; the General Services 
Administration's Office of 18F; and the science, technology, 
and innovation activities established pursuant to section 217 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92).

Software development pilot using agile best practices (sec. 885)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to identify between four and eight 
software development activities within the Department of 
Defense or military departments and pilot the use of modern 
agile methods as well as oversight metrics appropriate for 
agile development.
    To achieve this objective the Secretary should: direct the 
use of streamlined processes and available rapid solicitation 
procedures (and not lowest price technically acceptable or cost 
plus contracts); direct a vision and a road map; leverage the 
Digital Services Playbook; direct the use of commercial best 
practices for advanced computing systems; award within three 
months of identification, delivery of functionality; direct 
delivery of follow-on capability 2 weeks apart.
    Personnel resourced toward these efforts should include a 
program manager, product owner, engineering lead, design lead, 
with certain qualifications best suited for agile development.
    Data rights should obtain such that software is open source 
and such that the copyright holder provides for it to be 
publicly available or such that sufficient data rights enable 
any third party to continue or to maintain it.
    Certain restrictions regarding the use of funds and 
contract types apply.
    In conducting this review, the Secretary should use the 
tools, resources, and expertise of digital and innovation 
organizations, including the Defense Innovation Board, Defense 
Innovation Unit Experimental, Defense Science Board, Defense 
Digital Service, federally funded research and development 
centers, research laboratories, and other technical, 
management, and acquisition experts; the General Services 
Administration's Office of 18F; and science, technology, and 
innovation activities established pursuant to section 217 the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92).
    The Secretary should report on commencement and completion 
of the pilot activity under this section.

Use of open source software (sec. 886)

    The committee recommends a provision to improve the 
Department of Defense's management of the source code, and 
other technical data, associated with its custom developed 
computer software. This provision covers unclassified, non-
defense item software and does not apply to any items covered 
by section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778). 
The provision directs the Secretary to update the Defense 
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to ensure 
that the Department negotiates access to its own code, manage 
that code using open source licenses, and identify means by 
which it can better manage the code base associated with its 
legacy software. The Secretary of Defense is also directed to 
consult with experts from the Defense Innovation Board, DARPA, 
the NSA, and the Defense Digital Service when updating the 
DFARS and drafting additional policy or instructions on the use 
of open source software and to make use of existing Department 
of Defense open source resources where possible. The provision 
further directs the Department to make use of technology prize 
competitions for improving, repurposing, or reusing software, 
and to identify methods to reverse engineer Department of 
Defense software for which source code is unavailable.

                       Subtitle J--Other Matters

Improved transparency and oversight over Department of Defense 
        research, development, test, and evaluation efforts and 
        procurement activities related to medical research (sec. 891)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense from entering into a contract, grant, 
or cooperative agreement for congressional special interest 
medical research program under the Congressionally Directed 
Medical Research Program of the Department of Defense unless 
there is sufficient compliance with cost accounting standards 
and other specified requirements.

Rights in technical data related to medical research (sec. 892)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
special interest medical research programs under the 
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program of the 
Department of Defense to include agreements that provide the 
United States Government with the same rights to the technical 
data that apply to items or processes developed under the 
contract, grant, or cooperative agreement as applicable under 
section 2320(a)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, to items 
and processes developed exclusively with federal funds.

Oversight, audit, and certification from the Defense Contract Audit 
        Agency for procurement activities related to medical research 
        (sec. 893)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Defense Contract Audit Agency to certify the adequacy of the 
accounting systems and perform an incurred cost audit prior to 
the obligation of funds for congressional special interest 
medical research programs under the Congressionally Directed 
Medical Research Program of the Department of Defense.

Requirements for Defense Contract Audit Agency report (sec. 894)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
standard definition for the Defense Contract Audit Agency's 
(DCAA) reporting on its backlog. In future reporting, DCAA 
should include any individual incurred cost audit that has not 
been completed within 18 months after receipt of a qualified 
proposal as part of the incurred cost audit backlog.

Prototype projects to digitize defense acquisition regulations, 
        policies, and guidance, and empower user tailoring of 
        acquisition process (sec. 895)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Research and Engineering, to develop prototypes to 
digitize defense acquisition regulations, policies, and 
guidance. The committee is concerned that the Department of 
Defense lacks the tools to effectively tailor its acquisition 
practices for specific projects. Acquisition policy itself 
states that policies are tailorable, but such flexibilities are 
rarely made use of in practice. The Department should therefore 
leverage a digital support tool to facilitate such tailoring in 
accordance with existing laws, regulations, and guidance.

Pilot program for adoption of acquisition strategy for Defense Base Act 
        insurance (sec. 896)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program for the 
United States Army Corps of Engineers for purposes of adopting 
an acquisition strategy for insurance required by the Defense 
Base Act (32 U.S.C. 1651, et seq.) in order the minimize the 
cost of such insurance to the Department of Defense. The 
contract entered into under this authority would be effective 
for at least 3 years, or as considered appropriate by the 
Secretary. The committee notes that this provision is not 
intended to change policies on support of workmen's 
compensation or reduce compensation practices. The committee 
believes that the provision should result in a more efficient 
acquisition strategy that reduces costs to the Department of 
Defense.

Phase III awards (sec. 897)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 9(r)(4) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
638(r)(4)). The provision would clarify that the issuance of 
Phase III awards should give preference to the Small Business 
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology 
Transfer (STTR) award recipients who developed the technology. 
This provision would also clarify that SBIR and STTR award 
recipients should fulfill the competition requirements under 
section 2304 of title 10, United States Code, for military 
procurement.

Pilot program for streamlined technology transition from the SBIR and 
        STTR programs of the Department of Defense (sec. 898)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program for the 
commercialization of products and services produced by covered 
small business concerns developed through the Small Business 
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology 
Transfer (STTR) programs. For this pilot program, the Secretary 
of Defense should set up a multiple award contract for those 
products and services. The pilot program would terminate on 
September 30, 2023.

Annual report on limitation of subcontractor intellectual property 
        rights (sec. 899)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees, no later than 180 days after the enactment of this 
Act and annually for 5 years afterwards, a report listing all 
contracts entered into during the previous fiscal year using 
procedures under part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation 
where the prime contractor limited the intellectual property 
rights of one or more subcontractors without being required to 
do so by the United States Government.

Extension from 20 to 30 years of maximum total period for Department of 
        Defense contracts for storage, handling, or distribution of 
        liquid fuels and natural gas (sec. 899A)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2922(b) of title 10, United States Code, to raise the 
maximum period of Department of Defense contracts for storage, 
handling, or distribution of liquid fuels and natural gas from 
20 to 30 years. The committee believes that the 20-year 
limitation is outdated, since modern fuel storage 
infrastructure is capable of operating for up to 30 years and 
could produce substantial savings.

Exception for Department of Defense contracts from requirement that 
        business operations conducted under government contracts accept 
        and dispense $1 coins (sec. 899B)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 5112(p)(1) of title 31, United States Code, to exempt 
Department of Defense contracts from the requirements in order 
to relieve the cost burden on the Department associated with 
these regulations.

Investing in rural small businesses (sec. 899C)

    The committee recommends a provision that expands the pool 
of eligible communities for the Small Business Administration's 
(SBA) Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) 
program and provides much-needed flexibility to rural small 
businesses participating in the program. This provision allows 
governors to directly petition SBA to designate additional 
rural areas as HUBZones; reduces the number of a small firm's 
employees required to live within a HUBZone from 35 to 33 
percent; and requires SBA's HUBZone office to make a decision 
on a governor's application within 60 days.

                       Items of Special Interest

Assess requirements in certain categories of business systems for 
        consolidation to pursue cost-effective solutions

    The committee notes with concern that the military services 
continue to separately procure business systems in categories 
where requirements could be consolidated for efficiency and 
cost-effectiveness, such as contract writing, personnel and 
pay, and enterprise resource programs. Accordingly, the 
committee has recommended reductions in the research and 
development and procurement accounts for systems in these 
categories.
    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
refocus its efforts toward common solutions in these 
categories. As outlined under DOD Instruction 5000.75 
pertaining to defense business systems, the Department should 
take a portfolio approach to categories, should leverage the 
use of fixed-price contracting, and pursue the use of 
commercial-off-the-shelf solutions that minimize customization, 
and more frequent delivery of increments. Leveraging the use of 
fixed-price contracts entails that sufficient technical risk, 
business process re-engineering, and software engineering work 
has been done prior to contract award.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee has established a 
pilot program for business systems that would encourage use of 
commercial best practices in cost-effective agile development, 
and the committee recommends that the systems separately 
pursued by the military services in these categories be 
considered for participation in that pilot.

Avoidance of specification of contractor facility locations in 
        solicitations and contract requirements

    The committee notes with concern the use by the United 
States Department of the Army organizations of contract 
requirements that set specific criteria for locations of 
contractor facilities. The committee notes that in some cases 
these restrictive requirements are driven by law or policy, and 
that in some cases the location of a contractor's facility may 
be a legitimate factor in source selection designed to produce 
the best value for warfighters and taxpayers. However, these 
types of restrictions may also be used to unfairly limit 
competitions to favor specific contractors. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to identify all 
solicitations released in the past 2 years which specify 
contractor location as a requirement for contract award. The 
Secretary should then determine whether this requirement was 
justified based on statutory, regulatory, or policy 
requirements, or are legitimately a differentiator in 
determining the best value to soldiers and to the taxpayer. The 
committee directs the Secretary to report the results of this 
review and analysis to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives, no later than June 1, 
2018.

Commercial off-the-shelf power supplies

    The Committee understands the implementation of commercial 
items in military systems offers significant opportunities for 
reduced development time, faster insertion of new technology, 
and lower life-cycle costs. Maximizing the use of commercially 
mature technology provides the greatest opportunity to meet 
program cost, schedule, and performance objectives and is 
consistent with an evolutionary acquisition strategy to address 
today's threats.
    However, the committee is concerned that program managers 
apply a broad brush stroke to the use of commercial items in an 
effort to address these objectives, introducing unnecessary 
risk to systems in the interest of a cost or schedule tradeoff. 
The fact remains, commercially available power supplies remain 
a primary failure mode of military systems. The cost and 
schedule savings driven from the implementation of commercially 
available power supplies in military aircraft, ground vehicles, 
and ships is rarely worth the risk introduced to the system 
based on the unreliable design of commercial power supplies. 
Commercially available power supplies are not robustly designed 
to account for military environments, including the threats 
posed by electromagnetic interference, varying temperature and 
humidity conditions, or the shock and vibration loads commonly 
found on military platforms.
    Today's industrial base does offer a range of robust power 
supply products specifically designed for military 
environments. These robust products consider design 
specifications in line with the rugged environments in which 
they'll by subjected to throughout their lifecycle. These 
considerations lead to a highly reliable power supply that 
significantly reduces this as a failure mode.
    The committee encourages program managers and acquisition 
professionals to pay particular attention to the intended 
product use environment and understand the extent to which this 
environment differs from the commercial use environment. 
Further, the committee expects appropriate testing and 
qualification of power supplies to ensure technical risk is 
reduced.

Comptroller General evaluation of Contractor Business Systems 
        Improvement Program

    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit to the congressional defense committees a 
report evaluating the extent to which the Contractor Business 
Systems Improvement Program established pursuant to section 893 
of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note) has 
improved the ability of the contractors to perform work on 
Department programs and the ability of the Department of 
Defense to manage and oversee contractor performance. This 
report is due no later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act. The evaluation should cover the following topics:
          (1) A description of how the program was implemented, 
        including scope, roles, and responsibilities; data 
        generated; and program activities;
          (2) An accounting of program implementation costs to 
        the Department;
          (3) An assessment of program implementation costs to 
        contractors, including an accounting of costs to 
        implement and how these costs compare to the value of 
        the contractor's total gross revenue allocated to 
        United States Government contracts;
          (4) Identification of how the Contractor Business 
        Systems Improvement Program led to improvements in 
        contractor performance on programs or improved 
        Department management and Department oversight of the 
        programs, considering the various phase of the 
        acquisition process (acquisition planning, award, 
        administration, oversight, and closeout);
          (5) An assessment of the relative value and role of 
        independent third party auditors and government 
        auditors in assessing a contractor's business systems;
          (6) Identification of information that would be 
        useful to the Department and contractors in assessing 
        contractor business systems;
          (7) Identification of improvements in management and 
        oversight in situations where contractors perform on 
        more than one Department program;
          (8) Representative case studies; and
          (9) A description of any other matters the 
        Comptroller General determines to be relevant.

Cybersecurity in modernizing the Department of Defense healthcare 
        management system

    The Department of Defense Healthcare Management System 
Modernization (DHMSM) program is designed to support a 
continuum of medical care for military personnel and enable 
healthcare personnel to easily access service members' medical 
records worldwide. In fiscal year 2017, the Department 
successfully fielded DHMSM to a small, outpatient-only hospital 
at Fairchild Air Force Base. The committee notes that the 
Program Executive Office DHMS has worked closely with both the 
Department's medical community and the DHMSM contractor to re-
engineer the Department's medical business processes to adapt 
to the contractor's existing, off-the-shelf medical business 
software solution. The committee also notes that the 
Department's swift deployment of capability to Fairchild 
demonstrates the Department's progress in implementing best 
practices for IT acquisition. The committee strongly approves 
of these actions as they reduce risk and save time and money 
for the Department.
    The committee is encouraged by the recent decision that the 
Department of Veterans Affairs will use Department of Defense's 
Military Health System (MHS) Genesis as its future electronic 
health record system, as this represents an opportunity for 
significant efficiencies and to ease transition and 
interoperability between service members' and veterans' records 
who are entering the VA's medical system.
    The committee notes that the program has funded extensive 
cybersecurity testing and this is appropriate for a system that 
will eventually store medical and financial information for 
over 9 million DOD beneficiaries worldwide. However, the 
committee is concerned that many of the cybersecurity problems 
discovered to date have not yet been fixed. The committee is 
concerned it would put the medical records of DOD personnel -- 
and, given the VA's recent decision to use MHS Genesis, 
potentially veterans as well--at unnecessary risk, and 
accordingly the committee strongly encourages the Department to 
address cybersecurity vulnerabilities prior to additional 
deployments.

Cybersecurity Regulation--Small Business Compliance Assistance

    The committee supports efforts by the Department of Defense 
to develop a new cyber security and incident reporting process 
for defense contractors with access to controlled unclassified 
information stored on or processed by contractor information 
systems, as required by Section 914 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239). 
The committee is aware, however, that the Department's 
implementation of this requirement through the new contracting 
clause on Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber 
Incident Reporting in DFARS 252.204-7012 has been a cause of 
concern and confusion from many in industry, including small 
businesses and businesses for which defense revenue is a small 
portion of their overall operations. The committee is aware of 
the Department's efforts to assist industry with implementation 
of this new guidance, but remains concerned by the degree to 
which small businesses and other non-traditional defense 
contractors are struggling to meet this requirement. Therefore, 
the Committee urges the Department to collaborate with 
universities or other organizations to provide low-cost 
cybersecurity services to small businesses, as recommended by 
the U.S. Small Businesses Administration Office of Advocacy in 
a public comment published on February 29, 2016, and increase 
outreach efforts to small businesses regarding their 
obligations under the regulation.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to 
review industry compliance with the DFARS clause, including 
particular compliance challenges among small businesses 
producing commercial items with defense revenue as only a small 
share of overall revenue. The review should also assess the 
efficacy of the Department's efforts to assist industry with 
implementation and should include input from affected 
contractors, including both prime and subcontractors. Finally, 
the review should consider and make a recommendation regarding 
any delay or exception to the December 31, 2017 compliance 
deadline and the associated impact on both the Department's 
access to the industrial base and cyber and information 
security standards. The Secretary shall brief the armed 
services committees of the House and Senate on the results of 
the review no later than October 15, 2017.

Defense Acquisition University research collaboration with academia

    The committee notes that the Defense Acquisition University 
performs some research on acquisition policy issues in order to 
improve training of acquisition professionals and to support 
development of innovative acquisition models and practices. The 
committee believes that these activities should be expanded and 
better connected with research efforts and expertise in 
academia. Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the 
Defense Acquisition University to develop, maintain, and 
promulgate a list of high priority academic research and 
analysis topics on defense acquisition policy issues. The 
intent of this list is to make academic and government-
affiliated researchers aware of the topics that are of 
particular concern to the defense acquisition community and to 
guide their research to areas that will have a higher 
likelihood of impact. The committee notes that the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) provided specific authority for the Department of Defense 
to use funds within the Defense Acquisition Workforce 
Development Fund to support some of these types of research 
activities and that section 217 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) 
authorized a program of science and technology activities that 
were in part intended to leverage research capabilities to 
improve acquisition policies and practices.

Defense Innovation Unit Experimental

    The committee applauds the Defense Innovation Unit 
Experimental (DIUx) for accelerating the adoption of private 
sector innovations by the Department. The services DIUx offers 
are important to accessing technological advances from 
nontraditional defense contractors, for whom the speed of 
defense contracting presents too great a hurdle to do business.
    The committee encourages DIUx to continue to support 
Department of Defense missions by providing flexible and 
streamlined acquisition of new technologies. The committee 
directs the Department to consider expanding the mission of the 
Unit to include new physical locations at which DIUx may post 
reservists as in the model piloted in Austin, Texas, with a 
specific emphasis on evaluating locations that would allow a 
close collaboration with Department of Defense laboratories.

Department of Defense exemptions from certain regulations

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review, 
no later than January 1, 2018, the costs and benefits of 
exempting purchases by the Department of Defense and the 
National Nuclear Security Administration from the following 
executive orders and presidential memorandum as necessary: (1) 
Executive Order 13706 (Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal 
Contractors); (2) Executive Order 13655 (Non-Retaliation of 
Disclosure of Compensation Information) (3) Executive Order 
13655 (Non-Retaliation for Disclosure of Compensation 
Information); (4) Presidential Memorandum: Advancing Pay 
Equality Through Compensation Data Collection; (5) Presidential 
Memorandum: Updating and Modernizing Overtime Regulations; (6) 
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies 
on Contractor Tax Delinquency; (7) Executive Order 13495 
(Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts); 
(8) Executive Order 13494 (Economy in Government Contracting); 
(9) Executive Order 13496 (Notification of Employee Rights 
Under Federal Labor Laws); and (10) Executive Order 13502 (Use 
of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects).
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to recommend 
exemptions or changes as necessary to best support efficient 
and effective execution of Department of Defense missions.

Exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals

    Consistent with existing acquisition regulations and 
committee initiatives, the committee believes that exchanges of 
information among all interested parties, from the earliest 
identification of a requirement through receipt of proposals, 
should be highly encouraged. Any exchange of information must 
be consistent with procurement integrity requirements so as to 
avoid creating unfair advantages for potential proposers. The 
committee believes that the purpose of exchanging information 
is to improve the understanding of DOD requirements and 
industry capabilities, thereby allowing potential offerors to 
judge whether or how they can satisfy the DOD's requirements, 
and increasing DOD's knowledge of what solutions industry could 
offer to satisfy the requirement, enhancing the ability to 
obtain quality supplies and services, at reasonable prices, and 
increase efficiency in proposal preparation, proposal 
evaluation, negotiation, and contract award.

Impact of Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract 
        vehicles on small businesses and innovation

    The committee is concerned about the effect of the 
Department's use of the One Acquisition Solution for Integrated 
Services (OASIS) multiple award, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite 
Quantity (IDIQ) contract vehicles on the small business 
community and on innovation. The structure and the use of the 
OASIS vehicles may be creating disincentives for small 
businesses, reducing competition and negatively affecting 
innovation.
    The committee is concerned OASIS does not have a consistent 
or transparent process for on boarding or off boarding 
companies, nor does it have a consistent review of companies 
currently on the vehicle. OASIS does not contain a pathway for 
subcontractors to gain the experience necessary to compete to 
on board as a prime contractor, and incumbent companies not 
already on the vehicle are unable to compete for contracts they 
currently hold. Finally, the committee is concerned OASIS 
requirements may be too burdensome for some small businesses to 
meet reasonably. Understanding IDIQ contract vehicles may offer 
efficiencies to the Department; the committee believes these 
efficiencies must be balanced with support for the small 
business community and the innovation that community can offer.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to analyze 
and submit to the congressional defense committees a report on 
the effect of Department's use of the OASIS IDIQ contract 
vehicles on the small business community and on innovation.

Increase in licensing fees and the negative competitive impact on the 
        services sector

    The committee is concerned with the recent surge in 
licensing fees being charged to acquire necessary parts and 
components used in the maintenance of the military's aging 
aviation and ground fleet. This increase in licensing fees is 
unnecessarily increasing costs to the government and having a 
negative impact on competition within the services sector. The 
committee strongly recommends that the government negotiate 
data rights and intellectual property costs directly with the 
original equipment manufacturers to encourage competition to 
achieve the best value for the government.

Integrity of patented intellectual property in reverse engineering 
        programs

     The committee supports the Defense Logistics Agency's 
(DLA's) reverse engineering program but is concerned that small 
business intellectual property is not being adequately 
protected, especially in those cases where end items are 
developed without federal funding and are patented. The 
Committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to conduct a review of DLA's application of reverse 
engineering. The review will determine: if DLA has adequate 
measures in place to protect small business intellectual 
property; if DLA is providing patented materials to third-party 
contractors; if Department of Defense Instruction 4140.57 
requires modification to provide guidance to protect small 
business intellectual property.

Notice of cost-free federal procurement technical assistance in 
        connection with registration of small business concerns in 
        procurement systems

    The Director of the Defense Logistics Agency, in 
consultation with the Administrator of General Services and the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall 
establish procedures to ensure that any notice or direct 
communication regarding registration of a small business 
concern in a procurement system contains information about 
cost-free federal procurement technical assistance services 
that are available through the Small Business Administration, 
Procurement Technical Assistance Centers of the Defense 
Logistics Agency, the Department of Commerce (including the 
Minority Business Development Agency), and other Federal 
agencies and programs.

Ongoing improvement to the management of the National Technology and 
        Industrial Base

    The committee strongly supports international cooperative 
defense agreements that serve to reduce barriers and enhance 
collaboration between the United States and our strongest 
allies. The committee is concerned, however, that even 
following the conclusion of these agreements certain barriers 
remain that restrict cooperation on an industrial level, 
limiting the exchange of information, data, and technology 
between domestic industry and our closest allied industrial 
partners participating in the national technological and 
industrial base. The committee believes that enabling such 
collaboration would contribute significantly to the successful 
development, production, and fielding of the highest-quality 
systems at the most reasonable costs. Specifically, the 
committee is concerned that certain barriers to cooperation may 
be discouraging domestic industry from fully leveraging mature 
systems and technology solutions already developed by our 
allies that could benefit the U.S. and allied operating 
community, resulting in unnecessary, costly, and redundant 
development initiatives. These barriers also impact the ability 
of those countries that are part of the U.S. national 
technology and industrial base to modify U.S.-origin equipment, 
preventing proper integration and uniformity across their armed 
forces and discouraging them from purchasing equipment from the 
United States.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense is 
currently undertaking a review, in consultation with 
interagency partners, of various authorities, requirements, and 
their implications, related to National Technology and 
Industrial Base countries. The committee directs the Secretary 
of Defense to brief the relevant congressional defense 
committees no later than 30 days after completion of the review 
or no later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that this review addresses:
          (1) The manner in which National Technology and 
        Industrial Base countries may transfer controlled 
        material within the National Technology and Industrial 
        Base, including once materials have been exported from 
        the United States to one of these countries;
          (2) The mechanisms by which National Technology and 
        Industrial Base countries can raise and address 
        concerns in a multilateral forum; and
          (3) The extent to which the authorities and 
        obligations of National Technology and Industrial Base 
        countries conflict with existing bilateral treaties.

Procurement Technical Assistance Center transitional cost share

    The committee recognizes the valuable role of Procurement 
Technical Assistance Centers (PTACs) in assisting small 
businesses to compete in the defense marketplace. The 
Procurement Technical Assistance Program (PTAP) was authorized 
in 1985 and is administered by the Defense Logistics Agency 
(DLA). DLA provides funding through PTAP on a cost share basis. 
The federal cost share is limited to no more than 50 percent, 
unless a PTAC provides services in a distressed area, as 
defined by regional unemployment rates, in which case the 
government cost share is limited to no more than 75 percent. 
The Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization provided 
DLA discretion to fund up to 65 percent of program costs for 
PTACs serving non-distressed service areas but DLA has not yet 
used the discretion to do so.
    The committee is concerned that for PTACs serving regions 
transitioning from distressed to non-distressed status, a 
reduction in government cost share from 75 percent to 50 
percent would have a significant negative impact on PTAC 
activities and undermine small business activity in regions 
that are only beginning to experience reduction in 
unemployment. This creates uncertainty for those PTACs which 
may be required to reduce small business assistance which could 
serve to increase unemployment in the impacted region. The 
committee urges DLA to use existing authority to provide up to 
a 65 percent cost share to PTACs serving non-distressed service 
areas that within the prior three years served distressed 
service areas, prioritizing applications that have the highest 
likelihood of delivering best value to the Department of 
Defense.

Program Management Report

    The committee is interested in how the Department of 
Defense can incorporate nationally accredited standards for 
project, program, and portfolio management--as required by 
Public Law 104-113 and Public Law 114-264--into its existing 
project, program, and portfolio management policy, guidance, 
and instruction, as well as how it may replace or revise 
existing policy, guidance, and instruction related to project, 
program, and portfolio management.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to deliver, not later than 90 days after enactment, a 
report to Congress on the adoption of project, program, and 
portfolio management standards within the Department of 
Defense.

Report on Monopolistic Practices

    The Defense Logistics Agency is responsible for achieving 
fair and reasonable prices for noncompetitive spare parts 
required for Department of Defense equipment. The committee is 
concerned about allegations that, in some cases, the Defense 
Logistics Agency is paying excessive prices for noncompetitive 
spare parts without conducting thorough cost analyses. The 
committee is also aware of allegations that some contractors 
who provide spare parts to the government may be disguising 
their cost structures from procurement officers, in effect 
acting as hidden monopolists, decreasing competition and 
increasing prices to the government.
    The committee therefore directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct a study of Department of Defense 
and Defense Logistics Agency processes for purchasing 
noncompetitive spare parts and make recommendations for how to 
improve transparency and reporting in this area. The committee 
further directs the Comptroller General to provide a final 
report to the congressional defense committees by February 1, 
2018, on the results of the study.

Strategic Capabilities Office Support

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
acquisition process has proven ineffective for on-time 
procurement due to institutional reliance on military 
development that does not capitalize on the private sector, 
which is the driving force of innovation today and for the 
future.
    Furthermore, the committee recognizes that the Strategic 
Capabilities Office (SCO) is demonstrating promising concepts 
and systems with innovative programs that average completion in 
three years using a comparatively small budget.
    In order to enhance Department of Defense acquisition, the 
committee encourages the transition of technology developed by 
SCO for rapid fielding of new capabilities, the adoption of SCO 
culture of both competition and failing without fear of 
punishment, as well as the application of SCO lesson's learned 
to improve the Department of Defense acquisitions process.

Supporting the Development and Commercialization of National Security 
        Technologies

    The committee supports the efforts of the Department of 
Defense's MD5 National Security Technology Accelerator Program 
to build new partnerships to connect innovators and 
entrepreneurs with the education, networks, and resources to 
capitalize on Defense-inspired technologies to advance U.S. 
security and economic priorities. The Committee recognizes the 
national security imperative for developing a network of 
innovators and entrepreneurs both inside and outside of the 
Department of Defense equipped with the incentives, expertise, 
know-how, and resources required to successfully develop, 
commercialize, or apply technology relevant to the military. 
The Committee recommends continued support of the MD5 National 
Security Technology Accelerator's activities, further building 
and scaling the necessary components to support civil military 
partnerships in technology research and development.

Use of Commercial Services

    The committee notes that for some services, like 
transportation and communications, security and reliability 
requirements of the Department of Defense are often more strict 
than those of the commercial market. In May 2017, TRANSCOM 
Commander General Darren McDew testified during a Senate Armed 
Services Committee hearing on the distinct vulnerability 
USTRANSCOM faces because the majority of the command's 
transportation data resides and travels through the unsecure 
commercial internet. In his testimony Commander McDew stated, 
``I do not have the authority to compel a commercial industry 
to bring their standards up to the level that we have inside. 
Nor are we assured exactly what that standard is. We do know 
that inside the Department of Defense, U.S. CYBERCOM and others 
have established a standard that we believe that our networks 
are protected. Outside, I guarantee you that every CEO thinks 
that they have the level that they think they need. Reconciling 
what they think and what reality is, is important.'' The 
Committee urges the Department of Defense to carefully balance 
requirements, risk, and cost when procuring commercial 
services, especially in circumstances where the Department 
requires higher standards than are generally available in the 
commercial marketplace. While commercial service providers can 
offer innovation, efficiencies, and cost savings, these 
benefits should not be to the detriment of security or other 
military unique standards.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

   Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related Matters

Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense (sec. 901)
    The committee recommends a provision clarifying and 
expanding the responsibilities of the Chief Management Officer 
of the Department of Defense. The committee notes the upcoming 
establishment of the Chief Management Officer position as 
required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). Last year's legislation 
established the role with the mission of managing the business 
operations of the Department, through the establishment of 
policies on, and supervision of, such operations. The Chief 
Management Officer was also charged with serving as the 
principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on specified 
activities and programs, and given explicit authority to direct 
the secretaries of the military departments and the heads of 
all other elements of the Department with regard to business 
operations.
    The committee remains committed to an empowered and active 
Chief Management Officer, exercising these authorities across 
the Department to transform business operations of all 
components. The committee recommends this provision to create 
three areas of expanded authority for the Chief Management 
Officer, including: (1) Oversight, direction and control of the 
business-focused defense agencies and field activities; (2) The 
assumption of some Chief Information Officer roles for the 
purpose of federal statute and in business systems; and (3) 
Coordination of enterprise governance and utilization of data 
for management purposes.
    The committee notes that defense agencies and field 
activities require increased oversight in order to ensure 
effective and efficient performance. The current structure of 
assignment to staff principals within the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense has led to insufficient oversight for the 
agencies' performance and for their ability to support the 
Department in core functions. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision that would assign to the Chief 
Management Officer (upon establishment of the position) the 
responsibility for oversight, direction and control of the 
business-support Defense Agencies and Field Activities 
identified by the Secretary of Defense by January 15, 2018. Of 
course, principal staff assistants aligned to these 
organizations would continue to be closely connected to their 
operations. The Secretary of Defense shall make arrangements 
for the transfer of these entities to be effected with minimal 
disruption to their functioning and broader support of the 
Department. The Secretary shall submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report on the specified elements of this 
transfer. Within the provision, `Shared business services' is 
meant to indicate those activities that constitute the business 
operations of the Department of Defense, and not those 
activities that are directly tied to specific technical 
missions (e.g., intelligence, threat response).
    The committee notes that the current Chief Information 
Officer is expected to perform roles ranging from traditional 
Chief Information Officer functions to warfighting capabilities 
like offensive cyber and technical operations. However, 
decisions related to business systems could be more effectively 
handed by the entity coordinating business management and 
reform across the Department. Therefore, the committee 
recommends the shifting of several major Chief Information 
Officer functions to the Chief Management Officer organization, 
and consolidation of the rest in a Chief Information Warfare 
Officer.
    Further, the committee notes that true transformation of 
the Department's business operations will require the 
availability and use of large amounts of data from a number of 
diverse systems across the Department. The committee directs 
the Chief Management Officer to develop an enterprise-level 
plan for data governance for the Department, with a particular 
emphasis on the gathering and usage of data with clear 
management implications. Subject to the authority, direction 
and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Chief Management 
Officer shall have the authority to direct all Department 
elements to share their business operations and/or management-
related data in order to inform the business transformation 
mission.
    The committee's intent is not for the addition of large 
internal bureaucracy to manage these new responsibilities, and 
expects the Chief Management Officer to instead gather those 
personnel currently fulfilling these roles within the Office of 
the Secretary of Defense and the Chief Information Officer 
organization. However, the committee acknowledges the 
overriding importance of fundamental business transformation 
across the Department, and expects the Department to use the 
direct hiring authority for management experts referenced 
elsewhere in this bill to encourage a robust capability aimed 
at improving business management across the enterprise.
Realignment of responsibilities, duties, and powers of Chief 
        Information Officer of the Department of Defense (sec. 902)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 142 of title 10, United States Code, concerning the 
Chief Information Officer (CIO), by elevating the role and 
realigning its authorities and responsibilities to two other 
officials. This provision would establish a Chief Information 
Warfare Officer (CIWO) who would assume responsibility for 
defense-wide information warfighting functions. The roles and 
responsibilities of the current CIO concerning business systems 
and statutory requirements not specified within the CIWO's 
purview would fall to the Chief Management Officer (CMO) of the 
Department of Defense.
    The CIWO would be a presidentially appointed, Senate-
confirmed position that reports directly to the Secretary of 
Defense and is responsible for all matters relating to the 
information environment of the Department of Defense. The CIWO 
would have the authority to establish policy for and direct the 
secretaries of the military departments and the heads of all 
other elements of the Department on matters concerning: (1) 
Space and space launch systems; (2) Communications networks and 
information technology (other than business systems); (3) 
National Security Systems; (4) Information assurance and 
cybersecurity; (5) Electronic warfare and cyber warfare; (6) 
Nuclear command and control and senior leadership 
communications systems; (7) Command and control systems and 
networks; (8) The electromagnetic spectrum; (9) Positioning, 
navigation, and timing; and (10) Any other matters assigned to 
the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, not 
relating to business systems or management, in section 2223 and 
2224 of title 10, United States Code, sections 11315 of title 
40, United States Code, and sections 3506 and 3544 of title 44, 
United States Code.
    The provision would also establish the CIWO with the 
authority, direction, and control over the missions, programs, 
and organizational elements pertaining to the Information 
Assurance mission (formally the Information Directorate) of the 
National Security Agency. The provision would assign the CIWO 
with the authority, direction, and control over the Defense 
Information Systems Agency and with responsibilities for 
policy, oversight, guidance, and coordination for all 
Department matters relating to electromagnetic spectrum.
    The provision would specify that the authority of the CIWO 
to direct the secretaries includes: (1) Playing a significant 
and directive role in the decision processes for all annual and 
multi-year planning, programming, budgeting, and execution 
decisions, including the authority to realign relevant elements 
of the budget requests of the military departments; (2) 
Reviewing and approving any funding request or reprogramming 
request; (3) Ensuring that the military departments comply with 
Government and Department standards; (4) Reviewing and 
approving the appointment of any other employee who functions 
in the capacity of a Chief Information Officer or a Chief 
Information Warfare Officer for any component within the 
Department (except for the Chief Management Officer of the 
Department of Defense); and (5) Participating in all relevant 
meetings, management, and decision-making forums. The provision 
would also assign to the CIWO the authority to require the 
military departments to comply with U.S. Government and 
Department standards.
    The provision would establish the CIWO as the Principal 
Cyber Advisor to the Secretary of Defense and the Principal 
Department of Defense Space Advisor. The provision would also 
establish collaborative mechanisms with other relevant 
Department entities for developing and overseeing the execution 
of offensive and defensive information warfare strategies, 
plans, programs, and operations.
    The committee has concerns that the existing organizational 
construct and resourcing authorities within the Department of 
Defense for space, cyber, and information are not commensurate 
with the organizational structure and resourcing required to 
meet the demands of 21st century warfare. Information is 
central to modern warfare, yet it is treated as an afterthought 
in a Department postured to man, train, and equip forces to 
operate in the land, air, and sea domains. As a result, the 
space and cyberspace domains and the overall information 
environment have failed to receive the dedicated focus and 
prioritization required to meet the demands of a rapidly 
changing battlefield centered on the transmittal, surety, 
exploitation, and dominance of information.
    Moreover, the committee believes that the existing 
authorities of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) are 
insufficient to address the multitude of management challenges 
across the Department of Defense information environment. 
Countless efforts across the Department of Defense are plagued 
by poorly enforced standards and a CIO position whose policy 
and guidance are largely considered as advisory by the 
Services. As a result, each Service continues to pursue 
disparate information technology and business systems efforts. 
In some instances, such as the Joint Information Environment, 
two of the Services have largely agreed to adopt standards for 
implementation, yet the Navy has only agreed to support the 
``spirit and intent'' of this foundational effort for 
implementing a defendable Department-wide infrastructure.
    The information environment challenges do not end with the 
acquisition of information technology. Space and cyber are 
equally under-prioritized and require an organizational 
construct that recognizes information dominance as a critical 
element of warfighting.
    With respect to space, numerous studies over the past 2 
decades have exposed issues with the programmatic decision-
making that is fragmented across more than 60 offices in the 
Department of Defense. Funding for space programs within the 
Air Force is also near 30-year lows, while the threats and our 
reliance on space are at their highest and growing. The Air 
Force was also unable to prioritize and fund $772.0 million 
worth of space priorities in its fiscal year 2018 budget 
request, opting instead to include those requirements on an 
unfunded priorities list.
    Similarly in cyber, the Cyber Mission Force is scheduled to 
achieve Full Operational Capability for manning and training. 
However, the funding necessary to equip that force has not been 
fully budgeted for by the Services. As a result, the Department 
of Defense is on the path to fielding a hollow cyber force: 
6,200 trained personnel who lack the tools required to protect, 
deter, and respond to malicious cyber behavior. The Services 
failed to prioritize a combined $700.0 million in their fiscal 
year 2018 budget requests, instead opting to shift those 
burdens to the unfunded requirements list. Some of the Services 
have also demonstrated an inability to manage their people 
within the Cyber Mission Force, which is especially alarming to 
the committee given the level of importance being placed on 
building the force.
    Until there is an official in the Department of Defense who 
can prioritize these missions, the committee is concerned that 
the priorities for space, cyber, and information will never 
receive the resourcing and senior level attention necessary to 
compete against the parochial interests of each individual 
Service. The Services should be postured to achieve dominance 
in their respective unique domains; however, tradeoffs should 
be considered against Department-wide resourcing, not as a 
subset forced to compete against the parochial tendencies of 
each of the Services.
    The committee believes the establishment of the CIWO should 
require very few, if any, additional personnel. The committee 
believes personnel should be resourced from offices and 
personnel currently within the office of the CIO or among other 
offices, such as that of the Principal Department of Defense 
Space Advisor and Principal Cyber Advisor, currently scattered 
across the Department in various existing stovepipes.
Clarification of the authority of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
        Acquisition and Sustainment with respect to service acquisition 
        programs for which the service acquisition executive is the 
        milestone decision authority (sec. 903)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 901 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
authority of the future Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment (USD (A&S)) under section 133b(b) 
of title 10, United States Code, with respect to service 
acquisition programs for which the service acquisition 
executive is the milestone decision authority.
Executive schedule matters relating to Under Secretary of Defense for 
        Acquisition and Sustainment (sec. 904)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment 
(A&S) as an Executive Level III position. When the committee 
reorganized the office of Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, the Under Secretary for Research and Engineering 
(R&E) was established as an Executive Level II position, which 
is one step below a cabinet official, in order to prioritize 
innovation efforts which had become moribund in recent years. 
The other Under Secretaries in the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense are Executive Level III, which is appropriately one 
step below the Deputy Secretary of Defense. This aligns the 
Under Secretary of Defense for A&S with the level of the other 
Under Secretaries.
Technical amendment (sec. 905)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 901(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) in order to repeal the 
section regarding service of the incumbent Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Technology relative to the position 
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.
Redesignation of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 
        as Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Health (sec. 
        906)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 136 of title 10, United States Code, to redesignate 
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness as the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Health and make 
necessary conforming amendments.
Qualifications for appointment and additional duties and powers of 
        certain officials within the Office of the Under Secretary of 
        Defense (Comptroller) (sec. 907)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 135 of title 10, United States Code, to require 
individuals appointed to the positions of Under Secretary of 
Defense (Comptroller) and Deputy Chief Financial Officer to 
have significant financial management service, which includes 
having previously served as the chief financial officer, deputy 
chief financial officer, or an equivalent executive-level 
position with direct authority for financial management in a 
large public- or private-sector organization that received an 
audit with an unqualified opinion on its financial statements.
Five-year period of relief from Active Duty as a commissioned officer 
        of a regular component of the Armed Forces for appointment to 
        Under Secretary of Defense positions (sec. 908)
    The committee includes a provision that would establish the 
requirement for a 5-year separation from Active Duty as a 
commissioned officer before serving in a position of 
Undersecretary of Defense. The current requirement currently 
exists for three of the Under Secretaries (Research and 
Engineering; Acquisition and Sustainment; and Policy).
Redesignation of Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense as 
        Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense and related matters (sec. 
        909)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 137a of title 10, United States Code, to redesignate 
all Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense as Deputy 
Under Secretaries of Defense and would increase the authorized 
number of Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense from five to six. 
This amendment reflects the elimination of subordinate Deputy 
Under Secretaries and reflects that these positions are the 
immediate and senior subordinate to the Under Secretaries of 
Defense.
    Additionally, this provision would designate the newly 
authorized Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering and the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment as two of the authorized positions, 
consistent with the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
reorganization provisions in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
Reduction of number and elimination of specific designations of 
        Assistant Secretaries of Defense (sec. 910)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 138(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to reduce 
the total number of authorized Assistant Secretaries of Defense 
from 14 to 13, and eliminate specific designation for all but 
two.
Limitation of maximum number of Deputy Assistant Secretaries of Defense 
        (sec. 911)
    The committee recommends a provision that would set the 
maximum number of authorized Deputy Assistant Secretaries of 
Defense to 46.
Modification of definition of OSD personnel for purposes of limitation 
        on number of Office of Secretary of Defense personnel (sec. 
        912)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 143(b) of title 10, United States Code, to include 
contractor personnel working in the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense (OSD) in the total number of OSD personnel, for 
purposes of adhering to the reduction in headquarters mandated 
by section 903(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).

  Subtitle B--Organization of Other Department of Defense Offices and 
                                Elements

Reduction in authorized number of Assistant Secretaries of the military 
        departments (sec. 921)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3016(a), section 5016(a), and section 8016(a) of title 
10, United States Code, to reduce the number of authorized 
Assistant Secretaries of each of the services by one.
Qualifications for appointment of Assistant Secretaries of the military 
        departments for financial management (sec. 922)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 3016, 5016, and 8016 of title 10, United States Code, 
to require individuals appointed to the positions of Assistant 
Secretary of the military departments for financial management 
to have significant financial management service, which 
includes having previously served as the chief financial 
officer, deputy chief financial officer, or an equivalent 
executive-level position with direct authority for financial 
management in a large public- or private-sector organization 
that received an audit with an unqualified opinion on its 
financial statements.

 Subtitle C--Organization and Management of the Department of Defense 
                               Generally

Reduction in limitation of number of Department of Defense SES 
        positions (sec. 931)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1109(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to reduce the number 
of Department of Defense Senior Executive Service positions 
from 1,260 to 1,140.
Manner of carrying out reductions in major Department of Defense 
        headquarters activities (sec. 932)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 346 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to require that the 
reductions to headquarters activities made pursuant to that 
section be carried out after a consideration of current 
manpower levels, historic manpower levels, mission 
requirements, and anticipated staffing needs of such 
headquarters activities necessary to meet national defense 
objectives. The committee is concerned that the Department of 
Defense will execute the reductions required by section 346 in 
a uniform, or so-called ``salami-slice'' manner, divorced from 
analysis and critical assessment of national defense 
objectives, and the differing relative responsibilities between 
headquarters, particularly the combatant commands. For example, 
the committee is aware that manpower levels at Pacific Command 
have actually decreased since 1975, even as the threats in that 
region have grown, resulting in the President in 2011 
identifying the need to intensify the U.S. presence there, 
stating his goal that ``the United States will play a larger 
and long-term role in shaping this region and its future.'' The 
committee, consequently, believes it imperative that the 
Department assess manpower requirements critically, and use the 
headquarters reduction requirement of section 346 to 
redistribute resources, rather than to mindlessly meet a 
statutory requirement.
Certifications on cost savings achieved by reductions in major 
        Department of Defense headquarters activities (sec. 933)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 346 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to require that the 
Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation certify 
mandated cost savings estimated for headquarters reductions.
Direct hire authority for the Department of Defense for personnel to 
        assist in business transformation and management innovation 
        (sec. 934)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Secretary of Defense the authority to appoint a small group of 
individuals to assist the Department in management innovation. 
The provision specifies that the appointments covered in this 
section must be completed on a term basis, specified at the 
time of the appointment, and that each must have experience in 
management and organizational change.
    The committee strongly encourages that this authority be 
used to create a small organization focused on business 
transformation across the Department of Defense, outside of the 
line management of defense agencies. The committee intends that 
these personnel be used to recommend opportunities to eliminate 
waste and inefficiency, reduce the cost of Department of 
Defense operations, and consolidate functions where 
appropriate.
    The committee expects this provision to be used in 
conjunction with section 913 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and 
section 1111 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92).
Data analytics capability for support of enhanced oversight and 
        management of the Defense Agencies and Department of Defense 
        Field Activities (sec. 935)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Deputy Chief Management Officer (and successor positions) to 
establish and maintain a data analytics capability for 
oversight and management of the defense agencies and field 
activities. This capability would include an accurate 
tabulation of the expenditures by each of these entities on 
personnel, an accurate tabulation of personnel within each 
entity, and a clear mapping of the functions being performed by 
these agencies and the resources allocated against each. This 
capability would be informed by data gathered from the defense 
agencies and field activities, as well as elsewhere within the 
Department of Defense. An interim report on the standup of this 
capability would be required to be submitted to the 
congressional defense committees, as well as a final report due 
no later than December 31, 2020.
Enhanced use of data analytics to improve acquisition program outcomes 
        (sec. 936)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Deputy Chief 
Management Officer (and successor positions), in coordination 
with the Armed Forces and the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (and successor 
positions), to establish a set of activities that use data 
analysis, measurement, and other evaluation-related methods to 
improve the acquisition outcomes of the Department of Defense 
and enhance organizational learning.
Pilot programs on data integration strategies for the Department of 
        Defense (sec. 937)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Chief 
Management Officer, to develop data integration strategies to 
address high priority management challenges of the Department. 
The committee notes that many of the challenges currently faced 
by the Department are driven by the lack of shared information 
and data governance for relevant actors. Challenges to address 
would include data related to the budget, to logistics 
management, and to personnel security and insider threat. The 
Secretary would be responsible for submitting a report on the 
outcomes of these pilot programs within 180 days of the 
enactment of this act.
    Broadly, the committee encourages the Department to 
consider developing data strategies that cover all relevant 
components, to ensure that sharing of information occurs and 
that both collection and analysis of data are valued and 
contribute toward management of the component.
Background and security investigations for Department of Defense 
        personnel (sec. 938)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to take actions to allow the Defense 
Security Service to conduct before October 1, 2020 all 
personnel background and security investigations adjudicated by 
the Consolidated Adjudication Facility of the Department of 
Defense (DOD). This provision is based on the committee's 
judgement that the current situation of massive clearance 
delays has serious adverse effects on national security and 
must be addressed in order to avoid any further damage to DOD's 
readiness.
    The background investigation process is broken. It is 
composed of decades-old security practices, is grossly 
inefficient, and has costs that have been rising steadily and 
substantially for years. In addition, persistent mismanagement 
and ill-considered changes to standards have resulted in a very 
large and rapidly growing backlog. In sum, the current 
situation has led to accumulation of huge indirect costs to 
customers like DOD; operational risks, as personnel are idled 
while waiting for clearances; and a degradation in workforce 
quality, as high-performing personnel with the best 
alternatives are unlikely to wait for many months to begin work 
for the U.S. Government. The committee lacks confidence that 
the current owner of the background investigation mission has 
the will, culture, or capability to effect vital reforms in 
current processes and practices.
    Current practices are mired in outdated methods and non-
digital, non-automated technology. Expensive human 
investigative resources are consumed with fact checking and 
data collection functions (ripe candidates for automation) as 
opposed to investigating substantive issues about the actions 
and circumstances of prospective and current employees.
    A better model has been clear to policymakers for at least 
a decade: a ``continuous evaluation'' concept based on 
automated access to a wide array of digital sources and 
records. Constant access and reporting from these data sources 
has been demonstrated to turn up greater volumes of more 
serious issues than current practices; expensive human 
resources would then be devoted to investigating concerns 
arising from the continuous evaluation process. Derogatory 
information that crossed adjustable thresholds of seriousness 
would be automatically ``pushed,'' as alerts, to analysts for 
action. For current employees, information from modern insider 
threat programs would become an important component of the 
continuous evaluation process, providing information from 
counterintelligence, cybersecurity, human resources, physical 
security, and law enforcement databases and investigations. 
These continuous vetting techniques would eliminate the need 
for infrequent but expensive ``periodic re-investigations'' 
(PRs) that are mandated today--though under the current system, 
PRs are so infrequent that threats are missed for long periods.
    The executive branch made policy decisions starting a 
decade ago to shift to this continuous evaluation approach but 
has achieved little actual progress. One factor contributing to 
this inertia has been the position of the Security Executive 
Agent, a function assigned to the Director of National 
Intelligence (DNI). The Office of the DNI has supported the 
continuous evaluation (CE) model but only as an add-on or 
augmentation to existing practices: not as a substitute. While 
CE promises to be more effective and efficient than current 
practices, costs would soar if CE is conducted in addition to 
what is done today instead of serving as a true replacement.
    DOD is already paying over $1.0 billion annually for 
background investigations; the backlog exceeds 650,000 cases 
and is growing at a rate of 10,000-20,000 per month. The 
Government is not going to truly address this backlog unless it 
substitutes technology and smart risk-based decision-making for 
labor-intensive activities of questionable relative value. The 
committee is prepared to consider legislative change to 
investigative requirements applicable to the Department of 
Defense if the executive branch does not address this policy 
problem swiftly on its own.
    The committee believes that DOD must take back 
responsibility for background investigations of its employees 
and contractors and change how these investigations are 
conducted. The committee believes that this is the best way to 
ensure effective oversight by the congressional defense 
committees of this troubled program. At the same time, the 
committee believes it would be a grave mistake to import back 
into DOD the existing OPM organization, culture, and practices. 
A fresh start is needed that is built incrementally on existing 
CE initiatives and encompasses a phased transition of 
responsibility from OPM to DOD.
    The committee also fully realizes that there is no quick 
fix for the immense problems DOD faces and that the backlog and 
the cost of doing business could get worse before they can get 
better. The committee continues to have serious concerns about 
the ability of DOD to manage the development of a robust CE 
information technology (IT) capability. The committee also 
continues to be at least equally concerned about DOD's ability 
to orchestrate the creation of an integrated, automated, 
enterprise-wide insider threat detection and analysis 
capability. The committee's apprehension is that the 
Department's leadership has not realized the level of resource 
commitment and time that will be involved in creating digital 
access and analysis capabilities to the data collected and held 
by all the different functional organizations--
counterintelligence, personnel security, human resources, 
physical security, cybersecurity, law enforcement, 
intelligence, etc.--across the Services, combatant commands, 
Joint Staff, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and all 
the defense agencies and field activities. This is an 
organizational management challenge as well as a technical 
challenge of the first order. The committee expects the 
Department to take advantage of existing direct hiring 
authorities in order to build up the necessary investigative 
workforce to execute this mission. The committee also 
recognizes that the Department may need to consider 
establishing an appropriate funding mechanism to support this 
mission. The reference to DOD usage of existing commercial data 
within this provision is not meant to extend the Department's 
authorities with regard to the handling and usage of personal 
data.
    The committee is committed to monitoring the Department's 
progress in taking over this new mission and seeks to ensure 
that DOD has a robust implementation plan with clear targets 
for the standup of these interrelated capabilities. DOD should 
also look, where possible, to take advantage of the work done 
across government to modernize the background investigation 
process.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Transfer of lead of Guam Oversight Council from the Deputy Secretary of 
        Defense to the Secretary of the Navy (sec. 951)
    The committee includes a provision that would redesignate 
the Secretary of the Navy as the lead for the Guam Oversight 
Council. This would transfer the responsibility for the 
activities involving the relocation of forces, primarily 
Marines from Okinawa to Guam, from the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense to the Secretary of the Navy.
Corrosion control and prevention executive matters (sec. 952)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 903(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417) to 
clarify the qualifications and position of a corrosion control 
and prevention executive (CCPE) of a military department.
    The committee remains very concerned that the resources and 
priorities given to corrosion control and prevention by the 
military departments are lessened when the duties of the 
corrosion executive are additive to that official's other 
duties as assigned and performed. From an organizational 
perspective, the Departments of the Navy and Air Force have 
been most effective in corrosion control and prevention when 
they have had individuals in place whose primary responsibility 
was to perform the functions of the CCPE. The committee views 
the Department of the Army's model of appointing a Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and 
Technology as the CCPE and having action-officer level 
individuals assist in those duties as ineffective. The 
committee believes, however, that the CCPEs are most effective 
when they are provided resources that enable them to perform 
studies, analyses, inspections, and other duties as prescribed 
in section 903 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417).

                       Items of Special Interest

Comptroller General of the United States report on Department of 
        Defense oversight of the defense agencies and Department of 
        Defense field activities
    The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense is 
authorized to provide for the performance of a supply or 
service activity that is common to more than one military 
department by a single agency of the Department of Defense. 
Further, the Secretary of Defense is required to provide 
oversight of these agencies, known Defense Agencies and Field 
Activities (DAFA), by reviewing the services and supplies 
provided by the DAFA to ensure that there is a continuing need 
for each such agency and activity. The Secretary is also 
required to determine that the provision of those services and 
supplies by each DAFA, rather than by the military departments, 
is a more effective, economical, or efficient manner of 
providing those services and supplies, among other things 
(section 192 of title 10, United States Code). Several of these 
agencies and activities have been established to support 
business operations, including the Defense Media Activity, 
Defense Human Resources Activity, and Defense Legal Services 
Agency.
    The committee is interested in understanding the scope and 
impact of DOD's previous reviews of this fourth estate 
community. The committee is also interested in how the results 
of previous reviews were measured.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate: (1) The extent to which DOD 
has examined the continuing need for its DAFAs as required 
under section 192 of title 10, United States Code; (2) 
Potential duplication or overlap of services and supplies 
provided between the military departments and selected DAFAs; 
and (3) Potential improvements to more effectively assess the 
results of any reform initiatives within these DAFAs.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to brief the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate not later than April 15, 2018, on preliminary 
findings of the evaluation with a final report to be due by 
June 30, 2018.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Arctic
    The committee notes that the strategic importance of the 
Arctic continues to increase as the United States and other 
countries recognize the military significance of the Arctic's 
sea lanes, choke points, and its potential for power projection 
into multiple regions. The committee also recognizes that the 
Department of Defense's mission requirements in the Arctic are 
expected to grow, as increases in human and maritime activity 
bring heightened risk of maritime accidents, oil spills, 
illegal fishing and harvesting of other natural resources in 
the exclusive economic zone of the United States, and other 
potential threats or challenges to United States sovereignty.
    The committee notes that Russia has aggressively focused on 
the development of Arctic capabilities and has made significant 
investments in military infrastructure in the Arctic. The 
committee remains concerned that the current Department of 
Defense jurisdiction over the Arctic region presents 
operational seams between three geographic combatant commands 
and two functional combatant commands: U.S. Northern Command, 
U.S. European Command, and U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Strategic 
Command, and U.S. Transportation Command, with U.S. European 
Command holding the primary responsibility for the major 
adversary in the region, U.S. Pacific Command retaining 
operational control of U.S. forces located in Alaska, and U.S. 
Northern Command assigned as the Department's advocate for 
Arctic capabilities.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to designate a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 
with primary responsibilities for the Arctic region, in order 
to coordinate the formation of Arctic defense policy with 
relevant Department of Defense entities. The Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for the Arctic Region would have the 
responsibilities of: advocating for United States national 
security interests in the Arctic region; mitigating operational 
seams between relevant geographic and functional combatant 
commands in order to improve unity of effort; identifying any 
capability and resource gaps in the Arctic region and 
formulating plans to mitigate these gaps; identifying the 
actions by foreign nations which increase the threat to United 
States interests in the Arctic region; formulating plans to 
mitigate these actions; and planning military-to-military 
cooperation with partner nations that have mutual security 
interests in the Arctic region.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $4.0 billion of 
fiscal year 2018 funds authorized in division A of this Act to 
unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal 
reprogramming procedures. Transfers of funds between military 
personnel authorizations would not be counted toward the dollar 
limitation in this provision.
Calculations for payments into Department of Defense Military 
        Retirement Fund using single level percentage of basic pay 
        determined on Armed Force-wide rather than Armed Forces-wide 
        basis (sec. 1002)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1465 of title 10, United States Code, to change the 
calculation of the single level percentage applied to basic pay 
with respect to the required monthly deposits into the Military 
Retirement Fund by the military services to a single rate for 
each military service, rather than the single aggregate normal 
cost method now used, in order to increase budgetary 
transparency with respect to the relative long-term costs 
associated with changes in end strength and benefits among the 
military services. The change in the method of calculation 
would be effective for contributions to the Fund beginning in 
fiscal year 2019.
Certifications on audit readiness of the Department of Defense and the 
        military departments, Defense Agencies, and other organizations 
        and elements of the Department of Defense (sec. 1003)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense, in addition to the military departments, 
defense agencies, and other organizations and elements that are 
subject to a financial audit, to certify its financial 
statements as ready for audit by the September 30, 2017, 
deadline established by the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66), and annually each 
fiscal year thereafter, until the Department, or the relevant 
military department, defense agency, or other organization or 
element, obtains a qualified audit opinion on its full 
financial statements. The committee is concerned that almost 3 
decades after the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (Public 
Law 101-576) and with an estimated $7.4 billion invested in 
audit, audit readiness, and ERP efforts since 2012, the 
Department remains unable to obtain an opinion on its financial 
statements. The committee defines audit ready/readiness as a 
defense agency's, organization's, or military department's 
having in place the critical audit capabilities and associated 
infrastructure to successfully start and support a financial 
audit of its financial statements. The committee directs that 
the management assertion letters issued by the military 
departments, defense agencies, and defense organizations that 
receive audit opinions on their financial statements be used to 
determine compliance with this provision. The committee fully 
supports the Department's focus on audit going forward but 
continues to believe in the importance of the Department 
certifying that it has met the deadline for audit readiness to 
account for the investment of taxpayer dollars in audit 
readiness activities since 2008.
Failure to obtain audit opinion on fiscal year full financial 
        statements of the Department of Defense (sec. 1004)
    The committee recommends a provision that would reduce the 
annual rate of basic pay for calendar year 2020 and for each 
year thereafter for each secretary of a military department who 
does not obtain an audit opinion on their service's fiscal year 
2018 financial statements. This requirement is consistent with 
section 1003(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66). The committee does not 
consider a disclaimer of opinion to comply with Congress' 
intent because a disclaimer of opinion is issued when the 
audited entity is unable to provide sufficient supporting 
evidence to enable the auditor to express an opinion. This 
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a team of private sector experts on financial audits 
to assess the Department's progress and make recommendations 
for improvements to its process for achieving an opinion on its 
full financial statements.
Improper payment matters (sec. 1005)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to comply with recommendations made by 
the Comptroller General of the United States that it improve 
the method and procedures by which it estimates, identifies 
susceptible programs, and reduces improper payments.
    The committee is concerned, based on reports published by 
the Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) and the 
committee's own research, that improper payments are currently 
under-reported (for example, the DOD IG report estimates an 8 
percent error rate as opposed to the 2-3 percent commonly 
referenced by the Department). Both the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) and the DOD IG have reported that 
the Department's methods for sampling and estimating improper 
payments is inadequate. The committee is also concerned that 
the Department only attempts to recover improper payments in 
the small sample population used to estimate the scale of 
improper payments--overpayments in the larger population are 
essentially written off. For example, only $5.5 million of the 
fiscal year 2014 travel overpayments were subject to recovery, 
indicating that DFAS did not take any effort to recapture 
around 99 percent of the overpayments from this program.
Financial operations dashboard for the Department of Defense (sec. 
        1006)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to establish a 
searchable database that contains key indicators of the 
financial performance of the Department of Defense, and is 
accessible across the government. The committee recognizes the 
value of transparency and the ability of information to drive 
effective and accountable government. The committee also 
recognizes that while the statutory language guiding the 
Department in its financial improvement efforts is primarily 
focused on the requirement for annual financial audits, 
Congress' intent for requiring the Department to audit its 
financial statements is to ensure not only that the Department 
complies with its Constitutional and legal obligation to 
account for all taxpayer funds received and expended but also 
that Department leadership has available reliable financial 
information with which to make better program management and 
budgeting decisions. An auditable financial statement is simply 
the means by which the accuracy of the financial data being 
used in day-to-day and strategic decision making processes is 
validated. More importantly, the financial controls required to 
achieve and sustain a clean audit opinion reduce wasteful 
spending resulting from inefficiencies. For example, as 
evidence of quantifiable savings resulting from improved 
financial controls and reduced payment inefficiencies, the 
Marine Corps reported in 2008 that its efforts to achieve audit 
readiness yielded real mission value by generating enough 
savings to purchase either 1 additional Cobra attack 
helicopter, 3 M1A1 tanks, or 70 million rounds of rifle 
ammunition. Extrapolated across the entire Department of 
Defense, this experience of 1-2 percent savings points to a 
potential annual savings of billions of dollars available to 
fund critical national defense requirements (assuming budget 
top-line stability). Without the control environment that 
underpins auditability, it costs more to achieve our desired 
levels of military readiness.
    To facilitate the adoption of better financial controls and 
provide much-needed transparency on the cost of the 
Department's financial operations, this dashboard would contain 
key indicators of the financial performance of the Department 
of Defense, to include outstanding accounts payable, abnormal 
accounts payable, outstanding advances, unmatched 
disbursements, abnormal undelivered orders, negative 
unliquidated obligations, Anti-Deficiency Act violations, 
interest penalty payments, improper payment amounts for each 
budget account, total costs deriving from payment delays, and 
actual savings realized through improvement initiatives. The 
database should include these data elements for the military 
departments, defense agencies, and all defense organizations 
subject to a financial audit, and it should permit a user to 
track financial performance over time for each defense 
organization individually and the Department of Defense 
cumulatively. The data elements should be reported monthly.
    This provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
to report annually on a target savings and the actual mission 
value realized as a result of improvements to financial 
management and related cost-savings initiatives.
Comptroller General of the United States recommendations on audit 
        capabilities and infrastructure and related matters (sec. 1007)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to comply with recommendations made by 
the Comptroller General of the United States that it establish 
a consolidated corrective action plan (CAP) and a centralized 
monitoring and reporting process whereby it reports bi-monthly 
on the status of the CAPs of the military departments, defense 
agencies, and other organizations and elements of the 
Department.

                   Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities

Extension and modification of authority to support a unified 
        counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec. 
        1011)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 
three years section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-
375), as most recently amended by section 1013 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328). Additionally, the provision would modify existing 
authorities to provide assistance to the Government of Colombia 
to address the emergence of new threats to peace and stability.
    The committee strongly supports the vital partnership 
between the United States and Colombia and notes the remarkable 
security gains the Government of Colombia has achieved over the 
last 15 years and its contributions to regional security. The 
committee believes that an enduring security relationship 
between the United States and Colombia is essential to 
sustaining and building on these gains as the peace process and 
demobilization of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia 
(FARC) proceeds. The committee also notes with concern reports 
of record yields of coca and the persistence and emergence of 
other illegally armed groups, ranging from terrorist 
organizations to drug trafficking organizations, that threaten 
peace, stability, and security. Finally, the committee urges 
the Secretary of Defense to continue to coordinate through 
interagency process to ensure that the Department's security 
cooperation programs and authorities reflect the evolving 
security environment in Colombia and the region.

                Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Policy of the United States on minimum number of battle force ships 
        (sec. 1016)
    The committee recommends a provision that would codify at 
least a 355-ship Navy battle force as U.S. policy. The 
committee notes the Navy's latest Force Structure Assessment 
(FSA), completed in December 2016, increased the battle force 
requirement from 308 ships to 355 ships. This requirement 
includes inventory objectives by ship category, which the 
committee views as the optimal mix of platforms for the 
purposes of this provision.
    The committee further notes the latest Navy FSA concluded, 
``[The 355-ship requirement] reflects an in-depth assessment of 
the Navy's force structure requirements--it also includes a 
level of operational risk that we are willing to assume based 
on the resource limitations under which the Navy must operate 
... To fully resource [Combatant Commander demands,] enduring 
missions, ongoing operations and setting the theater for prompt 
warfighting response, [the] Navy would require a 653-ship 
force.''
    Recognizing this unconstrained demand for 653 ships and 
recent testimony on the increasingly dangerous security 
environment, the committee believes the Navy's requirement of 
355 ships should be achieved and all options for doing so 
should be reviewed as soon as possible.
    The committee further believes that a clear policy 
statement on achieving the 355-ship objective, which could take 
at least 18 years according to an April 2017 Congressional 
Budget Office report, is warranted because of the long-term 
commitment required by current and future Congresses and 
administrations.
Operational readiness of Littoral Combat Ships on extended deployment 
        (sec. 1017)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend title 
10, United States Code and provide the Secretary of the Navy 
with additional flexibility to maintain Littoral Combat Ships 
(LCS) by allowing government or contractor personnel to conduct 
maintenance on LCS vessels operating on deployment regardless 
of ship locations.
    This provision would codify the authorities successfully 
employed in a pilot program authorized by section 1025 of the 
Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).
    The pilot program was conducted to evaluate maintenance 
options for LCS vessels on extended deployments from December 
2014 to September 2016. The Navy's assessment of the pilot 
program, which was submitted in a March 2017 report to Congress 
found, ``Based on the pilot program results, cost savings are 
expected to be notable. Even more importantly, the flexibility 
to provide timely maintenance in support of schedule changes 
and mission execution is crucial to long-term success of the 
LCS Fleet . . .''
    The committee concurs with the Navy's assessment of the 
pilot program and recommends codifying the associated 
authorities in title 10, United States Code.
Authority to purchase used vessels to recapitalize the Ready Reserve 
        Force and the Military Sealift Command surge fleet (sec. 1018)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, to provide the 
Secretary of Defense with the authority to purchase used 
vessels as part of a program to recapitalize the Ready Reserve 
Force (RRF) and Military Sealift Command (MSC) surge fleet. In 
addition, the provision would provide the U.S. Navy with 
greater flexibility in using the National Defense Sealift Fund 
(NDSF) for such recapitalization purposes.
    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) has developed a recapitalization strategy for RRF and MSC 
surge fleet vessels, consisting of building new construction 
vessels, extending the service lives of certain vessels already 
in the inventory, and acquiring used vessels, in order to 
maintain capacity at an acceptable level of risk. The committee 
further understands that such recapitalization is necessary 
because the current vessels in the inventory are reaching the 
limit of safe operation at an affordable cost.
    The committee notes that this provision would permit the 
Secretary of Defense to purchase vessels that have previously 
served in the U.S. Maritime Security Fleet, which is a 
component of the U.S. Maritime Security Program. The committee 
further notes that the DOD has requested this authority.
    The committee believes this provision is a prudent measure 
to ensure continued access to adequate U.S. military surge 
sealift. In addition, the committee recognizes that maintenance 
for and activations of any vessels added to the RRF inventory 
would be conducted in U.S. shipyards.
Surveying ships (sec. 1019)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Chief of Naval Operations to conduct a force structure 
assessment for the purpose of establishing a surveying ship 
requirement and provide the results to the congressional 
defense committees not later than 120 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act. This assessment may be limited in scope 
to identifying a force structure assessment requirement for 
surveying ships.
    The committee notes the U.S. Navy currently has six 
surveying ships in service, but does not have a force structure 
assessment requirement for this class of ships because it is 
not included in the Navy battle force. The committee further 
notes surveying ships perform critical missions in support of 
fleet operations, including gathering much of the U.S. 
military's ocean environment information.
    The committee further believes a greater number of these 
ships may be required as surveying ships continue to operate 
around the world with an expanding mission set. For example, in 
December 2016 a Chinese navy ship illegally seized a U.S. Navy 
unmanned underwater vehicle, which was collecting oceanographic 
data, while operating with the USNS Bowditch (T-AGS-62) in the 
South China Sea. In addition, the newest surveying ship, USNS 
Maury (T-AGS-66), includes an innovative moon pool for 
deployment and retrieval of autonomous underwater vehicles.
    Accordingly, the committee urges the Chief of Naval 
Operations to review the full range of potential applications 
for surveying ships in conducting this force structure 
assessment.
Pilot program on funding for national defense sealift vessels (sec. 
        1020)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of the Navy to establish a pilot program related to 
national defense sealift vessels for funds appropriated in 
fiscal years 2018 and 2019.
    This pilot program would allow obligations and expenditures 
for the operation, maintenance, lease, or charter of national 
defense sealift vessels to be made from the National Defense 
Sealift Fund (NDSF) or Operations and Maintenance, Navy (OMN) 
appropriation accounts.
    This pilot program would also allow obligations and 
expenditures for the research and development relating to 
national defense sealift vessels to be made from the NDSF or 
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Navy (RDTEN) 
appropriation accounts.
    In addition, the pilot program would allow funds 
appropriated in the OMN or RDTEN appropriations for national 
defense sealift purposes to not be required to be deposited 
into the NDSF appropriation.
    The committee notes the NDSF was created in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-
484) to address sealift funding issues. While recognizing the 
importance of continuing to fund sealift requirements, the 
Department of the Navy, in coordination with the U.S. 
Transportation Command and the U.S. Maritime Administration, 
has proposed a more efficient funding mechanism. This provision 
would allow the Navy to conduct a pilot program to evaluate 
this alternative mechanism, which would use the OMN and RDTEN 
appropriations rather than the NDSF, to fund specified national 
defense sealift activities.
    The committee understands this pilot program is intended to 
preserve funding for sealift requirements while providing the 
Department of the Navy one fewer appropriations account to 
manage, prepare financial statements for, and address for 
financial auditability purposes. The committee further 
understands this pilot program seeks to streamline the funding 
flow by reducing reimbursable documents between Navy commands 
when a national defense sealift vessel is activated.
    The provision would require independent reports from the 
Secretary of the Navy, Commander of the U.S. Transportation 
Command, and Administrator of the U.S. Maritime Administration 
to be submitted to the congressional defense committees within 
120 days of completion of the pilot program.

                      Subtitle D--Counterterrorism

Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of 
        individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
        Bay, Cuba, to the United States (sec. 1031)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2018, the prohibition on the use of funds 
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release 
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
Bay, Cuba, to the United States.
Extension on prohibition on use of funds to construct or modify 
        facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred 
        from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 
        1032)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2018, the prohibition on the use of funds 
provided to the Department of Defense to construct or modify 
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred 
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Extension on prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release to 
        certain countries of individuals detained at United States 
        Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1033)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2018, the prohibition on the use of funds 
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release 
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
Bay, Cuba, to Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for realignment of forces at 
        or closure of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba 
        (sec. 1034)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2021, the prohibition on the use of funds 
provided to the Department of Defense to close or abandon 
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo; to relinquish control 
of Guantanamo Bay to the Republic of Cuba; or to implement a 
material modification to the Treaty between the United States 
of America and Cuba signed at Washington, D.C. on May 29, 1934, 
that constructively closes United States Naval Station, 
Guantanamo Bay.
Authority to transfer individuals detained at United States Naval 
        Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States temporarily 
        for emergency or critical medical treatment (sec. 1035)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the temporary transfer of individuals detained at United States 
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to the United States for 
necessary medical treatment that is not available at 
Guantanamo.

         Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations

Matters relating to the submittal of future-years defense programs 
        (sec. 1041)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 221 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to publish an unclassified electronic 
database on the Comptroller's U.S. government restricted 
website for the future years defense program and, where 
applicable, a separate classified annex to the congressional 
defense committees, Congressional Budget Office, Congressional 
Research Service, and Government Accountability Office. The 
committee notes that this should be in accordance with existing 
guidance as set forth by Department of Defense Financial 
Management Regulation 7000.14-R to include that all electronic 
files include the source extensible markup language (XML) files 
to be embedded.
Department of Defense integration of information operations and cyber-
        enabled information operations (sec. 1042)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a cross-functional task force 
to integrate across organizations of the Department of Defense 
responsible for information operations, military deception, 
public affairs, electronic warfare, and cyber operations to 
produce integrated strategy, planning, and budgeting to 
counter, deter, and conduct strategic information operations 
and cyber-enabled information operations. In carrying out the 
requirements of subsection (b)(1), the committee directs that 
the Secretary require the commander of each combatant command 
to develop specific plans to conduct information operations 
through cyberspace that could threaten those things, entities, 
resources, assets, and systems that the leaders of adversary 
countries value most highly, with the goal of establishing an 
effective deterrent to information operations and cyber attacks 
against the United States, its allies, and its interests. These 
capabilities and plans should be tailored to specific potential 
adversaries. Additionally, the provision would require the task 
force to review the Department of Defense Strategy for 
Operations in the Information Environment, dated June 2016, and 
submit to the congressional defense committees an 
implementation plan. Lastly, the provision would establish a 
Defense Intelligence Officer for Information Operations and 
Cyber Operations within the Department of Defense.
Prohibition on lobbying activities with respect to the Department of 
        Defense by certain officers of the Armed Forces and civilian 
        employees of the Department within two years of separation from 
        military service or employment with the Department (sec. 1043)
    The committee recommends a provision that would apply a 2-
year limitation on certain officers and civilian employees of 
the Department of Defense from engaging in any lobbying 
activity with respect to issues involving the Department of 
Defense.
Definition of ``unmanned aerial vehicle'' for the purposes of title 10, 
        United States Code (sec. 1044)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the definition of an unmanned aerial vehicle as an aerial 
vehicle that is not controlled by a human being, but would not 
include a vehicle that is remotely piloted.
Technical amendment relating to management of military technicians 
        (sec. 1045)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
technical modification to section 1053 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92; 129 
Stat. 981; 10 U.S.C. 10216 note) by striking 20 percent and 
replacing it with 12.6 percent.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for retirement of legacy 
        maritime mine countermeasures platforms (sec. 1046)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
prohibition on use of funds for retirement of legacy maritime 
mine countermeasures platforms to include fiscal year 2018.
    The committee notes the Navy's current plan to reach an 
initial operational capability of replacement mine 
countermeasures systems is not scheduled to occur until fiscal 
year 2020 at the earliest. However, the Navy's latest Annual 
Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels calls for the 
Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships to begin retiring in 
fiscal year 2019.
    The committee remains concerned a capability gap may result 
if current mine countermeasures systems are not maintained 
until operationally effective and suitable replacements are 
fielded in sufficient quantities.
Sense of Congress on the basing of KC-46A aircraft outside the 
        continental United States (sec. 1047)
    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress regarding the basing of KC-46A tanker 
aircraft outside of the continental United States.
Authorization to procure up to six polar-class icebreakers (sec. 1048)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is 
operating, in consultation with the Secretary of the Navy, to 
enter into a contract or contracts for the procurement of up to 
six polar-class icebreakers, including both polar-class heavy 
icebreakers and polar-class medium icebreakers. The committee 
notes that section 3 of title 14, United States Code, states, 
``the Coast Guard shall be a service in the Department of 
Homeland Security.''
    As codified in a May 19, 2017 Memorandum of Agreement 
between the Department of the Navy and Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS), the committee notes the Undersecretary of 
Management in the DHS serves as the Acquisition Decision 
Authority for the Polar Icebreaker Program and that this 
program is governed in accordance with DHS Acquisition 
Management Directive 102-01 and Instruction 102-01-001. The 
committee believes maintaining authority, responsibility, and 
accountability with the Acquisition Decision Authority is 
essential to delivering icebreakers on cost and schedule.
    Accordingly, the committee believes the Secretary of the 
Department of Homeland Security should be the single official 
provided with authorities, limitations, or other legislative 
direction related to the Polar Icebreaker Program.

                    Subtitle F--Studies and Reports

Assessment of global force posture (sec. 1061)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant commanders, to conduct 
an assessment of the global force posture of the Armed Forces. 
The provision would also require the Secretary to submit a 
report on the assessment to the Committees on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than the 
earlier of 180 days after production of the 2018 National 
Defense Strategy or December 31, 2018. The committee believes 
that a number of factors have increased the importance of and 
need for forward-based U.S. military forces and capabilities, 
including the proliferation of new and more lethal anti-access/
area denial capabilities of peer and near-peer threats, and 
increased vulnerability of air and sea lines of communication. 
Forward-based forces could provide increased deterrence and 
regional security and stability, and would have the capability 
to respond to both overt military aggression and to adversarial 
competition activities with tangible actions short of armed 
conflict. The ability of U.S. Armed Forces to respond in a 
timely manner and at an appropriate scale is increasingly 
constrained by growing threats to air and sea lines of 
communication, and likely requires a fundamental shift in the 
calculus regarding forward basing of U.S. military capabilities 
and force structure.
    The use by adversaries of major short- or no-notice 
military exercises as cover for military aggression, as well as 
the daily persistence of threats in areas such as the South 
China Sea, place a premium on having an adequate forward-based 
force presence. As our forces experienced in the opening phases 
of Operation Inherent Resolve, ad hoc creation of a 
headquarters for major military operations can result in 
confused and overly complicated command and control 
relationships, and fundamentally undermining holistic joint, 
combined, and multi-agency deliberate and contingency plans and 
operations.
    The committee believes the assessment must include a clear 
concept for command and control of both peacetime operations 
and wartime combat operations, whether through the use of 
existing combatant command headquarters and their respective 
component commands, or through the creation of stand-alone 
Joint Task Force headquarters. It must also ensure appropriate 
forward-based force structure and capabilities are in place and 
in a sufficient state of readiness.
    The committee expects the Department to assess and 
recommend the appropriate ratio of U.S.-based to forward-based 
forces, as well as apply the appropriate mix of forward-based 
force structure capabilities and end strength growth to respond 
to increased threats to the security of extended lines of 
communication, the proliferation of anti-access/area denial 
capabilities, and the emerging necessity to respond to 
adversarial competition activities occurring below the 
threshold of armed conflict.
Army modernization strategy (sec. 1062)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to develop a comprehensive modernization 
strategy for the total Army. This strategy should explicitly 
address the Army's vision, end-state, key objectives, war 
fighting challenges, and risks. It should be sufficiently 
descriptive to drive requirements, set priorities, identify 
opportunity costs, and establish acquisition timelines. The 
committee assesses that a comprehensive strategy would give 
strategic purpose to existing acquisition programs. The 
strategy should provide the congressional defense committees an 
understanding of potential long-term costs beyond the future 
year defense program (FYDP) and aid in the decision-making 
process to terminate unneeded or underperforming programs. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit its 
modernization strategy to the congressional defense committees 
within 90 days after the enactment of this Act.
    The strategy shall describe how the Army intends on 
fighting and winning as part of a joint force engaged in combat 
across all operational domains. It should account for current 
trends and developments in weapons and equipment technologies. 
It should also account for the rapid pace potential peer 
adversaries are evolving new tactics and force design. Key is 
an understanding of what the Army will need to maintain 
command, control, communications, and sustainment of dispersed 
combat and combat support units in the face of electronic and 
cyber-attack.
    The committee is concerned the Army is not modernized to 
fight and win high-intensity combined arms, maneuver battle 
against a peer adversary. The committee is aware of specific 
capability gaps that would significantly affect Army maneuver 
forces' freedom of action, mobility, lethality, and 
sustainment.
    The committee notes that the Army has published numerous 
strategies for specific programs such as small arms, tracked 
combat vehicles, wheeled vehicles, and aviation. Yet the Army 
does not possess an all-encompassing modernization strategy 
that provides purpose and priority to the above. Given the Army 
expends tens of billions of dollars each year on procurement, 
research, development, testing, and evaluation, the committee 
views a comprehensive Army modernization strategy as essential.
    The committee acknowledges the Army remains engaged in 
active operations across the world and accordingly has made 
readiness its first priority. However, the committee assesses 
modernization as requirement for readiness in the very near 
future.
Report on Army plan to improve operational unit readiness by reducing 
        the number of non-deployable soldiers assigned to operation 
        units (sec. 1063)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees detailing the Army's plan to improve 
operational unit readiness by reducing the number of non-
deployable soldiers assigned to those units and replacing them 
with soldiers capable of worldwide deployment. The committee is 
concerned that 10 percent of soldiers in the Army's operational 
units are currently non-deployable. This is resulting in units 
that are deploying to operational theaters with far less than 
90 percent of their authorized personnel.
    The committee is also concerned that these levels of non-
deployable soldiers assigned to operational units are 
negatively affecting training, training management 
efficiencies, equipment maintenance, small unit cohesion, and 
combat effectiveness. High levels of non-deployable soldiers 
may be affecting other measurable aspects of unit readiness 
such as training and maintenance of assigned equipment.
    The committee understands readiness is the Army's first 
priority given the current national security situation. The 
committee assesses that, if the Army can improve the readiness 
of individual soldiers so that they may deploy and participate 
in all scheduled unit training, overall readiness rates will 
improve.
Efforts to combat physiological episodes on certain Navy aircraft (sec. 
        1064)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to provide quarterly updates on the 
progress of the Navy's Physiological Episode Team and their 
efforts to combat physiological episodes in F/A-18 Hornets and 
Super Hornets, EA-18 Growlers, and T-45 Goshawks.
    The committee is concerned by the continued prevalence of 
physiological episodes occurring in a number of Navy aircraft 
including F/A-18 Hornets and Super Hornets, EA-18 Growlers, and 
T-45 Goshawks. The problems affecting the Naval Aviators and 
Naval Flight Officers flying these aircraft range in frequency 
and severity, but are consistent in their degradation of Naval 
Aviation safety and readiness. Physiological episodes, with 
apparent root causes in the environmental control systems and 
Onboard Oxygen Generating System (OBOGS), have been named Naval 
Aviation's number one safety priority. While the committee 
understands Navy senior leadership is focused on the issue and 
a Physiological Episode Team (PET) has been in place since 2010 
to try to solve the issues, the committee is concerned that no 
solutions have been found at the same time that recent events 
indicate the situation may be getting worse in legacy Hornets 
and T-45s.
    The committee is also concerned that while the Navy has 
repeatedly stated that their efforts to solve the problems are 
``resource unconstrained'', it is unclear how much money and 
manpower is being expended on the effort. As funding for the 
engineering analysis and mitigation efforts comes from a 
variety of sources, it is difficult to get a clear picture of 
the total effort, inhibiting proper oversight and limiting 
analysis of where resources could potentially be added to 
further the effort.
    The committee is further concerned by the breakdown in 
communications within the Naval Aviation Enterprise, most 
especially between the engineers working the problem at Naval 
Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) and the aviators on the flight 
line. While a lot of good work was being done and data being 
created and analyzed, those efforts were not always being 
effectively communicated down to the flightline, where the 
dangers of physiological episodes are most acute. The committee 
urges the Navy to consider designating a single individual for 
each affected platform to act as the bridge between engineer 
and operator to ensure that a positive and frequent 
communication flow becomes a strength of the solution process.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to provide the committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
House of Representatives quarterly updates on the Department's 
efforts to mitigate and solve Naval Aviation's number one 
safety priority. The required updates shall contain, but may 
not be limited to, activities of the Naval Aviation Enterprise 
addressing physiological episodes over the course of the 
previous quarter; identified funding expended in support of 
such activities; any planned or executed changes to PET 
structure or processes; and planned activities for the next two 
upcoming quarters.
Studies on aircraft inventories for the Air Force (sec. 1065)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to commission three studies to be 
submitted to the congressional defense committees in 
unclassified, and to the extent necessary, in classified 
versions to recommend future aircraft inventories and 
capability mixtures of Air Force aircraft no later than March 
1, 2019. These studies would provide competing visions and 
alternatives for a future set of choices regarding Air Force 
aircraft capabilities and capacities. One study would be 
performed by the Secretary of the Air Force with the 
participation of the Director of the Office of Net Assessment 
in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The second study 
would be performed by a federally funded research and 
development center. The third study would be conducted by a 
qualified independent, non-governmental institute, as selected 
by the Secretary of Defense.
    The committee believes two enduring tenets of our national 
security strategies over the years have served the United 
States well: (1) the United States will maintain sufficient 
military forces and capabilities to engage around the world to 
encourage peace and stability; and (2) in the event we do need 
to conduct military operations, the U.S. Armed Forces will do 
so away from U.S. territory in a fashion that puts adversary 
value structures at risk, as well as retain the ability to win 
more than one major regional conflict simultaneously. To 
accomplish both of these fundamental tenets, the committee 
believes the Air Force needs a set of robust, capable, and 
ready forces with a rotational base sufficient to sustain such 
operations.
    The committee also believes the Air Force currently lacks 
an understandable and sufficient aircraft inventory force-
sizing rationale. Force structure is a direct determinant of 
the extent to which the national security strategy of the 
United States can be executed. Accordingly, the Air Force needs 
a logical, understandable, and easily articulated force-sizing 
approach that derives from the national defense strategy and 
that establishes a clear ability to trace strategy to task.
    Finally, the committee believes Air Force aircraft 
inventories should be planned and procured at levels necessary 
to support the fundamental tenets of our national security and 
national defense strategies, as opposed to allowing arbitrary 
budget restrictions to drive U.S. national security strategy. 
The emergence and re-emergence of near-peer competitors with 
advancing military technological capabilities and growing 
capacity, as well as increasingly capable regional threats, are 
steadily eroding the technological overmatch and military 
dominance the United States has singularly enjoyed since the 
end of the Cold War period.
Plan and recommendations for interagency vetting of foreign investments 
        with potential impacts on national defense and national 
        security (sec. 1066)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State and the Secretary of Treasury, to conduct an assessment 
and develop and present to Congress a plan for the Department 
of Defense and recommendations for other agencies for how 
certain foreign investments can be better vetted. The committee 
is concerned about the foreign use of investment tools and 
methods that work around existing vetting processes to gain 
access to critical technology or intellectual property. Such 
methods may also be used to deny the Department of Defense 
access to such technology once foreign control or influence has 
been established. In considering recommendations for other 
agencies, the Department may want to consider the following, in 
addition to other options:
          (1) Mandatory notification by foreign investors to 
        the appropriate departments and agencies of the United 
        States Government when making transactions in certain 
        areas that are more likely to impair the ability of the 
        Department to defend the Nation;
          (2) Expanded authority to unilaterally initiate 
        reviews of such transactions;
          (3) The ability to suspend certain transactions 
        during interagency vetting, if the transactions are 
        likely to impair the ability of the Department to 
        defend the Nation; and
          (4) Mechanisms for outside sources to provide input, 
        as well as greater transparency in certain areas.
    The Department of Defense should provide the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
an interim report within 90 days and a final report within 180 
days of the enactment of this Act.
Report on authorities for the employment, use, and status of National 
        Guard and Reserve technicians (sec. 1067)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chief of the 
National Guard Bureau, the Chief of the Army Reserve, the Chief 
of the Air Force Reserve, and representatives of National Guard 
and Reserve technicians to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by no later 
than April 1, 2018, a report assessing the adequacy of current 
authorities for the employment, use, and status of military 
technicians, to include recommendations for statutory change. 
The purpose of the report would be to define the mission and 
requirements of military technicians, identify means to improve 
their management and administration, and identify means to 
enhance the capability of the Department of Defense to recruit 
and retain technicians.
Conforming repeals and technical amendments in connection with reports 
        of the Department of Defense whose submittal to Congress has 
        previously been terminated by law (sec. 1068)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical and conforming amendments related to Department of 
Defense reporting requirements that were terminated under 
section 1080 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and section 1061 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328).
Annual reports on approval of employment or compensation of retired 
        general or flag Officers by foreign governments for Emoluments 
        Clause purposes (sec. 1069)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 908 of title 37, United States Code, to require the 
service secretaries to submit to certain congressional 
committees an annual report on approval of employment or 
compensation of retired general or flag officers by foreign 
governments for which the consent of Congress is required by 
article I, section 9 (the emoluments clause) of the 
Constitution.
Annual report on civilian casualties in connection with United States 
        military operations (sec. 1070)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on civilian casualties caused as a result 
of United States military operations during the preceding year. 
The report is to be delivered no later than May 1 of each year.
Report on large-scale, joint exercises involving the air and land 
        domains (Sec. 1071)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on large-scale, joint exercises involving 
the air and land domains.
Department of Defense review of Navy capabilities in the Arctic region 
        (sec. 1072)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to submit a report on the capabilities of 
the Navy in the Arctic region to the congressional defense 
committees not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactments of this Act.
Business case analysis on establishment of active duty association and 
        additional primary aircraft authorizations for the 168th Air 
        Refueling Wing (sec. 1073)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a business case analysis 
on the establishment of an active or classic association with 
the 168th Air Refueling Wing.
Report on Navy capacity to increase production of anti-submarine 
        warfare and search and rescue rotary wing aircraft in light of 
        increase in the size of the surface fleet to 355 ships. (Sec. 
        1074)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to report to the congressional defense 
committees, no later than September 15, 2017, on the capacity 
of the United States Navy to increase production of anti-
submarine warfare and combat search and rescue rotary wing 
aircraft given the stated intent to increase the size of the 
fleet to 355 ships.
    The committee is aware that the Navy is currently 
performing an assessment for the fleet. The committee is also 
aware that much of the current fleet of MH-60 helicopters are 
approaching the end of their planned service life and will have 
to undergo a service life extension in the next few years which 
will take roughly thirty aircraft out of service annually.
    Given the anticipated growth of the fleet the committee 
assesses there will be an increased requirement for combat 
search and rescue and anti-submarine warfare helicopters. All 
of these requirements place future demand on the naval 
helicopter industrial base while the Navy's procurement plan is 
imposing a gap in production between the ending of the latest 
MH-60R contract and procurement to fulfill future aircraft 
requirements. This gap will cause a loss of skilled labor and 
extensively impact the broader supply chain, driving the cost 
per airframe up significantly and unnecessarily.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

Protection against misuse of Naval Special Warfare Command insignia 
        (sec. 1081)
    The committee recommends a provision that would add a new 
section 7882 to title 10, United States Code, to prohibit a 
person from using any covered Naval Special Warfare insignia in 
connection with any promotion, good, service, or other 
commercial activity when a particular use would be likely to 
suggest a false affiliation, connection, or association with, 
endorsement by, or approval of, the United States Government, 
the Department of Defense, or the Department of the Navy, and 
to authorize the Attorney General to initiate civil proceedings 
to prevent unauthorized use of such insignia.
Collaborations between the Armed Forces and certain non-Federal 
        entities on support of Armed Forces missions abroad (sec. 1082)
    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate on the contributions of qualified non-
Federal entities to the effectiveness of the mission of the 
Department of Defense through the provision of private 
humanitarian, economic, and other non-lethal assistance from 
U.S. citizens in response to local needs identified by members 
of the Armed Forces in areas in which the Armed Forces are 
deployed abroad. Further, the provision would express the sense 
of the Senate that U.S. military commanders should collaborate 
with and, consistent with applicable laws and regulations, 
provide transportation, lodging, and other logistical support 
to qualified non-Federal entities to enhance missions of the 
Armed Forces abroad. Additionally, the provision would require 
the Secretary of Defense not later than 120 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act to conduct a review of guidance within 
the Department of Defense applicable to collaborations between 
military commanders and qualified non-federal Entities and, if 
determined as appropriate in light of the review, issue 
additional guidance within 180 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act.
    The committee is concerned that there is a lack of clarity 
on what constitutes appropriate interaction between Department 
of Defense personnel and qualified non-Federal entities. The 
committee believes the lack of clear, consistent guidance 
across the Armed Forces on such collaboration creates confusion 
for military commanders and could impede the ability of 
privately-funded qualified non-Federal entities to provide 
private assistance that would directly benefit the 
accomplishment of military objectives while also saving U.S. 
taxpayer funds.
Federal charter for Spirit of America (sec. 1083)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend title 
36, United States Code, to establish a federal charter for 
Spirit of America.
Reconsideration of claims for disability compensation for veterans who 
        were the subjects of mustard gas or lewisite experiments during 
        World War II (sec. 1084)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in consultation with the 
Secretary of Defense, to reconsider all claims for compensation 
under chapter 11 of title 38, United States Code, that were 
denied before the date of the enactment of this Act, and make a 
disability determination in connection with full-body exposure 
to mustard gas or Lewisite during active military, naval, or 
air service during World War II. The provision would require 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary of Defense 
to presume that a veteran experienced full-body exposure to 
mustard gas or Lewisite, unless proven otherwise, when 
reconsidering a claim.
Prize competition to identify root cause of physiological episodes on 
        Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force training and operational 
        aircraft (sec. 1085)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a prize competition designed 
to accelerate identification of the root cause or causes of 
physiological episodes experienced in Navy, Marine Corps, and 
Air Force training and operational aircraft.
Exception to the interdepartmental waiver doctrine for cleanup of 
        vehicle crashes (sec. 1086)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to expend funds to clean up vehicle 
crashes on another Federal department or agency's property if 
the crash was the result of a Department of Defense activity.
Transfer of surplus firearms to Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle 
        Practice and Firearms Safety (sec. 1087)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 40728(h) of title 36, United States Code, by directing 
the Secretary of the Army to transfer no more than 10,000 
surplus M1911 and M1911A1 pistols to the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program. The committee notes that all sales shall be at fair 
market value and all revenues from said sales, less transfer 
and storage costs, shall be returned to the Treasury as 
miscellaneous receipts.

                       Items of Special Interest

355 ship build-up review
    The committee supports the Navy's Force Structure 
Assessment requirement for 355 battle force ships. The 
committee is aware that the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral 
John Richardson, published a white paper, The Future Navy, 
which calls for the Navy to achieve the 355 ship objective in 
the 2020s.
    Furthermore, the committee is aware that achieving the FSA 
battle fleet objective may require options other than solely 
relying on new-construction shipbuilding. The committee 
understands that the Navy is examining options to extend the 
service life of ships currently in the fleet and reactivate 
inactive ships. The committee believes it is important that 
Congress fully understand the business case analysis for these 
options and others which could grow the fleet.
    Therefore, not later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
deliver a report to the congressional defense committees which 
shows a detailed business case analysis for each option to grow 
the battle fleet other than new construction. The report shall 
include business case analyses for service life extension and 
reactivation options.
Arctic domain awareness
    The committee understands that current Department of 
Defense and commercial satellite constellations do not provide 
sufficient space coverage to offer consistent coverage of the 
Arctic and Polar regions. The committee further understands 
that the U.S. military currently faces significant challenges 
in its ability to operate in the Arctic region given these 
current communications, navigational, and domain awareness 
shortfalls.
    The committee notes that in December 2016, the Department 
of Defense issued the Report to Congress on Strategy to Protect 
United States National Security Interests in the Arctic Region, 
a report required by this committee in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (P.L. 114-92). The 
committee is encouraged that the Department intends to ``engage 
public, private, and international partners to improve domain 
awareness in the Arctic,'' but is concerned that, as the report 
identifies, ``command and control of forces are challenged by 
limited satellite and terrestrial communications above 65 
degrees north.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense 
to identify possible partnerships with commercial industry to 
meet immediate domain awareness and communications requirements 
in the Arctic, to include improved satellite imagery and 
communications, terrestrial communications, unmanned aerial 
systems, and other urgent, identified needs of the Department.
Assessment of Navy capabilities to support U.S. Coast Guard and partner 
        nations' international maritime law enforcement activities
    Elsewhere in this report, the committee has expressed 
concern about the size of the Navy fleet and its effect on 
warfighting capability, and about the ability of the Navy to 
achieve the force derived from the Navy's latest Force 
Structure Assessment.
    In peacetime, the Navy also is tasked with supporting other 
Government priorities, including law enforcement activities of 
the U.S. Coast Guard or allied nations.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy may not give 
adequate consideration to supporting these priorities. This may 
derive from having insufficient forces, but it could also be 
affected by insufficiently trained personnel or inadequate 
authorities.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy, in consultation with the Chief of Naval Operations, to 
provide an assessment to the Committees on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives no later than March 
1, 2018. The assessment should address the following elements:
          (1) The Navy's current capabilities and capacity to 
        provide support to the U.S. Coast Guard or allied 
        nations and their maritime law enforcement activities, 
        including efforts to combat:
                  (a) human trafficking;
                  (b) illegal, unreported, and unregulated 
                fishing; and
                  (c) other illicit activity at sea.
          (2) Technical coordination with partner nations and 
        non-governmental organization to improve tracking and 
        detection of vessels engaged in such activities;
          (3) Unfilled demand from the U.S. Coast Guard and 
        allied nations for such support;
          (4) Limitations on the Navy's ability to provide such 
        support; and
          (5) Legislative proposals for mitigating these 
        limitations.
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity 
        Conflict
    The committee notes that section 922 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) included a number of reforms designed to enhance the role 
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations 
and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC) in providing for the 
oversight and advocacy of special operations forces (SOF). The 
Acting ASD SOLIC testified before the committee on May 4, 2017, 
that ``In overseeing SOF acquisitions, technology, logistics, 
personnel, readiness, and talent management functions, SOLIC 
will be positioned to institutionalize these hard-learned 
lessons of contemporary conflicts. The `Service secretary-like' 
authorities in section 922 serve as a strategic linchpin, 
ensuring that we lock in these hard-won gains.''
    The committee believes the Department has made important 
progress in implementing these reforms, including by taking 
steps to emphasize the role of the ASD SOLIC in budgeting, 
programming, and personnel matters in recent months. However, 
the committee believes much more remains to be done to achieve 
the full intent of the provision.
    The committee remains mindful of the congressionally-
directed reductions to headquarters staff, but continues to 
believe that the ``service secretary-like'' mission of the ASD 
SOLIC should be more robustly resourced in order to rebalance 
the ASD SOLIC's lines of effort and fulfill its mandate under 
title 10, United States Code. The committee also supports the 
ongoing review of the non-legally binding responsibilities 
currently assigned to the ASD SOLIC under Department guidance 
and looks forward to receiving recommendations for the 
divesture of any such responsibilities. Additionally, the 
committee strongly encourages the Department to consider 
reforms to the organizational structure of the office that 
would ensure a significantly increased emphasis on its 
responsibility to exercise its ``service secretary-like'' 
responsibilities with respect to U.S. Special Operations 
Command.
Audit progress
    The committee is concerned that Department of Defense has 
not obtained an audit opinion on its full financial statements 
after over 20 years of working to do so, as required by law. 
The Chief Financial Officer's Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-576) 
mandates the preparation of audited annual financial statements 
for certain funds and accounts from executive agencies, 
including the Department. The Department of Defense is the only 
agency which has not received an unqualified (clean) audit 
opinion on their annual financial statements, which means that 
their statements were free of material misstatements and accord 
with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, acting through 
the Defense Business Board, to study audit progress to date, 
specifically focusing on the organizational and individual 
incentives that could improve the Department's standing. The 
committee hopes that this effort will produce actionable 
recommendations for the Department and for Congress to 
incentivize a clean audit across the Department of Defense.
Budget Control Act Repeal
    The committee has ongoing concerns about the negative 
impact of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) on the 
Department of Defense and other agencies that contribute to our 
national security and supports its unconditional repeal.
Comptroller General of the United States review of the U.S. Navy's 
        approach to nuclear-powered aircraft carrier dismantlement and 
        disposal
    The committee notes the Department of the Navy's planning 
for the dismantlement and disposal of the ex-USS Enterprise 
includes options that have not been previously utilized for 
nuclear-powered warship disposal. In 2012, the ex-USS 
Enterprise was inactivated and began the process of defueling. 
In 2014, the Navy released a request for information to assess 
the potential of commercial dismantlement and disposal, based 
on the Navy's assessment that the traditional means of nuclear-
powered warship disposal at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) 
may not be viable for the ex-USS Enterprise. In November 2016, 
the Navy released a request for proposals (RFP) for partial 
commercial dismantlement and disposal. In February 2017, the 
Navy announced this RFP was cancelled.
    The committee understands current planning includes the 
evaluation of three alternatives: commercial recycling of the 
non-nuclear portions of the ex-USS Enterprise followed by 
reactor compartment packaging at PSNS, commercial recycling of 
the entire ship, and a disposal path decision at a later date.
    The committee is concerned with several aspects of the 
Navy's approach to dismantlement and disposal of the ex-USS 
Enterprise, which will set a precedent for future nuclear-
powered aircraft carriers, including:
          (1) Incomplete National Environmental Policy Act and 
        Nuclear Regulatory Commission documentation necessary 
        to evaluate the potential impacts associated with each 
        alternative prior to preparing to award a contract;
          (2) Intention to fund the dismantlement incrementally 
        using the Operations and Maintenance, Navy account;
          (3) Intention to award a contract for a project that 
        could exceed the Acquisition Category II funding 
        threshold without presenting the congressional defense 
        committees with a contracting strategy, detailed cost 
        estimate, or results of a formal decision review 
        process; and
          (4) Projections of PSNS workload that do not clearly 
        depict the government's best estimate of future 
        workload.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report setting forth the results of a review no 
later than June 1, 2018, with preliminary observations and 
recommendations due no later than March 1, 2018, on the Navy's 
approach to dismantlement and disposal of the ex-USS Enterprise 
that shall include the following:
          (1) The extent to which each of the three 
        alternatives comply with applicable statutes and 
        regulations, as well as specific actions necessary to 
        achieve such compliance prior to selecting a course of 
        action or awarding an associated contract.
          (2) The pros and cons associated with the Navy's 
        proposed alternatives to dismantlement and disposal of 
        the ex-USS Enterprise, including analyses of the 
        contracting strategies, cost and schedule estimates, 
        and impact on the workload and facilities at the Navy's 
        public shipyards.
          (3) The budgetary and program management implications 
        of funding this effort using the Operations and 
        Maintenance, Navy account, as compared to a procurement 
        account (e.g., the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 
        account and treating this project similar to an 
        aircraft carrier refueling and complex overhaul). 
        Include a review of the Navy's intent to use an 
        incremental funding approach, as compared to fully 
        funding the effort.
          (4) The extent to which this effort should be subject 
        to acquisition reviews, program deliverables (e.g., a 
        program cost and schedule baseline), and acquisition 
        executive involvement in accordance with acquisition 
        best practices and applicable guidance, including 
        Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02.
          (5) The extent to which the Navy's public shipyard 
        workload estimates, including PSNS, depict the 
        government's best estimate of projected workload and is 
        appropriately budgeted for in the Department of Defense 
        future years defense program.
          (6) Other information regarding or related to the 
        Navy's dismantlement and disposal strategy for the ex-
        USS Enterprise that the Comptroller General determines 
        to be of significant importance to the execution and 
        oversight of this effort, as well as for the 
        dismantlement and disposal of future nuclear aircraft 
        carriers.
    The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to consider 
the results and recommendations of this Comptroller General 
review prior to selecting a course of action for the 
dismantlement and disposal of the ex-USS Enterprise and to keep 
the congressional defense committees informed of significant 
actions related to this effort.
DUI prevention and rideshares
    The committee is encouraged by the Department's continued 
efforts to reduce alcohol-related incidents generally and 
driving under the influence (DUI) in particular. For example, 
the Marine Corps' ``Protect What You've Earned'' effort teaches 
Marines to consider the long-term benefits of responsible 
decision making. The committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to consider other innovative approaches to help further 
reduce the number of service member DUI incidents. Installation 
and unit-based car-pool and rideshare programs have the 
potential to reduce service member costs while also providing 
reliable and safe methods of transportation. New transportation 
technology has the potential to make these, and other, 
innovative approaches more accessible to military 
installations.
Efficient use of non-tactical government owned transportation
    The committee notes that significant cost savings could be 
achieved through the more efficient use of non-tactical 
government owned mobility and transportation on military 
installations. Notably, the Department of Defense spends 
roughly $435.0 million each year for non-tactical passenger 
vehicles and light trucks, with a use rate of just seven 
percent.
    To address these inefficiencies, the committee encourages 
the Secretary of Defense to examine the Department's approach 
to providing non-tactical transportation. New technologies and 
approaches should be utilized to meet department needs while 
also improving overall efficiency. The recent Department of 
Transportation Smart Cities Challenge provides useful insight 
to innovative approaches that might be beneficial to the 
Department of Defense. The committee also encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to incentivize military installations to 
partner with industry and local communities to explore mutually 
beneficial transportation opportunities.
Encouraging Air Force Rescue Unit Associations
    The committee notes that United States Air Force rescue 
squadrons, including those in the reserve component, deliver 
critical combat and emergency support to military and civilian 
personnel in harm's way, both at home and abroad. Whether 
called upon to provide combat search and rescue or to respond 
to a natural disaster, Air Force rescue squadrons are an 
adaptable and invaluable capability for the nation.
    The unique nature of the rescue mission lends itself well 
for a robust partnership between Active, Reserve, and National 
Guard rescue units. In particular, experience gained by 
National Guard units while performing their domestic duties, 
under title 32, United States Code, provides important 
opportunities to prepare units for success in combat 
environments. The committee believes that the significant 
experience residing in reserve component rescue squadrons 
should be better leveraged to benefit the Total Force.
    Issued in 2014, the report of National Commission on the 
Structure of the Air Force--a report required by the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (P.L. No. 112-
239)--recommended forming additional associate units comprised 
of both active and reserve component personnel and equipment. 
As part of the House Report of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (H. Rept. 114-537), the 
House of Representatives further encouraged the Air Force to 
consider forming associate units with the three Air National 
Guard combat search and rescue units in Alaska, California, and 
New York.
    The committee believes the Air Force should accelerate the 
creation of combat search and rescue associate units to promote 
efficiency, leverage Reserve Component expertise, improve 
readiness across the Total Force, and expand interoperability 
between Active and Reserve Components.
Management of Special Access Programs
    The committee understands the necessity of protecting 
sensitive information in Special Access Programs (SAPs). 
Unfortunately, implementing such special protection risks 
creating information silos that may result in the duplication 
of efforts across programs and teams. The Office of the 
Secretary of Defense has undertaken efforts to address this 
challenge and ensure appropriate information sharing, while 
maintaining adequate security controls. The committee applauds 
these efforts, but is concerned about whether the Department 
has yet to achieve an appropriate balance among these concerns.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary to review the 
rationalization efforts implemented to date to ensure that the 
Department of Defense policy results in granting access to 
special programs in a matter that will promote the goal of 
advancing mission capabilities across multiple SAPs, while 
maintaining appropriate security controls. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
on the status of these efforts no later than December 1, 2017.
National Guard Counterdrug Program
    The National Guard Counterdrug Program (NGCP) is a 
federally-funded program that provides military-specific skill-
sets to law enforcement agencies and community-based 
organizations to address the supply and demand for illicit 
drugs. The timing and allocation of funding continues to be a 
limiting factor for the NGCP and impedes the effective 
sustainment of relationships with supported agencies and 
impacts the retention of highly-trained individuals.
    With such challenges in mind, the committee is interested 
in the allocation of resources to best support the Department 
of Defense (DOD) counternarcotics efforts. In October 2015, the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the 
National Guard had developed performance measures to report on 
its counterdrug program, but the information collected was not 
being used to evaluate and inform funding for state-level 
programs or oversee the counterdrug schools training.
    While the National Guard has developed its Threat Based 
Resource Model (TBRM) to determine the severity of the drug 
threat, and is using it to determine funding levels for each 
state within the counterdrug program, the committee is 
concerned that the states' use of the funds has not produced 
results in line with each state's counterdrug objectives. The 
committee would like to have a better understanding of how the 
NGCP allocates and expends resources in alignment with its 
stated objectives.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate the NGCP's approach to 
resource allocation, to include the following: (1) A 
description of how the NGCP aligns with the Department of 
Defense's overarching counter-narcotics objectives; (2) A 
description of how the National Guard determines funding and 
distribution percentages for each state in the TBRM; (3) An 
assessment of the extent to which funding for the National 
Guard counterdrug program is expended in accordance with 
approved state plans; and (4) An assessment of the extent to 
which the National Guard Counterdrug Program is achieving its 
stated objectives.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General to brief the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives not later than March 15, 2018, on preliminary 
findings of the evaluation with a final report to follow by 
June 30, 2018.
National Guard role in enhanced border security
    The committee acknowledges an increased emphasis on 
enhancing our nation's border security to address illegal 
immigration, illicit drug smuggling, human trafficking, and 
other criminal activities that threaten our national security. 
The committee notes there may be additional opportunities for 
National Guard units to conduct valuable unit and individual 
training events that would contribute to readiness as well as 
enhanced border security.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
and the Secretary of the Air Force to submit to the 
congressional defense committees, in consultation with the 
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, the Commander of U.S. 
Northern Command and the Secretary of Homeland Security, a 
report by December 1, 2017, with recommendations on how the 
Army National Guard and Air National Guard could gain effective 
unit and individual training while also enhancing the border 
security capabilities of the continental United States. This 
report should contain a description of: the types of activities 
that would achieve such training and enhanced border security; 
the costs associated with such activities and the delineation 
of state and federal funding required; the potential impact on 
operations and personnel tempo for tasked units; any 
limitations of current operating authorities for each potential 
training activity; and any other information the Secretaries 
consider relevant.
Navy strategic laydown and dispersal plan
    The committee is concerned that the Navy has not yet 
presented detailed plans for expanding the fleet to achieve the 
355-ship force structure objective identified in December 2016. 
As the Navy develops such plans, the committee believes that 
the Navy should also define the appropriate Navy infrastructure 
including measures to ensure that risk to the fleet from 
natural or manmade catastrophes is effectively mitigated.
    The committee is aware that the Chief of Naval Operations 
promulgated OPNAV Instruction 3111.17A in May 2017 to set 
policy and establish responsibility for the design and 
assessment phases of the annual Navy Strategic Laydown and 
Dispersal (SLD) plan.
    The committee notes OPNAV Instruction 3111.17A includes 
direction to consider actions that would ``limit risks 
associated with natural disasters or manmade catastrophes''' 
during the homeporting determination process. The committee 
believes that the Navy should include this direction as a key 
consideration in decisions regarding basing of capital ships, 
namely aircraft carriers and amphibious ships, particularly as 
these ship classes increase.
    The committee further notes OPNAV Instruction 3111.17A also 
includes direction to consider actions that would improve 
Operational Plan (OPLAN) and Contingency Plan (CONPLAN) 
response times. The committee believes that this direction 
should also be a key consideration in decisions regarding 
basing of capital ships.
Northern Triangle human rights training
    The Committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to provide the congressional defense and foreign 
relations committees no later than June 30, 2018, a report on 
the extent to which U.S. assistance to police forces in the 
Northern Triangle builds professionalism and respect for human 
rights. The report should contain the following elements: (1) A 
description of the Department of Defense's objectives in 
training police forces in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala; 
(2) An assessment of the extent to which the Department of 
Defense is achieving its objectives with respect to human 
rights and increased professionalism across police 
institutions; (3) An assessment of any plans to sustain efforts 
to train police forces in the Northern Triangle; and (4) Any 
other matters deemed relevant by the Comptroller General of the 
United States.
Plan on actions to address vulnerabilities arising from unencrypted 
        aircraft transponders on military aircraft
    The committee recognizes the benefits to efficiency and 
effectiveness of the Department of Defense's integration into 
the Next Generation Air Transportation System. However, the 
committee is extremely concerned with potential vulnerabilities 
to operations security, physical security, and cybersecurity of 
military aircraft equipped with existing and planned 
transponders that provide unencrypted real-time, or near real-
time, information available in the public domain.
    The committee is also concerned that the deadline for 
Department of Defense aircraft to be equipped with new 
transponder equipment that provides further unencrypted 
information is currently January 1, 2020. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, to 
complete a plan that includes:
          (1) Actions that have been taken to mitigate the 
        vulnerabilities discussed above;
          (2) Remaining actions to be taken and deadlines for 
        completing those actions;
          (3) Identification of the primary Department of 
        Defense official charged with overseeing the 
        Department's coordinated efforts on such plan, and a 
        description of the roles and responsibilities of such 
        official; and
          (4) Other actions the Secretary deems relevant.
    The Secretary of Defense shall provide a report on this 
plan to the congressional defense committees no later than 
December 31, 2017.
Report on infrastructure required to protect national security 
        interests of the United States in the Arctic region
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
to the congressional defense committees no later than June 30, 
2018 a report on the requirements and investment plans for 
military infrastructure necessary to protect United States 
security interests in the Arctic region. The report should 
include the following: a review of the operational plan for the 
protection of United States national security interests in the 
Arctic region, including strategic and national assets; a 
description of United States military capabilities required to 
implement the operational plan, including types of forces, 
major weapons systems, and logistics required for operations in 
the Arctic region; a description of the installations, 
infrastructure, and deep water ports for deployment of assets 
required to support the operational plan; and an investment 
plan to establish the installations and infrastructure required 
to implement the operational plan. The report shall be 
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified 
annex.
Report on initiatives for mitigating military pilot shortfalls
    The committee remains concerned with the increasing 
shortage of military pilots in the Armed Forces, particularly 
in the United States Air Force, who report leaving the Armed 
Forces due to various disincentives to continued service, and 
the attraction of larger salaries and increased control of 
their personal schedules offered by the major airline industry. 
At a June 6, 2017 hearing, senior Air Force leaders testified 
the Air Force was 1,500 pilots short, with fighter pilots 
comprising 1,300 of that shortfall. Forecasted trends also 
indicate Air Force pilot retention will worsen in future years 
as more commercial airline pilots reach mandatory retirement 
age. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Army are also seeing 
forecasted trends toward decreased aviator retention rates. 
While the services have continued to request additional bonus 
authorities and increased maximum allowed annual bonus amounts, 
some of which were authorized and appropriated by Congress in 
recent years, underlying quality of life, quality of service, 
and other disincentives to continued service remain.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in consultation with the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of 
the Navy, and Secretary of the Air Force, to provide to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives no later than March 1, 2018, a report on 
initiatives for mitigating pilot shortfalls. The report shall 
include, at a minimum, the following elements:
          (1) The viability of and resource requirements for 
        increasing aviator production in each military service;
          (2) A comprehensive review of aviator manning 
        requirements in each military service;
          (3) A comprehensive review of available aircraft 
        fleet capacities for seasoning pilots to acceptable 
        proficiency, currency, and experience levels;
          (4) Initiatives undertaken to improve the quality of 
        service for aviators in the Armed Forces, to include 
        elimination of tertiary non-flying training 
        requirements, increased monthly flying time, and more 
        effective training;
          (5) Initiatives undertaken to improve the quality of 
        life of aviators in the Armed Forces, to include the 
        review of disincentives to continued service caused by 
        high rates of deployment, insufficient pay and 
        allowances, family hardships, and other morale-based 
        issues;
          (6) An assessment of the feasibility of developing a 
        career track for Armed Forces aviators that would allow 
        continuous flying duties, as opposed to tertiary 
        assignments and duties required for promotion to senior 
        officer ranks;
          (7) The potential for striking partnership agreements 
        and memoranda of understanding with flight training 
        universities, major airlines, or other entities to 
        achieve synergies in satisfying national pilot demands; 
        and
          (8) Other information the Secretary considers 
        relevant.
Trafficking of commodities
    The committee is concerned by the trafficking of people and 
illegal goods, particularly as it relates to the financing of 
terrorism, the empowerment of transnational organized crime 
organizations, and the destabilization of governments 
worldwide. The committee notes that in recent testimony, 
Admiral Kurt W. Tidd, USN, the Commander of U.S. Southern 
Command, stated that in his area of responsibility, 
``Transregional and transnational threat networks are now the 
principal threat to regional security and stability,'' but that 
their ``interests, influence, capabilities, and reach extend 
beyond the responsibilities of any one Geographic or Functional 
Combatant Command, undercutting our national interests in 
multiple domains and many regions.'' The possibility of witting 
or unwitting exploitation of these networks to harm the United 
States is a serious concern.
    Trafficking worldwide encompasses a number of goods, 
including drugs, people, weapons, antiquities, and tobacco. The 
committee notes with interest that some of these goods may not 
be illegal in and of themselves, but that their illicit 
movement provides significant revenue to transnational threat 
networks in areas such as the Northern Triangle of Central 
America, the U.S.-Mexico border, the Afghanistan-Pakistan 
border, and elsewhere, as was pointed out with respect to 
tobacco products in a 2015 interagency report entitled ``The 
Global Illicit Trade in Tobacco: A Threat to National 
Security.'' The committee is concerned by the illicit trade in 
tobacco and its propensity to fund transnational organized 
crime and terrorist groups.
    The committee, therefore, directs the Secretary of Defense 
(DOD), in consultation with the Department of Homeland 
Security, the Department of State, and other relevant 
departments and agencies, to provide a written update to the 
committee on the status of DOD's support for efforts to combat 
trafficking in commodities, including tobacco. This update 
should include: (1) A description of the impact of trafficking 
in commodities on the national security of the United States, 
including the financing of transnational terrorism and crime 
organizations; (2) Current lines of effort in combating such 
trafficking; and (3) A description of DOD's support for these 
lines of effort.
    The report, which may include a classified portion, on the 
current strategy and implementation of efforts to address the 
challenge posed by commodities trafficking, should be delivered 
not later than September 1, 2017.
Unmanned maritime systems test and training range
    The committee believes that the Navy must increasingly 
leverage unmanned systems across all warfighting domains, but 
particularly on the sea surface and undersea. The committee 
understands that the Navy is funding development programs which 
would support warfighting concepts such as manned-unmanned 
teaming and multi-domain systems integration. The committee 
believes that the Navy may need to increase its test and 
training range infrastructure to provide adequate support for 
testing, experimenting and exercising with unmanned maritime 
systems.
    Therefore, not later than one year after the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall deliver to the 
congressional defense committees a report which evaluates 
potential approaches for dealing with increased demand for 
supporting unmanned maritime systems, including adding 
infrastructure at new locations or expanding existing 
infrastructure.

                  TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

               Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters

Pilot program on enhanced personnel management system for cybersecurity 
        and legal professionals in the Department of Defense (sec. 
        1101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to assess the 
feasibility and advisability of an enhanced personnel 
management system for cybersecurity and legal professionals, 
applicable to new hires in those fields in pay grades GS-15 and 
below within the Department of Defense, commencing January 1, 
2020.
Inclusion of Strategic Capabilities Office and Defense Innovation Unit 
        Experimental of the Department of Defense in personnel 
        management authority to attract experts in science and 
        engineering (sec. 1102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
certain existing personnel management authorities at the 
Department of Defense to include the Strategic Capabilities 
Office and the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental. The 
committee notes that these authorities have previously been 
established to allow certain scientific organizations within 
the Department to attract experts in science and engineering. 
The committee notes that these authorities have been 
implemented by these organizations to great effect and have 
helped significantly to improve the scientific and technical 
workforce of these organizations. Given this positive impact, 
the committee believes that such authorities should be extended 
to newly-formed scientific organizations in the Department of 
Defense.
    The committee notes that both the Strategic Capabilities 
Office and the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental receive 
administrative support through the Washington Headquarters 
Services (WHS). The committee expects that the Washington 
Headquarters Services will provide personnel, management, and 
other administrative support in most efficient manner possible 
to reduce bureaucratic delays, eliminate non-value added 
processes, and best support agility, flexibility, and missions 
that support technology innovation.
Permanent authority for demonstration projects relating to acquisition 
        personnel management policies and procedures (sec. 1103)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1762 of title 10, United States Code, to provide a 
permanent authority for personnel programs for employees in the 
Department of Defense civilian acquisition workforce and 
supporting personnel assigned to work directly with that 
workforce. The provision would also increase the number of 
participants from 120,000 to 130,000 to account for the 
increasing need to train individuals managing acquisition 
programs in cyber deterrence, detection, and response.
Establishment of senior scientific technical managers at Major Range 
        and Test Facility Base facilities and Defense Test Resource 
        Management Center (sec. 1104)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2358a of title 10, United States Code, to explicitly 
include the test and evaluation centers, defined as each 
facility of the Major Range and Test Facility Base, and the 
Defense Test Resource Management Center. Section 1122 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) established and codified the authority of the 
defense research laboratories to hire senior scientific 
technical managers classified above GS-15 of the General 
Schedule. The committee intended that this authority would be 
available to both defense research and development 
laboratories, as well as test and evaluation centers. However, 
the committee has learned that alternative interpretations 
within the Department of Defense have prevented the directors 
of test and evaluation centers from exercising this authority.
Extension of temporary direct hire authority for domestic defense 
        industrial base facilities, the major range and test facilities 
        base (sec. 1105)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
section 1125(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) through fiscal year 2019.
Direct hire authority for financial management experts in the 
        Department of Defense workforce (sec. 1106)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
financial management hiring authority granted in section 1110 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-38) to those Department of Defense components 
not included in the military departments and defense agencies.
Authority for wavier of requirement for a baccalaureate degree for 
        positions in the Department of Defense on cybersecurity and 
        computer programming (sec. 1107)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
briefing by the Secretary of Defense to the Committees on Armed 
Services for the Senate and the House of Representatives, no 
later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
on the feasibility and advisability of the enactment into law 
of a wavier that would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive 
any requirement in law for the possession of a baccalaureate 
degree as a condition of appointment to a position with the 
primary duties of cyber security and computer programming.

                  Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters

Elimination of the foreign exemption provision in regard to overtime 
        for Federal civilian employees temporarily assigned to a 
        foreign area (sec. 1111)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 5542 and 5544 of title 5, United States Code, to allow 
overtime pay equal to one and one-half times the hourly rate of 
basic pay for nonexempt Federal civilian employees assigned to 
temporary duty travel in exempt areas as defined by the Fair 
Labor Standards Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-718).
One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation on premium 
        pay and aggregate limitation on pay for Federal civilian 
        employees working overseas (sec. 1112)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1101 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as 
most recently amended by section 1137 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), to 
extend through 2018 the authority of heads of executive 
agencies to waive limitation on the aggregate of basic and 
premium pay of employees who perform work in an overseas 
location that is in the area of responsibility of the commander 
of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), or a location that was 
formerly in CENTCOM, but has been moved to an area of 
responsibility for the commander of U.S. Africa Command, in 
support of a military operation or an operation in response to 
a declared emergency.
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant allowances, 
        benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on official duty 
        in a combat zone (sec. 1113)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 1 
year the discretionary authority of the head of a federal 
agency to provide allowances, benefits, and gratuities 
comparable to those provided to members of the Foreign Service 
to an agency's civilian employees on official duty in a combat 
zone.

                       Items of Special Interest

Direct hiring authorities
    The committee is disappointed that despite language 
authorizing direct hiring authorities provided in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, the 
implementation of these policies has yet to take effect in many 
cases. The committee requests a status update no later than 
September 30, 2017, on the implementation of direct hire 
authorities provided for in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
Implementation of direct hiring authorities for military spouses
    The committee recognizes the unique challenges facing 
military spouses in maintaining suitable employment despite 
frequent moves between duty stations and other requirements of 
military work. In recent years, Congress has provided direct 
hiring authorities to assist military spouses in obtaining 
employment with the federal government.
    The committee understands that despite the authorization of 
special hiring authorities for military spouses, these 
authorities have not yet been sufficiently utilized and 
military family groups have received feedback that spouses 
still face great difficulty in navigating the federal hiring 
process in a timely manner and obtaining employment. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit no 
later than December 1, 2017, a report outlining the 
Department's progress on the implementation of direct hiring 
authorities for military spouses.
Industry fellowships for civilian contracting officers
    The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense 
(DOD) to assign civilian contracting officers to industry 
fellowships by making use of Section 1104 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328), which authorized the DOD, with the agreement of a 
private-sector organization and the consent of the employee, to 
arrange for the temporary assignment of a DOD employee to the 
private-sector organization, or from the private-sector 
organization to a DOD organization. The committee is concerned 
with the workforce development plans pertaining to civilian 
contracting officers, and using such an authority will assist 
in developing senior contracting officers with an aim at 
leveraging industry best practices and developing innovative 
better buying practices.
Waiver of Long-Term Temporary Duty travel per diem rates
    The committee remains concerned that the Department of 
Defense has yet to implement the authority contained in section 
1151 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328), authorizing the service secretaries 
to waive reduced per diem rates for meals and incidental 
expenses incurred during long-term temporary duty travel, when 
the secretary concerned, or appropriately delegated authority, 
determines that the reduced rates are insufficient to cover 
actual expenses under certain circumstances. The committee 
strongly urges the Department to implement this policy so that 
long-term temporary duty travelers in need of actual expense 
reimbursement may receive it. The committee believes that 
civilian public shipyard workers and others supporting enduring 
mission requirements play an important role and, therefore, the 
committee expects that critical work will not be interrupted in 
pursuit of savings.

             TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

                  Subtitle A--Assistance and Training

Support of special operations for irregular warfare (sec. 1201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the relevant 
Chief of Mission, to expend up to $10.0 million annually 
through fiscal year 2021 to provide support to foreign forces, 
irregular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting 
or facilitating ongoing irregular warfare operations by U.S. 
Special Operations Forces (SOF).
    The committee notes with concern that adversarial nations 
are becoming more aggressive in challenging U.S. interests and 
partnerships and destabilizing regional order through the use 
of asymmetric means that often fall below the threshold of 
traditional armed conflict, often referred to as the ``grey 
zone.'' The committee notes that the ability of U.S. SOF to 
conduct low-visibility, irregular warfare operations in 
politically sensitive environments make them uniquely suited to 
counter the malign activities of our adversaries in this 
domain. However, the committee is concerned that the Secretary 
of Defense lacks sufficient authority to provide support for 
irregular warfare operations by U.S. SOF to counter this 
growing threat and therefore believes that granting this 
authority will provide the Secretary with the necessary options 
and flexibility to achieve U.S. military objectives.
Modification of authority on support of special operations to combat 
        terrorism (sec. 1202)
    The Committee recommends a provision that would make 
modifications to section 127e of title 10, United States Code 
related to oversight responsibilities and reporting 
requirements.
Modifications of certain authority in connection with reform of defense 
        security cooperation programs and activities (sec. 1203)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
programs sufficient to satisfy the requirement for 
institutional capacity building pursuant to section 333(c)(4) 
of title 10, United States Code. The provision would also 
modify the Ministry of Defense Advisor program under section 
332 of title 10, United States Code. The committee continues to 
strongly believe that strengthening the institutional capacity 
of foreign security partners to more effectively manage and 
employ security forces is vital to the long-term success of 
Department of Defense security cooperation programs.
Global Security Contingency Fund matters (sec. 1204)
    The committee recommends a provision (sec. 1204) that would 
extend for two years section 1207 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, as amended, and make 
other modifications.
Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (sec. 1205)
    The committee recommends a provision (sec. 1205) that would 
authorize the Secretary of Defense to operate the Defense 
Institute of International Legal Studies and would require the 
Secretary to conduct a comprehensive review of the mission, 
workforce, funding, and other support of the Institute.

        Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan

Extension of Commanders' Emergency Response Program and related 
        authorities (sec. 1211)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2019 the Commanders' Emergency Response 
Program (CERP) in Afghanistan under section 1201 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public 
Law 112-81) as amended by the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
Extension of authority to transfer defense articles and provide defense 
        services to the military and security forces of Afghanistan 
        (sec. 1212)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2018 the authority under section 1222 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
(Public Law 112-238), as most recently amended by section 1213 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(114-328), to transfer defense articles being drawn down in 
Afghanistan and to provide defense services in connection with 
such transfers to the military and security forces of 
Afghanistan. The provision would also extend though fiscal year 
2018 the exemption for excess defense articles (EDA) 
transferred from Department of Defense stocks in Afghanistan 
from counting toward the annual limitation on the aggregate 
value of EDA transferred under section 516 of the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961 (Public Law 87-195).
Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement of certain 
        coalition nations for support provided to United States 
        military operations (sec. 1213)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
fiscal year 2018 the authority to make Coalition Support Funds 
(CSF) payments under section 1233 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), as 
amended. Under this section, the Secretary of Defense may use 
Coalition Support Funds to reimburse certain or designated 
nations for support provided to or in connection with U.S. 
military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria.
    As established in section 1218 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), 
reimbursements under this section to Pakistan can only be made 
for certain activities meant to enhance the security situation 
in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and for 
counterterrorism. As noted in the Senate report accompanying 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328), the committee believes that stability in 
the region cannot be achieved without stability in Pakistan 
itself and that fostering a strong, stable, and secure Pakistan 
is consistent with the national security goals of the United 
States. The committee notes that these national security goals 
remain unchanged from one year ago and thus, the recommended 
provision would extend the separate authority for Pakistan 
created last year.
    The recommended provision would limit the total amount of 
funds that may be provided in fiscal year 2018 to $900.0 
million. Of this total, the amount that could be provided to 
Pakistan would be limited to $700.0 million. The provision 
would also extend for 1 year certain notifications and 
certification requirements relating to payments to Pakistan. 
The provision would also make $350.0 million of this amount 
contingent upon certification from the Secretary of Defense 
that Pakistan is taking demonstrable steps against the Haqqani 
network and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba in Pakistan.
Extension of authority to acquire products and services produced in 
        countries along a major route of supply to Afghanistan (sec. 
        1214)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2019 the authority in section 801(f) of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 
(Public Law 111-84), as most recently amended by section 1212 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328), to acquire products and services produced 
in countries along a major route of supply to Afghanistan.
Extension of semiannual report on enhancing security and stability in 
        Afghanistan (sec. 1215)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 15, 2020 the semiannual reporting requirement 
on enhancing security and stability in Afghanistan.

Sense of Congress regarding the Afghan special immigrant visa program 
        (sec. 1216)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that an additional 4,000 visas should be made 
available for principal aliens who are eligible for special 
immigrant status under the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 
(8 U.S.C. 1101 note) to prevent harm to the operations of the 
United States Government in Afghanistan.

Special immigrant visas for Afghan allies (sec. 1217)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend the 
Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) to 
authorize an additional 4,000 special immigrant visas for 
Afghan allies.

         Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran

Modification of authority to provide assistance to counter the Islamic 
        State of Iraq and Syria (sec. 1231)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authority under section 1236 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3559) to provide for 
infrastructure repair and renovation and small-scale 
construction of temporary facilities necessary to meet urgent 
operational or force protection requirements with a cost less 
than $4 million in Iraq.
    Construction, renovation or repair projects in excess of $1 
million would not be carried out under this provision unless 
approved in advance by the Commander of U.S. Central Command, 
who shall notify in writing the congressional defense 
committees of that decision, including the justification for 
the project and its estimated cost at least 14 days in advance 
of the start of the project. Aggregate costs of construction, 
repair, and renovation projects carried out under this section 
in any fiscal year may not exceed $30 million.
    The committee supports the Department's request for a more 
flexible small-scale construction authority with the objective 
of bolstering the force protection of Iraqi Security Forces and 
coalition advisers via the reconfiguration and development of 
new temporary fighting and defensive positions, the maintenance 
of roads and trails necessary for the conduct of military 
operations, and similar small-scale projects. The committee 
emphasizes this authority is not intended for the construction 
or reconstruction of infrastructure or other permanent 
facilities.

Modification of authority to provide assistance to the vetted Syrian 
        opposition (sec. 1232)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authority under section 1209 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3541) by striking the 
prior approval reprogramming requirement and replacing it with 
a notification requirement before carrying out new initiatives.
    Additionally, the provision would modify the authority to 
provide for infrastructure repair and renovation and small-
scale construction of temporary facilities necessary to meet 
urgent operational or force protection requirements with a cost 
less than $4 million in Syria. Construction or repair projects 
in excess of $1 million would not be carried out under this 
provision unless approved in advance by the Commander of U.S. 
Central Command, who shall notify in writing the congressional 
defense committees of that decision, including justification 
for the project and its estimated cost at least 14 days in 
advance of the start of the project. The aggregate amount of 
construction and repair projects carried out under this section 
in any fiscal year may not exceed $10 million.
    The committee supports the Department's request for a more 
flexible small-scale construction authority with the objective 
of bolstering the force protection of vetted Syrian partner 
forces and coalition advisers via the reconfiguration and 
development of new temporary fighting and defensive positions, 
the maintenance of roads and trails necessary for the conduct 
of military operations, and similar small-scale projects. The 
committee emphasizes this authority is not intended for the 
construction or reconstruction of infrastructure or other 
permanent facilities.

Extension and modification of authority to support operations and 
        activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 
        1233)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through fiscal year 2018 the authority under section 1215 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 
(Public Law 112-81) as amended, for the Secretary of Defense to 
support the operations and activities of the Office of Security 
Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-I). The provision would authorize the 
use of up to $42 million in fiscal year 2018 to support OSC-I 
operations and activities.
    The section would limit the obligation and expenditure of 
more than 50 percent of the funds available to OSC-I until 30 
days after the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State 
submit to the appropriate congressional committees the plan to 
transition the activities conducted by OSC-I but funded by the 
Department of Defense to another entity, or transition the 
funding of such activities to another source, as required in 
the joint explanatory statement to accompany the conference 
report on S. 2943 of the 114th Congress, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). 
The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts to 
adjust the fiscal year 2018 budget request for the OSC-I to 
more accurately reflect annual requirements and looks forward 
to receiving the required plan for transition. Furthermore, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to conduct an independent analysis of the required plan and 
submit to the appropriate congressional committees, within 180 
days of the Department of Defense and State submitting their 
plan, a report containing the results of the independent 
analysis. At a minimum, the independent analysis should compare 
and contrast the OSC-I with other Offices of Security 
Cooperation while considering any unique requirements for the 
OSC-I for fulfilling its mandate.
    The provision also clarifies OSC-I's mandate to support 
strategic defense institution building and the 
professionalization of the security forces of, or associated 
with, the Government of Iraq, rather than providing tactical 
support. Such capacity building activities are critical for 
Iraq's long-term stability to prevent the resurgence of the 
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the emergence of successor 
organizations, and the growth of other destabilizing actors.

Modification and additional elements in annual report on the military 
        power of Iran (sec. 1234)

    The committee recommends a provision that would add 
additional elements to the annual report on the military power 
of Iran required under section 1245 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), to 
include additional information on Iran's military use of 
civilian transportation infrastructure and assets as well as 
transfers to and from Iran pertaining to nuclear, ballistic 
missile, chemical, biological, and advanced conventional 
weapons, and other identified technologies.
    The committee is deeply concerned about transfers to and 
from Iran of illicit technology, especially with respect to 
weapons programs that could potentially threaten the United 
States and its allies. It also remains deeply concerned by 
reports that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is using 
civilian transportation infrastructure and assets to further 
its destabilizing activities in the Middle East, including the 
ongoing conflict in Syria.

         Subtitle D--Matters Relating to the Russian Federation

Extension of limitation on military cooperation between the United 
        States and the Russian Federation (sec. 1241)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through fiscal year 2018 section 1232 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) 
which prohibits funds authorized to be appropriated for the 
Department of Defense from being used for bilateral military-
to-military cooperation between the United States and the 
Russian Federation without certain certifications by the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of 
State, or unless certain waiver conditions are met.

Extension of limitation on availability of funds relating to 
        sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea (sec. 1242)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through fiscal year 2018 the limitation under section 1234 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328) on the use of Department of Defense funds 
for activities to recognize the sovereignty of the Russian 
Federation over Crimea.

Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 1243)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2019 the authority under section 1250 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92) as amended by section 1237 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) for the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
Secretary of State, to provide security assistance, including 
defensive lethal assistance, and intelligence support to 
military and other security forces of the Government of 
Ukraine. The provision would authorize the use of up to $500.0 
million in fiscal year 2018 to provide security assistance to 
Ukraine.
    The provision would prohibit the obligation or expenditure 
of half of the funds authorized to be appropriated in fiscal 
year 2018 under this authority until the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of State, certifies that 
Ukraine has taken substantial action to make defense 
institutional reforms. The committee continues to believe that 
defense institutional reforms are critical to sustaining 
capabilities developed using security assistance provided under 
this and other authorities.
    The committee remains deeply concerned by the continuing 
aggression of Russia and Russian-backed separatists that 
violate ceasefire agreements. The committee continues to 
emphasize the importance of providing security assistance and 
intelligence support, including defensive lethal assistance, to 
the Government of Ukraine to build its capacity to defend its 
territory and sovereignty.

Extension of authority on training for Eastern European national 
        security forces in the course of multilateral exercises (sec. 
        1244)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through calendar year 2020 the authority under section 1251 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92) for the Secretary of Defense, with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to provide multilateral 
or regional training, and pay the incremental expenses of 
participating in such training, for countries in Eastern Europe 
that are a signatory to the Partnership for Peace Framework 
Documents but not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) or became a NATO member after January 1, 
1999. The provision would also amend section 1251 to allow the 
participation of non-military security forces in such training, 
and would make other technical and clarifying amendments. The 
committee notes the purpose of such training is to promote 
interoperability, improve the ability of participating 
countries to respond to external threats, including from hybrid 
warfare, and increase the ability of NATO to take collective 
action when required.

Security assistance for Baltic nations for joint program for resiliency 
        and deterrence against aggression (sec. 1245)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary 
of State, to provide security assistance of up to $100.0 
million derived from amounts authorized to be appropriated for 
the European Deterrence Initiative in fiscal year 2018 to 
conduct or support a joint program of the Baltic nations to 
improve their resilience against and build their capacity to 
deter aggression by the Russian Federation.
    The committee believes that joint procurement could enable 
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to strengthen security 
cooperation, improve key military capabilities, and realize 
cost savings through efficiencies of scale. However, the 
committee also recognizes joint procurement may not be feasible 
under certain circumstances. Therefore, the provision would 
define a joint program as either: (a) A program jointly agreed 
by the Baltic nations that builds interoperability among these 
countries; or (b) An agreement for the joint procurement by the 
Baltic nations of defense articles or defense services to 
improve resiliency and enhance deterrence of aggression by the 
Russian Federation.

Annual report on military and security developments involving the 
        Russian Federation (sec. 1246)

    The committee recommends a provision that would add an 
element on hybrid warfare to the annual report on Russian 
military and security developments required under section 1245 
of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-
291), as most recently amended by the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), 
including assessments of: (a) Russia's information warfare 
strategy and capabilities, including the use of misinformation, 
disinformation, and propaganda in social and traditional media; 
(b) Russia's financing of political parties, think tanks, media 
organizations, and academic institutions; (c) Russia's 
malicious cyber activities; (d) Russia's use of coercive 
economic tools, including sanctions, market access, and 
differential pricing, especially in energy exports; and (e) 
Russia's use of criminal networks and corruption to achieve 
political objectives.

Annual report on attempts of the Russian Federation to provide 
        disinformation and propaganda to members of the Armed Forces by 
        social media. (sec. 1247)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require to 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees no later than March 31 of each year a report on 
attempts by the Russian Federation, or any foreign person 
acting as an agent of or on behalf of the Russian Federation, 
during the preceding year to knowingly disseminate Russian 
Federation-supported disinformation or propaganda, through 
social media applications or related Internet-based means, to 
members of the Armed Forces with probable intent to cause 
injury to the United States or advantage the Government of the 
Russian Federation.

Support of European Deterrence Initiative to deter Russian aggression 
        (sec. 1248)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the United States, together with NATO 
allies and other European partners, should demonstrate its 
resolve and ability to meet its commitments under Article V of 
the North Atlantic Treaty through appropriate military 
exercises with an emphasis on participation of U.S. forces 
based in the continental United States and testing strategic 
and operational logistics and transportation capabilities. Not 
later than March 1, 2018, the provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report providing analysis of the challenges to the 
United States' ability to flow significant forces from the 
continental United States to the European theater in the event 
of a major contingency and the Department of Defense's plans, 
including the conduct of military exercises, to address these 
challenges.

Sense of Congress on the European Deterrence Initiative (sec. 1249)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the European Deterrence Initiative will 
bolster efforts to deter further Russian aggression and that 
investments that support the security and stability of Europe 
and further develop European security capabilities are in the 
long-term national security interests of the United States.

Enhancement of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 1250)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1250 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (PL 114-92) to include treatment of wounded 
Ukrainian soldiers in the United States in medical treatment 
facilities as part of the Secretarial Designee Program as 
appropriate security assistance and intelligence support under 
the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.

Sense of Congress on importance of the North Atlantic Treaty 
        Organization Intelligence Fusion Center (sec. 1251)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the collocation of the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization (NATO) Intelligence Fusion Center with U.S. 
European Command's Joint Intelligence Analysis Complex provides 
the optimal solution to intelligence and operational 
requirements while fostering critical diplomatic relationships, 
and is the most efficient configuration of the intelligence 
enterprise.

        Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Asia-Pacific Region

Asia-Pacific Stability Initiative (sec. 1261)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to establish the Asia-Pacific 
Stability Initiative and provide the necessary guidelines and 
authorities for the Department of Defense to execute and 
implement it. The recommended provision would outline the 
stated objective of the initiative, the authorized activities, 
and funding authorities to be used. The recommended provision 
would also ensure that the Department of Defense retains a 
maximum amount of flexibility in carrying out the initiative.
    To ensure the security and prosperity of the region, and to 
enhance U.S. military power in the region, the United States 
must demonstrate that it intends to remain a significant 
guarantor of security through targeted funding to realign our 
force posture, improve operationally relevant infrastructure, 
fund additional exercises, pre-position equipment, and build 
capacity with our allies and partners.
    During his testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services on April 27, 2017, Admiral Harry B. Harris, Jr., 
Commander of United States Pacific Command, stated that, ``this 
effort will reassure our regional partners and send a strong 
signal to potential adversaries of our persistent commitment to 
the region.'' As the initiative evolves in the coming years, 
the committee expects to work closely with the Department to 
make this initiative a reality and secure the freedom and 
prosperity of the region for another generation.

Expansion of military-to-military engagement with the government of 
        Burma (sec. 1262)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
Section 1253 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291) to remove certain restrictions on military-to-
military engagement with Burma. As currently written, the 
underlying legislation limits engagements with Burma to matters 
concerning human rights, the rule of law, humanitarian and 
disaster relief, English language training, medical and health 
training, and defense institutional reform.
    The recommended provision would expand authorized 
engagements to include the understanding of security issues, 
adherence to international training standards, training on 
maritime domain awareness and peacekeeping operations, and 
combating illegal trafficking and migration. These changes 
would help shape and assist ongoing reform efforts in Burma and 
assist in the pursuit of U.S. national security objectives in 
the country.

Agreement supplemental to Compact of Free Association with Palau (sec. 
        1263)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Congressional approval necessary to bring the September 2010 
Compact Review Agreement (CRA) with Palau and its appendices 
into force, while authorizing and approving necessary 
modifications to the outdated funding schedule that was 
included in the 2010 Agreement. The recommended provision would 
clarify that the funding the Department of the Interior has 
provided Palau from 2011 to 2017 fulfills a portion of the 
financial commitments of the United States under the CRA. 
Finally, the recommended provision would extend the statutory 
authority allowing the U.S. Government to provide certain 
grants to Palau specified in prior legislation. This provision 
would, along with funding to implement the Agreement, have a 
significant impact on our defense relationship with Palau, and 
would provide a measurable advantage in our strategic posture 
in the western Pacific Ocean.
    Under the 2010 Agreement, the United States committed to 
provide a total of $215.75 million in assistance to Palau from 
2011 through 2024. Adding in the $13.25 million planned to be 
provided in fiscal year 2010 while negotiations were ongoing, 
the total commitment of the United States amounts to $229 
million. Although the Agreement has had bipartisan support and 
the previous administration proposed legislation annually from 
2011 through 2017 to fund commitments made under the Agreement 
and bring it into force, Congress did not enact the necessary 
legislation. Instead, Congress provided limited annual 
authority and discretionary funding for Palau as a stop-gap 
measure, totaling $105.1 million. These annual appropriations 
leave the United States with a remaining $123.9 million 
commitment to Palau. The Administration's budget request for 
fiscal year 2018 for the Department of Defense includes the 
$123.9 million for the remaining funding commitment to Palau.
    Palau gained its independence and established diplomatic 
relations with the United States in 1994 with the entry into 
force of the United States-Palau Compact of Free Association, 
which affirmed each nation's shared commitment to mutual 
security and Palau's economic development, and provided the 
United States with responsibility for Palau's defense as well 
as options to access defense sites in Palau for 50 years.
    As a sovereign and freely associated state in the western 
Pacific, Palau carries significant foreign policy and national 
security significance for the United States. The Compact 
provides the United States military special access to Palau's 
land, water, and air space along with the critical authority to 
deny the same access to military forces and personnel of other 
nations as appropriate. This agreement gives the U.S. military 
critical access and influence in an increasingly contested 
region.
    The 1994 Compact does not have a termination date and the 
majority of its provisions remain in force. The financial 
assistance provisions of the 1994 Compact, however, expired on 
September 30, 2009. Therefore, the recommended provision, along 
with related appropriations, would allow the U.S. Government to 
continue its targeted financial assistance to Palau so that 
Palau will have a path toward budgetary self-reliance.
    As required by the Compact, the United States and Palau 
conducted a review on the 15th anniversary of the Compact 
beginning in 2009 and subsequently signed the Compact Review 
Agreement in September 2010. This agreement calls for $229 
million in U.S. assistance to Palau through 2024, thereby 
enabling Palau to transition to reliance on withdrawals from 
its trust fund from 2025 through 2044.

Workforce issues for relocation of Marines to Guam (sec. 1264)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority for visas to be granted to individuals performing 
work on facilities related to the relocation of Marines to Guam 
from 2019 to 2023. The number of new visas that could be 
granted for this specific purpose is limited to 4000.
    The committee notes that the limited workforce availability 
on Guam is not sufficient to perform the planned work for the 
Department of Defense and, if these visas are not provided, the 
projects would be delayed and the costs increased by almost 
$900.0 million.

United States policy with respect to freedom of navigation operations 
        and overflight beyond the territorial seas (sec. 1265)

    The committee recommends a provision that would declare 
that it is the policy of the United States to fly, sail, and 
operate throughout the oceans, seas, and airspace of the world 
wherever international law allows. The recommended provision 
would also make a number findings regarding freedom of 
navigation for law-abiding parties, the commitment of the 
United States to freedom of navigation, and other things. The 
recommended provision would also direct the Secretary of 
Defense to implement the stated policy by planning and 
executing routine and regular naval presence missions and 
freedom of navigation operations throughout the world and 
throughout the year.

Sense of Congress on the importance of the rule of law in the South 
        China Sea (sec. 1266)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express a 
sense of Congress on the importance of maintaining the rule of 
law in the South China Sea. The committee notes that certain 
activities by China have recently called into question its 
commitment to the rule of law, and furthermore are continuing 
to destabilize the security of the region. Such actions 
directly threaten the national security interests of the United 
States. The committee also notes that a United Nations arbitral 
tribunal declared in July 2016 that China has no legal basis to 
claim rights to the resources within its nine-dash line, 
invalidating the assertions of the Chinese government. The 
tribunal also went on to outline a number of actions that China 
had recently taken that were unlawful and created a serious 
risk of collision. These actions are alarming to the committee. 
These concerns are only compounded by the fact that the United 
States has taken only limited actions or operations in the last 
several months to ensure freedom of navigation and overflight 
in the South China Sea. As the United States has the unique 
capabilities to carry out such activities, the committee is 
concerned that the absence of such sends a signal to the 
Chinese government that their actions will go uncontested. The 
committee urges the United States government to play a vital 
role in securing the South China Sea and ensuring freedom of 
navigation.

Sense of Congress on the importance of the relationship between the 
        United States and Japan (sec. 1267)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the United States and Japan are 
indispensable partners and that our security alliance will 
continue to ensure a secure and prosperous region and world. 
The committee notes that the Government of Japan remains 
committed to our bilateral security relationship and that it is 
making all necessary contributions and actions to maintain our 
alliance.
    The committee also notes that certain threats in the Asia-
Pacific region have been increasing recently and that 
countering those threats will depend even more on a strong 
partnership between our two countries. In recognition of these 
evolving regional dynamics and of Japan's unwavering 
commitment, the committee urges the Administration to make 
clear, unequivocal statements regarding our security 
relationship with Japan and about Japan's territorial 
integrity.

Sense of Congress on the importance of the United States alliance with 
        the Republic of Korea (sec. 1268)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the United States should reaffirm its 
commitment to defending our allies in Northeast Asia and 
support ongoing efforts to strengthen its alliance with the 
Republic of Korea. The committee notes that North Korea's 
nuclear and missile programs violate multiple United Nations 
Security Council resolutions and have destabilized the Korean 
peninsula and the entire Asia-Pacific region by committing 
provocations against South Korea and other countries. The 
conduct of the government of North Korea poses an imminent 
threat to the United States and the rest of the world. The 
committee recommends that the United States increase pressure 
on North Korea and strengthen its alliance with the Republic of 
Korea in order to counter the threat posed by the North Korean 
regime. The committee also supports efforts to deepen 
trilateral coordination and cooperation between the United 
States, the Republic of Korea, and Japan.

Sense of Congress on extended deterrence for the Korean Peninsula and 
        Japan (sec. 1269)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the nuclear and missile program of North 
Korea is one of the most dangerous national security threats 
facing the United States today, and thus the Nuclear Posture 
Review to be completed this year should fully consider the 
perspectives of key allies and partners in East Asia, including 
the Republic of Korea and Japan.

Defense partnership between the United States and Taiwan (sec. 1270)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the United States should strengthen and 
enhance its partnership and strategic cooperation with Taiwan. 
The recommended provision notes the commitment to the Taiwan 
Relations Act (Public Law 96-8) and to the ``Six Assurances''' 
originally expressed by President Reagan. The committee notes 
that both the United States and Taiwan should work toward 
mutual security objectives through regular transfers of defense 
articles and services, assistance in building an effective air 
defense capability, and participation in multilateral training 
activities. The recommended provision would also request a 
report by the Secretary of Defense regarding reestablishing 
port of call exchanges between the United States and Taiwan.

Naval port of call exchanges between the United States and Taiwan (sec. 
        1270A)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to reestablish regular ports of call by 
the United States at suitable ports in Taiwan. The recommended 
provision would also direct the Secretary to allow United 
States Pacific Command to receive ports of call by Taiwan.

Program to enhance Taiwan's undersea warfare capabilities (sec. 1270B)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement a program of technical 
assistance to support efforts by Taiwan to develop indigenous 
undersea warfare capabilities. The committee notes that 
Taiwan's current fleet of submarines is several decades old, 
hampering Taiwan's ability to conduct missions and training for 
their sailors. The committee believes that assistance from the 
United States on undersea capabilities, to include vehicles and 
sea mines, would bolster Taiwan's self-defense.

Invitation of Taiwan military forces to participate in joint military 
        exercises (Sec. 1270C)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to invite Taiwan to participate in a ``Red 
Flag'' exercise. The committee notes that the Department of 
Defense conducts several Red Flag exercises annually, including 
at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska and at Nellis Air Force 
Base in Nevada. The recommended provision would require an 
invitation to Taiwan for one of these exercises within one 
year.

Report on military exchanges between senior officers and officials of 
        the United States and Taiwan (Sec. 1270D)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on military exchanges between the United 
States and Taiwan. The committee notes that Section 1284 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) recommended that the Secretary carry out a program 
of exchanges to improve military to military relations between 
the United States and Taiwan. The committee notes that these 
recommendations have not yet been acted upon. Accordingly, the 
recommended provision requires the report to include a list of 
actions taken to implement last year's recommendations, as well 
as a description of future plans to do so. The recommended 
provision would also require an explanation if no action have 
been taken thus far or no future plans have been made.

                          Subtitle F--Reports

Submittal of Department of Defense Supplemental and Cost of War 
        Execution Reports on a quarterly basis (sec. 1271)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1221(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) to 
require the Department of Defense to submit the Cost of War 
Execution report 45 days after the end of each fiscal quarter. 
The committee is concerned about the time and cost necessary 
for the Department to produce these reports. The average cost 
to the Department to produce the monthly reports is about 
$180,000 and they are usually late. By reducing the number of 
reports required the committee hopes to alleviate the 
Department and the taxpayers of these burdens.
    The committee notes that the original intent of these 
reports, and the former requirement that the Government 
Accountability Office would review them, was to urge the 
Department to create a process for reporting on the cost of the 
wars using accounting systems to directly pull information as 
necessary. The committee is encouraged that this process is now 
in place and running relatively smoothly. By changing the 
frequency of these reports the committee expects to receive 
these reports on time and with same detail that they currently 
include, since the Department will have more time to create 
them.

Consolidation of reports on United States Armed Forces, civilian 
        employees, and contractors deployed in support of Operation 
        Inherent Resolve and Operation Freedom's Sentinel (sec. 1272)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report, 30 days after the enactment of the Act and 
every 90 days thereafter, on the total number of U.S. 
Department of Defense personnel deployed in support of 
Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) and Operation Freedom's 
Sentinel (OFS), including members of United States Armed 
Forces, Department of Defense civilians, and Department of 
Defense contractors. Additionally, this provision would repeal 
section 1224 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92).

                       Subtitle G--Others Matters

Modification of availability of funds in Special Defense Acquisition 
        Fund for precision guided munitions (sec. 1281)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 114 of title 10, United States Code to change the 
current requirement that of the amount available in the Special 
Defense Acquisition Fund, $500.0 million may only be used to 
procure and stock precision guided munitions. The committee 
recommends a change to the available obligation authority in 
the Special Defense Acquisition Fund, requiring that 20 percent 
of such funds must be used on precision guided munitions and 
associated support equipment and services.
    Precision guided munitions, for the purpose of this 
requirement, is defined as a guided munition intended to 
precisely hit a specific target, whether fired from air, sea, 
surface, or are man-portable.

Use of funds in the United States for certain United States-Israel 
        anti-tunnel cooperation activities (sec. 1282)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authority under section 1279 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), as 
amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), for the Secretary of Defense, 
in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of 
National Intelligence, to carry out research, development, 
test, and evaluation, on a joint basis with Israel, to 
establish anti-tunnel capabilities to detect, map, and 
neutralize underground tunnels that threaten the United States 
or Israel. The provision would provide that of the amount 
contributed by the United States for activities under section 
1279 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (Public Law 114-92), not less than 50 percent of such 
amount shall be used for research, development, test, and 
evaluation activities for purposes of such section in the 
United States.
    The committee continues to support the anti-tunnel 
cooperation program with Israel and notes the potential 
benefits to support efforts to: restrict the flow of drugs, 
including heroin and fentanyl, under our southern border; 
protect forward deployed troops; and secure Israel's borders. 
The committee encourages the department to fully utilize the 
authorities provided in section 1279 and seek opportunities to 
maximize anti-tunnel research, development, test, and 
evaluation cooperation with Israel.

Foreign military sales letters of request for pricing and availability 
        (sec. 1283)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense implementing agency for a foreign 
military sale (FMS) to consult with the relevant US commercial 
entities involved in the sale before delivering a formal 
pricing and availability response to the foreign customer. If 
the commercial entity believes the price is not accurate, then 
the commercial entity and the implementing agency should each 
provide a justification for the differences to the Defense 
Security Cooperation Agency within 30 days of being notified of 
the discrepancy by the commercial entity.

Sense of Congress reaffirming strategic partnerships and allies (sec. 
        1284)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Congress that United States allies and partners 
are critical to defending peace and prosperity throughout the 
world.

                              Budget Items

Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative

    The budget request included $3.0 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), for the Defense Security 
Cooperation Agency (SAG 4GTD), of which $150.0 million was for 
the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. The committee 
recommends an increase of $350.0 million for the Ukraine 
Security Assistance Initiative.

                       Items of Special Interest

Enhanced assistance and cooperation for Afghanistan by the Government 
        of India

    The committee is concerned by the current stalemate in 
Afghanistan, and believes that the United States should 
leverage the capabilities of allies and partners to more 
effectively secure regional stability and security. The 
committee believes that the United States needs to recommit to 
the fight in Afghanistan and that India, as a major defense 
partner of the United States and a contributor to regional 
security, has a critical role to play in this effort.
    The committee notes that on February 9, 2017, General John 
W. Nicholson, Commander of U.S. Forces--Afghanistan, testified 
before the committee that ``With over $2.0 billion development 
aid executed since 2002, and another $1.0 billion pledged in 
2016, India's significant investments in Afghan infrastructure, 
engineering, training, and humanitarian issues will help 
develop Afghan human capital and long-term stability.'' 
Further, the committee notes that General Nicholson highlighted 
significant short-term materiel and training needs within the 
Afghan Air Force (AAF), and has personally urged India to 
provide this targeted support to meet urgent gaps.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to enhance trilateral 
cooperation between the Governments of Afghanistan, India, and 
United States for the purposes of strengthening the sovereignty 
and security of Afghanistan. In doing so, the committee expects 
that any increase in investment and assistance pursuant to this 
trilateral cooperation would take into account the mutual 
priorities of the three respective governments. This assistance 
could include logistical support; joint training; combined 
military planning; threat analysis; intelligence, materiel, and 
maintenance support for Afghan National Defense and Security 
Forces for humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, security 
assistance, and any other areas deemed appropriate.
    The committee believes that India, as a regional partner to 
Afghanistan and a major defense partner of the United States, 
is well-suited to assist the Government of Afghanistan to 
improve the security of Afghanistan and the broader region, and 
can work on a trilateral basis with the United States and 
Afghanistan to do so. The committee also believes that timely 
actions by the Indian government to fill identified needs in 
Afghanistan would significantly benefit the short- and long-
term security and stability of the region.

Importance of soft power tools in the Asia-Pacific region

    The committee notes that continued engagement by the United 
States in the Asia-Pacific region is critical to maintaining 
security and stability in the region. In addition to assessing 
current force posture and investing in hard power assets, the 
committee notes the importance of soft power tools, including 
independent academic institutions like Fulbright University 
Vietnam and others in the region. The Committee believes these 
institutions are an important element of our Asia-Pacific 
strategy, and can help build the workforce and bolster the 
capabilities that our regional allies need--including in cyber 
defense and cyber-supportive information technology 
infrastructure and training--to counter ongoing security 
threats. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
support efforts by the Department of State and other U.S. 
actors to ensure that all appropriate tools of U.S. soft power 
are being fully utilized.

Institutionalizing Advise and Assist Lessons Learned

    U.S. military personnel have been actively engaged as part 
of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) in advising and assisting 
Iraqi Security Forces and vetted Syrian forces to counter the 
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant since late 2014. In 
Afghanistan, the U.S. still has more than 8,000 military 
forces, many of which are focused on advising and assisting the 
Afghan National Defense and Security Forces as part of 
Operation Freedom's Sentinel (OFS). The committee notes that 
the Department of Defense's (DOD) approach to advising and 
assisting partner nation forces has evolved over time, 
transitioning from a larger U.S. military presence to now 
relying on a more limited number of U.S. forces on the ground. 
For example, the current approach in Syria uses a small 
footprint with a significant presence of special operations 
forces and reliance on key enablers such as air support, 
airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), 
and logistics. DOD continues to draw personnel from across the 
military services, including from conventional combat units, to 
serve as advisors in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has previously 
identified challenges DOD has faced in supporting advising 
missions, such as selecting and training advisor personnel, 
balancing advising activities with other missions, and 
maintaining the readiness of units that provide advisors. The 
committee is aware of ongoing efforts to develop new 
capabilities, such as the Army's effort to develop advise and 
assist brigades. Given these past challenges, and the emphasis 
that current military strategy continues to place on the 
importance of advising partner security forces to counter 
global threats, it remains essential for DOD to take steps to 
ensure that it: (1) has an effective approach for selecting, 
training, and utilizing advisor personnel in ongoing 
operations; and (2) continues the development of a long-term 
strategy that institutionalizes successful advise and assist 
approaches to ensure U.S. forces are positioned to effectively 
execute similar missions in the future. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to evaluate the following issues:
    1. What are the key characteristics of DOD's approach to 
planning for, training, and utilizing U.S. military personnel 
to advise and assist partner forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, and 
Syria?
    2. What challenges, if any, has DOD faced in providing and 
utilizing U.S. military personnel to carry out their assigned 
advise and assist missions?
    3. What challenges, if any, has DOD faced in providing air 
support, ISR, logistics, or other key enabling capabilities for 
advise and assist missions?
    4. To what extent has DOD assessed and institutionalized 
lessons from OIR, OFS, and other advise and assist missions 
past and present, to identify and implement necessary changes 
to doctrine, training, and force structure to support ongoing 
and future advise and assist missions?
    5. Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
not later than November 1, 2017, on the Comptroller General's 
preliminary findings and submit a final report to the 
congressional defense committees on a date agreed to at the 
time of the briefing.

NATO Strategic Communications Center of Excellence

    The committee is concerned by provocative information 
operations campaigns conducted by the Russian Federation that 
seek to undermine the United States, our allies, and the NATO 
alliance. The Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities 
received testimony that describes Russia's ``mastery of the 
tools of information warfare'' and public information campaigns 
and propaganda.
    The committee is aware that the NATO Strategic 
Communication Center of Excellence is a multi-national and 
NATO-accredited international military organization based in 
Riga, Latvia. The Center of Excellence works to enhance the 
strategic communications capabilities within the NATO alliance 
and allied nations by providing comprehensive analyses, timely 
advice, and practical support to the alliance.
    The committee is concerned that while the Center of 
Excellence's work on strategic communications and the 
information environment is highly relevant to the United 
States, U.S. European Command in particular, the United States 
does not have a full-time employee seconded to the NATO 
Strategic Communication Center of Excellence.
    Therefore, the Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to 
assign appropriate personnel to the NATO Strategic 
Communication Center of Excellence.

Report on the military capabilities of Hezbollah

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, submit 
to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth 
an assessment of the military capabilities of Hezbollah in 
Lebanon. The report shall include: (1) a detailed assessment of 
the capabilities of conventional and non-conventional forces of 
Hezbollah in Lebanon and (2) a detailed assessment of the 
operational performance of Hezbollah forces in Syria, including 
its military cooperation with Syrian and Iranian military and 
paramilitary entities and with armed forces and intelligence 
entities of the Russian Federation. The Secretary shall submit 
the report to the congressional defense committees no later 
than April 1, 2018. If the report is submitted in a classified 
form, the report shall be accompanied by an unclassified 
executive summary.

Security strategy for Great Lakes region of Africa

    The committee notes that Africa's Great Lakes sub-region 
continues to be plagued by decades of instability and armed 
conflict resulting from porous borders, competition for 
resources, weak governance, territorial disputes, and the 
continued existence and growth of extremist and terrorist 
groups in the region. The United States, United Nations, 
European Union, and the African Union have been engaged in 
operations aimed at addressing these threats and improving 
stability in the region. With Operation Observant Compass (OOC) 
ending, it is imperative that the Department of Defense remain 
engaged in the region through continued cooperation with 
regional security forces, sharing of intelligence, and 
multilateral exercises to increase regional capacity to combat 
shared threats. The committee notes that following the 
disestablishment of OOC and the retrograde of forces from the 
African Union Regional Task Force from the affected areas, 
there are reports that the Lord's Resistance Army is increasing 
attacks against local populations. The committee understands 
and supports the Department's decision to transition its 
efforts from OOC to a broader regional engagement strategy. 
However, the tenuous regional security situation underscores 
the need to develop and implement a strategy to maintain 
regional engagement and arrest further deterioration of the 
security situation as soon as possible.
    As such, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a briefing to the committee on its strategy to combat 
security threats in the African Great Lakes sub-region. The 
briefing shall, at a minimum, include: (1) an identification 
and assessment of the primary security threats in the region, 
(2) a plan for engagement with appropriate security forces in 
the region, with a focus on building capacities and cooperation 
with the United States and encouraging interoperability between 
countries in the region, (3) an assessment of the U.S. and 
partner nation force structure necessary to mitigate regional 
security threats, sustain engagement, and maintain the ability 
to respond to contingencies, and (4) an account of any 
agreements between the U.S. and countries of the region for use 
of facilities, if required, and (5) any other matters the 
Secretary of Defense deems appropriate.

Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative

    The committee continues to strongly support efforts under 
the Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative aimed at 
enhancing the capabilities of regional partners to more 
effectively exercise control over their maritime territory and 
to deter adversaries. The committee notes that to date, the 
Department of Defense has utilized the authority under section 
1263 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended, to support specified 
partner capacity-building efforts in the region, to include the 
provision of training, sustainment support, and participation 
in multilateral engagements. The committee further notes that 
section 1241 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) included a significant 
reform of the security cooperation authorities available to the 
Department intended to enhance the ability of the Department to 
respond to evolving security challenges with flexible 
authorities related to the provision of training, equipment, 
and other support to foreign security partners with mutual 
security interests and objectives.
    Of particular note, section 1241 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) 
provides the Secretary of Defense with a permanent, global 
authority to provide training, equipment, and sustainment 
support to build the capacity of foreign security partners to 
perform counterterrorism operations, counter-weapons of mass 
destruction operations, counter-illicit trafficking operations, 
counter-transnational organized crime operations, maritime and 
border security operations, military intelligence operations, 
and operations or activities that contribute to an 
international coalition operation determined by the Secretary 
to be in the national interest of the United States.
    Additionally, sections 1241 through 1247 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) included numerous other authorities intended to enhance 
security cooperation activities, including authorizing 
military-to-military exchanges and operational support to 
friendly foreign countries to enable ongoing operations. The 
committee believes these security cooperation authorities 
provide the Department with enhanced flexibility to operate 
effectively in a continuously evolving and complex global 
security environment. The committee further believes that these 
authorities are particularly relevant to the security 
environment in South Asia and Southeast Asia and directs the 
Department to make use of the full complement of security 
cooperation authorities available to the Department, 
particularly those under section 1241 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), to 
enhance the capabilities of foreign security partners in the 
region to protect mutual security interests.
    To this end, the committee directs the Department to 
continue with the Maritime Security Initiative through the 
title 10 authorities for security cooperation established in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328). In addition, the committee believes that, 
consistent with new authorities, the Secretary should expand 
the Department's efforts under the Maritime Security Initiative 
to encompass additional countries, including Bangladesh, Sri 
Lanka, and Burma. In addition, the Secretary should also 
include India among the countries eligible for payment of 
incremental expenses in connection with training under the 
Initiative.

Southeast Asia terrorism

    The committee is concerned with the rise of violent 
extremist groups in Southeast Asia and the affiliation of those 
terrorist groups to the Islamic State. The committee is 
concerned that, as U.S. counterterrorism operations in the U.S. 
Central Command area of responsibility exert increased pressure 
on the Islamic State and affiliated networks, foreign fighters 
from Southeast Asia will return to their countries of origin 
and continue terrorist activities. The committee urges the 
Commanders of U.S. Pacific Command and U.S. Special Operations 
Command--Pacific to strengthen collaboration with regional 
partners to combat this growing threat through a comprehensive 
counterterrorism strategy.

Transformation of the Kosovo Security Forces to the Kosovo Armed Forces

    The committee supports continued U.S. assistance to the 
Kosovo Security Force as it makes the gradual transition to a 
multi-ethnic army for the Republic of Kosovo. Kosovo's long-
term security is deeply rooted in its political and security 
relationships with the United States, NATO, and other 
international partners. These relationships are underwritten by 
shared democratic values and adherence to the rule of law. 
Therefore, the committee believes it is critical that the 
transformation of the Kosovo Security Forces to the Kosovo 
Armed Forces take place through an inclusive and transparent 
process that complies with Kosovo's constitution, respects of 
the rights and concerns of all of Kosovo's citizens, promotes 
regional security and stability, and supports Kosovo's 
aspirations and eventual full membership in NATO.

U.S.-India defense cooperation

    The committee is pleased to see progress in the U.S.-India 
defense partnership. The positive adjustment of U.S. export 
controls for defense articles sold to India is in accordance 
with section 1292(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) that required an 
assessment regarding such an adjustment. Furthermore, the 
United States and India have continued to refine their annual 
Exercise Malabar, which has benefited from the recent inclusion 
of Japan. The committee supports the exercise's consistent 
focus on maritime patrol, reconnaissance scenarios, and anti-
submarine warfare operations.
    Even so, the committee is concerned by a growing gap 
between the overarching goals of the bilateral defense 
relationship and the Department's implementation of these 
objectives. The Joint Strategic Vision (JSV) agreed to by the 
United States and India in 2015 codified a common commitment to 
maritime awareness and freedom of navigation as overarching 
defense missions. The key body in the Department of Defense 
implementing and coordinating defense cooperation with India is 
the 2012 Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI). Its 
six ``pathfinder'' initiatives are (1) development of a 
chemical-biological protective ensemble for troops; (2) 
development of mobile electric hybrid power stations; (3) a 
next-generation small unmanned aircraft; (4) a roll-on/roll-off 
intelligence and surveillance module for transport aircraft; 
(5) digital helmet-mounted displays; and (6) the joint 
biological tactical detection system. While the Committee 
supports all of these initiatives, it is concerned that several 
of these projects lack focus and are underdeveloped, and 
therefore urges the Department to prioritize elements of the 
DTTI that most closely align with the JSV.
    Compounding this concern is the Department's delay in 
complying with a requirement in section 1292(a)(1)(B) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) to designate an individual within the Department 
to coordinate and expedite bilateral defense cooperation. The 
committee believes that appointing such an individual would 
bring a refined approach to prioritizing defense cooperation 
and aligning it with missions like maritime awareness and anti-
submarine warfare, and eventually joint naval patrol of the 
Indian Ocean.
    Moreover, the committee is aware that key defense 
cooperation agreements have not been completed, namely the 
Communications Capability and Security Agreement and the Basic 
Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geospatial Intelligence. 
The Department has approached negotiation of these agreements 
with consistency and good faith, as evidenced in the successful 
signing of the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement with 
India earlier this year. The committee commends both the 
Department and the Ministry of Defense for this progress, and 
hopes to see similar agreement with the two outstanding 
documents as well.
    Finally, looking ahead to the future of the U.S. Major 
Defense Partnership with India, the committee encourages the 
Department to work closely with India in the cyber and space 
operating domains at appropriate strategic, operational, and 
tactical levels. As a rising economic power and key security 
partner, it is the committee's judgment that India deserves a 
seat at the table as the U.S. works with our other key allies 
and partners to increase resiliency, strengthen deterrence, and 
secure superiority in both operating domains.
    Therefore, the committee requests that the Secretary of 
Defense brief the committee not later than 180 days after the 
enactment of this Act on the following elements:
          (1) Confirmation that the Secretary has appointed an 
        individual in fulfillment of statutory requirement 
        under Sec. 1292(a)(1)(B) of the National Defense 
        Authorization Act FY2017 (Public Law 114-328);
          (2) Recommendation on which DTTI initiatives the 
        Secretary intends to prioritize in alignment with the 
        Joint Strategic Vision, and whether new initiatives are 
        needed to match the common importance that both 
        countries give to increasing maritime domain awareness;
          (3) Update on the state of outstanding defense 
        cooperation agreements with India; and
          (4) State of trilateral discussions for future 
        Malabar Exercises, specifically whether the Department 
        and the Ministry of Defense have discussed with Japan 
        the integration of seaborne terrorism and joint naval 
        patrol exercises into Malabar.

Ukrainian wounded warriors

    The committee understands that in June 2015, the Secretary 
of Defense approved the use of the Secretarial Designee program 
and Emergency and Extraordinary Expense funding to pay costs 
arising from the medical and rehabilitative treatment at 
military medical treatment facilities of wounded Ukrainian 
soldiers who could not receive the necessary specialized 
medical treatment in Ukraine. Costs covered included inpatient 
care, transportation, lodging, meals, and incidental expenses 
relating to the movement and medical treatment of the wounded 
Ukrainian soldiers. The committee understands that eight 
wounded Ukrainian soldiers were successfully assisted through 
this program. The committee recognizes that providing this 
specialized care enhances military operational medical force 
readiness through the performance of combat-related medical 
procedures that help ensure physicians and other providers 
maintain critical readiness skillsets.
    The committee is concerned that the expenses of medical 
coverage for additional wounded Ukrainian soldiers approved 
under the Secretarial Designee program only extends to 
inpatient care, and the Ukrainian government is required to 
fund all remaining costs. In light of the ongoing conflict in 
Ukraine, the Ukrainian government is unable to reimburse these 
costs, creating difficulty in bringing any additional wounded 
soldiers to the United States for the care they desperately 
need.
    Russia's persistent military aggression in Ukraine 
continues to inflict grievous injuries on Ukrainian soldiers, 
who require medical treatment that cannot be performed in 
country. The committee supports the Department of Defense's 
efforts through the Secretarial Designee program to provide 
medical and rehabilitative assistance in military medical 
treatment facilities in the United States to Ukrainian soldiers 
wounded in defense of their country and strongly encourages the 
Department to fund to the extent practicable both the medical 
and non-medical costs it previously covered for future cases.

United States commitment to the NATO alliance

    The committee believes the NATO alliance remains vital for 
protecting U.S. national security interests, facilitating 
transatlantic security cooperation, and promoting peace and 
stability in Europe and around the world. As threats to the 
common security of the United States and our NATO allies grow 
more severe and more complex, the committee believes it is 
essential that the United States maintain an ironclad 
commitment to upholding its obligations under Article 5 of the 
North Atlantic Treaty, which declares that ``an armed attack 
against one or more [NATO allies] shall be considered an attack 
against them all.''
    The committee honors the contributions of our NATO allies 
to U.S. national security. In response to the September 11th 
terrorist attacks, which killed 2,600 Americans and 135 
citizens of NATO countries, our NATO allies invoked Article 5 
of the North Atlantic Treaty for the first time in history. 
NATO troops fought side by side with U.S. troops in 
Afghanistan, and over 1,000 of them made the ultimate 
sacrifice. The committee honors the sacrifices of our NATO 
allies sharing the burden of collective security.
    At the same time, the committee continues to urge NATO 
allies to uphold their obligations under Article 3 of the North 
Atlantic Treaty to ``maintain and develop their individual and 
collective capacity to resist armed attack'' by honoring the 
pledge made at the Wales Summit in September 2014 to reach the 
goal of spending 2 percent of GDP on defense by 2024. It is 
also critical that NATO allies continue to coordinate defense 
investments to both improve deterrence against Russian 
aggression and terrorist organizations and more appropriately 
balance defense spending across the alliance. The committee is 
encouraged that, according to NATO Secretary General Jens 
Stoltenberg, defense budgets across Europe and Canada increased 
by 3.8 percent in 2016, or by approximately $10.0 billion. 
Given the threat on NATO's eastern flank, the committee is 
gratified that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania each plan to 
spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense in 2018.
    The NATO alliance defends not only the common security of 
the United States and our NATO allies, but our common values as 
well. That is why the committee is increasingly concerned about 
indications of the erosion of democratic institutions in 
certain NATO member states, including Hungary, Turkey, and 
Poland. The committee believes it is important for all NATO 
allies to uphold their obligations under the North Atlantic 
Treaty, which commits NATO allies to ``safeguard the freedom, 
common heritage and civilization of their peoples, founded on 
the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of 
law.''

Venezuelan military cooperation

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to 
Congress a report on military cooperation between the 
Government of Venezuela with Cuba, Iran, and Russia, entities 
designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the United 
States, and persons considered to be regional militant groups 
hostile to the United States but not otherwise designated as 
foreign terrorist organizations by the United States. The 
report shall include descriptions of the following: (1) 
Cooperation on military intelligence and counterintelligence 
operations; (2) Cooperation in illicit drug trafficking 
operations; (3) Cooperation in cyber and information 
operations; (4) Cooperation with transnational criminal 
organizations; (5) Weapons and technology transfers to and from 
either party and the impact that such transferred weapons have 
upon either party's military capabilities; and (6) Estimates of 
the types and amounts of support, including funding, lethal and 
non-lethal supplies, and training provided.
    The Secretary shall submit the report to the congressional 
defense committees no later than April 1, 2018. If the report 
is submitted in a classified form, the report shall be 
accompanied by an unclassified executive summary.

                TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION

Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction funds (sec. 1301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would define the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, define the funds as 
authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this Act, and 
authorize CTR funds to be available for obligation for 3 fiscal 
years.
Funding allocations (sec. 1302)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$324.6 million, the amount of the budget request, for the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction program.

                    TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

                     Subtitle A--Military Programs

Working capital funds (sec. 1401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for the defense working capital funds at the 
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec. 1402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction, at the levels identified in section 4501 of 
division D of this Act.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide (sec. 1403)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug 
Activities, Defense-wide, at the levels identified in section 
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriations for the Office of the Inspector General of 
the Department of Defense at the levels identified in section 
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1405)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the Defense Health Program activities at the 
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.

                 Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile

Authority to dispose of certain materials from and to acquire 
        additional materials for the National Defense Stockpile (sec. 
        1411)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) Manager to dispose of up 
to $9.0 million of excess materials in order to acquire two new 
materials and rare earth elements (REE) that have been 
identified by the Department of Defense (DOD) as essential to 
meet military requirements. The committee notes these REE 
acquisitions would alleviate DOD supply chain vulnerability and 
mitigate the risk of foreign reliance for REE and critical 
materials. Specifically, the two materials and REE are 
electrolytic manganese metal and antimony.
    Additionally, the committee recognizes the strategic value 
of the NDS and its critical material locations across the 
United States: Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana, Nevada, 
New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, 
Virginia, and West Virginia.

             Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Matters

Acquisition reporting on major chemical demilitarization programs of 
        the Department of Defense (sec. 1421)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense's major chemical demilitarization 
programs to report separately under the Acquisition Category 1 
(ACAT 1) system in order to enhance transparency.

                Subtitle D--Armed Forces Retirement Home

Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 
        1431)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
an appropriation of $64.3 million from the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home Trust Fund for fiscal year 2018 for the 
operation of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Armed Forces Retirement Home matters (sec. 1432)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1513A, 1517(e)(2), and 1518 of the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home (AFRH) Act of 1991 (24 U.S.C. 413a, 417(e)(2), 
and 418 respectively) to transfer oversight responsibilities of 
the AFRH from the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness to the Secretary of Defense. Additionally, the 
provision would amend section 1516 of such Act (24 U.S.C. 416) 
to provide the Department more flexibility in selecting members 
of the Advisory Council of the AFRH. Finally, the provision 
would amend section 1517(b) of such Act (24 U.S.C. 417(b)) to 
clarify that the administrator of the AFRH serves at the 
pleasure of the Secretary of Defense.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Authority for transfer of funds to Joint Department of Defense-
        Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration 
        Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois 
        (sec. 1441)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer $115.5 million from the 
Defense Health Program to the Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration 
Fund, created by section 1704 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) for 
the operations of the Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health 
Care Center.
Enhancement of database of emergency response capabilities of the 
        Department of Defense (sec. 1442)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1406 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2436; 
10 U.S.C. 113 note) to enhance the database of emergency 
response capabilities of the Department of Defense by adding 
the requirement to track the cyber capabilities of the National 
Guard and Reserve in the requirement to capture emergency 
response capabilities that the Department of Defense may be 
able to provide in support of the National Response Plan's 
Emergency Support Function. The Department of Defense would 
also be required to establish, maintain, and keep current the 
database at least once every 2 years.

                       Items of Special Interest

Agro-terrorism
    A Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak in the United States has 
the potential to cause upwards of $200 billion in damages to 
our food production economy. When American and allied forces 
took control of al Qaeda harbor sites in the caves of 
Afghanistan in 2002, among the thousands of documents they 
discovered were U.S. agricultural documents and al Qaeda 
training manuals targeting agriculture. The Committee is 
concerned about the potential for our adversaries to use Foot 
and Mouth Disease or another foreign animal disease in an 
attempt to cause serious harm to the food security and economy 
of the United States.
    The committee directs the Department of Defense, in 
consultation with the Department of Agriculture, to brief the 
committee on the threats associated with the introduction of 
Foot and Mouth Disease or another foreign animal disease in an 
attempt to cause serious harm to the food security and economy 
of the United States, and our ability to respond to such 
threats.
Assessment of designating a Joint Chemical-Biological Defense Logistics 
        Distribution Center
    The committee recognizes that in fiscal year 2006, Congress 
urged the Secretary of the Army to designate the U.S. Army Pine 
Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, as the Center of Industrial and 
Technical Excellence for Chemical and Biological Defense.
    The committee hereby directs the Secretary of Defense to 
evaluate the feasibility of designating a Joint Chemical-
Biological Defense Logistics Distribution Center to consolidate 
the Joint Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear 
sustainment functions and provide enhanced military readiness 
to the warfighter. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to submit an assessment to the 
congressional defense committees not later than December 1, 
2017.
Domestic production of Scandium
    Given the planned initiation and production in the United 
States within the next 5 years of as much as 100 metric tons of 
Scandium, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a briefing on the potential defense and industrial uses 
of Scandium to the congressional defense committees by December 
1, 2017.
Fiscal stability of the National Defense Stockpile
    The committee notes that the funds within the National 
Defense Stockpile (NDS) Transaction Fund have been 
significantly depleted due to the lack of excess materials 
available for disposal. The Fund was designed to allow for the 
sale of excess materials, from which the funds in turn could be 
used to acquire emergent strategic and critical materials for 
national defense requirements. While this process has been 
ongoing since just after World War II, the value of the 
available inventory designated as excess is no longer 
sufficient to acquire the strategic and critical material 
requirements identified by the President as necessary.
    The committee believes the current manager of the NDS, the 
Defense Logistics Agency office for Strategic Materials (DLA-
SM), is hampered in its acquisition strategy due to the lack of 
funds available for procurement of materials. The committee has 
observed that the DLA-SM must determine which materials are 
most critical for acquisition, leaving other material 
requirements unfunded. The committee notes that even after 
managing resources in this cost-prohibitive environment, the 
fund will likely become insolvent within the next 3-7 years.
    Additionally, the committee strongly encourages the 
Department to make use of existing authorities under Section 
303 of the Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. 2093) to enter 
into commitments to purchase strategic and critical materials 
required to meet the defense, industrial, and essential 
civilian needs of the United States from domestic producers and 
domestic producers that the Department believes are likely to 
initiate commercial production of such materials within the 
next five years.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, in coordination with the NDS manager, to provide a 
briefing to the congressional defense committees no later than 
January 31, 2018, on the plan to develop and implement a 
funding strategy for sustaining a robust NDS inventory when 
current funds in the transaction fund are depleted. This 
strategy should include the incorporation of acquisition 
requirements for strategic and critical materials though the 
discretionary appropriations process.

   TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS 
                         CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

         Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations

Purpose (sec. 1501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
this title and make authorization of appropriations available 
upon enactment of this Act for the Department of Defense, in 
addition to amounts otherwise authorized in this Act.
Overseas contingency operations (sec. 1502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
authorization of appropriations in this section as overseas 
contingency operations as directed in section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) 
of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
1985.
Procurement (sec. 1503)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriation for procurement activities at the 
levels identified in section 4102 of division D of this Act.
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1504)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriation for research, development, test, 
and evaluation activities at the levels identified in section 
4202 of division D of this Act.
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1505)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for operation and maintenance 
activities at the levels identified in section 4302 of division 
D of this Act.
Military personnel (sec. 1506)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for military personnel activities 
at the levels identified in section 4402 of division D of this 
Act.
Working capital funds (sec. 1507)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for the defense working capital 
funds at the levels identified in section 4502 of division D of 
this Act.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide (sec. 1508)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for the Drug Interdiction and 
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide at the levels identified 
in section 4502 of division D of this Act.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1509)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for the Office of the Inspector 
General of the Department of Defense identified in section 4502 
of division D of this Act.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1510)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the additional appropriations for the Defense Health Program 
activities identified in section 4502 of division D of this 
Act.

                     Subtitle B--Financial Matters

Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1521)
    The committee recommends a provision that would state that 
the amounts authorized to be appropriated in this title are in 
addition to amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated by 
this Act.
Special transfer authority (sec. 1522)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $3.5 billion of 
overseas contingency operation funding authorized for fiscal 
year 2018 in this title to unforeseen higher priority needs in 
accordance with normal reprogramming procedures. This transfer 
authority would be in addition to the authority provided to the 
Secretary elsewhere in this Act.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1531)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that amounts authorized for the Afghanistan Security Forces 
Fund (ASFF) for fiscal year 2018 continue to be subject to the 
conditions specified in subsections (b) through (g) of section 
1513 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2008 (Public Law 110-181), as amended. The provision would 
extend the authority under subsection 1532(b) of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to accept certain 
equipment procured using the ASFF and to treat such equipment 
as Department of Defense stocks. The provision would also 
extend the goal of using $25.0 million to support, to the 
extent practicable, the efforts of the Government of 
Afghanistan to promote the recruitment, training, and 
integration of Afghan women into the Afghan National Defense 
and Security Forces. The provision would also require that 
products published or issued by an inspector general relating 
to the oversight of the ASFF be prepared in accordance with 
certain quality standards.

                              Budget Items

Defense Security Cooperation Agency
    The budget request included $2.3 billion for Operations and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), Overseas Contingency 
Operations, for the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, of 
which $1.0 billion is for Coalition Support Funds (CSF).
    The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act is a 
provision that would limit the total amount of CSF that may be 
provided in fiscal year 2018 to $900.0 million. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends a reduction of $100.0 million to CSF.
Transfer of European Reassurance Initiative
    The budget request included $4.8 billion in the Overseas 
Contingency Operations account for the European Reassurance 
Initiative (ERI), of which $214.3 million was for Military 
Personnel, $2.27 billion was for Operation and Maintenance, 
$1.87 billion was for Procurement, $64.1 million was for 
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, $306.9 million was 
for Military Construction, and $50.1 million was for Revolving 
and Management Funds.
    In the aftermath of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and 
annexation of Crimea and escalating threats against NATO allies 
in Eastern Europe, the ERI was designed to reverse major 
reductions in U.S. military presence. Due to arbitrary budget 
caps in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25), this 
timely U.S. response through the ERI was only possible by 
including those funds in the Overseas Contingency Operations 
(OCO) account. However, the committee has long been concerned 
the ERI does not properly belong in the OCO account and should 
be transferred to the base defense budget as soon as possible 
without negatively impacting ongoing U.S. efforts to reassure 
allies and re-establish deterrence.
    Military and civilian leaders of the Department of Defense 
have consistently identified Russia as a top threat to U.S. 
national security interests. Substantial and sustained 
investment in U.S. military presence in Europe will be required 
to improve the capability, capacity, and agility of U.S. forces 
to address Russian conventional, nuclear, and hybrid threats 
from the Arctic region to Eastern Europe to the Mediterranean. 
In short, providing credible deterrence against Russian 
aggression is not a contingent requirement, but an enduring 
requirement.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a transfer of these 
activities from the ERI in the OCO account to the European 
Deterrence Initiative as part of the base defense budget to 
fully support U.S. military presence in Europe, facilitate 
efficient planning and execution, and ensure budgetary 
transparency. The committee recommends a transfer of $214.3 
million from Military Personnel, $2.12 billion from Operation 
and Maintenance, $1.87 billion from Procurement, $64.1 million 
from Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, $306.9 
million from Military Construction, and $50.1 million from 
Revolving and Management Funds for a total of $4.63 billion 
from the OCO account to the respective base accounts.

     TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS

                      Subtitle A--Space Activities

Air Force Space Command (sec. 1601)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Commander of Air Force Space Command serve a term of at least 6 
years.
    The committee is concerned that numerous organizational 
impediments impede the ability of the Department of Defense to 
meet the national security space challenges of the 21st 
century.
    Numerous studies over the past 2 decades have concluded 
that DoD space leadership responsibilities are fragmented and 
defused. The committee believes that extending the tenure of 
the Commander of Air Force Space Command will partially address 
some of the challenges undermining the development, deployment, 
and employment of our National Security Space capabilities. 
Similar to the continuity of leadership employed by the Navy's 
Nuclear Propulsion Program and the Navy Strategic Systems 
Program, the committee believes that Air Force space programs, 
which similarly require enhanced technical and operational 
focus, will benefit from the sustained leadership.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee also proposes the 
creation of the Chief Information Warfare Officer (CIWO). Among 
its numerous information and cyber-related roles and 
responsibilities, the CIWO would have the authority to 
establish policy for, and direct, the secretaries of the 
military departments and the heads of all other elements of the 
Department of Defense relating to space and space launch 
systems. The CIWO would also assume the role of the Principal 
Department of Defense Space Advisor.
Air Force space contractor responsibility watch list (sec. 1602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
and maintain a contractor responsibility watch list (CRWL) for 
Air Force space programs. The CRWL would include contractors 
with histories of poor performance on space procurement or 
research, development, test, and evaluation program contracts. 
The provision would authorize the Commander of Air Force Space 
and Missile Systems Center to place a contractor on the CRWL 
upon determining that the ability of the contractor to perform 
Air Force space contracts has been called into question by: (1) 
Poor performance or award fee scores below 50 percent; (2) 
Financial concerns; (3) Felony or civil judgments; or (4) 
Security or foreign ownership and control issues.
    The provision would also make the Commander of Air Force 
Space and Missile Systems Center responsible for determining 
which contractors to place on the watch list, whether an entire 
company or a specific division should be included, and when to 
remove a contractor from the list.
    The provision would prohibit the Air Force Space and 
Missile Systems Center from soliciting an offer from, awarding 
a contract to, executing an engineering change proposal with, 
or exercising an option on any Air Force space program with a 
contractor included on the CRWL without the prior approval of 
the Commander of Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. It 
would also prohibit a prime contractor on an Air Force Space 
and Missile Systems Center contract from entering into a 
subcontract valued in excess of $3.0 million or 5 percent of 
the prime contract value with a contractor included on the CRWL 
without the prior approval of the Commander of Air Force Space 
and Missile Systems Center.
    The provision would also establish a process for a 
contractor to submit to the Commander of Air Force Space and 
Missile Systems Center a written request for removal from the 
watch list, including evidence that the contractor has resolved 
the issue that was the basis for inclusion on the list.
    The Commander of Air Force Space Command should notify the 
congressional defense committees of each instance an entity is 
either added or removed from the CRWL.
    The committee believes that the Air Force space acquisition 
community lacks the tools necessary to effectively hold 
contractors accountable for poor performance. The space 
acquisition community has a finite number of contractors, 
involves numerous multi-billion dollar programs, and has a 
history of cost overruns and schedule delays. Program offices 
typically manage contractor performance via modifications to 
award fees or in the most extreme cases through debarment of a 
contractor. Because of this small contractor base, it is not 
uncommon for contractors who perform poorly on one program to 
win contracts for similar work in other programs. The committee 
believes that, if used effectively, the CRWL would provide the 
Air Force space acquisition community with an additional tool 
for enhanced accountability and better contractor performance.
    The committee notes that there is precedence for this 
action. The National Reconnaissance Office has maintained and 
effectively utilized its own CRWL to hold its contractors 
accountable and to notify Congress of serious programmatic 
issues. If instituted similarly at the Air Force Space and 
Missile Systems Center, the CRWL will provide to the space 
acquisition community additional critical tools for ensuring 
taxpayer dollars are spent effectively by appropriately dis-
incentivizing contractors' poor performance.
    The committee believes the unique nature of satellite 
acquisition programs and the relatively small size of the 
satellite industrial base make the utilization of a CRWL 
particularly important.
Presidential National Voice Conferencing system (sec. 1603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would consolidate 
disparate program elements of the Presidential and National 
Voice Conferencing (PNVC) system under the Air Force Program 
Executive Officer, who has been given overall responsibility 
for the system. The PNVC system, which is a ground segment 
component of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite 
system, is designed to give the President the ability to 
execute time-sensitive conference discussions with his advisors 
under the most stressing environments, including those 
associated with the employment of nuclear forces either before 
or after an attack. Currently, the components of the PNVC 
system are executed by different agencies, and hence its 
overall budget is fragmented. This provision would consolidate 
this fragmented structure under the Air Force. The committee 
believes that it is important that the authority for this 
effort be aligned with accountability under the Air Force. 
Given the importance of this nuclear command, control, and 
communications acquisition and the delays encountered to date 
due to its fragmented structure, reporting shall follow 
guidelines for an Acquisition Category 1 system.
Limitation on use of funds for Delta IV launch vehicle (sec. 1604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Air Force from obligating funds to maintain infrastructure, 
system engineering, critical skills, base and range support, 
depreciation, or sustainment commodities for the Delta IV 
launch vehicle unless the Secretary of the Air Force certifies 
to the congressional defense committees that the Air Force 
plans to launch a satellite procured by the Air Force on a 
Delta IV launch vehicle within 3 years of that certification.
    The committee understands that while the Air Force no 
longer has plans to utilize the Delta IV launch vehicle, the 
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) will rely on the Delta IV 
to meet its heavy lift requirements for the foreseeable future. 
While the committee advocated for the Delta IV launch vehicle 
to eliminate its reliance on the Atlas V, the Air Force has 
insisted that it no longer intends to utilize the Delta IV. 
Given that the Air Force no longer requires the Delta IV, the 
committee believes that the Air Force should not be responsible 
for the significant costs associated with maintaining the 
capability for the NRO.
    The committee is concerned that with the decision to phase 
out the Delta IV, the Air Force and the NRO have both 
underestimated the cost and technical risk in replacing the 
unique heavy lift capability required to meet NRO requirements.
Policy of the United States with respect to classification of space as 
        a combat domain (sec. 1605)
    The committee recommends a provision that would state that 
it is the policy of the United States to develop, procure, 
field, and maintain an integrated system of assets in response 
to the increasingly contested nature of the space operating 
domain to: (1) ensure the resilience of capabilities at every 
level of orbit in space; (2) deter or deny an attack on 
capabilities at every level of orbit in space; and (3) defend 
the territory of the United States, its allies, and its 
deployed forces across all operating domains.
Launch support and infrastructure modernization (sec. 1606)
    The committee understands that in calendar year 2017, 
Eastern Launch and Test Range plans to support 35 space 
launches, with an expected increase to 48 launches annually in 
the next few years. This represents tremendous growth from the 
7 to 18 launches seen annually in previous years.
    The committee also understand that not only is the tempo of 
space launches increasing, but the number, type, and providers 
of space launch vehicles and activities are also growing to 
fulfill the national objective of a competitive domestic space 
launch industry.
    Then-Commander of U.S. Air Force Space Command, General 
John Hyten, issued in March 2016 his ``Commander's Intent on 
Range Support to Commercial Space Launch'' to increase the 
Department of Defense's ability to provide efficient space 
launch and range support to civil and commercial space launch 
providers.
    The committee is concerned that, despite increased 
efficiencies in space launch due to better liaison between 
defense, civil, and commercial space launch providers, full-
scale space launch operations are limited by decaying range 
infrastructure on both the Eastern and Western Test and Launch 
Ranges.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to carry out a program to modernize space launch infrastructure 
and improve space launch activities, to include processing and 
launch of national security space vehicles, in the Eastern and 
Western Test and Launch Ranges.

  Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities

Extension of authority to engage in commercial activities as security 
        for intelligence collection activities (sec. 1611)
    The Committee recommends a provision that would extend by 3 
years the authority under section 431 of title 10, United 
States Code.

     Subtitle C--Cyber Warfare, Cybersecurity, and Related Matters

Policy of the United States on cyberspace, cybersecurity, and cyber 
        warfare (sec. 1621)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the policy of the United States with respect to matters 
pertaining to cyberspace, cybersecurity, and cyber warfare.
    The committee has long expressed its concern with the lack 
of an effective strategy and policy for addressing cyber 
threats and cyber deterrence. The National Defense 
Authorization Act has included numerous provisions over the 
past few years that directed the executive branch to define and 
develop the policies and strategies necessary to improve the 
structure, capability, roles, and responsibilities of our 
national cyber efforts. The committee has also placed a strong 
emphasis on the need for developing a comprehensive cyber 
deterrence strategy. Unfortunately, the committee believes the 
responses to those requests have been insufficient and not 
commensurate with the threat we face in the cyber domain.
Cyber posture review (sec. 1622)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of 
National Intelligence, the Attorney General, the Secretary of 
the Department of Homeland Security, and the Secretary of 
State, to conduct a cyber posture review. The purpose of the 
review would be to clarify U.S. cyber deterrence policy and 
strategy for the near term by conducting a comprehensive review 
of the cyber posture of the United States for the next 5 to 10 
years. A report on the results of the review would be due no 
later than March 1, 2018, in unclassified and classified forms 
as necessary.
    The provision would also state that it is the sense of 
Congress that the United States should respond to all cyber 
attacks and to all significant cyber intrusions by imposing 
costs on those responsible that exceed any benefit that the 
attacker or intruder may have hoped to gain.
    The Department of Defense Science Board Task Force on Cyber 
Deterrence asserted in a report released in February 2017, 
that, for ``at least the coming five to ten years, the 
offensive cyber capabilities of our most capable potential 
adversaries are likely to far exceed the United States' ability 
to defend and adequately strengthen the resilience of its 
critical infrastructures.'' As a result the Board concluded 
that ``bolstering the U.S. cyber deterrence posture must be an 
urgent priority.''
    The committee has long advocated for a robust cyber 
deterrence policy and has been disappointed in the level of 
seriousness and priority afforded to developing a deterrence 
framework by prior administrations. The committee encourages 
the new administration to immediately prioritize the 
development of a cyber deterrence strategy that emphasizes both 
deterrence by denial and deterrence by consequence imposition.
Modification and clarification of requirements and authorities relating 
        to establishment of unified combatant command for cyber 
        operations (sec. 1623)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
requirements and authorities germane to the establishment of a 
unified combatant command for cyber operations, mandated by 
section 167b(a) of title 10, United States Code. The 
recommended provision would: (1) Direct that the elevation of 
United States Cyber Command to a unified combatant command 
occur before the Cyber Mission Force reaches full operational 
capability; (2) Clarify the functions of cyber command to make 
them align with Department of Defense policy; and (3) Refine 
the command and control responsibilities of the Cyber Command 
Commander.
    The committee notes that on May 9, 2017, the Commander of 
United States Cyber Command testified that the Cyber Mission 
Force is scheduled to be fully operational by the end of fiscal 
year 2018.
Annual assessment of cyber resiliency of nuclear command and control 
        system (sec. 1624)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Commander of the United States Strategic Command and the 
Commander of the United States Cyber Command to jointly conduct 
an annual assessment of the cyber resiliency of the nuclear 
command and control system. The assessment would evaluate the 
sufficiency and resiliency of the nuclear command and control 
system for operation through a cyber attack and would develop 
recommendations for mitigating the concerns of the Commanders 
born from this assessment.
    The provision would require the Commanders to jointly 
submit to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for 
submission to the Council on Oversight of the National 
Leadership Command, Control, Communications System (``the 
Council''), a report on the assessment. The Council would also 
submit the report and any comments it feels appropriate to the 
Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Defense would submit 
to the congressional defense committees the report along with 
the Council's and the Secretary of Defense's comments. The 
provision would sunset 10 years after the date of enactment.
    In a report released in February 2017, the Department of 
Defense Science Board Task Force on Cyber Deterrence recognized 
that ``nuclear forces and supporting infrastructure require 
sustained and comprehensive assessments of their ability to 
operate in the face of a major state's cyber attack.'' 
Consistent with the annual requirements for the nuclear 
stockpile assessment to the President and Congress, the Board 
concluded that the ``cyber security and resilience of U.S. 
nuclear forces (especially nuclear command, control, and 
communications (NC3)) is of equal and parallel importance.''
Strategic Cybersecurity Program (sec. 1625)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the 
National Security Agency, to establish the Strategic 
Cybersecurity Program (SCP). The program would execute 
continual red-teaming reviews of: (1) Offensive cyber systems; 
(2) Long-range strike systems; (3) Nuclear deterrent systems; 
(4) National security systems; and (5) Critical infrastructure 
of the Department of Defense. The SCP would also be responsible 
for assessing the cybersecurity adequacy of acquisition plans 
for proposed systems and infrastructure in order to ensure the 
effectiveness of these covered systems. The provision would 
provide for this effort up to $100.0 million of the funding 
authorized to be appropriated in fiscal year 2018 for the 
Information Systems Security Program.
    In a report released in February 2017, the Department of 
Defense Science Board Task Force on Cyber Deterrence concluded 
that ``[b]usiness as usual will not be adequate to provide a 
high degree of confidence that systems essential to offensive 
cyber, long-range strike, and nuclear deterrence are resilient 
(end-to-end) against top tier cyber attack. A sustained 
independent red team capability, backed by top-notch analytics 
and supported by intelligence assessments, is needed. It is 
vital that such a red team be independent from the mission 
owner of the systems it is evaluating.''
    Consistent with the Board's findings, the committee 
believes that the SCP should be a ``sustaining effort over 
decades with top-notch leaders and technologically diverse 
staff'' and modeled on the nuclear ballistic missile submarine 
security program. The program should: include the emulation of 
top tier adversaries and an expanded consideration of threats; 
inform and be informed by intelligence collection requirements; 
and include a full range of countermeasure development.
    The committee is aware that each of the Services is 
developing Cyber Protection Teams (CPTs) to defend department 
systems and networks. The committee believes that CPT capacity 
is limited and will be required to assess, defend, and triage a 
variety of threats of different degrees of severity. The CPT 
construct is also both flexible and deployable. However, the 
committee believes that certain systems of critical importance 
require specialized capability and evaluation independence from 
the mission owner. Therefore, the committee recommends the 
development of an elite independent red-teaming capability to 
continuously assess the information assurance of the Department 
of Defense's most significant networks and critical 
infrastructure.
    The committee is also aware that the Cyber Resiliency of 
Weapons Systems program is working to identify vulnerabilities 
in current and existing weapons systems. The committee 
anticipates that the Strategic Cybersecurity Program and the 
Cyber Resiliency of Weapons Systems program will work closely 
together to prioritize their respective work based on the most 
critical cybersecurity needs of the Department of Defense.

Evaluation of agile acquisition of cyber tools and applications (sec. 
        1626)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Commander of U.S. Cyber Command to conduct an evaluation of 
alternative methods for developing, acquiring, and maintaining 
software-based cyber tools and applications for Cyber Command 
and for the cyber component commands of the Armed Forces. The 
goal of the evaluation is to identify a set of practices that 
will increase the speed and effectiveness of developing 
capabilities to match the speed at which the operational cyber 
environment changes, in peacetime and during a conflict.
    The provision would specifically require consideration of 
the Agile Acquisition and related models that are widely used 
in leading software and information technology companies and 
recommended by the Defense Digital Service.
    The committee has been concerned for many years about the 
inability of the Department of Defense (DOD), despite 
congressional encouragement, to propose and adopt an 
acquisition model tailored to the unique and demanding cyber 
mission in DOD. DOD cyber forces must react almost instantly to 
constant changes in the operational environment in defended 
cyberspace, the global Internet, and adversary networks, as 
well as in adversaries' tools and tactics. Tool and application 
development must be rapid and tightly coupled to users and 
operators, but must also be disciplined and repeatable. 
Industry best practices provide mature models for DOD to adopt.

Report on cost implications of terminating dual-hat arrangement for 
        Commander of United States Cyber Command (sec. 1627)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Commander of United States Cyber Command to provide to the 
congressional defense committees a report that identifies the 
costs associated with developing the capabilities required to 
meet the requirements outlined in section 1642(b)(2)(C) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328).
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328) included a provision that prohibited the 
Secretary of Defense from taking action to end the ``dual-hat 
arrangement'' until the Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff jointly determine and certify to the 
appropriate committees of Congress that ending that arrangement 
would not pose unacceptable risks to the military effectiveness 
of Cyber Command. The provision also required the establishment 
of conditions-based criteria, including the achievement of full 
operational capability of the cyber mission force and the 
development of: (1) Robust operational infrastructure; (2) 
Robust command and control systems and processes; (3) The tools 
and weapons used in cyber operations; (4) Capabilities to 
enable intelligence collection and operational preparation of 
the environment for cyber operations; and (5) Capabilities to 
train cyber operations personnel, test cyber capabilities, and 
rehearse cyber missions.
    The committee believes any decision to separate Cyber 
Command and the National Security Agency should be conditions-
based. The committee also believes that the funding associated 
with separating the ``dual-hat arrangement'' will be a 
multiyear sustained effort. The committee notes that the fiscal 
year 2018 budget request failed to include the funding 
necessary to resource the separation of the ``dual-hat 
arrangement.'' The committee looks to Cyber Command to estimate 
the funding required to meet the conditions identified in 
section 1642(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and intends to closely 
monitor future budget submissions and the cost, schedule, and 
performance of key cyber programs to ensure that Cyber Command 
is appropriately resourced prior to any decision to end the 
``dual-hat arrangement.''

Modification of Information Assurance Scholarship Program (sec. 1628)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2200a of title 10, United States Code, to formally 
designate the Department of Defense Cybersecurity Scholarship 
Program, and to require that not less than 5 percent of the 
funding allocated to the program each year be reserved for the 
pursuit of an associate degree. The provision would also 
require the Secretary of Defense, by no later than September 
30, 2018, to provide a plan to the congressional defense 
committees for reinvigoration of the program.

Measuring compliance of components of Department of Defense with 
        cybersecurity requirements for securing industrial control 
        systems (sec. 1629)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to update its cyber scorecards to ensure 
that the Secretary measures each component of the Department of 
Defense in its progress towards securing the industrial control 
systems of the Department against cyber threats.

Exercise on assessing cybersecurity support to election systems of 
        States (sec. 1630)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to incorporate the cybersecurity of 
elections systems of the States as a component of the Cyber 
Guard Exercise.

Report on various approaches to cyber deterrence (sec. 1630A)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prepare a report on various approaches 
to cyber deterrence.
    The committee believes that our national security is at 
great risk. The cyber threats we face from Russia, China, North 
Korea, and Iran are growing in sophistication and scale. 
According to the Department of Defense Science Board's Task 
Force on Cyber Deterrence, ``The cyber threat to U.S. critical 
infrastructure is outpacing efforts to reduce pervasive 
vulnerabilities, so that for the next decade at least the 
United States must lean significantly on deterrence to address 
the cyber threat posed by the most capable U.S. adversaries. It 
is clear that a more proactive and systematic approach to U.S. 
cyber deterrence is urgently needed.''
    The committee remains concerned by the executive branch's 
lack of urgency and failure to address the foundational legal 
and policy questions required to formulate an effective 
deterrence strategy. The committee believes the Nation cannot 
afford to fall another decade behind the cyber threats that are 
proliferating exponentially. As the Defense Science Board 
report states, a ``proactive and systematic approach'' is 
necessary.
    In light of the inherent complexities of cyber deterrence 
and this issue's relatively nascent theoretical foundations, 
the committee believes that the Department of Defense should 
complete a robust competitive analysis with three strategic 
objectives: (1) To identify, define, and explain the various 
theoretical approaches to cyber deterrence; (2) To present the 
strengths and weaknesses of each approach relative to the 
threat and to one another; and (3) To present a recommended 
cyber deterrence doctrine for the United States as well as a 
dissenting alternative if necessary.
    Further, as the Secretary completes this report, the 
committee encourages the Secretary to consider past efforts 
that have leveraged creative approaches to difficult problems. 
For example, when President Eisenhower needed to formulate a 
comprehensive government strategy for dealing with an emerging 
Soviet challenger, he commissioned his ``Solarium Project,'' 
which tasked three separate expert ``task forces''--each with 
the same information but operating with different philosophies 
and under different constraints--to investigate and to 
recommend a strategy for U.S. engagement with the Soviet Union. 
We believe approaches like the ``Solarium Project'' may prove 
to be useful models for this report.

Prohibition on use of software platforms developed by Kaspersky Lab 
        (sec. 1630B)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
any component of the Department of Defense from using, whether 
directly or through work with or on behalf of another element 
of the United States Government, from using any software 
platform developed, in whole or in part, by Kaspersky Lab or 
any entity of which Kaspersky Lab has a majority ownership.

                       Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces

Collection, storage, and sharing of data relating to nuclear security 
        enterprise (sec. 1631)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
data sharing between the Department of Energy's (DOE) National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the Department of 
Defense (DOD) with respect to cost, programmatic, and technical 
data relating to programs and projects of the nuclear security 
enterprise.
    The committee notes that this provision not only concerns 
the sharing of such data between the DOE/NNSA and DOD but also 
within each agency so that the U.S. Government-funded pool of 
data is common to the nuclear enterprise. Data developed by 
taxpayer dollars belong to the U.S. Government, and data 
collected by any one government organization should be shared--
especially with respect to developing accurate cost estimates 
of future programs to assist in developing engineering designs 
and requirements. It is incumbent upon senior government 
officials as stewards of taxpayer dollars to promote data 
sharing and to ensure that all procedural hurdles and 
classifications are overcome.
    The committee notes that the Atomic Energy Act does not 
restrict data sharing between organizations. Section 2163 of 
title 42, United States Code, explicitly allows the sharing of 
data between organizations as long as the Department of Defense 
designee has determined security requirements are met.

Establishment of procedures for implementation of Nuclear Enterprise 
        Review (sec. 1632)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to issue a final Department of Defense 
Instruction no later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
this Act for the 2014 Nuclear Enterprise Review. The committee 
believes that a formal DOD Instruction will institutionalize a 
process that has served the Department well so far in 
addressing concerns initially documented by the 2014 Nuclear 
Enterprise Review.

Procurement authority for certain parts of intercontinental ballistic 
        missiles (sec. 1633)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Defense to buy intercontinental ballistic 
missile parts pursuant to contracts entered into under section 
1645(a) of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291).

Execution and programmatic oversight of nuclear command, control, and 
        communications programs (sec. 1634)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department of Defense 
(DOD), or any successor with primary responsibility for nuclear 
command, control, and communications (NC3), in coordination 
with the Under Secretary of Defense of Acquisition and 
Sustainment, to develop a database of acquisition program 
metrics on DOD NC3 acquisition systems not later than 1 year 
after the date of enactment of this Act.
    NC3 systems connect the President to his advisors and 
ultimately enable force direction of the nuclear forces, making 
its modernization a key national priority. The committee is 
concerned about the management of more than 100 separate NC3 
systems fragmented between the Department of the Air Force, the 
Department of the Navy, and the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense. This fragmentation has led to delays in critical 
capabilities. Section 171(a) of title 10, United States Code, 
created the Council on Oversight of the National Leadership 
Command, Control, and Communications Systems (the Council), 
with the CIO acting as Executive Secretary, to provide 
oversight of these systems, but much work remains to be done.
    Furthermore, the committee is concerned that the Council 
has neglected long-term planning in favor of addressing crises 
as they arise. The Council is currently required to provide an 
annual report to the congressional defense committees on its 
recent activities and the activities proposed under the current 
future years defense program, along with details on current 
programs and threats.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Council to add to its 
annual report to Congress, beginning in 2019, a section on its 
10-year plan for acquisition, modernization, and sustainment. 
The plan should cover schedule, cost, risk, system-level 
integration, and surety.
    Finally, the committee values the work of the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) in reviewing the progress and 
challenges facing NC3 acquisition and programs. The committee 
therefore directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to continue assessment of these programs, as well as the 
progress developing and implementing an overall NC3 
architecture, and to brief the congressional defense committees 
on the results on an annual basis from fiscal years 2018 to 
2022 with periodic updates as agreed to with the GAO. In 
particular, the Comptroller General should provide, as the GAO 
has for space systems, a brief periodic summary of the 
acquisition status of selected NC3 programs that are below 
Acquisition Category I, which are not normally tracked in the 
Selected Acquisition Reporting database. The Comptroller 
General should pay particular attention to the recent efforts 
that the Air Force has taken to consolidate NC3 acquisition at 
the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, the allocation of staff 
and secure facilities to stand up this acquisition effort, and 
the general implementation of NC3 activities and organizations 
outlined in Air Force Program Action Directive D16-01, dated 
August 2, 2016.
    Further, the Comptroller General should consult with the 
congressional defense committees each year as he or she 
determines the scope and timing of each annual review. Each 
review may include, as the Comptroller General deems 
appropriate, the insights of both DOD and non-DOD entities that 
have relevant NC3 knowledge. The Comptroller General should, as 
part of periodic reporting, notify the congressional defense 
committees of any issues with the assistance of these entities 
that may delay or hinder data gathering and reporting.

Measures in response to noncompliance of the Russian Federation with 
        its obligations under the INF Treaty (sec. 1635)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
research and development program on a dual-capable ground-
launched missile with a maximum range of 5,500 kilometers, in 
order to close the capability gap opened by the Russian 
violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) 
Treaty.
    U.S. officials have been aware of possible violations by 
the Russian Federation of the INF Treaty since 2008. The U.S. 
Government did not raise the issue with Russian officials until 
2013, and it did not brief NATO on the subject until 2014. 
Since 2013, senior U.S. officials, including the President, the 
Secretary of State, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, have raised the violations with their Russian 
counterparts, but there is no evidence that Russia is moving 
toward compliance with the treaty. The 2017 Department of State 
report titled, ``Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, 
Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments,'' 
concluded that Russia remains in violation of its obligations 
under the INF Treaty.
    It is not in the national security interests of the United 
States to refrain from doing any research and development into 
such military capabilities while Russian capabilities are 
developed, advanced, produced, and deployed, and no other 
country in the world is bound by the treaty. The committee does 
not intend for the United States to enter into violation of the 
INF Treaty. The committee notes that research and development, 
without testing, would not constitute a violation of the 
treaty.
    While a missile with advanced capabilities may be 
preferable once the technology has matured, the most 
practicable solution in the near-term may be modification of an 
existing missile system for ground-launch. Accordingly, the 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees evaluating 
existing U.S. missile systems for modification to intermediate 
range and ground-launch, including Tomahawk, Standard Missile-
3, Standard Missile-6, Long-Range Stand-Off Cruise Missile, and 
Army Tactical Missile System. The system may be operated by 
whichever military service deemed most appropriate by the 
Secretary of Defense but should be suitable for deployment by 
the Commanders of U.S. European Command and U.S. Pacific 
Command.
    The report should be submitted to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 120 days after enactment of this Act.

Certification that the Nuclear Posture Review addresses deterrent 
        effect and operation of United States nuclear forces in current 
        and future security environment (sec. 1636)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that the Secretary of Defense certify that the new Nuclear 
Posture Review (NPR) being conducted by the Department of 
Defense addresses: (1) The ability of the current U.S. nuclear 
posture to deter current and future nuclear-armed adversaries; 
(2) The ability of the United States to operate in a major 
regional conflict that involves nuclear weapons; (3) The 
ability and preparedness of forward-deployed members of the 
Armed Forces to operate in a nuclear environment; and (4) 
Weapons, equipment, and training not currently part of U.S. 
nuclear posture that would fill any gaps in those capabilities.
    The provision would also require the Secretary to certify 
that the NPR addresses all the above interests for the 
projected security environment and U.S. nuclear posture over 
the next 10 years and identify any actions that could be taken 
by the Secretary of Defense or the Administrator of the 
National Nuclear Security Administration to decrease the risk 
posed by additional changes in the security environment in the 
future.
    The provision would also state the sense of the Congress on 
the importance of the timely modernization of U.S. nuclear 
forces in order to maintain a flexible and resilient force.

Plan to manage Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment System 
        and multi-domain sensors (sec. 1637)

    The committee recommends a provision that, not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, would require 
the Secretary of the Air Force to manage the missile element of 
the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment (ITWAA) 
system as a weapon system consistent with Air Force Policy 
Directive 10-9, ``Lead Command Designation and Responsibilities 
for Weapon Systems,'' dated March 8, 2007.
    In addition, the Secretary of the Air Force should include 
a long-term plan to integrate and manage all available sensors 
for multi-domain exploitation against modern and emergent 
threats.

Certification requirement with respect to strategic radiation hardened 
        trusted foundry (sec. 1638)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to certify to the congressional defense 
committees that a strategic radiation hardened trusted foundry 
will be operational not later than December 31, 2020. The 
microelectronic components supplied by such a foundry will be 
necessary for the successful and timely completion of the 
Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent and the Long-Range Stand-off 
Missile programs. It is the committee's understanding that 
there is one remaining trusted foundry capable of meeting 
future requirements of these systems. The committee is 
concerned about the health of the industrial base for such 
specialized components and will continue to track this issue 
closely.
    In addition to the certification, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on the Department of Defense's plan to 
ensure an operational foundry by 2020. This plan should be 
developed in coordination with the Department's long-term 
strategy for trusted and assured microelectronics and should 
take into consideration future opportunities for coordinating 
acquisition of strategic radiation hardened microelectronics 
across the Services and programs.
    The report should be submitted no later than February 28, 
2018.

Requirements for Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1639)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to fully incorporate into the Nuclear 
Posture Review (NPR) input and views from other government 
agencies, including the Department of Energy, the Department of 
State, and the National Nuclear Security Administration. The 
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit 
the NPR in its entirety to the congressional defense committees 
and provide an unclassified version to the public.

Sense of Congress on Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1640)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Congress that the Nuclear Posture Review should 
take into account treaty obligations of the United States, and 
should examine the tools required to sustain the stockpile 
stewardship program under section 4201 of the Atomic Energy 
Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2521).

                  Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs

Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli Cooperative 
        Missile Defense Program co-development and co-production (sec. 
        1651)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
not more than $92.0 million for the Missile Defense Agency to 
provide to the Government of Israel to procure Tamir 
interceptors for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense 
system through co-production of such interceptors in the United 
States. Before disbursing the funding for Iron Dome to the 
Government of Israel, the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Sustainment must certify that the March 5, 2014, bilateral 
international agreement concerning Iron Dome, as amended, is 
being implemented.
    The provision would also authorize $120.0 million for the 
Missile Defense Agency to provide to the Government of Israel 
for the procurement of the David's Sling Weapon System and 
$120.0 million for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor program, 
including for co-production of parts and components in the 
United States by U.S. industry. The funds for the David's Sling 
Weapon System may be disbursed after the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment certifies that the 
Government of Israel has demonstrated successful completion of 
certain milestones required by the research, development, and 
technology agreement and the bilateral co-production agreement; 
that the funds will be matched on a one-for-one basis or in an 
amount that otherwise meets best efforts; and that the level of 
co-production of parts and components in the United States is 
not less than 50 percent. Additionally, the committee directs 
United States and Government of Israel representatives from the 
David's Sling Weapon System Affordability Working Group to 
jointly brief the committee no later than October 1, 2017, on 
the drivers of production costs, cost reduction initiatives, 
and efforts to achieve co-production efficiencies for the 
David's Sling program.
    The funds for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier program may be 
disbursed after certain conditions, which include the 
completion of two successful flight tests at a test range in 
the United States and certification from the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment that the United States 
has entered into a bilateral agreement with the Government of 
Israel. That agreement must establish: (1) The terms of co-
production of parts and components; (2) Transparency on the 
Israeli requirement for the number of interceptors and 
batteries; (3) Technical milestones for co-production and 
procurement; (4) A joint affordability working group to 
consider cost reduction initiatives; and (5) Joint approval 
processes for third-party sales.
    The committee acknowledges that the September 14, 2016, 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the United States and 
Israel commits $500.0 million in U.S. funding for cooperative 
missile defense programs annually beginning in fiscal year 2019 
and ending in fiscal year 2028. According to the MOU, the 
United States and Israel jointly understand that any U.S. funds 
provided for such programs should be made available according 
to separate bilateral agreements for the Iron Dome, David's 
Sling, and Arrow 3 weapon systems, and should maximize co-
production of parts and components in the United States at a 
level equal to or greater than 50 percent of U.S.-appropriated 
funds for production. Additionally, Israel commits not to seek 
additional missile defense funding from the United States for 
the duration of the MOU, except in exceptional circumstances as 
may be jointly agreed by the United States and Israel. The 
committee expects to receive annual updates on all cooperative 
defense programs, as delineated in the MOU, to include progress 
reports and spending plans, as well as the top-line figures of 
the Israel Missile Defense Organization budget.

Development of persistent space-based sensor architecture (sec. 1652)

    The committee recommends a provision that would, unless 
otherwise directed or recommended by the Ballistic Missile 
Defense Review (BMDR), require the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency (MDA) to develop using sound acquisition 
practices a highly reliable and cost-effective persistent 
space-based sensor architecture capable of supporting the 
ballistic missile defense system. The Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency should ensure that rigorous testing of the 
space-based sensor architecture is conducted before final 
production decisions or operational deployment. The space-based 
sensor architecture should provide functions such as: (1) 
control of increased raid sizes; (2) precision tracking of 
threat missiles; (3) fire-control-quality tracks of evolving 
threat missiles; (4) enabling launch-on-remote and engage-on-
remote capabilities; (5) discrimination of warheads; (6) 
effective kill assessment; (7) an enhanced shot doctrine; (8) 
integration with the command, control, battle management, and 
communication program of the ballistic missile defense system, 
(9) integration with all other elements of the current 
ballistic missile defense system, including the Terminal High 
Altitude Area Defense, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, 
and Patriot Air and Missile Defense Systems; (10) and any 
additional functions the BMDR finds to be appropriate.
    The committee recognizes that the current space-based 
missile defense sensor architecture is in need of further 
development and advancement and notes that, in order to counter 
the growing threat from North Korea and Iran, the United States 
should invest in a space-based sensor architecture to 
strengthen homeland defense. To that end, the committee 
recommends the authorization of MDA's request of $27.5 million 
on its Unfunded Requirements List to support the development of 
a space-based sensor architecture. The committee notes that 
while developing the space-based sensor architecture, the 
Director of MDA should design the program so as to avoid, to 
the extent possible, the acquisition and program management 
missteps that occurred in the past on similar programs. Because 
of the high cost to develop and deploy any system in space, the 
committee recommends that, as MDA generates cost estimates for 
the space-based sensor architecture, it should utilize either: 
(1) the GAO cost-estimating and assessment guide (GAO-09-3SP) 
or (2) the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) 
operating and support cost-estimating guide.

Ground-based interceptor capacity and Fort Greely missile field 
        infrastructure requirements (sec. 1653)

    The committee supports the efforts of the Missile Defense 
Agency (MDA) and the Department of Defense to complete the 
emplacement of 44 Ground Based Interceptors (GBIs) by the end 
of 2017 and to improve the overall reliability and performance 
of the GBI fleet and the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. 
The committee notes that MDA has made critical improvements to 
the existing kill vehicles of some of the GBI fleet in order to 
address deficiencies demonstrated in flight tests. The 
committee encourages MDA's development of the Redesigned Kill 
Vehicle (RKV) to further address reliability concerns in the 
existing fleet and to enhance the warfighter's shot doctrine. 
Additionally, the committee encourages the Department to 
continue its efforts to complete a Ballistic Missile Defense 
Review (BMDR), as directed by the January 27, 2017 Presidential 
Memorandum on Rebuilding the U.S. Armed Forces and section 1684 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(P.L. 114-328). As the threat from adversaries' missiles 
becomes more sophisticated and complex, the committee 
acknowledges that expanding the GBI fleet beyond 44 is just one 
option for addressing such a threat, but would need to consider 
where additional GBIs could be deployed and the infrastructure 
costs to do so. The committee will evaluate any recommendations 
for expanding or modifying the current program of record for 
homeland missile defense put forward by the BMDR.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that, 
unless otherwise directed by the BMDR, directs the Secretary of 
Defense to increase the number of GBIs by up to 28, and execute 
any requisite construction to ensure that Missile Fields 1 and 
2 at Fort Greely, or any other alternative missile fields, are 
capable of supporting and sustaining additional GBIs. The 
Secretary shall additionally identify a ground-based 
interceptor stockpile storage site for up to 14 GBIs.
    The committee recognizes that an increase to GBIs at Fort 
Greely, or elsewhere, requires significant planning. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency to submit to the congressional defense committees, not 
later than 90 days after the enactment of this act, a report on 
options to increase the capacity by up to 100 GBIs of the 
ground-based midcourse defense element of the ballistic missile 
defense system, including an identification of potential sites, 
a cost-benefit analysis of such sites, a description of the 
additional infrastructure and components needed, along with a 
cost and schedule estimate, to increase the number of ground-
based interceptors configured with the RKV, or other designs, 
at Fort Greely, Alaska, or other locations. This report should 
also include the benefit of supplementing ground-based 
midcourse defense elements, with other more distributed 
elements, for homeland defense.

Sense of the Senate on the state of United States missile defense (sec. 
        1654)

    The committee recommends a provision that expresses the 
sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense should use 
the Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) to consider 
accelerating the development of technologies that will increase 
the capacity, capability, and reliability of the ground-based 
midcourse defense element of the ballistic missile defense 
system and that, upon completion of the BMDR, to the extent 
practicable and with sound acquisition practices, the Director 
of the Missile Defense Agency should accelerate the 
development, testing, and fielding of such capabilities as they 
are prioritized in the BMDR, to include the redesigned kill 
vehicle, the multi-object kill vehicle, the C3 booster, a 
space-based sensor layer, boost phase sensor and kill 
technologies, and additional ground-based interceptors. The 
provision also states that it is essential for the Department 
of Defense and the Missile Defense Agency to follow a ``fly 
before you buy'' approach before final production decisions or 
operational deployment.

Sense of the Senate and report on ground-based mid-course defense 
        testing (sec. 1655)

    The committee recommends a provision that expresses the 
sense of the Senate that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) 
should increase funding to homeland missile defense testing and 
continue to flight test the ground-based midcourse defense 
system at least once each fiscal year. The committee directs 
the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees that includes a revised 
missile defense testing campaign that accelerates the 
development and deployment of new missile defense technologies. 
This revised testing campaign should specifically review the 
acceleration of the redesigned kill vehicle, the multi-object 
kill vehicle, the configuration-3 booster, unmanned aerial 
vehicles that utilize directed energy, and a space-based 
missile defense sensor architecture.

                       Items of Special Interest

Airborne boost phase laser missile defense demonstration

    The committee directs the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency, unless otherwise recommended by the Ballistic Missile 
Defense Review, to rapidly develop and demonstrate an airborne 
boost phase intercept capability for missile defense. Existing 
technologies should be adapted to demonstrate this capability. 
The concept of operation for this demonstration should be 
developed in cooperation with the U.S. Pacific Command to 
address emerging threats and heightened tensions in the Asia-
Pacific region.

AN/TPY-2 detection and cueing capability

    The committee notes the increased level of ballistic 
missile development, testing, and, in some cases, use by 
specific countries in the Pacific and Middle Eastern regions. 
More sophisticated missile technologies, combined with growing 
missile quantities and mobility, are increasing the threat to 
not only our forward deployed personnel but also the homeland. 
Hostile missile launches and testing programs that threaten 
U.S. personnel and partners and allies like Saudi Arabia, 
Japan, and Turkey require a more robust forward presence of 
early detection, cueing, and discrimination capabilities to 
detect and eliminate these constantly evolving threats.
    The committee notes that the AN/TPY-2 radars currently 
forward deployed in the U.S. Central and Pacific Command areas 
of responsibility have successfully provided early detection 
and cueing capability for 11 years and could serve as a 
template for future expansion of ballistic missile defense 
(BMD) capabilities, both as a stand-alone sensor or as part of 
a larger BMD system such as a Terminal High Altitude Area 
Defense (THAAD) battery.
    The Secretary of Defense has been tasked to ``initiate a 
new Ballistic Missile Defense Review to identify ways of 
strengthening missile-defense capabilities, rebalancing 
homeland and theater defense priorities and highlighting 
priority funding areas.'' The committee encourages the Army to 
strongly consider fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2020 funding 
for additional AN/TPY-2 radar acquisitions, in either Forward 
Base or Terminal Mode, to meet the growing global and regional 
need.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the congressional defense committees by September 1, 
2017 on plans to provide additional forward deployed radar 
detection and cueing capabilities. This briefing shall include: 
(1) an analysis of regional missile threats; (2) any specific 
capabilities needed for operations in a nuclear environment; 
(3) near-term alternatives for addressing threats; and (4) 
timelines to deploy additional assets and the budget needed to 
fund these additional capabilities.

Assistance of U.S. Special Operations Command to U.S. Forces-Korea for 
        Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Under the Unified Command Plan, the U.S. Special Operations 
Command is tasked with synchronizing the plans of the 
geographic commands to Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction 
(CWMD). U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) also have 
exquisite, but limited, capabilities to secure and render safe 
WMDs. The U.S. Forces-Korea are responsible for deterring and 
countering threats from North Korea, including its stockpiles 
of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. The committee 
understands that North Korea's chemical and biological weapons 
stockpiles are large and stored in numerous heavily fortified 
sites.
    In the event of a contingency, the committee understands 
that special operations and conventional ground forces, 
including the Second Infantry Division, will be tasked with 
securing such stockpiles and sites. However, it is not clear to 
the committee how U.S. SOF would synchronize its highly 
specialized CWMD skills within a larger military campaign 
designed to secure the significant number of WMD sites in North 
Korea involving conventional forces.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Commanders of the U.S. 
Forces-Korea and U.S. Special Operations Command to submit a 
plan for synchronizing skills and expertise of conventional and 
special operations forces with respect to securing North Korean 
WMD sites. As part of this plan, the committee directs the 
Commander of U.S. Forces--Korea to describe current 
deficiencies and shortfalls that should inform changes to 
operational planning (within Korea and the U.S. Government) and 
training and equipping of its forces to secure North Korean WMD 
sites, if directed. The committee directs that the plan be 
delivered to the congressional defense committees not later 
than February 28, 2018.

Cobra Dane radar system improvements

    The committee is aware of the critical sensor coverage that 
the Cobra Dane radar provides to the Ballistic Missile Defense 
System in the tracking of threatening ballistic missiles, as 
well as its role in space surveillance and identification of 
space objects. The committee understands that the Cobra Dane 
radar was initially fielded in 1976 and today confronts growing 
sustainment and obsolescence challenges. Additionally, the 
committee supports the deployment of the Long Range 
Discrimination Radar (LRDR) for improved persistent long-range 
midcourse discrimination, precision tracking, and hit 
assessment of threat ballistic missiles, but it acknowledges 
that the LRDR is not a one-for-one replacement for the Cobra 
Dane radar. In addition, the committee understands that as the 
Air Force's new space fence radar becomes operational in 2020, 
it will not need the capabilities of the Cobra Dane radar for 
space surveillance. Nevertheless, the committee is concerned 
about the lack of a comprehensive and credible plan for cost-
effective investments in technology refresh to maximize Cobra 
Dane's reliability and minimize life cycle costs.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in coordination with the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency and the Commander of U.S. Northern Command, to submit to 
the congressional defense committees concurrently with the 
fiscal year 2019 budget request, a report on the long-term 
operation and sustainment of Cobra Dane. The report should 
characterize Cobra Dane's current operational availability and 
sustainment challenges and include a detailed comparison of the 
capabilities of the LRDR and the Cobra Dane radar, to include 
the unique capabilities of each radar, the common capabilities 
of each radar, and the advantages and disadvantages of each 
radar's location. It should also include a plan, with an 
associated cost estimate and funding profile across the future 
years defense program, for meeting the military's requirements 
through alternative radar solutions or the continued operation 
and maintenance of the Cobra Dane radar. Plans for sustainment 
of the Cobra Dane radar should address obsolescence challenges 
and expediting and smoothing investments in priority refresh 
projects, such as transmitter group replacement, automated data 
processing equipment rehost, and traveling wave tube redesign 
in fiscal year 2019 and over the future years defense program. 
Finally, the report should outline the costs, and how they will 
be shared, to maintain operational access and sustainment of 
Shemya Island, on which the radar resides.

Commercial Geospatial-Intelligence Imagery

    The committee applauds the National Geospatial-Intelligence 
Agency's (NGA) leadership in acquiring new sources of 
commercial geospatial-intelligence data and services as part of 
its combat support mission. As part of this leadership 
function, the committee directs the NGA to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees and the House and Senate 
Select Intelligence Committees on acquiring new and non-
traditional sources of geospatial-intelligence, including but 
not limited to new commercial satellite imagery and data of 
various kinds, commercial airborne imagery and data, and other 
geospatial-intelligence-related products and services the 
Director determines are relevant to its mission.

Comptroller General review of very low frequency/low frequency 
        terminals

    The committee supports the efforts of the Department of 
Defense to modernize and replace legacy very low frequency/low 
frequency (VLF/LF) communications terminals and related 
infrastructure, which provide to the President and military 
commanders a secure and survivable beyond line of sight 
communication pathway for strategic forces. The committee is 
concerned, however, about the progress and health of this 
modernization effort. Maintaining this capability has become 
even more important because of the recent emergence of diverse 
and complex threats to satellite-based communications systems.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct an assessment of the Department of 
Defense's efforts to improve nuclear command, control, and 
communications by modernizing VLF/LF terminals and related 
infrastructure. This assessment should include: (1) Information 
about the current health of the VLF/LF network, including 
operational and sustainment challenges; (2) An update on the 
progress of acquisition programs; (3) The potential costs and 
benefits of requiring the military services to adopt a common 
VLF/LF terminal or waveform; (4) The extent to which the 
Department of Defense is considering greater use of non-
satellite radio frequencies, including but not limited to VLF/
LF, to support nuclear command, control, and communications; 
and (5) Any other issues that the Comptroller General considers 
appropriate. In addition to obtaining information from relevant 
Department of Defense organizations, this assessment may 
include, as the Comptroller General deems appropriate, the 
insights of non-Department of Defense organizations, including 
federally funded research and development centers, university 
affiliated research centers, contractors, and industry groups.
    The Comptroller General shall brief the congressional 
defense committees on the results of this assessment no later 
than May 31, 2018.

Conventional Prompt Strike

    The committee is encouraged by the continued commitment of 
the Department of Defense to the Conventional Prompt Strike 
(CPS) activity shown in the budget request. In written 
testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on April 4, 
2017, General John Hyten, Commander, U.S. Strategic Command 
(STRATCOM), emphasized his support for development and 
deployment of CPS as the Department of Defense's ``leading 
technology maturation effort in the realm of hypersonics.'' 
General Hyten further stated that STRATCOM ``foresee[s] an 
operational need for a CPS capability by the mid-2020s.''
    The committee therefore urges the Department to proceed to 
a Milestone A decision consistent with section 1688 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328). The committee is concerned that a delay of a 
Milestone A decision would delay investment in long lead items 
or test technologies that may be required to attain an 
operational capability.
    The committee supports the Department's approach of 
maturing and demonstrating key technologies needed by both 
land- and sea-based CPS systems. The committee notes that the 
CPS integrated master plan required by the Senate report 
accompanying S. 2943 (S.R. 114-255) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 addressed test facility 
infrastructure for ground testing and flight testing, but it 
failed to address the potential future need for underwater 
launch test facilities. The committee recognizes that the 
Department has not yet made a decision that would determine 
testing needs, but it remains concerned that failure to 
adequately consider all potential requirements could lead to 
needless cost and schedule delays in a future program of 
record. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, in coordination with the Director of Navy Strategic 
Systems Programs, to provide a briefing to the congressional 
defense committees no later than February 28, 2018, that 
includes an assessment of the adequacy of sites in the Navy 
inventory to support underwater launch testing for a CPS 
capability, should the need arise.

Counter unmanned aerial systems capabilities

    The committee recognizes that adversaries continue to 
procure low-cost Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and have armed 
them for military purposes in conflict areas like Iraq and 
Syria. The United States must meet this threat by expanding its 
capability to protect military personnel, military 
installations, and critical infrastructure. The committee 
believes that UAS threats will only increase overseas and 
domestically and that additional resources are necessary to 
meet Joint Urgent Operational Needs Statements.
    Significant advances in directed energy in recent years has 
proven that this technology is effective against the entire 
find, fix, track, target, engage and assess UAS kill chain. The 
committee notes that this technology has been demonstrated at 
recent military exercises such as a live-fire exercise at White 
Sands Missile Range and the U.S. Army's Maneuver Fires 
Integration Exercise (MFIX) and is ready to be operationalized. 
The committee is aware of the Marine Corps intent to procure 
five compact high energy laser weapon systems for deployment 
for counter-UAS purposes and commends the Marine Corps for its 
forward-thinking.
    High energy laser and high powered microwave weapon systems 
offer a game-changing capability that augment existing kinetic 
solutions and can also help break the cost disparity of using 
expensive kinetic weapons and interceptors against low-cost 
drones. The committee encourages the military services to 
continue their efforts to develop, procure, and deploy directed 
energy counter-UAS capabilities as appropriate.

Expand capacity and capabilities of the ICCAE with focus on data 
        sciences, machine learning, artificial intelligence, modeling & 
        war gaming, and intelligence integration

    The Committee notes that the Intelligence Community Centers 
for Academic Excellence (ICCAE) have demonstrated ongoing 
support for the intelligence community in several areas, in 
particular the recruitment of a more diverse set analysts, 
collectors and other intelligence community staff. The ICCAE 
program has effectuated a strategy for recruitment that 
includes STEM related training, critical language requirements, 
and cultural immersion that underlie students' primary areas of 
study. Additionally, the Committee notes that the intelligence 
community requires staff who possess fundamental knowledge and 
critical skills in the data sciences, machine learning, 
artificial intelligence, computer vision, computationally 
efficient modeling techniques, empirically driven war gaming 
applications, and operational intelligence integration. The 
Committee believes these are key areas where expanded capacity, 
capability, research, and training would directly benefit the 
IC, while directly supporting the Objectives of the ICCAE 
program.

Fill rate of billets for United States Cyber Command

    The committee directs the Commander of United States Cyber 
Command to track the rates at which the Services fill the 
personnel billets for United States Cyber Command, the Joint 
Force Cyber Headquarters of each of the Services, and the Cyber 
Mission Forces. The Commander shall compare these fill rates to 
averages for other joint assignments, component command 
assignments, and combat units. The Commander shall also track 
the degree to which the Services are assigning officers and 
enlisted personnel to repeat tours in cyber headquarters and 
operational forces and to other positions that rely on and 
sustain the skills and knowledge acquired during tours at Cyber 
Command, Joint Force Cyber Headquarters, and Cyber Mission 
Forces. The committee directs that a brief summary of these 
statistics, and any other related metrics the Commander chooses 
to include, be provided annually to the congressional defense 
committees in documentation supporting the budget request for 
the duration of the current Future Years Defense Program.

Importance and use of United States Federal Aviation Administration 
        licensed spaceports

    The committee continues to recognize the unique importance 
of United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) licensed 
spaceports and, when appropriate, encourages the use of such 
spaceports and launch and range complexes for mid-to-low 
inclination orbits or polar high-inclination orbits in support 
of national security space priorities. The committee recognizes 
that these federally licensed, non-federally owned launch 
facilities, including the Pacific Spaceport Complex--Alaska 
(PSCA), the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS), and 
Oklahoma Air & Space Port, are available to meet the 
requirements for the national security space program from the 
Department of Defense (DOD), Air Force Space Command, 
Operationally Responsive Space Office, and Missile Defense 
Agency. The committee notes that such spaceports improve the 
resiliency of U.S. launch infrastructure and help ensure 
consistent access to space to support national security space 
priorities.
    The PSCA has supported numerous launches for Air Force 
Space Command including specific national security launches. It 
remains the only commercial polar launch range available in the 
United States. A state-of-the-industry spaceport on Kodiak 
Island, Alaska, PSCA provides access to space for vital 
government and commercial interests. The committee supports the 
Missile Defense Agency's plan to conduct tests of the Terminal 
High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system from the PSCA and 
encourages the Department, where appropriate, to consider 
expanding the use of federally-licensed, non-federally owned 
launch facilities to conduct national security launches and 
U.S. and foreign missile tests.
    The Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) at Wallops 
Island, Virginia provides medium-class and small-class launch 
capabilities for the Department. It has launched numerous 
missions for DOD with its agency partners, Air Force Space 
Command, the Operationally Responsive Space Office, and MDA. 
MARS provides assured/responsive access to mid-to-low 
inclination orbits for payloads up to 15,300 lbs. The committee 
supports the Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office's planned 
launch of the L-111 mission from MARS by the end of 2018 and 
encourages the DOD, where appropriate, to consider expanding 
the use of federally-licensed, non-federally owned launch 
facilities to conduct national security launches and missile 
tests. The Oklahoma Air & Space Port, near Bums Flat, Oklahoma, 
is the only space port in the United States to have a civilian 
FAA approved Space Flight Corridor in the National Airspace 
System. This Space Flight Corridor is unique because it is not 
within Military Operating Areas or within restricted airspace, 
which provides an operational capability for space launch 
operations and associated industries specialized in space-
related activities.
    The committee believes that these three facilities can be 
used, when appropriate, to support the national security space 
program.

Increased procurement of low-cost ballistic missile targets

    The committee continues to encourage the Missile Defense 
Agency (MDA) to use threat representative targets in its flight 
tests, to the maximum extent possible, in order to prove our 
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) is capable of defending 
against increasingly complex threat missiles. The committee is 
aware of potential target technologies that could provide 
flexibility, reduce cost, and improve schedule performance in 
meeting BMDS test objectives. Lower cost targets that are 
reliable and meet mission requirements could enable MDA to 
potentially procure more targets and test more frequently. 
Therefore, the committee directs MDA to complete an assessment 
that would consider the integration of low cost targets into 
the flight test plans for the BMDS.

Intelligence support to U.S. Strategic Command

    The committee directs the Commander of the U.S. Strategic 
Command and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency 
(DIA) to review nuclear intelligence support to the U.S. 
Strategic Command. The review should take into account recent 
DIA policies that require senior intelligence analysts 
currently at the Command to rotate to different assignments in 
support of other commands. While such a policy is admirable for 
its career broadening effects, it can be detrimental to the 
highly specialized areas of support, namely nuclear forces 
intelligence, to the U.S. Strategic Command, where resident 
analysts' skills take years to replace. Given Russia's recent 
nuclear force modernization, having these long-term analysts at 
U.S. Strategic Command to inform the Commander on the long-term 
trends of such modernization is critical to our deterrence 
posture.
    The Commander of U.S. Strategic Command and the Director of 
the DIA shall submit to the congressional defense and 
intelligence committees a report on this review no later than 
February 28, 2018.

Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interoperability

    The committee notes, following the U.S.-Republic of Korea 
(ROK) alliance decision, the recent deployment of a Terminal 
High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery to the ROK to 
protect U.S. and allied forces against the rapidly escalating 
ballistic missile threat from the Democratic People's Republic 
of Korea. While the committee fully supports this deployment 
and the Missile Defense Agency's plans to test the THAAD and 
Patriot systems together in a series of simulated engagements 
in fiscal year 2018, it remains concerned about the lack of 
interoperability and coordination between THAAD and other 
critical forward-deployed integrated air and missile defense 
systems such as Patriot.
    Therefore, unless otherwise directed or recommended by the 
Ballistic Missile Defense Review, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense, within 120 days of enactment of this Act, 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees on 
the benefits of achieving full interoperability between the 
THAAD and Patriot weapon systems. The report shall include an 
estimated schedule for integration, resources required, and any 
recommendations the Secretary sees fit to improve the 
integration of the two systems. The report shall be delivered 
in an unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

Positioning, Navigation, and Timing alternate sources

    The Department of Defense is reliant on Positioning, 
Navigation, and Timing (PNT) for a cross cutting range of 
military platforms and capabilities. Recognizing the importance 
of PNT, the committee strongly supports efforts by the 
Department's PNT Oversight Council to enhance PNT resilience 
and encourages the council to move quickly to deploy an 
alternate source of time and location with the ability to 
deliver time globally relative to United States Naval 
Observatory/Coordinated Universal Time. The committee 
encourages the PNT Oversight Council to utilize Department of 
Defense as well as commercial satellites systems to focus on 
technologies with high readiness levels that can be fielded 
rapidly and at reduced cost.

Replacement of National Airborne Operations Center aircraft

    The Secretary of the Air Force is beginning an analysis of 
alternatives on the replacement of the National Airborne 
Operations Center in anticipation of a Milestone A decision. 
The committee is concerned that the replacement fleet may lower 
the mission capability. Upon completion of the analysis, the 
Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on the conclusions of the 
analysis and the Air Force's planned course of action on the 
replacement of the fleet.

Report on Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Commission findings and 
        recommendations

    The committee notes that the Commission to Assess the 
Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) 
Attack was established in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), 
Title XIV, and re-established again in fiscal year 2006 to 
identify steps that should be taken by the United States to 
better protect its military and civilian systems from 
electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. The EMP Commission was 
charged with assessing the nature and magnitude of potential 
high-altitude EMP threats to the United States from all 
potentially hostile states or non-state actors, the 
vulnerability of U.S. military and civilian systems to an EMP 
attack, the capability of the United States to repair and 
recover from damage inflicted by an EMP attack, and the 
feasibility and cost of hardening select military and civilian 
systems against EMP attack.
    Since its establishment, the EMP Commission produced 
multiple reports and briefings that included findings and 
recommendations for the Department of Defense. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the 
committee on its assessment of the military findings and 
recommendations provided by the EMP Commission. The briefing 
shall, at a minimum, include: (1) An identification and 
assessment of the published findings and recommendations by the 
EMP Commission; (2) Actions taken on each of those findings and 
recommendations; and, (3) Recommended way ahead for the 
Department of Defense with regards to protection of military 
systems against EMP attack.

Reusable Launch Vehicles

    The committee is aware of the recent successful re-launch 
of an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle-class launch vehicle 
previously used to deliver a payload to orbit. With nearly 
every U.S. launch company moving toward full or partial 
reusability of boosters, the committee recognizes that the 
potential to reuse launch vehicles for orbital space launch may 
significantly reduce the cost and improve the reliability of 
space launch in the national security, civil, and commercial 
space sectors.
    The committee recommends that the Air Force move rapidly to 
establish procedures to evaluate, certify, and leverage 
reusability technologies in order to meet national security 
space requirements. To this end, performance and excess margin 
beyond what is required to carry out a given national security 
space missions should not be withheld by the government, and 
booster recovery should be encouraged when possible.
    The committee recommends that the government establish a 
process to evaluate and potentially certify reusable launch 
systems. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to brief the committee not later than 180 days after 
the enactment of this Act on the Department's activities to 
evaluate and utilize reusable launch vehicles for use in 
national security space missions.

Sea-based X-Band Radar

    As the Director of the Missile Defense Agency evaluates the 
possible locations that would be best suited for a future home 
port of the Sea-based X-Band Radar (SBX) as required by section 
1684 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (P.L. 114-92), the Director should consult with the 
Secretary of the Navy to avoid home port sites for the SBX that 
could negatively impact U.S. naval operations, including ship 
and submarine maintenance activities at the public shipyards.

Simultaneous strategic missile system flight tests

    The committee supports efforts by both the Navy and the Air 
Force to conduct realistic flight tests of their respective 
strategic missile systems. These rigorous flight test programs 
are critical to ensuring the reliability of the Nation's 
nuclear forces and for strategic messaging regarding our 
credibility.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees 
containing a plan for the Air Force to carry out a simultaneous 
test of at least two Minuteman III LGM-31 missiles. In addition 
to the simultaneous launch itself, such a test would 
demonstrate: (1) The ability of planners to deconflict multiple 
launches and warhead reentries; (2) The capability of test and 
tracking assets to accommodate multiple simultaneous launches 
and reentries; and (3) The resolve of the United States to 
ensure a robust and credible deterrent.
    The report should be submitted no later than February 28, 
2018.

Space Launch Automated Flight Safety and Termination Systems

    The committee believes implementation of the Automated 
Flight Safety and Termination System may support and enable an 
increased launch cadence at the federal ranges.
    Therefore the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in consultation with the Administrator of National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, to provide a report no 
later than December 31, 2017 to the congressional defense 
committees, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
Committee, and the House Space, Science, and Technology 
Committee on a strategy to transition to Automated Flight 
Safety and Termination Systems at the Eastern and Western 
ranges by 2022.
    This report should consider whether to exclude systems 
certified before enactment of this Act or when transition to 
automated systems is not in the best interest of the U.S. 
Government. This report shall also include an assessment of 
impacts to safety of both personnel involved with space launch 
activities and the general public not involved in such 
activities.

Staffing for nuclear command, control, and communications acquisition

    The committee applauds the recent steps taken by the U.S. 
Air Force to centralize responsibility for the nuclear command, 
control, and communications (NC3) enterprise in order to reduce 
fragmentation and increase accountability.
    Modernization of the NC3 enterprise is a key national 
priority, and the committee remains concerned that there is 
little margin for error. Any delay or deferment of the existing 
programs poses unacceptable risk.
    The committee received testimony in a Strategic Forces 
Subcommittee hearing on June 7, 2017, from General Robin Rand, 
Commander, Global Strike Command, on efforts to get the Nuclear 
Weapons Center and the Program Executive Office for NC3 50 to 
60 additional acquisition professionals to adequately oversee 
these programs. Therefore, the committee requests a briefing on 
the Air Force plan to fully staff the acquisition oversight of 
NC3 consistent with this testimony not later than 180 days 
after the enactment of this Act.

Training for cyber mission forces

    The Secretary of Defense in fiscal year 2013 directed the 
stand up of the Cyber Mission Forces (CMF) and provided funds 
for U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) and the service cyber 
components to establish the teams and fund the training of 
personnel and units. The funding provided by the Secretary for 
training covered fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2016. During 
this period of central funding, the Services, under the 
supervision of CYBERCOM, the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense, and the Joint Staff, were supposed to come to an 
agreement on a joint, federated training program funded by the 
Services for training of the CMF. This federated training 
program was to be an equitable division of labor that avoided 
duplication and built on the expertise of each service. The 
committee is concerned that the Services were not able to come 
to an agreement on a joint training program for the CMF for the 
budget submission for fiscal year 2018. The committee expects 
this issue to be resolved in the current budget planning cycle 
for fiscal year 2019 and expects to be kept informed of 
progress towards this goal in the coming months.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

Summary and explanation of funding tables
    Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military 
construction projects of the Department of Defense (DOD). It 
includes funding authorizations for the construction and 
operation of military family housing as well as military 
construction for the reserve components, the defense agencies, 
and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program. It also provides authorization for the base closure 
accounts that fund military construction, environmental 
cleanup, and other activities required to implement the 
decisions in base closure rounds.
    The tables contained in this Act provide the project-level 
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized 
in Division B of this Act and summarize that funding by 
account.
    The fiscal year 2018 budget requested $10.4 billion for 
military construction and housing programs. Of this amount, 
$8.7 billion was requested for military construction, $1.4 
billion for the construction and operation of family housing, 
and $255.9 million for base closure activities.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 
for military construction, housing programs, and base closure 
activities totaling $10.5. The total amount authorized for 
appropriations reflects the committee's continuing commitment 
to invest in the recapitalization of DOD facilities and 
infrastructure. However, the committee is concerned with the 
cost of some projects and has withheld authorization of those 
projects until such time as better analysis can be performed to 
determine the requirements and lower cost alternatives. 
Furthermore, the committee is concerned with cost increases and 
schedule delays on previous projects that appear to be the 
result of failure to properly manage these projects. Therefore 
the committee has included a number of provisions to ensure 
better management and accountability.
    The committee also notes that the budget request includes 
funding for some projects beyond what can be executed in fiscal 
year 2018. While the committee includes the full authorization 
for these projects, it has provided only the increment of 
funding expected to be executed in the coming fiscal year.
Short title (sec. 2001)
    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
division B of this Act as the ``Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018.''
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by 
        law (sec. 2002)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the expiration date for authorizations in this Act for military 
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing 
projects, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization Security Investment Program as of October 1, 2022, 
or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2023, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2003)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide an 
effective date for titles XXI through XXVII and title XXIX of 
October 1, 2017 or the date of enactment of this Act.

                 TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1.1 billion for military construction and $183.0 million 
for family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2018.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1.1 billion for military construction and $152.0 million for 
family housing for fiscal year 2018.
    The budget request included $31.0 million for 22 homes on 
Kwajalein. There are currently 18 military families on 
Kwajalein. This project, and a planned phase 2 which would 
include an additional 30 homes for $37.0 million, would result 
in 52 homes at an average cost of $1.3 million. The committee 
does not include the authorization of this project. The 
committee also has withheld authorization of the funding for 
the new confinement facility at Joint Base Lewis-McChord 
pending a review of capacity and requirements throughout the 
military prison system.
    The committee recognizes the significant unfunded military 
construction and family housing requirements identified by the 
Chief of Staff of the Army and has included an additional $68.8 
million for many of these projects, including authorization of 
a new Enlisted Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas and an air 
traffic control tower at Fort Benning, Georgia. Further details 
on projects authorized can be found in section 2101 and section 
4601 of this Act.

Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction project for the active component of the 
Army for fiscal year 2018. The authorized amount is listed on 
an installation-by-installation basis.

Family housing (sec. 2102)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units 
for the Army for fiscal year 2018. This provision would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and 
storage facilities.

Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the active component military construction 
and family housing projects of the Army authorized for 
construction for fiscal year 2018. This provision would also 
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military 
construction and family housing projects for the active 
component of the Army. The state list contained in this report 
is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2014 project 
        (sec. 2104)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2101(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B 
of Public Law 113-66) for construction of an airfield 
operations complex at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, to 
include a standby generator capacity of 1,000 kilowatts.

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2015 project 
        (sec. 2105)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2101(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291) for construction of a command and 
control facility at Fort Shafter, Hawaii, to include 
construction of 15 megawatts of redundant power generation.

Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2014 project (sec. 
        2106)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 2101 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B 
of Public Law 113-66) for one project in Kyoga-Misaki, Japan, 
until October 1, 2018, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019, whichever is later.

Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2107)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 2101 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291) for four projects until October 1, 2018, 
or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is later.

                 TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1.6 billion for military construction and $85.0 million for 
family housing for the Department of the Navy for fiscal year 
2018.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1.6 billion for military construction and $43.0 million for 
family housing for fiscal year 2018.
    The budget request includes $60.0 million for the purchase 
of 4 acres adjacent to the Navy Yard. The committee does not 
include authorization for this project. The budget request also 
includes $40.9 million for family housing units on Guam. The 
committee does not include authorization for this project 
pending the results of a review of policies involving 
accompanied versus unaccompanied tours required elsewhere in 
this act. The committee further notes the identified lack of 
available workforce on Guam to perform this work absent 
approval of a new visa program for construction workers.
    The committee recognizes the significant unfunded military 
construction and family housing requirements identified by the 
Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine 
Corps and has included an additional $459.4 million for many of 
these projects including authorization of a pier replacement in 
San Diego; an F-35 simulator facility at Miramar, California; 
and a force protection entry control point at Kaneohe Bay, 
Hawaii. Further details on projects authorized can be found in 
section 2201 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Navy and Marine Corps military construction projects for fiscal 
year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units 
for the Navy for fiscal year 2018. This provision would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and 
storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to improve existing family housing 
units of the Department of the Navy in an amount not to exceed 
$36.3 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the active component military construction 
and family housing projects of the Department of the Navy 
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2018. This 
provision would also provide an overall limit on the amount 
authorized for military construction and family housing 
projects for the active components of the Navy and the Marine 
Corps. The state list contained in this report is the binding 
list of the specific projects authorized at each location.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2014 projects (sec. 
        2205)
    The committee recommends a provision that would further 
extend the authorization contained in section 2201 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(division B of Public Law 113-66), for three projects until 
October 1, 2018, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2206)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 2201 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291), for two projects until October 1, 2018, 
or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is later.

              TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1.7 billion for military construction and $85.0 million for 
family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2018.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$2.2 billion for military construction and $85.0 million for 
family housing for fiscal year 2018.
    The committee recognizes the significant unfunded military 
construction and family housing requirements identified by the 
Chief of Staff of the Air Force and has included an additional 
$265.5 million for many of these projects, including 
authorization of a fire rescue center at Altus Air Force Base 
and an Airmen dormitory at Little Rock Air Force Base, 
Arkansas. Further details on projects authorized can be found 
in section 2301 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 
        2301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2018. 
The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units 
for the Air Force for fiscal year 2018. This provision would 
also authorize funds for facilities that support family 
housing, including housing management offices, housing 
maintenance, and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to improve existing family 
housing units of the Department of the Air Force in an amount 
not to exceed $80.6 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the active component military construction 
and family housing projects of the Air Force authorized for 
construction for fiscal year 2018. This provision would also 
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military 
construction and family housing projects for the active 
component of the Air Force. The state list contained in this 
report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized 
at each location.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2017 
        projects (sec. 2305)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2301(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B 
of Public Law 114-328) for the construction of a gate complex 
at the installation at Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, 
to include the construction of a visitor control center, a 
traffic check house, an emergency power generator system, and a 
transfer switch.
    This provision would also modify the authorization 
contained in section 2301(b) of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public 
Law 114-328) for the purchase of 142 hectares of land on Tinian 
in the Northern Mariana Islands.
    Additionally this provision would modify the authorization 
contained in section 2902 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public 
Law 114-328) for the construction of a parking apron and 
taxiway at Chabelley Airfield, Djibouti, to include the 
construction of paved shoulders, hangar pads, and a cargo 
apron.
    Finally, this provision would modify the authorization 
contained in section 4601 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public 
Law 114-328) to strike the project title ``Consolidated 
Corrosion Facility add/alter'' and insert ``Consolidated 
Communication Facility add/alter''.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2306)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 2301 of the Military 
Construction Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B of Public Law 
113-291) for two projects until October 1, 2018, or the date of 
the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is later.

           TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $3.1 billion for military construction for the defense 
agencies for fiscal year 2018.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$2.6 billion for military construction for fiscal year 2018.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the defense agencies for 
fiscal year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to carry out energy resilience and 
conservation projects. The budget request included $150.0 
million for the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment 
Program (ERCIP). The committee recommends an increase of $26.5 
million to allow for power upgrades and standby generation at 
SCSC Wallops Island, Virginia; central energy plant upgrades at 
Fort Jackson, South Carolina; and an IH Water Project at NSA 
South Potomac, MD.
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the military construction and family housing 
projects of the defense agencies authorized for construction 
for fiscal year 2018. This provision would also provide an 
overall limit on the amount authorized for military 
construction and family housing projects for the defense 
agencies. The state list contained in this report is the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2017 project 
        (sec. 2404)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authority contained in section 2401(b) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B 
of Public Law 114-328) for the construction of the Sembach 
Elementary/Middle School Replacement at Kaiserslautern, Germany 
to allow the construction of an elementary school.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2014 projects (sec. 
        2405)
    The committee recommends a provision that would further 
extend the authorization contained in section 2401 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(division B of Public Law 113-66), as amended by the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B 
of Public Law 114-328), for three projects until October 1, 
2018, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for 
the military construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is 
later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2406)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 2401 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291) for nine projects until October 1, 2018, 
or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for the 
military construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is later.

                   TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $154.0 million for military construction in 
fiscal year 2018 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) Security Investment Program. The committee recommends 
the requested amount.

  Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
                                Program

Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program in an 
amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically authorized 
in section 2502 of this title and the amount of recoupment due 
to the United States for construction previously financed by 
the United States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations of $154.0 million for the U.S. contribution to 
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program for fiscal year 2018.

             Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions

Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec. 2511)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to accept four military construction 
projects totaling $105.5 million from the Republic of Korea as 
in-kind contributions.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2017 
        projects (sec. 2512)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2511 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B 
of Public Law 114-328) for the construction of the 8th Army 
Correctional Facility at Camp Humphreys, Republic of Korea, to 
include a level 1 correctional facility and a utility and tool 
storage building.
    The provision would also modify the authorization contained 
in section 2511 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public Law 114-328) for the 
renovation of the Special Operations Forces (SOF) Operations 
Facility at K-16 Air Base, Republic of Korea, to include a 
renovation of an operations administrative area.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $575 million for military construction in 
fiscal year 2018 for facilities for the National Guard and 
reserve components.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$850 million for military construction in fiscal year 2018 for 
facilities for the National Guard and reserve components. The 
detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state 
list table included in this report.
    The committee recognizes the significant unfunded military 
construction and family housing requirements identified by the 
military service chiefs and has included as additional $276.8 
million for many of these projects including authorization of 
an Army reserve center at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington 
and a maintenance facility at Westover Air Reserve Base, 
Massachusetts. Further details on projects authorized can be 
found in the tables in this title and section 4601 of this Act.

 Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of Appropriations

Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition 
        projects (sec. 2601)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the Army National Guard for 
fiscal year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the Army Reserve for fiscal 
year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land 
        acquisition projects (sec. 2603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine 
Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2018. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition 
        projects (sec. 2604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the Air National Guard for 
fiscal year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2605)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military construction projects for the Air Force Reserve for 
fiscal year 2018. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and Reserve (sec. 2606)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for the reserve component military construction 
projects authorized for construction for fiscal year 2018 in 
this Act. This provision would also provide an overall limit on 
the amount authorized for military construction projects for 
each of the reserve components of the military departments. The 
state list contained in this report is the binding list of the 
specific projects authorized at each location.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2015 project 
        (sec. 2611)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorizations contained in section 2602 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291) for construction of an Army Reserve 
Center in Starkville, Mississippi to allow for the acquisition 
of approximately 15 acres of land.
Extension of authorizations for certain fiscal year 2014 projects (sec. 
        2612)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in sections 2602, 2604, and 2605 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(division B of Public Law 113-66) for three projects until 
October 1, 2018 or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2613)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in sections 2602 and 2604 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 
(division B of Public Law 113-291) for two projects until 
October 1, 2018 or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019, whichever is later.

          TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

Summary and explanation of tables
    The budget request included $255.9 million for the ongoing 
cost of environmental remediation and other activities 
necessary to continue implementation of the 1988, 1991, 1993, 
1995, and 2005 Base Realignment and Closure rounds. The 
committee recommends $255.9 million for these efforts. The 
detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state 
list table included in this report.

Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and closure 
        activities funded through Department of Defense Base Closure 
        Account (sec. 2701)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 2018 for ongoing activities that 
are required to implement the decisions of the 1988, 1991, 
1993, 1995, and 2005 Base Realignment and Closure rounds.

Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and closure 
        (BRAC) round (sec. 2702)

    The committee remains opposed to another base realignment 
and closure (BRAC) round. Our military is entering a period of 
growth and modernization with a focus on increasing the overall 
readiness of the force. The committee must understand what our 
future force structure will look like--its size and 
composition, how it will train, and the infrastructure required 
to sustain it--before we consider another BRAC round. Our 
nation cannot afford to spend precious resources that are 
needed to improve readiness on another BRAC round, given funds 
are still being appropriated for prior BRAC rounds. The 
committee is also concerned that the Secretary of Defense has 
yet to provide the force structure plan, the infrastructure 
inventory, and the assessment of infrastructure necessary to 
support the force structure that were required to be prepared 
under section 2815 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). This congressionally 
directed report with requirements based on our military's 
ability to deter and defeat future threats is necessary in 
order to evaluate any future base realignment and closure 
round.

       TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes

Authority to use expiring funds for certain military construction 
        projects (sec. 2801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
funds that would otherwise expire to be used for the sole 
purpose of the expansion of a cemetery, in the case of the 
Army, and for the enhancement of installation security, in the 
case of the Navy, by purchasing property that is voluntarily 
offered for sale.
Extension of temporary, limited authority to use operation and 
        maintenance funds for construction projects in certain areas 
        outside the United States (sec. 2802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to use operation and maintenance funds for 
limited construction projects in certain areas outside the 
United States.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

Authority to use energy cost savings for energy resilience, mission 
        assurance, and weather damage repair and prevention measures 
        (sec. 2811)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2912 of title 10, United States Code, to allow energy 
savings funds to be used for weather damage, mission assurance, 
and energy resilience.
Modification of unspecified minor military construction project 
        authority to cover correction of deficiencies that are threats 
        to installation resilience (sec. 2812)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2805(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to include 
both safety risks and military mission risks.
Land exchange valuation of property with reduced development that 
        limits encroachment on military installations (sec. 2813)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 159 of title 10, United States Code, in order to ensure 
that properties where development has been voluntarily 
restrained for the purpose of protecting military installations 
are fairly valued as part of any land swap between the 
Department of Defense and a public or private landowner.
Treatment of storm water collection systems as utility systems (sec. 
        2814)
    The committee includes a provision that amend section 
2688(i)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to include storm 
water treatment systems in the definition of utility systems.
Access to military installations by transportation network companies 
        (sec. 2815)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 346 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to include transportation 
network companies to the list of transportation companies that 
are allowed, with proper clearance, to access military 
installations for the purposes of transporting military 
personnel to and from the base.

                      Subtitle C--Land Conveyances

Land conveyance, Natick Soldier Systems Center, Massachusetts (sec. 
        2821)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to use competitive procedures to 
convey the parcels of real property consisting of approximately 
98 acres located in the vicinity of Hudson, Wayland, and 
Needham, Massachusetts, that are the sites of military family 
housing supporting military personnel assigned to the U.S. Army 
Natick Soldier Systems Center.
Land conveyance, Army and Air Force exchange service property, Dallas, 
        Texas (sec. 2822)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to allow the Army and Air Force 
Exchange Service to convey to an entity all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to a parcel of real 
property consisting of approximately 7.857 acres located at 
8901 Autobahn Drive, Dallas, Texas.
Land conveyances, certain former peacekeeper ICBM facilities in Wyoming 
        (sec. 2823)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the conveyance, at no cost to the Air Force, of the missile 
alert facility and launch control center at the Quebec #1 
Missile Alert Facility for the Peacekeeper ICBM facilities of 
the 190 Missile Group at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming to 
the Wyoming Department of State Parks and Cultural Resources.
Land exchange, Naval Industrial Ordnance Reserve Plant, Sunnyvale, 
        California (sec. 2824)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of the Navy to convey to an entity all right, title, 
and interest of the United States in and to the parcel of real 
property comprising Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant 
(NIROP) located in Sunnyvale, California in exchange for 
property interests that meet the readiness requirements of the 
Department of the Navy, as determined by the Secretary. This 
provision would restrict the Secretary from making such a 
conveyance until after submitting an assessment to the 
congressional defense committees of the feasibility and 
advisability of transferring, in whole or in part, functions 
currently performed at NIROP to real property already in the 
Navy inventory and involved in supporting the fleet ballistic 
missile program.
Land exchange, Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, Texas (sec. 2825)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of the Navy to convey to an entity all right, title, 
and interest of the United States in and to the parcel of real 
property consisting of 44 acres known as Peary Place 
Transmitter Site in Nueces County associated with the Naval Air 
Station Corpus Christi, Texas.

          Subtitle D--Project Management and Oversight Reforms

Project management oversight reforms
    The committee is concerned with the number of construction 
projects that are experiencing significant schedule delays and 
cost increases. The recent notification that the Hospital at 
Fort Bliss, Texas would cost an additional $250.0 million 
because of ``omissions'' and ``design errors'' is just one 
example of poor management of these projects with little to no 
accountability for those responsible. With other significant 
projects planned, including a new facility for the National 
Geospatial Agency and a hospital replacement at Fort Leonard 
Wood, it is essential that the Secretary of Defense ensure the 
proper oversight and management of the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers and Navy Facilities Command and, if these 
organizations are not able to consistently deliver projects on 
budget and on schedule, seek alternatives. Therefore the 
committee recommends a number of provisions that would increase 
transparency on the causes and individuals responsible for 
significant cost increases and schedule delays and would 
advance contracting with outside organizations if problems 
continue.
Notification requirement for certain cost overruns and schedule delays 
        (sec. 2831)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense 
committees of any military construction or military family 
housing project that has a cost overrun or a schedule delay of 
25 percent or more.
Limited authority for private sector supervision of military 
        construction projects in event of extensive overruns or project 
        delays (sec. 2832)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2851(a) of title 10, United States Code, to allow the 
Secretary of Defense to arrange for private sector direction or 
supervision of projects where the Chief of Engineers or the 
Commander of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command had cost 
overruns or project delays of more than 5 percent on at least 
10 percent of the projects for which either was responsible in 
the most recent fiscal year.
Annual report on cost overruns and schedule delays (sec. 2833)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees an annual report on military construction projects 
and military family housing projects that had cost overruns or 
schedule delays of 5 percent or more.
Report on design errors and omissions related to Fort Bliss hospital 
        replacement project (sec. 2834)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on design errors and omissions related to 
the hospital replacement project at Fort Bliss, Texas. The 
report should identify ``design errors'' and ``omissions'' that 
led to the $245.0 million cost increase for the replacement 
project and identify the organization and individual 
responsible for the design errors and omissions. Additionally, 
the report describe the actions taken by the Secretary of 
Defense to hold such organizations and individuals responsible 
for the errors and omissions. This report should be due no 
later than December 1, 2017.
    Additionally, this provision would prohibit the obligations 
of funds appropriated for the replacement project at Fort Bliss 
from being utilized until the report is submitted and a written 
certification is submitted outlining the steps taken to 
mitigate such overruns in the future of this project.
Report on cost increase and delay related to USSTRATCOM command and 
        control facility project at Offutt Air Force Base (sec. 2835)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the 16-month schedule delay and 10 
percent cost increase related to the United States Strategic 
Command command and control facility project at Offutt Air 
Force Base, Nebraska. The report should include the name of the 
organizations and/or persons responsible for the delay and cost 
increase as well as a description of actions that the Secretary 
has taken to hold such individuals or organizations accountable 
for these problems.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Annual Department of Defense energy management reports (sec. 2841)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2925 (a) of title 10, United States Code, to ensure the 
Department of Defense distinguishes between planned and 
unplanned power outages and establishes critical mission 
resilience metrics in the installation energy report.
Aggregation of energy efficiency and energy resilience projects in life 
        cycle costs (sec. 2842)
    The committee recommends a provision that would ensure the 
Department of Defense's energy projects consider life cycle 
costs.
Authority of the Secretary of the Air Force to accept lessee 
        improvements at Air Force Plant 42 (sec. 2843)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to permit the lessee of Air 
Force Plant 42 to make improvements to the plant or facility as 
necessary for the development or production of military weapons 
systems, munitions, components, or supplies.
Prohibition on use of funds for Kwajalein project (sec. 2844)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of funds to pursue the proposed 2-phase 52-home family 
housing project for 18 military personnel on Kwajalein. The 
committee is concerned that the project would cost $1.3 million 
per unit. Therefore, the committee does not include 
authorization for the Department to proceed with this project, 
including planning and design.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to 
explore alternative structures, such as those used by U.S. 
contractors on Kwajalein, that are a fraction of the price and 
can be used in similar remote locations where construction 
costs are prohibitively expensive.
Energy resilience (sec. 2845)
    The committee recommends a provision that would: (1) Ensure 
the readiness of the armed forces for their military missions 
by making energy security and resilience the focus of the 
Department's energy policy; (2) Require energy security and 
resilience in the cost-benefit analysis for the procurement of 
energy; and (3) Pursue projects that provide power directly to 
a military facility or installation in the event of an outage.
    The committee continues to be very concerned over the 
growing threat of cyberattacks, physical attacks, electro 
magnetic pulse events, weather-related outages, and their 
collective risk on readiness.
    For example, the committee notes that a lack of resilience 
caused a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) to lose its feed 
during a mission, causing a terrorist target to escape. 
Furthermore, a deliberate power outage at Incirlik Air Base 
left the Air Force without a grid power supply for almost a 
week, significantly reducing the number of airstrikes flown in 
support of the Syria mission.
    Additionally, the Department has informed the committee of 
an increasing trend in utility outages on military 
installations--both domestic and abroad--notably 127 in fiscal 
year 2015 that lasted 8 hours or longer. The majority of the 
outages were caused by a lack of resilience, costing the 
Department over $179,000 each day.
    The committee notes that a growing number of the 
Department's missions, whether RPA sorties or cyber, are fought 
from its installations. Therefore, an enhanced policy of energy 
resilience is necessary to improve the Department's readiness.
Consideration of energy security and energy resilience in awarding 
        energy and fuel contracts for military installations (sec. 
        2846)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2922a of title 10, United States Code, to ensure the 
Secretary concerned prioritizes energy security and resilience 
when considering energy or fuel contracts for military 
installations.
Requirement to address energy resilience in exercising utility system 
        conveyance authority (sec. 2847)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2688(g) of title 10, United States Code, that would 
require that utility systems be managed and operated in a 
manner consistent with energy resilience requirements and 
metrics.
In-kind lease payments; prioritization of utility services that promote 
        energy resilience (sec. 2848)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2667(c) of the title 10, United States Code, to 
prioritize energy resilience as in-kind consideration.
Disclosure of beneficial ownership by foreign persons of high security 
        space leased by the Department of Defense (sec. 2849)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to identify the beneficial owner of 
potential high security leased space. If any beneficial owner 
of such space is a foreign entity, the Department would be 
required to notify the tenant so that appropriate precautions 
could be taken.

                       Items of Special Interest

Bachelor Enlisted Quarters conditions
    The committee has concerns that the conditions of some 
Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQs) across the military services 
have fallen below a desirable level of habitability. The 
committee recognizes that the scarcity of military construction 
(MILCON) funding and a requirement to spend limited resources 
on emerging missions has caused the Services to make difficult 
decisions. However, the failure to construct new BEQs has 
created a situation where aging buildings are requiring 
increasing amounts of Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and 
Modernization (FSRM) funds in order to keep BEQs functioning, 
which is increasing the degradation of other installation 
infrastructure because of insufficient FSRM funds for routine 
maintenance. Furthermore, some servicemembers are required to 
reside in BEQs that fail to meet necessary standards, impacting 
work performance, morale, and retention rates. The committee 
strongly encourages the Secretaries of the Services to increase 
the prioritization of their BEQs when considering MILCON 
submissions.
Joint Test and Training Operations Center
    The committee commends the Army and the Air Force for 
establishing the Joint Test and Training Operations Center 
(JTTOC) at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR). The JTTOC de-
conflicts schedules between high-demand testing and training 
missions in the region. The JTTOC has increased real-time 
capability and airspace availability, making more effective use 
of the ranges, restricted airspace, and other airspace units. 
The committee applauds the progress made to-date and encourages 
the Army and Air Force to continue working together to create 
new efficiencies and optimize the use of WSMR's zero-to-
infinity airspace and surrounding airspace.
Life cycle construction materials
    The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense 
to make infrastructure and military construction investments 
based on life cycle cost analyses that demonstrate the lowest 
overall long-term costs needed to procure, install, maintain, 
and replace each project relative to the longest extension of 
service life. Such project materials may include, for example, 
low-logistics materials and structural systems for rapid force 
projection; infrastructure materials such as beams, girders, 
decking, and pilings for port and pier facilities construction; 
bridge construction, including rapidly deployable lightweight 
bridges; building construction on installations, such as cross-
laminated timber; forward operating base (FOB) and contingency 
base construction; maritime and air shipping, including 
composite maritime shipping containers, vessels and high-speed 
boats, such as the Mark V Special Operations Craft; additive 
manufacturing using cellulose-reinforced thermoplastics; and 
materials for ballistic and blast protection for installations, 
FOBs, and contingency bases. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense 
committees with a briefing on the use of these materials to 
reduce life cycle costs.
Lincoln Laboratory
    The committee recognizes the critical role that Lincoln 
Laboratory plays in conducting research and developing 
technologies that address critical national security 
challenges. The committee notes that the National Defense 
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) 
included $40.0 million, as requested by the Air Force, for the 
planning and design of two military construction projects to 
support the recapitalization of facilities to support Lincoln 
Laboratories. The committee understands that the Air Force 
intends to award an architectural and engineering contact for 
the design of these facilities by early October 2017 and 
encourages the Air Force to maintain this schedule, in order to 
support construction of the Advanced Microelectronics 
Integration Facility currently programmed for fiscal year 2019.
    The committee commends the Secretary of the Air Force for 
programming these investments and for committing to the 
recapitalization of the facilities and Lincoln Laboratory. The 
committee supports these important recapitalization efforts in 
order to keep the Department of Defense and the military 
services at the cutting edge of technology.
Major range and test facility bases
    The committee remains concerned that while the Department 
of Defense's major range and test facility bases (MRTFBs) have 
unspecified minor military construction authority up to $6.0 
million, based on section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, 
the Department has yet to adequately exercise and use its 
authority.
    Furthermore, the committee notes section 2806 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) amended the Defense Laboratory Modernization Pilot 
Program to specifically include MRTFBs. Under this pilot 
program, the funding limitation is $150.0 million and the 
authority currently expires at the end of fiscal year 2020.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly urges the Secretary of 
Defense to consider and use existing authorities to the maximum 
extent practicable, in order to make the appropriate 
infrastructure improvements necessary for the vital missions 
conducted at MRTFBs.
Review of DOD utility privatization
    The committee notes that Department of Defense (DOD) 
installations serve as platforms from which the Department 
employs forces across the full spectrum of military operations. 
To accomplish their missions, these installations rely on the 
use of utilities systems, such as the equipment, fixtures, 
pipes, wires, and other structures used in the distribution of 
electric power and natural gas; the treatment and distribution 
of water; and the collection and treatment of wastewater. 
However, historically, military installations have been unable 
to upgrade and maintain reliable utility systems fully due to 
inadequate funding and competing installation management 
priorities.
    In 1997, DOD decided that utility privatization (UP) was 
the preferred method for improving utility systems and services 
because privatization would allow installations to benefit from 
private sector financing and efficiencies. With private sector 
financing, installations could more quickly obtain major 
upgrades to their utility systems and pay for these 
improvements over time. Moreover, privatization of certain 
functions allows military commanders to focus on core defense 
missions and functions by relieving them of activities that can 
be done more efficiently and effectively by others.
    Prior Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports have 
identified challenges with DOD's UP efforts. In 2005, the GAO 
identified several management weaknesses in DOD's 
implementation of the UP program. In 2006, GAO reported that 
DOD's progress in implementing the UP program had been slower 
than expected and management concerns remained.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate DOD's UP program. The GAO 
review should assess the extent to which: (1) DOD has fully 
identified its priorities for privatization and achieved its UP 
goals; (2) The military services have complied with existing 
DOD requirements when implementing UP projects; (3) DOD has 
experienced any challenges in awarding and executing UP 
contracts; (4) DOD measures the performance of the UP contracts 
and whether or not DOD complies with industry standards; and 
(5) DOD has developed a means to have reasonable assurance the 
privatized utilities' operators are addressing reliability 
concerns and potential cyber threats to industrial control 
systems or other utilities' systems equipment.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to brief the Committees on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 
February 28, 2018, on preliminary findings of the Comptroller 
General's evaluation with a final report to be completed by 
March 30, 2018.
Unified Facilities Criteria for elevator design
    Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) and Unified Facilities 
Guide Specifications (UFGS) provide guidance for the design and 
construction of facilities and the acquisition of building 
system components by the Department of Defense. In general, the 
UFC and UFGS system relies, to the maximum extent practicable, 
upon commercial best practices. The committee is concerned that 
recent Departmental guidance in elevator design departs from 
these practices by prohibiting the use of machine roomless 
elevator designs and equipment that are widely and increasingly 
utilized in the private sector.
    The committee is also concerned that the guidance provides 
generally for construction specifications that depart markedly 
from established model building codes. The committee is unaware 
of any data regarding operational, safety, or other 
considerations that would recommend against the use of machine 
roomless elevator designs and equipment. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to ensure that UFC and UFGS guidance 
on elevator design reflects current commercial best practices 
and that such guidance permits the Department to acquire 
contemporary building transportation systems widely available 
on the market, unless the Secretary certifies that data are 
available demonstrating that there are operational or safety 
considerations.
Window fall prevention
    The Committee recognizes the risks of unintentional falls 
from windows in military family housing. According to the Safe 
Kids Worldwide 2015 Report to the Nation; Protecting Children 
in Your Home, about 8 children under age 5 die each year from 
falling out a window, and more than 3,300 are injured seriously 
enough to go to the hospital. Deaths and injuries often occur 
when children push against window screens or climb onto 
furniture located near to an open window. There have been a 
number of injuries and at least one death from children falling 
from windows in military housing.
    As such, the committee urges the Department of Defense to 
update its Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) for Family Housing 
(UFC 4-711-01) to require that all new and existing residential 
buildings have corrosion-resistant screens that meet the ANSI/
SMA6001 specifications for at least Medium loads, or successor 
standard; or that windows shall be equipped with window fall 
prevention screens, guards, or other devices that comply with 
ASTM F2006 or ASTM F2090, or a successor standard.
    The Committee also urges DOD to: (1) Specify that military 
housing privatization partners shall be required to include 
window fall prevention screens, guards, or other devices for 
military housing and shall not be allowed to seek waivers or 
exemptions; (2) Conduct an oversight program to ensure that all 
military housing be equipped with window fall prevention 
screens, guards, or other devices; and (3) Establish an 
awareness campaign that educates families on window fall risks 
and window fall prevention measures.

   TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2901)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
one Army military construction project for fiscal year 2018 for 
overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 
        2902)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2018 
for overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2903)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for military construction in the overseas 
contingency operations account for fiscal year 2018.
Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2904)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization contained in section 4602 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291) for two projects until October 1, 2018, 
or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds for the 
military construction for fiscal year 2019, whichever is later.

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

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

                                Overview

    Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for atomic energy 
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
2018, including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of 
plant and capital equipment; research and development; nuclear 
weapons; naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration 
and waste management; operating expenses; and other expenses 
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy 
Organization Act (Public Law 95-91). This title authorizes 
appropriations in three categories: (1) National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA); (2) defense environmental 
cleanup; and (3) other defense activities.
    The committee recommends a provision allocating funding 
consistent with the funding allocations in section 4701.
    The committee notes that the severity of the event at Waste 
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) necessitates biannual briefings to 
the congressional defense committees on actions taken towards 
bringing WIPP toward full operational status, including key 
milestones, status of any capital projects under Department of 
Energy Order 413.1, as well as obligations and expenditures. 
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to review these biannual updates and report to the 
congressional defense committees on significant findings and 
trends.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to continue its ongoing evaluation of the Hanford Waste 
Treatment Plant in the areas of cost-schedule performance, 
technology readiness levels, contractor assurance system, and 
other areas to be mutually agreed upon, and the committee 
further directs the Comptroller General of the United States to 
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committee no 
later than February 28, 2018.
    Finally, section 3137 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) requires a 5-year 
assessment by a joint committee of the National Academies of 
Science and the National Academy of Public Administration of 
the report, ``Governance and Management of the Nuclear Security 
Enterprise: Report to Congress,'' December 30, 2016. The joint 
panel has endorsed three overarching themes of review: (1) 
clarifying roles, responsibilities, authorities, and 
accountability; (2) mitigating burdensome practices; and (3) 
enabling change to be achieved and sustained. While the joint 
committee can assess the first two items, item (3) requires the 
NNSA to development a methodology not only to track 
implementation but also to assess whether the recommendation 
has met the objectives it was intended to achieve. The 
committee directs the Administrator of the NNSA to report no 
later than February 28, 2018, on the implementation of a 
methodology similar to that developed by the Department of 
Defense's Office of Cost Analysis and Program Estimation, which 
not only tracks implementation of recommendations of the 
Department's Nuclear Enterprise Review but also determines 
whether the recommendations have achieved the change they were 
intended to achieve. This methodology should be of assistance 
to the joint committee in its review of item (3).

         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriation of funds for the activities of the Department 
of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration.
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's 
defense environmental clean-up activities.
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's other 
defense activities.
Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's 
nuclear energy activities.

   Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Assessment and development of prototype nuclear weapons of foreign 
        countries (sec. 3111)
    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
section 2660 of title 50, United States Code, (Design and use 
of prototypes of nuclear weapons for intelligence purposes) and 
incorporate its functions into section 2538b of title 50, 
United States Code (Stockpile Responsiveness Program). Both 
programs were created in part to exercise all capabilities 
required to design, develop, engineer, produce, and deploy 
nuclear weapons, but only the latter has received funding 
through the appropriations process. The committee strongly 
supports this mission and supports the request of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration to combine the two programs 
into one fully-funded program.
Use of funds for construction and project support activities relating 
        to MOX facility (sec. 3112)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Energy to carry out construction and project 
support activities for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication 
Facility (MFFF) with any funds authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available for such purposes for fiscal year 
2018.
    The Secretary may waive this requirement to carry out 
construction and project support activities related to the MFFF 
project if the Secretary submits to the congressional defense 
committees: (1) The commitment of the Secretary to remove 
plutonium intended to be disposed of in the MOX facility from 
South Carolina and ensure a sustainable future for the Savannah 
River Site and (2) Certification that an alternative option 
exists for carrying out the plutonium disposition program for 
the same amount of plutonium identified that was to be disposed 
of in the MOX facility is completed meeting the requirements of 
National Nuclear Security Administration Business Operating 
Procedure ``BOP-03.07, Analysis of Alternatives'' dated March 
14, 2016; details of any required statutory or regulatory 
changes to complete the alternative option, and that the total 
lifecycle cost, consistent with Government Accountability 
Office cost estimating and assessment best practices as found 
in GAO-09-3SP ``GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide,'' 
that the alternative option would be less than half of the 
estimated remaining lifecycle cost of the mixed-oxide fuel 
program, estimates that should be of comparable accuracy.
Repeal, consolidation, and modification of reporting requirements (sec. 
        3113)
    The committee recommends modifying certain National Nuclear 
Security Administration reporting requirements to streamline 
such requirements for efficiency or eliminate requirements for 
programs that no longer exist.
National Nuclear Security Administration personnel system (sec. 3114)
    The committee recommends a provision that would adapt the 
pay banding and performance-based pay adjustment demonstration 
project carried out by the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) since 2008 into a permanent alternative 
personnel system.
Annual reports on unfunded priorities of National Nuclear Security 
        Administration (sec. 3115)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) to submit to the congressional defense committees, no 
later than 10 days after the date on which the budget for each 
fiscal year is submitted to Congress, a list, in priority 
order, of the unfunded requirements for the NNSA. The committee 
notes that section 222a of title 10, United States Code, 
requires the service chiefs and the commanders of the combatant 
commands to submit to Congress a list of unfunded requirements. 
The NNSA has not followed this practice but is a vital 
component to the safety and security of the United States. Each 
requirement in the list shall include a summary description of 
the priority, including the objectives to be achieved if such 
priority is funded and the additional amount of funds 
recommended.

                              Budget Items

National Nuclear Security Administration research and development 
        certification and safety
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $196.8 million for research and 
development certification and safety. The committee notes that 
these programs constitute the current investment in technology 
maturation for future systems, such as the interoperable 
warhead series, and also support the subcritical experiments 
necessary for stockpile stewardship and management. In order to 
meet anticipated needs in this program, the committee 
recommends an increase of $20.9 million in research and 
development certification and safety for a total of $217.7 
million.
Enhanced capabilities for subcritical experiments
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration included $50.8 million for enhanced capabilities 
for subcritical experiments. The committee notes that funding 
at this level is not expected to allow for completion of the 
radiography project on time in 2024. This capability is 
necessary to obtain experimental results in support of 
stockpile stewardship and management as well as modern 
configuration changes to support the sustainment program 
schedule. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$15.0 million in enhanced capabilities for subcritical 
experiments for a total of $65.8 million.
National Nuclear Security Administration enhanced surety
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $39.7 million for enhanced 
surety. The committee notes that the NNSA reduced funding for 
this program in order to support other NNSA priorities. 
Investment in this area is necessary to meet technology 
maturation goals, and to meet future stockpile requirements and 
insertion opportunities, such as the interoperable warhead 
series. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$12.3 million in enhanced surety for a total of $52.0 million.
Stockpile Responsiveness Program
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $40.0 million for the Stockpile 
Responsiveness Program. The committee strongly supports this 
program and recommends an increase of $10.0 million in 
Stockpile Responsiveness for a total of $50.0 million. This 
program is necessary to exercise the spectrum of capabilities 
required to develop and manufacture nuclear weapons to ensure 
that the U.S. nuclear deterrent remains secure, reliable, 
credible, and responsive.
Inertial confinement facility operations
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $334.8 million for inertial 
confinement fusion and high yield facility operations and 
target production. Increased shot rates across inertial 
confinement facilities would better support the Science, 
Advanced Simulation and Computing, and Directed Stockpile Work 
programs. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of 
$12.0 million in facility operations and target production for 
a total of $346.8 million. These operations are necessary for 
the successful execution of the NNSA Stockpile Stewardship and 
Management Plan.
National Nuclear Security Administration additive manufacturing
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $12.0 million for additive 
manufacturing. The committee notes that additive manufacturing 
has the potential to decrease production schedules, design 
cycles, and production costs for NNSA projects. Further 
research and investment in infrastructure is necessary to 
understand how additive manufacturing can be applied in this 
field. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
million in additive manufacturing for a total of $24.0 million.
National Nuclear Security Administration component manufacturing 
        development
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $38.6 million for component 
manufacturing development within the advanced manufacturing 
development program. The committee notes that the NNSA 
decreased funding for this program from prior years in order to 
support other NNSA priorities. The committee believes that 
immediate investment in this program will improve production 
efficiency and support component insertion in current and 
future systems. In order to restore funding to prior year 
levels, the committee recommends an increase of $36.4 million 
in component manufacturing development for a total of $75.0 
million.
National Nuclear Security Administration deferred maintenance
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $360.0 million for maintenance 
and repair of facilities and $427.3 million for 
recapitalization. The committee notes the risks and 
inefficiencies for both safety and programs posed by the poor 
condition of NNSA facilities and infrastructure across the 
nuclear enterprise. Therefore, in order to reduce the backlog 
of deferred maintenance, the committee recommends an increase 
of $50.0 million to maintenance and repair of facilities for a 
total of $410.0 million and an increase of $100.0 million in 
recapitalization for a total of $527.3 million.
Defense Nuclear Security deferred maintenance
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $687.0 million for Defense 
Nuclear Security operations and maintenance. The committee 
notes that facilities operated by the Defense Nuclear Security 
enterprise face a similar challenge with deferred maintenance 
to that of the rest of the NNSA enterprise. Therefore, to speed 
up execution of critical security infrastructure projects, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in operations 
and maintenance for a total of $692.0 million.
International nuclear security program
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $337.1 million for global 
material security. To support the ongoing efforts of the NNSA, 
the committee recommends an increase of $100.0 million in 
global material security for a total of $437.1 million. This 
program directly supports the International Atomic Energy 
Agency with technical expertise, works with international 
governments to detect and deter nuclear smuggling, and prevents 
nuclear and radiological material from being used against the 
United States and its interests. The additional funding shall 
be apportioned as follows: $20.0 million for international 
nuclear security; $20.0 million for radiological security; and 
$60.0 million for nuclear smuggling detection.
Nonproliferation and arms control
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $129.7 million for 
nonproliferation and arms control. To support the ongoing 
efforts by the NNSA, the committee recommends an increase of 
$70.3 million in nonproliferation and arms control for a total 
of $200.0 million. The threat of global nuclear proliferation 
continues to grow, and this program is vital to reducing the 
risk of nuclear and dual-use materials proliferation, 
equipment, and technology, while playing an essential role in 
supporting arms control treaty and agreement implementation. 
The additional funding shall be apportioned as follows: $60.3 
million for nuclear verification and $10.0 million for 
international nuclear safeguards.
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication facility
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) contained $270.0 million in 
nonproliferation construction for the Mixed Oxide Fuel 
Fabrication Facility (MFFF). According to the budget request, 
this funding is for activities in support of a decision to 
terminate the MFFF project in fiscal year 2018.
    The committee is disappointed in the lack of progress made 
on MFFF despite repeated concerns regarding its cost and 
management expressed by Congress, the Government Accountability 
Office, and other independent groups. The Department of 
Defense's failure to provide an updated performance baseline 
for MFFF as directed in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and its failure to 
submit the owner's agent report as directed by the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) are particularly troubling. Meanwhile, the committee is 
concerned by the lack of specificity in the proposed dilute and 
disposal alternative despite direction to address several 
aspects of this approach in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and report 
language accompanying S. 2943, the Senate-passed version of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328). Furthermore, the committee is concerned that, if 
the MFFF project is terminated at a later date, NNSA has not 
yet considered what the MFFF complex would be used for in lieu 
of its current mission.
    In light of the failure of the Department of Energy to 
substantiate the viability of its alternative to MFFF, the 
committee recommends an additional $80.0 million in 
nonproliferation construction for the MFFF for a total of 
$350.0 million, and it directs the Department of Energy to 
continue construction. Additional measures pertaining to MFFF 
are contained in title 31 of this Act.
Naval Reactors deferred maintenance
    The budget request for Naval Reactors included $466.9 
million for operations and infrastructure. The committee notes 
that Naval Reactors owns aging and excess facilities that pose 
safety and program risks and environmental liabilities. 
Therefore, in order to increase the pace of remediation, 
dismantlement, and disposal of inactive Naval Reactors 
facilities and to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog in 
operational facilities, the committee recommends an increase of 
$38.0 million in Naval Reactors operations and infrastructure 
for a total of $504.9 million.

                       Items of Special Interest

Common financial reporting
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to periodically review, on a biannual basis beginning in 
fiscal year 2018 and through 2022, the National Nuclear 
Security Administration's (NNSA) financial integration efforts 
and to report to the congressional defense committees on NNSA's 
progress in implementing a common financial reporting system as 
required in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). The committee has an interest 
in understanding NNSA's experience with financial integration 
and in ensuring that efforts to complete this integration are 
effective. The committee directs the first of the Comptroller 
General's reviews to examine the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's efforts to integrate financial systems at its 
Y-12 National Security Complex and Pantex Plant as part of the 
effort to combine the two sites' management and operating 
contracts.
Competition in contracting
    The committee believes competition is essential to 
efficient and effective use of taxpayer resources. However, the 
committee is concerned that unpredictability in contracting 
schedules of the Department of Energy (DOE), including the 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), could 
negatively affect competition. Specifically, and with 
particular respect to large contracts for management and 
operations (M&O), decontamination and decommissioning (D&D), 
and remediation, the committee is concerned that qualified 
entities may be less willing to undertake the expenses 
necessary to participate in a process that is prone to delay 
and reconsideration. Such an eventuality does not serve the 
interests of the Department or the taxpayer. The committee's 
concerns are amplified by the value of contracts planned for 
the next decade, which is expected to be around $60.0 billion. 
Accordingly, the committee encourages both DOE and NNSA to 
improve the stability and reliability of its schedule for 
releasing draft requests for proposals, requests for proposals, 
and awarding contracts. Further, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Energy to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees, not later than 60 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, on the schedule of major contract awards 
and procurements expected in the next 18 months funded under 
Atomic Energy Defense Activities.
Comptroller General review of high explosives capability
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to review the National Nuclear Security Administration's 
(NNSA) high-explosives (HE) capability. The committee 
recognizes that HE are a vital nuclear weapons component and 
that it is critical that NNSA maintain both a robust research 
and development (R&D) program as well as a production 
capability. Maintaining this capability across multiple NNSA 
sites, while perhaps necessary, is an expensive and potentially 
risky undertaking. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Comptroller General of the United States to: (1) identify all 
Department of Energy (DOE) and NNSA HE R&D and production 
capabilities specific to nuclear weapons, the justification for 
these sites, and what is known about the costs to maintain 
them; (2) examine DOE's projected requirements for HE 
capabilities to support the stockpile and work for others; (3) 
compare these requirements to current capabilities to identify 
any gaps or duplication in these capabilities; and 4) assess 
how NNSA plans for its HE capability and the extent to which it 
manages this capability as a strategic material.
    The Comptroller General of the United States should provide 
to the congressional defense committees a briefing within 270 
days of the enactment of this Act with a full report to follow.
Comptroller General review of Kansas City Plant capabilities
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to review the Kansas City Plant's staffing plans and 
capabilities to meet national security requirements. The 
Comptroller General shall provide an update of the review to 
the congressional defense committees no later than February 28, 
2018, with a final report to follow.
    The National Nuclear Security Administration's Kansas City 
Plant is responsible for producing non-nuclear components for 
Life Extension Programs (LEPs). The Kansas City Plant, which is 
currently producing components for two LEPs, will soon see its 
requirements double to accommodate four LEPs. Its timely 
production of components for Sandia National Laboratories is 
essential for maintaining LEP schedules.
Comptroller General review of plutonium oxide feedstock production 
        capacity
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to assess the Department of Energy's (DOE) current 
capacity and plans to meet the feedstock production needs of 
the plutonium disposition program, including the status of the 
Advanced Recovery and Integrated Extraction System (ARIES) and 
whether there are any potential alternatives to ARIES for 
feedstock production not later than May 1, 2018.
    The DOE's approaches for disposing of excess defense 
plutonium require that nuclear weapons pits from dismantled 
U.S. nuclear weapons are disassembled and that weapons-grade 
plutonium from these pits is converted into plutonium oxide 
feedstock. In 2012, DOE canceled plans for constructing a 
stand-alone facility where this work would take place and 
determined it would rely on existing facilities, particularly 
the Plutonium Facility 4 (PF-4) at Los Alamos National Lab 
(LANL), to accomplish feedstock production. The National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) operates the ARIES 
project, which is the technology development and demonstration 
project for disassembling pits and converting the resulting 
plutonium into oxide, within PF-4. However, in a 2009 report, 
NNSA concluded that the ARIES project at LANL would not be a 
viable option to perform the entire pit disassembly and 
conversion mission. Moreover, NNSA stated that the ARIES 
project would be unable to sustain the annual output of 
plutonium oxide feedstock necessary to support plutonium 
disposition through the mixed oxide fuel option. NNSA reached 
this conclusion in part because the nuclear weapons research 
and production missions that occupy most of the space at PF-4 
take precedence over other priorities at the facility.
    More recently, an independent assessment of DOE's options 
for plutonium disposition published by Aerospace in April 2015 
concluded that the production of plutonium oxide feedstock was 
a major risk factor for increasing costs. Aerospace did not 
assess the adequacy of the existing and proposed facilities to 
support the physics, chemistry, and metallurgical processes 
required for plutonium disposition. However, GAO's reporting on 
this subject in 2010 noted that there were a number of key 
technologies for pit disassembly and conversion that had not 
attained an appropriate technology readiness level.
    Given the importance of feedstock production to the success 
of U.S. plutonium disposition efforts, as well as the cost 
implications of delays to feedstock production, the committee 
is concerned that DOE may not have produced adequate plans for 
feedstock production. Specifically, the committee is concerned 
that the current capacity of the ARIES project, as well as the 
earlier planned use of H canyon for feedstock production, may 
not be sufficient to meet the needs of the plutonium 
disposition program and that competing priorities for space at 
PF-4 may interfere with feedstock production efforts.
National Nuclear Security Administration arms control research and 
        development plan
    The committee notes that Annex I, Section N of the Joint 
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provides for the long-term 
presence of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 
Iran using modern technologies. This section allows the IAEA to 
utilize internationally accepted modern technologies for 
inspection and verification of Iran's compliance with the 
JCPOA.
    The committee included an increase of $70.3 million above 
the President's budget request for National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) nonproliferation and arms control, for a 
total of $200.0 million.
    The committee directs the NNSA to provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on planned and potential 
research and development of technologies to detect 
proliferation of nuclear material which can be used for 
verification of Iran's compliance with the JCPOA. The briefing 
should include information on what amount of funding would be 
required to support significant advances and breakthroughs in 
technology development before the end of calendar year 2023.
National Nuclear Security Administration plutonium strategy
    Since 2008, the Nuclear Weapons Council has had a 
requirement to be able to produce between 50 and 80 plutonium 
pits per year by 2030 in order to meet deterrence requirements 
and national requirements related to the creation of a 
responsive nuclear infrastructure. In section 3112 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), 
Congress enacted a number of milestone pit production 
requirements to ensure the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) is making adequate progress to achieve 
the goal established by the Nuclear Weapons Council, 
culminating with the requirement to demonstrate the capability 
to produce 80 pits per year in 2027.
    The committee strongly supports the actions NNSA has taken 
to repurpose existing facilities at Los Alamos National 
Laboratory in pursuit of these requirements. By more 
economically using laboratory space, NNSA has developed a plan 
that it expects will eventually provide it with the capability 
to produce about 30 plutonium pits per year. Despite the 
important progress that has been made to resurrect this 
critical capability, the committee remains concerned about 
NNSA's plans to achieve the additional pit production capacity 
necessary for the long-term viability of the Nation's nuclear 
deterrent.
    In February 2016, the Administrator of the NNSA testified 
that NNSA was conducting an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) to 
evaluate infrastructure options associated with achieving the 
required pit production level of up to 80 pits per year by 
2030. In May 2017, the Administrator indicated that this AoA is 
expected to be complete in the summer of 2017. The committee 
strongly encourages NNSA to complete the AoA within the 
Administrator's estimated timeframe.
    While the committee appreciates the testimony of the 
Administrator that the AoA may not be ``necessarily 
dispositive,'' the committee expects the results of the AoA to 
evaluate and resolve most of the essential matters relating to 
how NNSA plans to achieve the required level of pit production. 
The committee believes NNSA must develop an actionable strategy 
that represents the most effective way to achieve the required 
level of capability, within the available schedule and at an 
appropriate cost, and it believes that progress must be made 
before these three requirements come into competition with each 
other.
Pantex material staging facility
    The National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) 
Pantex plant uses a 60-year-old facility to store and stage 
special nuclear material. The committee understands that 
efforts are underway to develop a new material staging area to 
facilitate workflow as well as secure special nuclear material 
that is awaiting final disposition. However, while the NNSA has 
begun a process to validate requirements for such a facility 
and expects that to be accomplished by the end of fiscal year 
2017, it has not scheduled a start date for an Analysis of 
Alternatives (AoA) of such a facility, nor has it identified an 
anticipated completion date. In addition, the committee 
understands that there may be opportunities for the NNSA to 
work with the Air Force and the Corps of Engineers as the Air 
Force replaces its aging weapons storage areas, which will have 
similar design and construction requirements.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees, to be submitted no later than February 28, 2018, 
with the validated requirements and the start and end dates of 
the AoA, as well as an account of how it will utilize, if 
possible, the design and construction expertise being developed 
for the replacement of the Air Force weapons storage areas.
Requirement for update on progress on interoperable warhead
    The committee supports the efforts of the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) to design and produce the first 
interoperable warhead (IW-1), which is an important piece of 
the modernization plan for the U.S. nuclear stockpile. However, 
while the NNSA's internal independent cost estimates for the 
IW-1 assume spending in fiscal year 2019, NNSA's Stockpile 
Stewardship and Management Plan does not propose to begin work 
until 2020. The committee is concerned that the misalignment of 
plans within NNSA could lead to delays in the program.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to provide an annual briefing to the congressional defense 
committees, beginning in fiscal year 2018 and no later than 
February 28th of each year, addressing whether the design and 
production of IW-1 remains on schedule; whether NNSA will be 
ready for an accelerated start should the Nuclear Weapons 
Council give authorization for Phase 6.2 by fiscal year 2020; 
and whether activities supporting the design and production are 
proceeding on schedule and will be available.
    The committee also directs the Comptroller General of the 
United States to brief the congressional defense committees no 
later than February 28, 2018, with a report to follow, on 
NNSA's progress on the IW-1. GAO's review shall also cover 
NNSA's planning and program management for the infrastructure, 
equipment, and personnel needed to complete the IW-1.
Requirements for managing schedules for analyses of alternatives for 
        projects of the National Nuclear Security Administration
    The Comptroller General of the United States issued a 
report in August 2016 titled ``NNSA Needs to Clarify 
Requirements for Its Plutonium Analysis Project at Los 
Alamos,'' which found that the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) ``has spent billions of dollars designing 
and partially constructing several one-of-a-kind major capital 
asset projects only to later reassess alternatives for each 
project in the wake of significant cost increases and schedule 
delays.'' The same report found that in some cases, the NNSA 
failed to identify key requirements for projects before 
beginning design work on a major project. In particular, the 
revised Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) 
facility project may not be able to support the requirement 
mandated by the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291) to demonstrate the capability to produce 80 
plutonium pits per year by 2027, because ``NNSA only tasked the 
CMRR project with replacing analysis equipment used in an aging 
facility'' and did not include a pit production-related 
parameter.
    Furthermore, the Government Accountability Office report 
found that the revised CMRR project schedule did not meet best 
practices because it only included near-term work ending in 
2017 and did not include all necessary work activities. The 
Department of Energy (DOE) updated its guidance ``Program and 
Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets'' (DOE 
O. 413.3B) in May 2016 to direct that all major capital 
projects include an integrated master schedule, but NNSA has 
not followed that practice.
    The committee is concerned that the facility produced by 
the revised CMRR project will not have the capacity for the 
legal requirements for pit production, and may continue to fall 
short of best practices for schedule and project management.
    The committee therefore directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
that includes an integrated master schedule for the revised 
CMRR project and updated key performance parameters and 
program-specific requirements for the same project, including 
anticipated needs to support pit production in the completed 
facility.
    The report should be submitted no later than February 28, 
2018.
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant planning
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Energy 
(DOE) lacks a strategic plan for the Waste Isolation Pilot 
Plant's (WIPP) transuranic (TRU) waste disposal mission that 
would include an analysis of whether the facility's existing 
disposal space is sufficient for existing and likely future TRU 
waste and whether future expansion of the facility will be 
necessary. The committee notes that the National Nuclear 
Security Agency's (NNSA) Plutonium Disposition Program, 
radioactive waste cleanup projects across the country, and 
ongoing nuclear modernization efforts depend on the 
availability of disposal space at the WIPP. In addition to the 
need for plans to account for the physical space limitations at 
WIPP, long-term planning is also required to ensure that future 
requirements and plans are consistent with the statutory 
disposal limit established in the 1992 WIPP Land Withdrawal 
Act, which was carefully negotiated between the State of New 
Mexico, the Department of Energy, and the Congress. DOE may 
need to excavate more storage at WIPP as early as 2026 and has 
already begun reviewing potential changes to the method it uses 
to count waste volumes that, if approved, would allow WIPP to 
accept more TRU waste. DOE, however, lacks complete information 
on the future volume of TRU waste it will need to dispose of 
and has not developed a plan or timeline for completing the 
regulatory approvals and construction tasks needed to ensure 
that WIPP can continue to support all of DOE's critical 
missions in 2026 and beyond.
    Therefore, to ensure that NNSA's Plutonium Disposition 
Program and other cleanup projects have accurate and up-to-date 
information on whether WIPP will be able to accept additional 
TRU waste, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy to 
develop a strategic plan for disposing of its TRU Waste that 
includes: (1) an analysis of WIPP's need for additional 
disposal space to dispose of the waste currently accounted for 
in its Annual TRU Waste Inventory Report as well as waste 
likely to be sent to WIPP but not yet in the inventory; (2) a 
plan for expanding WIPP's disposal space based on this 
analysis, including a timeline for completing the necessary 
regulatory approvals and construction tasks before WIPP's 
remaining disposal space is filled; and (3) a timeline for 
implementing DOE's preferred method for changing the way in 
which waste volumes disposed of at WIPP are counted and an 
analysis of the extent to which this change will allow for 
additional volumes of waste to be disposed of at WIPP without 
exceeding the statutory limit. The Secretary of Energy should 
submit this strategic plan to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Authorization (sec. 3201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
funding for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board at 
$30.6 million consistent with the budget request.

                  TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would re-
authorize certain aspects of the Maritime Administration.

                       DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES

Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 
the allocation of funds among programs, projects, and 
activities in accordance with the tables in division D of this 
Act, subject to reprogramming in accordance with established 
procedures.
    Consistent with the previously expressed views of the 
committee, the provision would also require that decisions by 
an agency head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a 
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on 
authorized, transparent, statutory criteria or merit-based 
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of 
sections 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, and 
other applicable provisions of law.

                         SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018
                                            (In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      FY 2018                         Senate
                                                                      Request      Senate Change    Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
              DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
 
                                           NATIONAL DEFENSE BASE BUDGET
 
                             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
 
DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
 
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY......................................      4,149,894         887,174       5,037,068
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY.......................................      2,519,054       1,514,570       4,033,624
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY......................................      2,423,608       1,931,402       4,355,010
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY.................................      1,879,283         885,552       2,764,835
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY.........................................      6,469,331       1,491,332       7,960,663
JOINT IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND.............................         14,442                          14,442
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY......................................     15,056,235       5,154,008      20,210,243
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY.......................................      3,420,107          69,400       3,489,507
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC..................................        792,345          42,500         834,845
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY...............................     19,903,682       4,850,800      24,754,482
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY.........................................      8,277,789       1,218,069       9,495,858
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS.......................................      2,064,825          59,803       2,124,628
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.................................     15,430,849       5,139,437      20,570,286
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE..................................      2,296,182          48,000       2,344,182
SPACE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................................      3,370,775         107,328       3,478,103
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE............................      1,376,602                       1,376,602
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................................     19,603,497         452,399      20,055,896
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE.......................................      4,835,418         611,150       5,446,568
JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND.............................         99,795                          99,795
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0       1,870,600       1,870,600
SUBTOTAL, TITLE I--PROCUREMENT..................................    113,983,713      26,333,524     140,317,237
 
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY........................      9,425,440         480,912       9,906,352
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY........................     17,675,035         378,455      18,053,490
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF..........................     34,914,359       1,224,318      36,138,677
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW..........................     20,490,902       1,167,608      21,658,510
OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE................................        210,900                         210,900
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0          64,100          64,100
SUBTOTAL, TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION..     82,716,636       3,315,393      86,032,029
 
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY...................................     38,945,417       1,261,823      40,207,240
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES...............................      2,906,842          73,024       2,979,866
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG...................................      7,307,170         182,923       7,490,093
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY...................................     45,439,407         761,181      46,200,588
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS...........................      6,933,408          46,891       6,980,299
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES...............................      1,084,007                       1,084,007
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE.............................        278,837           1,077         279,914
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE..............................     39,429,232       2,133,433      41,562,665
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE.............................      3,267,507          59,800       3,327,307
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG....................................      6,939,968         203,700       7,143,668
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.........................     34,709,717          74,000      34,783,717
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS....................................      1,452,686                       1,452,686
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0       1,411,595       1,411,595
SUBTOTAL, TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..................    188,694,198       6,209,447     194,903,645
 
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL..............................................    133,881,636        -154,913     133,726,723
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS.............      7,804,427          16,000       7,820,427
SUBTOTAL, TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL..........................    141,686,063        -138,913     141,547,150
 
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND............................................      1,586,596          50,100       1,636,696
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION.............................        961,732                         961,732
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF....................        790,814                         790,814
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.................................        336,887                         336,887
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM..........................................     33,664,466                      33,664,466
NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND...................................        509,327           7,000         516,327
SUBTOTAL, TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.......................     37,849,822          57,100      37,906,922
 
TOTAL, DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS.........    564,930,432      35,776,551     600,706,983
 
DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
 
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY............................................................        920,394          18,500         938,894
NAVY............................................................      1,616,665         426,904       2,043,569
AIR FORCE.......................................................      1,738,796         228,330       1,967,126
DEFENSE-WIDE....................................................      3,114,913        -501,450       2,613,463
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD.............................................        210,652          83,500         294,152
AIR NATIONAL GUARD..............................................        161,491          26,000         187,491
ARMY RESERVE....................................................         73,712          58,600         132,312
NAVY RESERVE....................................................         65,271                          65,271
AIR FORCE RESERVE...............................................         63,535         108,700         172,235
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM................................        154,000                         154,000
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.................................      8,119,429         449,084       8,568,513
 
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY..............................................        182,662         -31,000         151,662
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY.................................        346,625                         346,625
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.............................         83,682         -40,875          42,807
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS................        328,282                         328,282
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE.........................................         85,062                          85,062
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............................        318,324                         318,324
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.........................         59,169                          59,169
IMPROVEMENT FUND................................................          2,726                           2,726
SUBTOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING........................................      1,406,532         -71,875       1,334,657
 
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY............................................................         58,000                          58,000
NAVY............................................................        143,644                         143,644
AIR FORCE.......................................................         54,223                          54,223
SUBTOTAL, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE..........................        255,867                         255,867
 
TOTAL, DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.........      9,781,828         377,209      10,159,037
 
TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051).    574,712,260      36,153,760     610,866,020
 
                            ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)
 
DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
 
                                       DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS
ENERGY PROGRAMS
NUCLEAR ENERGY..................................................        133,000                         133,000
SUBTOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS.......................................        133,000                         133,000
 
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES..............................................     10,239,344         273,600      10,512,944
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION................................      1,793,310         250,297       2,043,607
NAVAL REACTORS..................................................      1,479,751          38,000       1,517,751
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES...................................        418,595                         418,595
SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION..............     13,931,000                      14,492,897
 
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES........................................        815,512                         815,512
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL..................................         30,000                          30,000
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP...................................      5,537,186                       5,537,186
SUBTOTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES............      6,382,698                       6,382,698
 
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS...................     20,446,698         561,897      21,008,595
 
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION
DEFENSE FACILITIES NUCLEAR SAFETY BOARD.........................         30,600                          30,600
SUBTOTAL, INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION..............         30,600                          30,600
 
TOTAL, DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND        20,477,298         561,897      21,039,195
 INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS......................
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)......     20,477,298         561,897      21,039,195
 
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE FUNDING, BASE BUDGET REQUEST............    595,189,558      36,715,657     631,905,215
 
                                       NATIONAL DEFENSE OCO BUDGET REQUEST
 
                             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
 
PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY......................................        424,686                         424,686
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY.......................................        559,283                         559,283
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY......................................      1,191,139                       1,191,139
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY.................................        193,436                         193,436
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY.........................................        405,575                         405,575
JOINT IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND.............................        483,058                         483,058
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY......................................        157,300                         157,300
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY.......................................        152,373                         152,373
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC..................................        225,587                         225,587
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY.........................................        220,059                         220,059
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS.......................................         65,274                          65,274
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.................................        740,778                         740,778
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE..................................        395,400                         395,400
SPACE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................................          2,256                           2,256
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE............................        501,509                         501,509
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................................      4,008,887                       4,008,887
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE.......................................        518,026          15,900         533,926
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0      -1,870,600
SUBTOTAL, PROCUREMENT...........................................     10,244,626      -1,854,700       8,389,926
 
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY........................        119,368                         119,368
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY........................        130,365                         130,365
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF..........................        135,358                         135,358
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW..........................        226,096                         226,096
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0         -64,100         -64,100
SUBTOTAL, RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION............        611,187         -64,100         547,087
 
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY...................................     16,126,403                      16,126,403
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES...............................         24,699                          24,699
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG...................................        108,111                         108,111
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND................................      4,937,515                       4,937,515
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY...................................      5,875,015                       5,875,015
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS...........................      1,116,640                       1,116,640
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES...............................         23,980                          23,980
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE.............................          3,367                           3,367
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE..............................     10,266,295                      10,266,295
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE.............................         58,523                          58,523
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG....................................         15,400                          15,400
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.........................      7,712,080         256,300       7,968,380
UNDISTRIBUTED...................................................              0      -2,121,300      -2,121,300
SUBTOTAL,OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............................     46,268,028      -1,865,000      44,403,028
 
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL..............................................      4,276,276        -214,300       4,061,976
SUBTOTAL,MILITARY PERSONNEL.....................................      4,276,276        -214,300       4,061,976
 
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND............................................        148,956         -50,111          98,845
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF....................        196,300                         196,300
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.................................         24,692                          24,692
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM..........................................        395,805                         395,805
COUNTER-ISLAMIC ISIS TRAIN & EQUIP FUND.........................      1,769,000                       1,769,000
SUBTOTAL, OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................      2,534,753         -50,111       2,484,642
 
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY............................................................        139,700         -15,700         124,000
NAVY............................................................         18,500         -18,500
AIR FORCE.......................................................        478,030        -270,830         207,200
DEFENSE-WIDE....................................................          1,900          -1,900
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.................................        638,130        -306,930         331,200
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050) OCO BUDGET REQUEST     64,573,000      -4,355,141      60,217,859
 
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050)...................    659,762,558      32,360,516     692,123,074
 
 
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XIV--ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME (FUNCTION 600)..........         64,300                          64,300
 
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADDS)
TITLE X--GENERAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY.............................     [4,000,000]                     [4,000,000]
TITLE XV--SPECIAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY............................     [3,500,000]                     [3,500,000]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
                        (In Thousands of Dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    FY 2018       Senate       Senate
                                    Request       Change     Authorized
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   SUMMARY DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE
                        ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
 
NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY,   574,712,260   36,153,760   610,866,020
 BASE BUDGET (051).............
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE              20,477,298      561,897    21,039,195
 ACTIVITIES (053)..............
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS    64,573,000   -4,355,141    60,217,859
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)..   659,762,558   32,360,516   692,123,074
 
     OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS PROGRAMS OUTSIDE THE
   JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE OR ALREADY AUTHORIZED
 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY
 (051)
DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT                 37,000                     37,000
 PURCHASES.....................
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: DISPOSAL OF         9,000                      9,000
 DOD REAL PROPERTY.............
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: LEASE OF           37,000                     37,000
 DOD REAL PROPERTY.............
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-       83,000            0        83,000
 MILITARY (051)................
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITES
 (053)
FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES               118,000                    118,000
 REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM.......
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE       118,000            0       118,000
 ACTIVITIES (053)..............
 
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES
 (054)
OTHER DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS...     7,855,000                  7,855,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED           7,855,000            0     7,855,000
 ACTIVITIES (054)..............
 
TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE                8,056,000            0     8,056,000
 DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS
 (050).........................
 
             DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
 
NATIONAL DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY
 AUTHORIZATIONS (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY   574,795,260   36,153,760   610,949,020
 (051).........................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE              20,595,298      561,897    21,157,195
 ACTIVITIES (053)..............
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES          7,855,000                  7,855,000
 (054).........................
TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY BUDGET       603,245,558   36,715,657   639,961,215
 AUTHORITY IMPLICATION, 050....
 
     NATIONAL DEFENSE MANDATORY PROGRAMS, CURRENT LAW (CB0 BASELINE)
 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY
 (051)
CONCURRENT RECEIPT ACCRUAL          7,496,000                  7,496,000
 PAYMENTS TO THE MILITARY
 RETIREMENT FUND...............
REVOLVING, TRUST AND OTHER DOD      1,333,000                  1,333,000
 MANDATORY.....................
OFFSETTING RECEIPTS............    -1,889,000                 -1,889,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-    6,940,000            0     6,940,000
 MILITARY (051)................
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITES
 (053)
ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL       1,273,000                  1,273,000
 ILLNESS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS
 AND OTHER.....................
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE     1,273,000            0     1,273,000
 ACTIVITIES (053)..............
 
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES
 (054)
RADIATION EXPOSURE COMPENSATION        59,000                     59,000
 TRUST FUND....................
PAYMENT TO CIA RETIREMENT FUND        514,000                    514,000
 AND OTHER.....................
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED             573,000            0       573,000
 ACTIVITIES (054)..............
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE             8,095,000            0     8,095,000
 MANDATORY PROGRAMS (050)......
 
      DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
 
DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY
 IMPLICATION (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY   581,735,260   36,153,760   617,889,020
 (051).........................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE              21,868,298      561,897    22,430,195
 ACTIVITIES (053)..............
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES          8,428,000                  8,428,000
 (054).........................
TOTAL, BUDGET AUTHORITY           612,031,558   36,715,657   648,747,215
 IMPLICATION (050).............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT

TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
 

SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   FY 2018 Request              Senate Change              Senate Authorized
 Line           Item        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Qty          Cost           Qty           Cost           Qty          Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY
        FIXED WING
    2   UTILITY F/W                   4          75,115                                        4          75,115
         AIRCRAFT..........
    4   MQ-1 UAV...........           2          30,206         10          100,000           12         130,206
            UFR: ER                                            [10]        [100,000]
            Improved Gray
            Eagle Air
            Vehicles.......
        ROTARY
    5   HELICOPTER, LIGHT            13         108,383                                       13         108,383
         UTILITY (LUH).....
    6   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK           48         725,976          2           39,000           50         764,976
         IIIA REMAN........
            UFR: Procures                                       [2]         [39,000]
            remanufactured
            AH64Es.........
    7   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK            0         170,910                                        0         170,910
         IIIA REMAN (AP)...
    8   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK           13         374,100          9          273,700           22         647,800
         IIIB NEW BUILD....
            UFR: Procures                                       [9]        [273,700]
            AH-64E.........
    9   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK            0          71,900                                        0          71,900
         IIIB NEW BUILD
         (AP)..............
   10   UH-60 BLACKHAWK M            48         938,308                                       48         938,308
         MODEL (MYP).......
   11   UH-60 BLACKHAWK M             0          86,295                                        0          86,295
         MODEL (MYP) (AP)..
   12   UH-60 BLACK HAWK A           36          76,516                                       36          76,516
         AND L MODELS......
   13   CH-47 HELICOPTER...           6         202,576          4          246,564           10         449,140
            UFR: New Build                                      [4]        [246,564]
            MH-47G aircraft
   14   CH-47 HELICOPTER              0          17,820                                        0          17,820
         (AP)..............
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   15   MQ-1 PAYLOAD (MIP).           0           5,910         10           16,000           10          21,910
            UFR: Procures                                      [10]         [16,000]
            of Common
            Sensor Payloads
   16   UNIVERSAL GROUND              0          15,000                                        0          15,000
         CONTROL EQUIPMENT
         (UAS).............
   17   GRAY EAGLE MODS2...           0          74,291                                        0          74,291
   18   MULTI SENSOR ABN              0          68,812          0           29,475            0          98,287
         RECON (MIP).......
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [29,475]
            of Electronic
            Intelligence
            (ELINT)
            upgrades.......
   19   AH-64 MODS.........           0         238,141                                        0         238,141
   20   CH-47 CARGO                   0          20,166                                        0          20,166
         HELICOPTER MODS
         (MYP).............
   21   GRCS SEMA MODS                0           5,514                                        0           5,514
         (MIP).............
   22   ARL SEMA MODS (MIP)           0          11,650                                        0          11,650
   23   EMARSS SEMA MODS              0          15,279                                        0          15,279
         (MIP).............
   24   UTILITY/CARGO                 0          57,737                                        0          57,737
         AIRPLANE MODS.....
   25   UTILITY HELICOPTER            0           5,900                                        0           5,900
         MODS..............
   26   NETWORK AND MISSION           0         142,102                                        0         142,102
         PLAN..............
   27   COMMS, NAV                    0         166,050                                        0         166,050
         SURVEILLANCE......
   28   GATM ROLLUP........           0          37,403                                        0          37,403
   29   RQ-7 UAV MODS......           0          83,160          5          131,000            5         214,160
            UFR: Procures                                       [5]        [131,000]
            Shadow V2 BLK
            III systems....
   30   UAS MODS...........           0          26,109          9              320            9          26,429
            UFR: Procures                                       [9]            [320]
            OSRVT systems..
        GROUND SUPPORT
         AVIONICS
   31   AIRCRAFT                      0          70,913                                        0          70,913
         SURVIVABILITY
         EQUIPMENT.........
   32   SURVIVABILITY CM...           0           5,884                                        0           5,884
   33   CMWS...............           0          26,825         24           25,000           24          51,825
            UFR: Limited                                       [24]         [25,000]
            Interim Missile
            Warning System
            (LIMWS) Quick
            Reaction
            Capability.....
   34   COMMON INFRARED               0           6,337         24           25,000           24          31,337
         COUNTERMEASURES
         (CIRCM)...........
            UFR: CIRCM B-                                      [24]         [25,000]
            Kits...........
        OTHER SUPPORT
   35   AVIONICS SUPPORT              0           7,038                                        0           7,038
         EQUIPMENT.........
   36   COMMON GROUND                 0          47,404                                        0          47,404
         EQUIPMENT.........
   37   AIRCREW INTEGRATED            0          47,066                                        0          47,066
         SYSTEMS...........
   38   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          83,790          0            1,115            0          84,905
            UFR: Airspace                                       [0]          [1,115]
            Information
            System shelter
            and Alternate
            Workstation....
   39   INDUSTRIAL                    0           1,397                                        0           1,397
         FACILITIES........
   40   LAUNCHER, 2.75                0           1,911                                        0           1,911
         ROCKET............
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT              170       4,149,894         97          887,174          267       5,037,068
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY
        SURFACE-TO-AIR
         MISSILE SYSTEM
    1   LOWER TIER AIR AND            0         140,826                                        0         140,826
         MISSILE DEFENSE
         (AMD).............
    2   MSE MISSILE........          93         459,040        147          650,041          240       1,109,081
            UFR: Additional                                   [147]        [650,041]
            MSE missiles...
    3   INDIRECT FIRE                 0          57,742          0          -19,000            0          38,742
         PROTECTION
         CAPABILITY INC 2-I
            Available prior                                     [0]        [-19,000]
            year funds.....
        AIR-TO-SURFACE
         MISSILE SYSTEM
    5   HELLFIRE SYS                998          94,790        106           10,070        1,104         104,860
         SUMMARY...........
            UFR: Procures                                     [106]         [10,070]
            maximum
            Hellfire
            missile........
    6   JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND         824         178,432          0          -45,000          824         133,432
         MSLS (JAGM).......
            Excess due to                                       [0]        [-45,000]
            delays.........
        ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
         MISSILE SYS
    8   JAVELIN (AAWS-M)            525         110,123        373          147,365          898         257,488
         SYSTEM SUMMARY....
            UFR: Procures                                     [373]        [147,365]
            additional
            Javelin........
    9   TOW 2 SYSTEM              1,156          85,851                                    1,156          85,851
         SUMMARY...........
   10   TOW 2 SYSTEM                  0          19,949                                        0          19,949
         SUMMARY (AP)......
   11   GUIDED MLRS ROCKET        4,458         595,182          0           14,500        4,458         609,682
         (GMLRS)...........
            UFR: Tooling                                        [0]         [14,500]
            and practice
            rounds.........
   12   MLRS REDUCED RANGE        3,306          28,321        576            6,330        3,882          34,651
         PRACTICE ROCKETS
         (RRPR)............
            UFR: Funds                                        [576]          [6,330]
            Reduced Range
            Practice
            Rockets........
        MODIFICATIONS
   15   PATRIOT MODS.......           0         329,073         47          167,454           47         496,527
            UFR: Procures                                      [47]        [167,454]
            additional ELES
   16   ATACMS MODS........           0         116,040         75           69,400           75         185,440
            UFR: Additional                                    [75]         [69,400]
            ATACMS.........
   17   GMLRS MOD..........           0             531                                        0             531
   18   STINGER MODS.......           0          63,090        576           28,800          576          91,890
            UFR: Maximizes                                    [576]         [28,800]
            Stinger........
   19   AVENGER MODS.......           0          62,931                                        0          62,931
   20   ITAS/TOW MODS......           0           3,500                                        0           3,500
   21   MLRS MODS..........           0         138,235         32           48,882           32         187,117
            UFR: Procures                                      [32]         [48,882]
            M270A1 MLRS
            launchers......
   22   HIMARS                        0           9,566                                        0           9,566
         MODIFICATIONS.....
        AIR-TO-SURFACE
         MISSILE SYSTEM
   27   HIMARS.............           0               0         32          435,728           32         435,728
            UFR: Procures                                      [32]        [435,728]
            HIMARS
            launchers......
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   23   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          18,915                                        0          18,915
         PARTS.............
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   24   AIR DEFENSE TARGETS           0           5,728                                        0           5,728
   26   PRODUCTION BASE               0           1,189                                        0           1,189
         SUPPORT...........
        TOTAL MISSILE            11,360       2,519,054      1,964        1,514,570       13,324       4,033,624
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         W&TCV, ARMY
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    1   BRADLEY PROGRAM....           0               0          0          111,000            0         111,000
            UFR: Recap 1                                        [0]        [111,000]
            Infantry
            Battalion Set
            of M2A4........
    2   ARMORED MULTI                42         193,715                                       42         193,715
         PURPOSE VEHICLE
         (AMPV)............
        MODIFICATION OF
         TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    4   STRYKER (MOD)......           0          97,552          0          695,500            0         793,052
            UFR: Second                                         [0]        [347,500]
            SBCT set of
            30mm...........
            UFR: Stryker                                        [0]        [348,000]
            ECP............
    6   BRADLEY PROGRAM               0         444,851                                        0         444,851
         (MOD).............
    7   M109 FOV                      0          64,230                                        0          64,230
         MODIFICATIONS.....
    8   PALADIN INTEGRATED           59         646,413                                       59         646,413
         MANAGEMENT (PIM)..
    9   IMPROVED RECOVERY            16          72,402          0          122,000           16         194,402
         VEHICLE (M88A2
         HERCULES).........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]        [122,000]
            one ABCT set of
            HERCULES
            (M88A2)........
   10   ASSAULT BRIDGE                0           5,855                                        0           5,855
         (MOD).............
   11   ASSAULT BREACHER              7          34,221          0           60,000            7          94,221
         VEHICLE...........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [60,000]
            Assault
            Breacher
            Vehicles,
            Combat Dozer
            Blades, Full
            Width Mine
            Plows..........
   12   M88 FOV MODS.......           0           4,826                                        0           4,826
   13   JOINT ASSAULT                27         128,350                                       27         128,350
         BRIDGE............
   14   M1 ABRAMS TANK                0         248,826          0          221,000            0         469,826
         (MOD).............
            UFR: Completes                                      [0]        [221,000]
            the first
            Brigade set of
            Trophy (NDI
            APS) for Abrams
            w/ ERI OCO (1
            APS Set).......
   15   ABRAMS UPGRADE               20         275,000          0          561,000           20         836,000
         PROGRAM...........
            UFR:                                                [0]        [561,000]
            Recapitalizatio
            n of 29 Abrams
            tanks to
            M1A2SEPv3......
        WEAPONS & OTHER
         COMBAT VEHICLES
   18   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0           1,992          0            2,350            0           4,342
         GUN (7.62MM)......
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,350]
            additional.....
   19   MULTI-ROLE ANTI-              0           6,520          0           20,000            0          26,520
         ARMOR ANTI-
         PERSONNEL WEAPON S
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [20,000]
            M3E1 light
            weight Carl
            Gustaf weapon
            systems........
   20   MORTAR SYSTEMS.....           0          21,452          0           13,050            0          34,502
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [13,050]
            M121 120mm
            Mortars........
   21   XM320 GRENADE                 0           4,524          0              799            0           5,323
         LAUNCHER MODULE
         (GLM).............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]            [799]
            M320A1 40mm
            Grenade
            Launchers......
   23   CARBINE............           0          43,150          0           13,987            0          57,137
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [13,987]
            M4A1 carbines..
   24   COMMON REMOTELY               0             750          0           10,000            0          10,750
         OPERATED WEAPONS
         STATION...........
            UFR: Accelerate                                     [0]         [10,000]
            CROWS
            modifications..
   25   HANDGUN............           0           8,326          0              378            0           8,704
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]            [378]
            Modular Handgun
            Systems........
        MOD OF WEAPONS AND
         OTHER COMBAT VEH
   26   MK-19 GRENADE                 0           2,000                                        0           2,000
         MACHINE GUN MODS..
   27   M777 MODS..........           0           3,985          0           85,787            0          89,772
            UFR: Funds M777                                     [0]         [85,787]
            lightweight
            towed howitzers
   28   M4 CARBINE MODS....           0          31,315                                        0          31,315
   29   M2 50 CAL MACHINE             0          47,414          0            5,256            0          52,670
         GUN MODS..........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,350]
            M2A1 .50cal
            machine........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,906]
            Mk93 MG mounts,
            M2A1 .50cal
            MGs, M205
            tripods........
   30   M249 SAW MACHINE              0           3,339                                        0           3,339
         GUN MODS..........
   31   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0           4,577          0            6,582            0          11,159
         GUN MODS..........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [6,582]
            M192 tripods,
            M240B 7.62mm,
            M240L 7.62mm,
            Gun Optics.....
   32   SNIPER RIFLES                 0           1,488                                        0           1,488
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   33   M119 MODIFICATIONS.           0          12,678                                        0          12,678
   34   MORTAR MODIFICATION           0           3,998                                        0           3,998
   35   MODIFICATIONS LESS            0           2,219                                        0           2,219
         THAN $5.0M (WOCV-
         WTCV).............
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   36   ITEMS LESS THAN               0           5,075          0            2,713            0           7,788
         $5.0M (WOCV-WTCV).
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,713]
            M150 Rifle
            Combat Optic
            (RCO); M68
            Close Combat
            Optics (CCO)...
   37   PRODUCTION BASE               0             992                                        0             992
         SUPPORT (WOCV-
         WTCV).............
   39   SMALL ARMS                    0           1,573                                        0           1,573
         EQUIPMENT (SOLDIER
         ENH PROG).........
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           171       2,423,608          0        1,931,402          171       4,355,010
         OF W&TCV, ARMY....
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, ARMY
        SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
         AMMUNITION
    1   CTG, 5.56MM, ALL              0          39,767          0            7,225            0          46,992
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [7,225]
            ammunition.....
    2   CTG, 7.62MM, ALL              0          46,804          0           14,900            0          61,704
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [14,900]
            ammunition.....
    3   CTG, HANDGUN, ALL             0          10,413          0               90            0          10,503
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]             [90]
            ammunition.....
    4   CTG, .50 CAL, ALL             0          62,837          0            8,890            0          71,727
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [8,890]
            ammunition.....
    5   CTG, 20MM, ALL                0           8,208                                        0           8,208
         TYPES.............
    6   CTG, 25MM, ALL                0           8,640          0           31,862            0          40,502
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [31,862]
            ammunition.....
    7   CTG, 30MM, ALL                0          76,850          0            2,150            0          79,000
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [2,150]
            ammunition.....
    8   CTG, 40MM, ALL                0         108,189          0           17,191            0         125,380
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [17,191]
            ammunition.....
        MORTAR AMMUNITION
    9   60MM MORTAR, ALL              0          57,359          0            2,506            0          59,865
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [2,506]
            ammunition.....
   10   81MM MORTAR, ALL              0          49,471          0            3,109            0          52,580
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [3,109]
            mortar.........
   11   120MM MORTAR, ALL             0          91,528          0           18,192            0         109,720
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [18,192]
            120mm..........
        TANK AMMUNITION
   12   CARTRIDGES, TANK,             0         133,500          0           40,300            0         173,800
         105MM AND 120MM,
         ALL TYPES.........
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [40,300]
            Tank cartridge.
        ARTILLERY
         AMMUNITION
   13   ARTILLERY                     0          44,200                                        0          44,200
         CARTRIDGES, 75MM &
         105MM, ALL TYPES..
   14   ARTILLERY                     0         187,149          0          159,181            0         346,330
         PROJECTILE, 155MM,
         ALL TYPES.........
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]        [159,181]
            ammunition.....
   15   PROJ 155MM EXTENDED         480          49,000          0          233,500          480         282,500
         RANGE M982........
            UFR: Excalibur.                                     [0]        [233,500]
   16   ARTILLERY                     0          83,046          0           80,722            0         163,768
         PROPELLANTS, FUZES
         AND PRIMERS, ALL..
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [48,601]
            PGK, prop
            charges,
            artillery fuzes
            UFR: Required                                       [0]         [32,121]
            to execute
            simultaneous
            OPLAN..........
        MINES
   17   MINES & CLEARING              0           3,942          0            3,050            0           6,992
         CHARGES, ALL TYPES
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [3,050]
            ammunition.....
        ROCKETS
   19   SHOULDER LAUNCHED             0           5,000          0           61,881            0          66,881
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [61,881]
            rockets,
            grenades.......
   20   ROCKET, HYDRA 70,             0         161,155          0           68,087            0         229,242
         ALL TYPES.........
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [68,087]
            APKWS..........
        OTHER AMMUNITION
   21   CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES.           0           7,441                                        0           7,441
   22   DEMOLITION                    0          19,345          0            2,261            0          21,606
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [2,261]
            munitions......
   23   GRENADES, ALL TYPES           0          22,759          0           25,361            0          48,120
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [25,361]
            ammunition.....
   24   SIGNALS, ALL TYPES.           0           2,583          0              829            0           3,412
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]            [829]
            signal
            munitions......
   25   SIMULATORS, ALL               0          13,084          0              450            0          13,534
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]            [450]
            signal
            munitions......
        MISCELLANEOUS
   26   AMMO COMPONENTS,              0          12,237                                        0          12,237
         ALL TYPES.........
   27   NON-LETHAL                    0           1,500          0              150            0           1,650
         AMMUNITION, ALL
         TYPES.............
            UFR: Non-Lethal                                     [0]            [150]
            Hand Grenade
            Munitions......
   28   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          10,730          0            3,665            0          14,395
         MILLION (AMMO)....
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [3,665]
            ammunition.....
   29   AMMUNITION PECULIAR           0          16,425                                        0          16,425
         EQUIPMENT.........
   30   FIRST DESTINATION             0          15,221                                        0          15,221
         TRANSPORTATION
         (AMMO)............
        PRODUCTION BASE
         SUPPORT
   32   INDUSTRIAL                    0         329,356          0          100,000            0         429,356
         FACILITIES........
            UFR: Upgrade at                                     [0]        [100,000]
            GOCO Army
            ammuntion
            plants.........
   33   CONVENTIONAL                  0         197,825                                        0         197,825
         MUNITIONS
         DEMILITARIZATION..
   34   ARMS INITIATIVE....           0           3,719                                        0           3,719
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           480       1,879,283          0          885,552          480       2,764,835
         OF AMMUNITION,
         ARMY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         ARMY
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
    1   TACTICAL TRAILERS/            0           9,716         25            1,155           25          10,871
         DOLLY SETS........
            UFR: Provides                                      [25]          [1,155]
            self-haul
            capability to
            Engineer
            Construction
            Units..........
    2   SEMITRAILERS,                 0          14,151          0           27,000            0          41,151
         FLATBED:..........
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [27,000]
            100 % of
            equipment
            shortage in
            Europe for M872
    3   AMBULANCE, 4                  0          53,000          0           15,593            0          68,593
         LITTER, 5/4 TON,
         4X4...............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [15,000]
            HMMWV
            ambulances.....
            UFR: Support                                        [0]            [593]
            increased end-
            strength.......
    4   GROUND MOBILITY               0          40,935                                        0          40,935
         VEHICLES (GMV)....
    6   JOINT LIGHT               2,110         804,440                                    2,110         804,440
         TACTICAL VEHICLE..
    7   TRUCK, DUMP, 20T              0             967                                        0             967
         (CCE).............
    8   FAMILY OF MEDIUM              0          78,650          0          185,222            0         263,872
         TACTICAL VEH
         (FMTV)............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]        [185,222]
            vehicles.......
    9   FIRETRUCKS &                  0          19,404                                        0          19,404
         ASSOCIATED
         FIREFIGHTING EQUIP
   10   FAMILY OF HEAVY               0          81,656         31            7,443           31          89,099
         TACTICAL VEHICLES
         (FHTV)............
            UFR: Procures                                      [31]          [7,443]
            Forward Repair
            Systems (FRS)..
   11   PLS ESP............           0           7,129          0           52,675            0          59,804
            UFR: Provides                                       [0]         [52,675]
            transportion of
            ammunition and
            break-bulk
            cargo..........
   13   TACTICAL WHEELED              0          43,040                                        0          43,040
         VEHICLE PROTECTION
         KITS..............
   14   MODIFICATION OF IN            0          83,940          0          107,727            0         191,667
         SVC EQUIP.........
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]        [107,727]
            Buffalo and
            MMPV...........
        NON-TACTICAL
         VEHICLES
   16   HEAVY ARMORED SEDAN           0             269                                        0             269
   17   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           1,320                                        0           1,320
         VEHICLES..........
   18   NONTACTICAL                   0           6,964                                        0           6,964
         VEHICLES, OTHER...
        COMM--JOINT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   19   WIN-T--GROUND                 0         420,492          0         -420,492            0               0
         FORCES TACTICAL
         NETWORK...........
            Early to need..                                     [0]       [-420,492]
   20   SIGNAL                        0          92,718                                        0          92,718
         MODERNIZATION
         PROGRAM...........
   21   TACTICAL NETWORK              0         150,497                                        0         150,497
         TECHNOLOGY MOD IN
         SVC...............
   22   JOINT INCIDENT SITE           0           6,065                                        0           6,065
         COMMUNICATIONS
         CAPABILITY........
   23   JCSE EQUIPMENT                0           5,051                                        0           5,051
         (USREDCOM)........
        COMM--SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   24   DEFENSE ENTERPRISE            0         161,383                                        0         161,383
         WIDEBAND SATCOM
         SYSTEMS...........
   25   TRANSPORTABLE                 0          62,600                                        0          62,600
         TACTICAL COMMAND
         COMMUNICATIONS....
   26   SHF TERM...........           0          11,622                                        0          11,622
   28   SMART-T (SPACE)....           0           6,799                                        0           6,799
   29   GLOBAL BRDCST SVC--           0           7,065          0           11,000            0          18,065
         GBS...............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [11,000]
            Global
            Broadcast
            Systems........
   31   ENROUTE MISSION               0          21,667                                        0          21,667
         COMMAND (EMC).....
        COMM--COMBAT
         SUPPORT COMM
   33   MOD-IN-SERVICE                0              70                                        0              70
         PROFILER..........
        COMM--C3 SYSTEM
   34   ARMY GLOBAL CMD &             0           2,658                                        0           2,658
         CONTROL SYS
         (AGCCS)...........
        COMM--COMBAT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   36   HANDHELD MANPACK              0         355,351                                        0         355,351
         SMALL FORM FIT
         (HMS).............
   37   MID-TIER NETWORKING           0          25,100                                        0          25,100
         VEHICULAR RADIO
         (MNVR)............
   38   RADIO TERMINAL SET,           0          11,160                                        0          11,160
         MIDS LVT(2).......
   40   TRACTOR DESK.......           0           2,041                                        0           2,041
   41   TRACTOR RIDE.......           0           5,534          0            8,200            0          13,734
            UFR:                                                [0]          [8,200]
            Procurement of
            Offensive Cyber
            Operations.....
   42   SPIDER APLA REMOTE            0             996                                        0             996
         CONTROL UNIT......
   43   SPIDER FAMILY OF              0           4,500          0            2,358            0           6,858
         NETWORKED
         MUNITIONS INCR....
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,358]
            SPIDER INC 1A
            systems........
   45   TACTICAL                      0           4,411                                        0           4,411
         COMMUNICATIONS AND
         PROTECTIVE SYSTEM.
   46   UNIFIED COMMAND               0          15,275                                        0          15,275
         SUITE.............
   47   FAMILY OF MED COMM            0          15,964                                        0          15,964
         FOR COMBAT
         CASUALTY CARE.....
        COMM--INTELLIGENCE
         COMM
   49   CI AUTOMATION                 0           9,560                                        0           9,560
         ARCHITECTURE......
   50   DEFENSE MILITARY              0           4,030                                        0           4,030
         DECEPTION
         INITIATIVE........
        INFORMATION
         SECURITY
   54   COMMUNICATIONS                0         107,804          0           23,278            0         131,082
         SECURITY (COMSEC).
            UFR: Security                                       [0]         [23,278]
            Data System and
            End
            Cyrptographic
            Units..........
   55   DEFENSIVE CYBER               0          53,436          4            8,000            4          61,436
         OPERATIONS........
            UFR: Funds                                          [4]          [8,000]
            Deployable DCO
            Systems for
            COMPO 2&3 Cyber
            Protection
            Teams..........
   56   INSIDER THREAT                0             690                                        0             690
         PROGRAM--UNIT
         ACTIVITY MONITO...
   57   PERSISTENT CYBER              0           4,000                                        0           4,000
         TRAINING
         ENVIRONMENT.......
        COMM--LONG HAUL
         COMMUNICATIONS
   58   BASE SUPPORT                  0          43,751                                        0          43,751
         COMMUNICATIONS....
        COMM--BASE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   59   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0         118,101                                        0         118,101
   60   EMERGENCY                     0           4,490                                        0           4,490
         MANAGEMENT
         MODERNIZATION
         PROGRAM...........
   61   HOME STATION                  0          20,050                                        0          20,050
         MISSION COMMAND
         CENTERS (HSMCC)...
   62   INSTALLATION INFO             0         186,251                                        0         186,251
         INFRASTRUCTURE MOD
         PROGRAM...........
        ELECT EQUIP--TACT
         INT REL ACT
         (TIARA)
   65   JTT/CIBS-M.........           0          12,154          0            7,600            0          19,754
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [7,600]
            critical spare
            parts..........
   68   DCGS-A (MIP).......           0         274,782          0         -150,000            0         124,782
            Changing                                            [0]       [-150,000]
            tactical
            requirements...
   70   TROJAN (MIP).......           0          16,052          0           13,160            0          29,212
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [13,160]
            TROJAN SPIRIT..
   71   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0          51,034                                        0          51,034
         (INTEL SPT) (MIP).
   72   CI HUMINT AUTO                0           7,815          0               76            0           7,891
         REPRTING AND
         COLL(CHARCS)......
            UFR: Provides                                       [0]             [76]
            CI/HUMINT
            Automated
            Reporting and
            Collection
            System
            capabilities...
   73   CLOSE ACCESS TARGET           0           8,050                                        0           8,050
         RECONNAISSANCE
         (CATR)............
   74   MACHINE FOREIGN               0             567                                        0             567
         LANGUAGE
         TRANSLATION SYSTEM-
         M.................
        ELECT EQUIP--
         ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         (EW)
   76   LIGHTWEIGHT COUNTER           0          20,459                                        0          20,459
         MORTAR RADAR......
   77   EW PLANNING &                 0           5,805                                        0           5,805
         MANAGEMENT TOOLS
         (EWPMT)...........
   78   AIR VIGILANCE (AV).           0           5,348                                        0           5,348
   81   COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/          0             469                                        0             469
         SECURITY
         COUNTERMEASURES...
   82   CI MODERNIZATION...           0             285                                        0             285
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL SURV.
         (TAC SURV)
   83   SENTINEL MODS......           0          28,491         12           72,000           12         100,491
            UFR: Procures                                      [12]         [72,000]
            additional
            Sentinal Radars
   84   NIGHT VISION                  0         166,493         50           65,005           50         231,498
         DEVICES...........
            New night                                          [50]          [2,500]
            vision testing
            devices........
            UFR:                                                [0]         [15,749]
            Accelerates
            fielding of the
            LTLM...........
            UFR: AN/PVS-14                                      [0]          [5,414]
            Night Vision
            Goggles........
            UFR: Enhanced                                       [0]          [4,608]
            Night Vision
            Goggles........
            UFR: Security                                       [0]         [36,734]
            Force
            Assistance Bde.
   85   SMALL TACTICAL                0          13,947          0            2,150            0          16,097
         OPTICAL RIFLE
         MOUNTED MLRF......
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,150]
            Small Tactical
            Optical Rifle
            Mounted laser
            range finder...
   87   INDIRECT FIRE                 0          21,380          0          577,283            0         598,663
         PROTECTION FAMILY
         OF SYSTEMS........
            UFR: IFPC/                                          [0]        [577,283]
            Avernger
            Battalions and
            Warn Suites....
   88   FAMILY OF WEAPON              0          59,105                                        0          59,105
         SIGHTS (FWS)......
   89   ARTILLERY ACCURACY            0           2,129                                        0           2,129
         EQUIP.............
   91   JOINT BATTLE                  0         282,549          0          120,422            0         402,971
         COMMAND--PLATFORM
         (JBC-P)...........
            UFR:                                                [0]        [120,422]
            Replenishes
            Joint Battle
            Command-
            Platform.......
   92   JOINT EFFECTS                 0          48,664                                        0          48,664
         TARGETING SYSTEM
         (JETS)............
   93   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0           5,198                                        0           5,198
         (LLDR)............
   94   COMPUTER                      0           8,117                                        0           8,117
         BALLISTICS: LHMBC
         XM32..............
   95   MORTAR FIRE CONTROL           0          31,813          0           20,700            0          52,513
         SYSTEM............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [20,700]
            Mortar Fire
            Control systems
            (M95, M96).....
   96   COUNTERFIRE RADARS.           0         329,057          0           64,200            0         393,257
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [64,200]
            AN/TPQ-53
            Counterfire
            Target
            Acquisition
            Radar System...
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL C2
         SYSTEMS
   97   FIRE SUPPORT C2               0           8,700          0            4,758            0          13,458
         FAMILY............
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]          [4,758]
            Advanced Field
            Artillery
            Tactical Data
            System (AFATDS)
   98   AIR & MSL DEFENSE             0          26,635          0           96,978            0         123,613
         PLANNING & CONTROL
         SYS...............
            UFR: Supports                                       [0]         [96,978]
            fielding (AMD)
            mission command
            assets to a
            Army Corps HQ..
  100   LIFE CYCLE SOFTWARE           0           1,992                                        0           1,992
         SUPPORT (LCSS)....
  101   NETWORK MANAGEMENT            0          15,179                                        0          15,179
         INITIALIZATION AND
         SERVICE...........
  102   MANEUVER CONTROL              0         132,572          0            4,819            0         137,391
         SYSTEM (MCS)......
            UFR: Tactical                                       [0]          [4,819]
            Mission Command
            Equipment......
  103   GLOBAL COMBAT                 0          37,201                                        0          37,201
         SUPPORT SYSTEM-
         ARMY (GCSS-A).....
  104   INTEGRATED                    0          16,140                                        0          16,140
         PERSONNEL AND PAY
         SYSTEM-ARMY (IPP..
  105   RECONNAISSANCE AND            0           6,093          0           19,755            0          25,848
         SURVEYING
         INSTRUMENT SET....
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [19,755]
            Engineer
            Instrument Set
            Field
            Reconnaissance
            and Survey Kits
  106   MOD OF IN-SVC                 0           1,134          0            1,459            0           2,593
         EQUIPMENT (ENFIRE)
            UFR: Support                                        [0]          [1,459]
            Security Force
            Assistance Bde.
        ELECT EQUIP--
         AUTOMATION
  107   ARMY TRAINING                 0          11,575                                        0          11,575
         MODERNIZATION.....
  108   AUTOMATED DATA                0          91,983          0          -15,000            0          76,983
         PROCESSING EQUIP..
            Accelerate                                          [0]        [-15,000]
            commercial IT
            solutions......
  109   GENERAL FUND                  0           4,465                                        0           4,465
         ENTERPRISE
         BUSINESS SYSTEMS
         FAM...............
  110   HIGH PERF COMPUTING           0          66,363                                        0          66,363
         MOD PGM (HPCMP)...
  111   CONTRACT WRITING              0           1,001                                        0           1,001
         SYSTEM............
  112   RESERVE COMPONENT             0          26,183                                        0          26,183
         AUTOMATION SYS
         (RCAS)............
        ELECT EQUIP--AUDIO
         VISUAL SYS (A/V)
  113   TACTICAL DIGITAL              0           4,441                                        0           4,441
         MEDIA.............
  114   ITEMS LESS THAN $5M           0           3,414          0           13,000            0          16,414
         (SURVEYING
         EQUIPMENT)........
            UFR: Accelerate                                     [0]          [3,000]
            procurement of
            Global
            Positioning
            System-Survey..
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]         [10,000]
            Automated
            Integrated
            Survey
            Instrument
            (AISI) systems.
        ELECT EQUIP--
         SUPPORT
  115   PRODUCTION BASE               0             499                                        0             499
         SUPPORT (C-E).....
  116   BCT EMERGING                  0          25,050                                        0          25,050
         TECHNOLOGIES......
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
  185   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           4,819                                        0           4,819
        CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
         EQUIPMENT
  117   PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS.           0           1,613                                        0           1,613
  118   FAMILY OF NON-                0           9,696                                        0           9,696
         LETHAL EQUIPMENT
         (FNLE)............
  120   CBRN DEFENSE.......           0          11,110                                        0          11,110
        BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
  121   TACTICAL BRIDGING..           0          16,610                                        0          16,610
  122   TACTICAL BRIDGE,              0          21,761         28           22,000           28          43,761
         FLOAT-RIBBON......
            UFR: Procures                                      [28]         [22,000]
            Bridge Erection
            Boats..........
  124   COMMON BRIDGE                 0          21,046        112           50,400          112          71,446
         TRANSPORTER (CBT)
         RECAP.............
            UFR: Procure                                      [112]         [50,400]
            Common Bridge
            Transporters...
        ENGINEER (NON-
         CONSTRUCTION)
         EQUIPMENT
  125   HANDHELD STANDOFF             0           5,000          0            5,600            0          10,600
         MINEFIELD
         DETECTION SYS-HST.
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [5,600]
            hand held mine
            detectors......
  126   GRND STANDOFF MINE            0          32,442          0           10,820            0          43,262
         DETECTN SYSM
         (GSTAMIDS)........
            UFR: Equipment                                      [0]         [10,820]
            for 15th and
            16th ABCT......
  127   AREA MINE DETECTION           0          10,571                                        0          10,571
         SYSTEM (AMDS).....
  128   HUSKY MOUNTED                 0          21,695          0            2,400            0          24,095
         DETECTION SYSTEM
         (HMDS)............
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [2,400]
            Husky Mounted
            Detection
            System.........
  129   ROBOTIC COMBAT                0           4,516          5           15,100            5          19,616
         SUPPORT SYSTEM
         (RCSS)............
            UFR: Procures                                       [5]         [15,100]
            M160s..........
  130   EOD ROBOTICS                  0          10,073        211           11,000          211          21,073
         SYSTEMS
         RECAPITALIZATION..
            UFR: Procures                                     [211]         [11,000]
            the Talon 5A
            robot..........
  131   ROBOTICS AND                  0           3,000                                        0           3,000
         APPLIQUE SYSTEMS..
  133   REMOTE DEMOLITION             0           5,847         44            1,192           44           7,039
         SYSTEMS...........
            UFR: Procures                                      [44]          [1,192]
            Radio Frequency
            Remote
            Activated
            Munitions......
  134   RAIL)
        GENERATORS
  164   GENERATORS AND                0         115,635        380           27,210          380         142,845
         ASSOCIATED EQUIP..
            UFR: Additional                                   [380]         [27,210]
            equipment for
            growing Army...
  165   TACTICAL ELECTRIC             0           7,436                                        0           7,436
         POWER
         RECAPITALIZATION..
        MATERIAL HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
  166   FAMILY OF FORKLIFTS           0           9,000         15            1,635           15          10,635
            UFR: Procures                                      [15]          [1,635]
            additonal 5K
            LCRTF..........
        TRAINING EQUIPMENT
  167   COMBAT TRAINING               0          88,888                                        0          88,888
         CENTERS SUPPORT...
  168   TRAINING DEVICES,             0         285,989                                        0         285,989
         NONSYSTEM.........
  169   CLOSE COMBAT                  0          45,718                                        0          45,718
         TACTICAL TRAINER..
  170   AVIATION COMBINED             0          30,568                                        0          30,568
         ARMS TACTICAL
         TRAINER...........
  171   GAMING TECHNOLOGY             0           5,406                                        0           5,406
         IN SUPPORT OF ARMY
         TRAINING..........
        TEST MEASURE AND
         DIG EQUIPMENT
         (TMD)
  172   CALIBRATION SETS              0           5,564                                        0           5,564
         EQUIPMENT.........
  173   INTEGRATED FAMILY             0          30,144                                        0          30,144
         OF TEST EQUIPMENT
         (IFTE)............
  174   TEST EQUIPMENT                0           7,771          0              525            0           8,296
         MODERNIZATION
         (TEMOD)...........
            UFR: Test                                           [0]            [525]
            Equipment
            Modernization
            systems (TEMOD)
        OTHER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  175   M25 STABILIZED                0           3,956                                        0           3,956
         BINOCULAR.........
  176   RAPID EQUIPPING               0           5,000          0            5,000            0          10,000
         SOLDIER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
            UFR: Support 10                                     [0]          [5,000]
            initiatives per
            year...........
  177   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          60,047                                        0          60,047
         SYSTEMS (OPA3)....
  178   BASE LEVEL COMMON             0          13,239                                        0          13,239
         EQUIPMENT.........
  179   MODIFICATION OF IN-           0          60,192          0           60,134            0         120,326
         SVC EQUIPMENT (OPA-
         3)................
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [60,134]
            support
            equipment......
  180   PRODUCTION BASE               0           2,271                                        0           2,271
         SUPPORT (OTH).....
  181   SPECIAL EQUIPMENT             0           5,319                                        0           5,319
         FOR USER TESTING..
  182   TRACTOR YARD.......           0           5,935                                        0           5,935
  185   BETSS-C COMPACT               0               0                                        0               0
         PAYLOADS..........
  186   INTELLIGENT REMOTE            0               0          0            8,600            0           8,600
         IMAGING
         SPECTOMETER--GROUN
         D SYSTEM..........
            UFR:                                                [0]          [8,600]
            Development of
            six focal plan
            arrays.........
  187   FORCE PROVIDER                0               0         12           27,700           12          27,700
         EXPEDITIONARY.....
            UFR: Procures                                      [12]         [27,700]
            Force Providers
            Battle-loss and
            components for
            RESET..........
  188   HVY EXPANDED MOBILE           0               0        230          132,250          230         132,250
         TACTICAL TRUCK EXT
         SERV..............
            UFR: Procures                                     [230]        [132,250]
            HEMTTS.........
  189      FIRE PROTECTION            0               0          9               54            9              54
           TYPE I..........
            UFR: Procures                                       [9]             [54]
            Fire Protection
            Type 1 sets....
        OPA2
  184   INITIAL SPARES--C&E           0          38,269          0          -23,940            0          14,329
            Early to need..                                     [0]        [-23,940]
        TOTAL OTHER               2,110       6,469,331      1,218        1,491,332        3,328       7,960,663
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        JOINT IMPROVISED-
         THREAT DEFEAT FUND
        NETWORK ATTACK
    1   RAPID ACQUISITION             0          14,442                                        0          14,442
         AND THREAT
         RESPONSE..........
        TOTAL JOINT                   0          14,442          0                0            0          14,442
         IMPROVISED-THREAT
         DEFEAT FUND.......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        COMBAT AIRCRAFT
    2   F/A-18E/F (FIGHTER)          14       1,200,146         10          739,000           24       1,939,146
         HORNET............
            UFR: Additional                                    [10]        [739,000]
            F/A-18 E/F
            Super Hornets..
    3   F/A-18E/F (FIGHTER)           0          52,971                                        0          52,971
         HORNET (AP).......
    4   JOINT STRIKE                  4         582,324          6          800,000           10       1,382,324
         FIGHTER CV........
            UFR: Additional                                     [6]        [800,000]
            F-35C..........
    5   JOINT STRIKE                  0         263,112                                        0         263,112
         FIGHTER CV (AP)...
    6   JSF STOVL..........          20       2,398,139          4          525,600           24       2,923,739
            UFR: Additional                                     [4]        [525,600]
            F-35B..........
    7   JSF STOVL (AP).....           0         413,450                                        0         413,450
    8   CH-53K (HEAVY LIFT)           4         567,605          2          280,200            6         847,805
            UFR: Additional                                     [2]        [280,200]
            CH-53K.........
    9   CH-53K (HEAVY LIFT)           0         147,046                                        0         147,046
         (AP)..............
   10   V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT).           6         677,404          6          562,464           12       1,239,868
            Multi-year                                          [0]        [-10,000]
            savings........
            UFR: Additional                                     [2]        [180,464]
            MV-22/V-22.....
            UFR: Additional                                     [4]        [392,000]
            MV-22B.........
   11   V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT)            0          27,422                                        0          27,422
         (AP)..............
   12   H-1 UPGRADES (UH-1Y/         22         678,429          7          220,500           29         898,929
         AH-1Z)............
            UFR: Additional                                     [7]        [220,500]
            AH-1Z..........
   13   H-1 UPGRADES (UH-1Y/          0          42,082                                        0          42,082
         AH-1Z) (AP).......
   16   P-8A POSEIDON......           7       1,245,251          6        1,011,000           13       2,256,251
            UFR: Additional                                     [6]      [1,011,000]
            P-8A Poseidon..
   17   P-8A POSEIDON (AP).           0         140,333                                        0         140,333
   18   E-2D ADV HAWKEYE...           5         733,910                                        5         733,910
   19   E-2D ADV HAWKEYE              0         102,026                                        0         102,026
         (AP)..............
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   22   KC-130J............           2         129,577          4          342,700            6         472,277
            UFR: Additional                                     [4]        [342,700]
            KC-130J........
   23   KC-130J (AP).......           0          25,497                                        0          25,497
   24   MQ-4 TRITON........           3         522,126                                        3         522,126
   25   MQ-4 TRITON (AP)...           0          57,266                                        0          57,266
   26   MQ-8 UAV...........           0          49,472                                        0          49,472
   27   OTHER SUPPORT                 0               0          4           59,200            4          59,200
         AIRCRAFT..........
   27   STUASL0 UAV........           0             880                                        0             880
            UFR: Procure                                        [4]         [59,200]
            additional
            aircraft.......
   71   C-40A AIRCRAFT                0               0          2          215,000            2         215,000
         PROCUREMENT.......
            UFR: Procure                                        [2]        [215,000]
            additional
            aircraft.......
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   30   AEA SYSTEMS........           0          52,960                                        0          52,960
   31   AV-8 SERIES........           0          43,555                                        0          43,555
   32   ADVERSARY..........           0           2,565                                        0           2,565
   33   F-18 SERIES........           0       1,043,661         62           81,100           62       1,124,761
            UFR: ALQ-214                                       [28]         [65,100]
            USMC Retrofit..
            UFR: ALR-67                                        [34]         [16,000]
            Retrofit A-KITS
            and Partial B-
            Kits...........
   34   H-53 SERIES........           0          38,712                                        0          38,712
   35   SH-60 SERIES.......           0          95,333                                        0          95,333
   36   H-1 SERIES.........           0         101,886                                        0         101,886
   37   EP-3 SERIES........           0           7,231                                        0           7,231
   38   P-3 SERIES.........           0             700                                        0             700
   39   E-2 SERIES.........           0          97,563                                        0          97,563
   40   TRAINER A/C SERIES.           0           8,184                                        0           8,184
   41   C-2A...............           0          18,673                                        0          18,673
   42   C-130 SERIES.......           0          83,541                                        0          83,541
   43   FEWSG..............           0             630                                        0             630
   44   CARGO/TRANSPORT A/C           0          10,075                                        0          10,075
         SERIES............
   45   E-6 SERIES.........           0         223,508                                        0         223,508
   46   EXECUTIVE                     0          38,787                                        0          38,787
         HELICOPTERS SERIES
   47   SPECIAL PROJECT               0           8,304                                        0           8,304
         AIRCRAFT..........
   48   T-45 SERIES........           0         148,071                                        0         148,071
   49   POWER PLANT CHANGES           0          19,827                                        0          19,827
   50   JPATS SERIES.......           0          27,007                                        0          27,007
   51   COMMON ECM                    0         146,642                                        0         146,642
         EQUIPMENT.........
   52   COMMON AVIONICS               0         123,507                                        0         123,507
         CHANGES...........
   53   COMMON DEFENSIVE              0           2,317                                        0           2,317
         WEAPON SYSTEM.....
   54   ID SYSTEMS.........           0          49,524                                        0          49,524
   55   P-8 SERIES.........           0          18,665                                        0          18,665
   56   MAGTF EW FOR                  0          10,111                                        0          10,111
         AVIATION..........
   57   MQ-8 SERIES........           0          32,361                                        0          32,361
   59   V-22 (TILT/ROTOR              0         228,321                                        0         228,321
         ACFT) OSPREY......
   60   F-35 STOVL SERIES..           0          34,963                                        0          34,963
   61   F-35 CV SERIES.....           0          31,689                                        0          31,689
   62   QRC................           0          24,766                                        0          24,766
   63   MQ-4 SERIES........           0          39,996                                        0          39,996
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   64   SPARES AND REPAIR             0       1,681,914          0          299,744            0       1,981,658
         PARTS.............
            UFR: C-40A                                          [0]         [12,600]
            Spares.........
            UFR: CH-53K                                         [0]          [7,500]
            Spares.........
            UFR: F-35B                                          [0]         [91,000]
            Spares.........
            UFR: Fund to                                        [0]        [168,000]
            max executable.
            UFR: KC-130J                                        [0]         [12,844]
            Spares.........
            UFR: UC-12W                                         [0]          [7,800]
            Spares.........
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIP & FACILITIES
   65   COMMON GROUND                 0         388,052          0           17,500            0         405,552
         EQUIPMENT.........
            UFR: F/A-18C/D                                      [0]         [17,500]
            Training
            Systems........
   66   AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIAL           0          24,613                                        0          24,613
         FACILITIES........
   67   WAR CONSUMABLES....           0          39,614                                        0          39,614
   68   OTHER PRODUCTION              0           1,463                                        0           1,463
         CHARGES...........
   69   SPECIAL SUPPORT               0          48,500                                        0          48,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
   70   FIRST DESTINATION             0           1,976                                        0           1,976
         TRANSPORTATION....
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT               87      15,056,235        113        5,154,008          200      20,210,243
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        WEAPONS
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        MODIFICATION OF
         MISSILES
    1   TRIDENT II MODS....           0       1,143,595                                        0       1,143,595
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
    2   MISSILE INDUSTRIAL            0           7,086                                        0           7,086
         FACILITIES........
        STRATEGIC MISSILES
    3   TOMAHAWK...........          34         134,375                                       34         134,375
        TACTICAL MISSILES
    4   AMRAAM.............         120         197,109          0           12,000          120         209,109
            UFR: Munitions                                      [0]         [12,000]
            Wholeness......
    5   SIDEWINDER.........         185          79,692                                      185          79,692
    6   JSOW...............           0           5,487                                        0           5,487
    7   STANDARD MISSILE...         117         510,875                                      117         510,875
    8   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB          90          20,968                                       90          20,968
         II................
    9   RAM................          60          58,587         60           48,000          120         106,587
            UFR: Additional                                    [60]         [48,000]
            RAM BLK II.....
   10   JOINT AIR GROUND              0           3,789                                        0           3,789
         MISSILE (JAGM)....
   13   STAND OFF PRECISION          19           3,122          0            9,400           19          12,522
         GUIDED MUNITIONS
         (SOPGM)...........
            UFR: AGM-176A                                       [0]          [9,400]
            Griffin Missile
            Qualifications.
   14   AERIAL TARGETS.....           0         124,757                                        0         124,757
   15   OTHER MISSILE                 0           3,420                                        0           3,420
         SUPPORT...........
   16   LRASM..............          25          74,733                                       25          74,733
        MODIFICATION OF
         MISSILES
   17   ESSM...............          30          74,524                                       30          74,524
   19   HARPOON MODS.......           0          17,300                                        0          17,300
   20   HARM MODS..........           0         183,368                                        0         183,368
   21   STANDARD MISSILES             0          11,729                                        0          11,729
         MODS..............
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   22   WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL            0           4,021                                        0           4,021
         FACILITIES........
   23   FLEET SATELLITE               0          46,357                                        0          46,357
         COMM FOLLOW-ON....
        ORDNANCE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   25   ORDNANCE SUPPORT              0          47,159                                        0          47,159
         EQUIPMENT.........
        TORPEDOES AND
         RELATED EQUIP
   26   SSTD...............           0           5,240                                        0           5,240
   27   MK-48 TORPEDO......          17          44,771                                       17          44,771
   28   ASW TARGETS........           0          12,399                                        0          12,399
        MOD OF TORPEDOES
         AND RELATED EQUIP
   29   MK-54 TORPEDO MODS.           0         104,044                                        0         104,044
   30   MK-48 TORPEDO ADCAP           0          38,954                                        0          38,954
         MODS..............
   31   QUICKSTRIKE MINE...           0          10,337                                        0          10,337
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
   32   TORPEDO SUPPORT               0          70,383                                        0          70,383
         EQUIPMENT.........
   33   ASW RANGE SUPPORT..           0           3,864                                        0           3,864
        DESTINATION
         TRANSPORTATION
   34   FIRST DESTINATION             0           3,961                                        0           3,961
         TRANSPORTATION....
        GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
   35   SMALL ARMS AND                0          11,332                                        0          11,332
         WEAPONS...........
        MODIFICATION OF
         GUNS AND GUN
         MOUNTS
   36   CIWS MODS..........           0          72,698                                        0          72,698
   37   COAST GUARD WEAPONS           0          38,931                                        0          38,931
   38   GUN MOUNT MODS.....           0          76,025                                        0          76,025
   39   LCS MODULE WEAPONS.         110          13,110                                      110          13,110
   40   CRUISER                       0          34,825                                        0          34,825
         MODERNIZATION
         WEAPONS...........
   41   AIRBORNE MINE                 0          16,925                                        0          16,925
         NEUTRALIZATION
         SYSTEMS...........
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   43   SPARES AND REPAIR             0         110,255                                        0         110,255
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL WEAPONS               807       3,420,107         60           69,400          867       3,489,507
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMO, NAVY & MC
        NAVY AMMUNITION
    1   GENERAL PURPOSE               0          34,882                                        0          34,882
         BOMBS.............
    2   JDAM...............       2,492          57,343                                    2,492          57,343
    3   AIRBORNE ROCKETS,             0          79,318                                        0          79,318
         ALL TYPES.........
    4   MACHINE GUN                   0          14,112                                        0          14,112
         AMMUNITION........
    5   PRACTICE BOMBS.....           0          47,027                                        0          47,027
    6   CARTRIDGES & CART             0          57,718                                        0          57,718
         ACTUATED DEVICES..
    7   AIR EXPENDABLE                0          65,908                                        0          65,908
         COUNTERMEASURES...
    8   JATOS..............           0           2,895                                        0           2,895
   10   5 INCH/54 GUN                 0          22,112                                        0          22,112
         AMMUNITION........
   11   INTERMEDIATE                  0          12,804                                        0          12,804
         CALIBER GUN
         AMMUNITION........
   12   OTHER SHIP GUN                0          41,594                                        0          41,594
         AMMUNITION........
   13   SMALL ARMS &                  0          49,401                                        0          49,401
         LANDING PARTY AMMO
   14   PYROTECHNIC AND               0           9,495                                        0           9,495
         DEMOLITION........
   16   AMMUNITION LESS               0           3,080                                        0           3,080
         THAN $5 MILLION...
        MARINE CORPS
         AMMUNITION
   20   MORTARS............           0          24,118          0           25,500            0          49,618
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [11,000]
            60mm Full Range
            Practice Rounds
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [14,500]
            81mm Full Range
            Practice Rounds
   23   DIRECT SUPPORT                0          64,045                                        0          64,045
         MUNITIONS.........
   24   INFANTRY WEAPONS              0          91,456                                        0          91,456
         AMMUNITION........
   29   COMBAT SUPPORT                0          11,788                                        0          11,788
         MUNITIONS.........
   32   AMMO MODERNIZATION.           0          17,862                                        0          17,862
   33   ARTILLERY MUNITIONS           0          79,427          0           17,000            0          96,427
            UFR: Additional                                     [0]         [17,000]
            training rounds
   34   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           5,960                                        0           5,960
         MILLION...........
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         2,492         792,345          0           42,500        2,492         834,845
         OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
 
        SHIPBUILDING AND
         CONVERSION, NAVY
        FLEET BALLISTIC
         MISSILE SHIPS
    1   OHIO REPLACEMENT              0         842,853                                        0         842,853
         SUBMARINE (AP)....
        OTHER WARSHIPS
    2   CARRIER REPLACEMENT           1       4,441,772          0         -300,000            1       4,141,772
         PROGRAM...........
            Unjustified                                         [0]       [-300,000]
            cost growth....
    4   VIRGINIA CLASS                2       3,305,315                                        2       3,305,315
         SUBMARINE.........
    5   VIRGINIA CLASS                0       1,920,596          0        1,173,000            0       3,093,596
         SUBMARINE (AP)....
            3rd FY20 SSN or                                     [0]        [450,000]
            SIB expansion..
            Additional EOQ                                      [0]        [750,000]
            funding Blk V
            MYP............
            NSBDF Savings..                                     [0]        [-27,000]
    6   CVN REFUELING                 0       1,604,890                                        0       1,604,890
         OVERHAULS.........
    7   CVN REFUELING                 0          75,897                                        0          75,897
         OVERHAULS (AP)....
    8   DDG 1000...........           0         223,968          0          -50,000            0         173,968
            Unjustified                                         [0]        [-50,000]
            cost growth....
    9   DDG-51.............           2       3,499,079          1        1,559,000            3       5,058,079
            Available prior                                     [0]       [-225,000]
            year funds.....
            Procure 1                                           [1]      [1,750,000]
            additional DDG-
            51.............
            UFR: SSEE Inc F                                     [0]         [34,000]
            for DDG........
   10   DDG-51 (AP)........           0          90,336          0          300,000            0         390,336
            EOQ for FY18-22                                     [0]        [300,000]
            MYP contract...
   11   LITTORAL COMBAT               1         636,146          0          -40,000            1         596,146
         SHIP..............
            Unit price                                          [0]        [-40,000]
            adjustment.....
        AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
   12   LX(R) OR LPD-30....           0               0          1        1,000,000            1       1,000,000
            Incremental                                         [1]      [1,000,000]
            funding for
            LX(R) or LPD-30
   15   LHA REPLACEMENT....           0       1,710,927                                        0       1,710,927
        AUXILIARIES, CRAFT
         AND PRIOR YR
         PROGRAM COST
   18   TAO FLEET OILER....           1         465,988                                        1         465,988
   19   TAO FLEET OILER               0          75,068                                        0          75,068
         (AP)..............
   20   TOWING, SALVAGE,              1          76,204                                        1          76,204
         AND RESCUE SHIP
         (ATS).............
   23   LCU 1700...........           1          31,850                                        1          31,850
   24   OUTFITTING.........           0         548,703          0          -38,200            0         510,503
            Post-delivery                                       [0]        [-38,200]
            funds early to
            need...........
   25   SHIP TO SHORE                 3         212,554          5          297,000            8         509,554
         CONNECTOR.........
            Quantity unit                                       [0]        [-15,000]
            price
            adjustment.....
            UFR: 5                                              [5]        [312,000]
            additional Ship-
            to-Shore
            Connector......
   26   SERVICE CRAFT......           0          23,994          0           39,000            0          62,994
            UFR: Berthing                                       [0]         [39,000]
            barge..........
   29   COMPLETION OF PY              0         117,542                                        0         117,542
         SHIPBUILDING
         PROGRAMS..........
   30   ESB................           0               0          1          661,000            1         661,000
            Procure                                             [1]        [661,000]
            additional ESB.
   32   CABLE SHIP.........           0               0          1          250,000            1         250,000
            Procure cable                                       [1]        [250,000]
            ship...........
        TOTAL SHIPBUILDING           12      19,903,682          9        4,850,800           21      24,754,482
         AND CONVERSION,
         NAVY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         NAVY
        SHIP PROPULSION
         EQUIPMENT
    3   SURFACE POWER                 0          41,910                                        0          41,910
         EQUIPMENT.........
    4   HYBRID ELECTRIC               0           6,331          0           -6,331            0               0
         DRIVE (HED).......
            Unjustified                                         [0]         [-6,331]
            cost growth....
        GENERATORS
    5   SURFACE COMBATANT             0          27,392                                        0          27,392
         HM&E..............
        NAVIGATION
         EQUIPMENT
    6   OTHER NAVIGATION              0          65,943                                        0          65,943
         EQUIPMENT.........
        OTHER SHIPBOARD
         EQUIPMENT
    8   SUB PERISCOPE,                0         151,240          0           29,000            0         180,240
         IMAGING AND SUPT
         EQUIP PROG........
            UFR: 3                                              [0]         [29,000]
            Submarine
            Warfare
            Federated
            Tactical
            Systems........
    9   DDG MOD............           0         603,355                                        0         603,355
   10   FIREFIGHTING                  0          15,887                                        0          15,887
         EQUIPMENT.........
   11   COMMAND AND CONTROL           0           2,240                                        0           2,240
         SWITCHBOARD.......
   12   LHA/LHD MIDLIFE....           0          30,287                                        0          30,287
   14   POLLUTION CONTROL             0          17,293                                        0          17,293
         EQUIPMENT.........
   15   SUBMARINE SUPPORT             0          27,990                                        0          27,990
         EQUIPMENT.........
   16   VIRGINIA CLASS                0          46,610                                        0          46,610
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
   17   LCS CLASS SUPPORT             0          47,955          0          -42,600            0           5,355
         EQUIPMENT.........
            Procurement                                         [0]        [-42,600]
            ahead of need..
   18   SUBMARINE BATTERIES           0          17,594                                        0          17,594
   19   LPD CLASS SUPPORT             0          61,908                                        0          61,908
         EQUIPMENT.........
   21   STRATEGIC PLATFORM            0          15,812                                        0          15,812
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
   22   DSSP EQUIPMENT.....           0           4,178                                        0           4,178
   23   CG MODERNIZATION...           0         306,050                                        0         306,050
   24   LCAC...............           0           5,507                                        0           5,507
   25   UNDERWATER EOD                0          55,922                                        0          55,922
         PROGRAMS..........
   26   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          96,909                                        0          96,909
         MILLION...........
   27   CHEMICAL WARFARE              0           3,036                                        0           3,036
         DETECTORS.........
   28   SUBMARINE LIFE                0          10,364                                        0          10,364
         SUPPORT SYSTEM....
        REACTOR PLANT
         EQUIPMENT
   29   REACTOR POWER UNITS           0         324,925                                        0         324,925
   30   REACTOR COMPONENTS.           0         534,468                                        0         534,468
        OCEAN ENGINEERING
   31   DIVING AND SALVAGE            0          10,619                                        0          10,619
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SMALL BOATS
   32   STANDARD BOATS.....           0          46,094                                        0          46,094
        PRODUCTION
         FACILITIES
         EQUIPMENT
   34   OPERATING FORCES              0         191,541                                        0         191,541
         IPE...............
        OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
   36   LCS COMMON MISSION            0          34,666                                        0          34,666
         MODULES EQUIPMENT.
   37   LCS MCM MISSION               0          55,870          2           28,900            2          84,770
         MODULES...........
            Procurement                                         [0]         [-5,100]
            ahead of need..
            UFR: Additional                                     [2]         [34,000]
            MCM USV........
   39   LCS SUW MISSION               0          52,960                                        0          52,960
         MODULES...........
   40   LCS IN-SERVICE                0          74,426          0           84,000            0         158,426
         MODERNIZATION.....
            UFR: LCS                                            [0]         [84,000]
            modernization
            for increased
            lethatlity.....
        LOGISTIC SUPPORT
   42   LSD MIDLIFE &                 0          89,536                                        0          89,536
         MODERNIZATION.....
        SHIP SONARS
   43   SPQ-9B RADAR.......           0          30,086                                        0          30,086
   44   AN/SQQ-89 SURF ASW            0         102,222                                        0         102,222
         COMBAT SYSTEM.....
   46   SSN ACOUSTIC                  0         287,553          0           27,000            0         314,553
         EQUIPMENT.........
            UFR: 3                                              [0]         [27,000]
            Submarine
            Warfare
            Federated
            Tactical
            Systems........
   47   UNDERSEA WARFARE              0          13,653                                        0          13,653
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
        ASW ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   49   SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC            0          21,449                                        0          21,449
         WARFARE SYSTEM....
   50   SSTD...............           0          12,867                                        0          12,867
   51   FIXED SURVEILLANCE            0         300,102                                        0         300,102
         SYSTEM............
   52   SURTASS............           0          30,180          0           10,000            0          40,180
            UFR: 1                                              [0]         [10,000]
            Additional.....
        ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         EQUIPMENT
   54   AN/SLQ-32..........           0         240,433                                        0         240,433
        RECONNAISSANCE
         EQUIPMENT
   55   SHIPBOARD IW                  0         187,007          0           40,000            0         227,007
         EXPLOIT...........
            UFR: 3 SSEE                                         [0]         [40,000]
            Increment F and
            Paragon/
            Graywing.......
   56   AUTOMATED                     0             510                                        0             510
         IDENTIFICATION
         SYSTEM (AIS)......
        OTHER SHIP
         ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   58   COOPERATIVE                   0          23,892          0            4,000            0          27,892
         ENGAGEMENT
         CAPABILITY........
            UFR: CEC IFF                                        [0]          [4,000]
            Mode 5
            Acceleration...
   60   NAVAL TACTICAL                0          10,741                                        0          10,741
         COMMAND SUPPORT
         SYSTEM (NTCSS)....
   61   ATDLS..............           0          38,016                                        0          38,016
   62   NAVY COMMAND AND              0           4,512                                        0           4,512
         CONTROL SYSTEM
         (NCCS)............
   63   MINESWEEPING SYSTEM           0          31,531                                        0          31,531
         REPLACEMENT.......
   64   SHALLOW WATER MCM..           0           8,796                                        0           8,796
   65   NAVSTAR GPS                   0          15,923                                        0          15,923
         RECEIVERS (SPACE).
   66   AMERICAN FORCES               0           2,730                                        0           2,730
         RADIO AND TV
         SERVICE...........
   67   STRATEGIC PLATFORM            0           6,889                                        0           6,889
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
        AVIATION ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   70   ASHORE ATC                    0          71,882                                        0          71,882
         EQUIPMENT.........
   71   AFLOAT ATC                    0          44,611                                        0          44,611
         EQUIPMENT.........
   77   ID SYSTEMS.........           0          21,239                                        0          21,239
   78   NAVAL MISSION                 0          11,976          0            1,000            0          12,976
         PLANNING SYSTEMS..
            UFR: Munitions                                      [0]          [1,000]
            Wholeness......
        OTHER SHORE
         ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   80   TACTICAL/MOBILE C4I           0          32,425                                        0          32,425
         SYSTEMS...........
   81   DCGS-N.............           0          13,790                                        0          13,790
   82   CANES..............           0         322,754                                        0         322,754
   83   RADIAC.............           0          10,718                                        0          10,718
   84   CANES-INTELL.......           0          48,028                                        0          48,028
   85   GPETE..............           0           6,861                                        0           6,861
   86   MASF...............           0           8,081                                        0           8,081
   87   INTEG COMBAT SYSTEM           0           5,019                                        0           5,019
         TEST FACILITY.....
   88   EMI CONTROL                   0           4,188                                        0           4,188
         INSTRUMENTATION...
   89   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0         105,292                                        0         105,292
         MILLION...........
        SHIPBOARD
         COMMUNICATIONS
   90   SHIPBOARD TACTICAL            0          23,695                                        0          23,695
         COMMUNICATIONS....
   91   SHIP COMMUNICATIONS           0         103,990                                        0         103,990
         AUTOMATION........
   92   COMMUNICATIONS                0          18,577                                        0          18,577
         ITEMS UNDER $5M...
        SUBMARINE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   93   SUBMARINE BROADCAST           0          29,669                                        0          29,669
         SUPPORT...........
   94   SUBMARINE                     0          86,204                                        0          86,204
         COMMUNICATION
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   95   SATELLITE                     0          14,654                                        0          14,654
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SYSTEMS...........
   96   NAVY MULTIBAND                0          69,764                                        0          69,764
         TERMINAL (NMT)....
        SHORE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   97   JOINT                         0           4,256                                        0           4,256
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SUPPORT ELEMENT
         (JCSE)............
        CRYPTOGRAPHIC
         EQUIPMENT
   99   INFO SYSTEMS                  0          89,663          0           12,000            0         101,663
         SECURITY PROGRAM
         (ISSP)............
            UFR: Crypto                                         [0]         [12,000]
            modernization..
  100   MIO INTEL                     0             961                                        0             961
         EXPLOITATION TEAM.
        CRYPTOLOGIC
         EQUIPMENT
  101   CRYPTOLOGIC                   0          11,287                                        0          11,287
         COMMUNICATIONS
         EQUIP.............
        OTHER ELECTRONIC
         SUPPORT
  110   COAST GUARD                   0          36,584                                        0          36,584
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SONOBUOYS
  112   SONOBUOYS--ALL                0         173,616                                        0         173,616
         TYPES.............
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  113   WEAPONS RANGE                 0          72,110                                        0          72,110
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  114   AIRCRAFT SUPPORT              0         108,482                                        0         108,482
         EQUIPMENT.........
  115   ADVANCED ARRESTING            0          10,900                                        0          10,900
         GEAR (AAG)........
  116   METEOROLOGICAL                0          21,137                                        0          21,137
         EQUIPMENT.........
  117   DCRS/DPL...........           0             660                                        0             660
  118   AIRBORNE MINE                 0          20,605                                        0          20,605
         COUNTERMEASURES...
  119   AVIATION SUPPORT              0          34,032                                        0          34,032
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SHIP GUN SYSTEM
         EQUIPMENT
  120   SHIP GUN SYSTEMS              0           5,277                                        0           5,277
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SHIP MISSILE
         SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
  121   SHIP MISSILE                  0         272,359                                        0         272,359
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  122   TOMAHAWK SUPPORT              0          73,184                                        0          73,184
         EQUIPMENT.........
        FBM SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  123   STRATEGIC MISSILE             0         246,221                                        0         246,221
         SYSTEMS EQUIP.....
        ASW SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  124   SSN COMBAT CONTROL            0         129,972          0           20,000            0         149,972
         SYSTEMS...........
            UFR: 3                                              [0]         [20,000]
            Submarine
            Warfare
            Federated
            Tactical
            Systems........
  125   ASW SUPPORT                   0          23,209                                        0          23,209
         EQUIPMENT.........
        OTHER ORDNANCE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  126   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0          15,596                                        0          15,596
         DISPOSAL EQUIP....
  127   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           5,981                                        0           5,981
         MILLION...........
        OTHER EXPENDABLE
         ORDNANCE
  128   SUBMARINE TRAINING            0          74,550                                        0          74,550
         DEVICE MODS.......
  130   SURFACE TRAINING              0          83,022                                        0          83,022
         EQUIPMENT.........
        CIVIL ENGINEERING
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  131   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           5,299                                        0           5,299
         VEHICLES..........
  132   GENERAL PURPOSE               0           2,946                                        0           2,946
         TRUCKS............
  133   CONSTRUCTION &                0          34,970                                        0          34,970
         MAINTENANCE EQUIP.
  134   FIRE FIGHTING                 0           2,541                                        0           2,541
         EQUIPMENT.........
  135   TACTICAL VEHICLES..           0          19,699                                        0          19,699
  136   AMPHIBIOUS                    0          12,162                                        0          12,162
         EQUIPMENT.........
  137   POLLUTION CONTROL             0           2,748                                        0           2,748
         EQUIPMENT.........
  138   ITEMS UNDER $5                0          18,084                                        0          18,084
         MILLION...........
  139   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0           1,170                                        0           1,170
         VEHICLES..........
        SUPPLY SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  141   SUPPLY EQUIPMENT...           0          21,797                                        0          21,797
  143   FIRST DESTINATION             0           5,572                                        0           5,572
         TRANSPORTATION....
  144   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0         482,916                                        0         482,916
         SUPPLY SYSTEMS....
        TRAINING DEVICES
  146   TRAINING AND                  0          25,624                                        0          25,624
         EDUCATION
         EQUIPMENT.........
        COMMAND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  147   COMMAND SUPPORT               0          59,076          0           -7,900            0          51,176
         EQUIPMENT.........
            Consolidate                                         [0]         [-4,200]
            requirements
            Navy Enterprise
            Resource
            Planning.......
            Consolidate                                         [0]         [-3,700]
            requirements
            Navy ePS.......
  149   MEDICAL SUPPORT               0           4,383                                        0           4,383
         EQUIPMENT.........
  151   NAVAL MIP SUPPORT             0           2,030                                        0           2,030
         EQUIPMENT.........
  152   OPERATING FORCES              0           7,500                                        0           7,500
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  153   C4ISR EQUIPMENT....           0           4,010                                        0           4,010
  154   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0          23,644                                        0          23,644
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  155   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0         101,982          0           19,000            0         120,982
         EQUIPMENT.........
            UFR: Port                                           [0]         [19,000]
            Security
            Barriers for
            Ship Repair
            Facilities.....
  156   ENTERPRISE                    0          19,789                                        0          19,789
         INFORMATION
         TECHNOLOGY........
        OTHER
  160   NEXT GENERATION               0         104,584                                        0         104,584
         ENTERPRISE SERVICE
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
  162   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          23,707          0        1,000,000            0       1,023,707
            Classified                                          [0]      [1,000,000]
            Project 0428...
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
  161   SPARES AND REPAIR             0         278,565                                        0         278,565
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL OTHER                   0       8,277,789          2        1,218,069            2       9,495,858
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT, MARINE
         CORPS
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    1   AAV7A1 PIP.........           0         107,665                                        0         107,665
    2   AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT            26         161,511                                       26         161,511
         VEHICLE 1.1.......
    3   LAV PIP............           0          17,244                                        0          17,244
        ARTILLERY AND OTHER
         WEAPONS
    4   EXPEDITIONARY FIRE            0             626                                        0             626
         SUPPORT SYSTEM....
    5   155MM LIGHTWEIGHT             0          20,259                                        0          20,259
         TOWED HOWITZER....
    6   HIGH MOBILITY                 0          59,943                                        0          59,943
         ARTILLERY ROCKET
         SYSTEM............
    7   WEAPONS AND COMBAT            0          19,616                                        0          19,616
         VEHICLES UNDER $5
         MILLION...........
        OTHER SUPPORT
    8   MODIFICATION KITS..           0          17,778                                        0          17,778
        GUIDED MISSILES
   10   GROUND BASED AIR              0           9,432                                        0           9,432
         DEFENSE...........
   11   JAVELIN............         222          41,159                                      222          41,159
   12   FOLLOW ON TO SMAW..           0          25,125                                        0          25,125
   13   ANTI-ARMOR WEAPONS            0          51,553                                        0          51,553
         SYSTEM-HEAVY (AAWS-
         H)................
        COMMAND AND CONTROL
         SYSTEMS
   16   COMMON AVIATION               0          44,928                                        0          44,928
         COMMAND AND
         CONTROL SYSTEM (C.
        REPAIR AND TEST
         EQUIPMENT
   17   REPAIR AND TEST               0          33,056                                        0          33,056
         EQUIPMENT.........
        COMMAND AND CONTROL
         SYSTEM (NON-TEL)
   20   ITEMS UNDER $5                0          17,644          0           20,200            0          37,844
         MILLION (COMM &
         ELEC).............
            UFR: Night                                          [0]         [20,200]
            Optics for
            Sniper Rifle...
   21   AIR OPERATIONS C2             0          18,393                                        0          18,393
         SYSTEMS...........
        RADAR + EQUIPMENT
         (NON-TEL)
   22   RADAR SYSTEMS......           0          12,411                                        0          12,411
   23   GROUND/AIR TASK               3         139,167                                        3         139,167
         ORIENTED RADAR (G/
         ATOR).............
   24   RQ-21 UAS..........           4          77,841                                        4          77,841
        INTELL/COMM
         EQUIPMENT (NON-
         TEL)
   25   GCSS-MC............           0           1,990                                        0           1,990
   26   FIRE SUPPORT SYSTEM           0          22,260                                        0          22,260
   27   INTELLIGENCE                  0          55,759          0           10,120            0          65,879
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
            UFR: CI and                                         [0]         [10,120]
            HUMINT
            Equipment
            Program........
   29   UNMANNED AIR                  0          10,154         10           13,500           10          23,654
         SYSTEMS (INTEL)...
            UFR: Long                                          [10]         [13,500]
            Endurance Small
            UAS............
   30   DCGS-MC............           0          13,462                                        0          13,462
   31   UAS PAYLOADS.......           0          14,193                                        0          14,193
        OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
         TEL)
   35   NEXT GENERATION               0          98,511                                        0          98,511
         ENTERPRISE NETWORK
         (NGEN)............
   36   COMMON COMPUTER               0          66,894          0            7,104            0          73,998
         RESOURCES.........
            UFR: Full                                           [0]          [7,104]
            Spectrum Cyber
            Operations DMSS
   37   COMMAND POST                  0         186,912                                        0         186,912
         SYSTEMS...........
   38   RADIO SYSTEMS......           0          34,361                                        0          34,361
   39   COMM SWITCHING &              0          54,615                                        0          54,615
         CONTROL SYSTEMS...
   40   COMM & ELEC                   0          44,455                                        0          44,455
         INFRASTRUCTURE
         SUPPORT...........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
   41   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           4,214                                        0           4,214
        ADMINISTRATIVE
         VEHICLES
   42   COMMERCIAL CARGO              0          66,951                                        0          66,951
         VEHICLES..........
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
   43   MOTOR TRANSPORT               0          21,824                                        0          21,824
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   44   JOINT LIGHT                 527         233,639                                      527         233,639
         TACTICAL VEHICLE..
   45   FAMILY OF TACTICAL            0           1,938                                        0           1,938
         TRAILERS..........
   46   TRAILERS...........           0          10,282                                        0          10,282
        ENGINEER AND OTHER
         EQUIPMENT
   48   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0           1,405                                        0           1,405
         CONTROL EQUIP
         ASSORT............
   50   TACTICAL FUEL                 0           1,788                                        0           1,788
         SYSTEMS...........
   51   POWER EQUIPMENT               0           9,910                                        0           9,910
         ASSORTED..........
   52   AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT            0           5,830                                        0           5,830
         EQUIPMENT.........
   53   EOD SYSTEMS........           0          27,240                                        0          27,240
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
   54   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          53,477                                        0          53,477
         EQUIPMENT.........
        GENERAL PROPERTY
   56   TRAINING DEVICES...           0          76,185          0            8,879            0          85,064
            UFR: ITESS-II                                       [0]          [8,879]
            Force on Force
            Training System
   58   FAMILY OF                     0          26,286                                        0          26,286
         CONSTRUCTION
         EQUIPMENT.........
   59   FAMILY OF                     0           1,583                                        0           1,583
         INTERNALLY
         TRANSPORTABLE VEH
         (ITV).............
        OTHER SUPPORT
   60   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           7,716                                        0           7,716
         MILLION...........
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   62   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          35,640                                        0          35,640
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT,          782       2,064,825         10           59,803          792       2,124,628
         MARINE CORPS......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        TACTICAL FORCES
    1   F-35...............          46       4,544,684         14        1,760,000           60       6,304,684
            UFR: Procure                                       [14]      [1,760,000]
            additional F-
            35As...........
    2   F-35 (AP)..........           0         780,300                                        0         780,300
   2a   O/A-X LIGHT ATTACK            0               0          0        1,200,000            0       1,200,000
         FIGHTER...........
            O/A-X Light                                         [0]      [1,200,000]
            Attack Fighter.
        TACTICAL AIRLIFT
    3   KC-46A TANKER......          15       2,545,674          2          400,000           17       2,945,674
            UFR: Procure KC-                                    [2]        [400,000]
            46.............
        OTHER AIRLIFT
    4   C-130J.............           0          57,708          3          162,100            3         219,808
            Technical                                           [3]        [102,000]
            adjustments....
            UFR: C-130J                                         [0]         [60,000]
            simulators.....
    6   HC-130J............           2         198,502          1          100,000            3         298,502
            UFR: Procures                                       [1]        [100,000]
            HC-130s........
    8   MC-130J............           5         379,373         12        1,230,000           17       1,609,373
            UFR: Procure MC-                                    [0]         [30,000]
            130J WST.......
            UFR: Procures                                      [12]      [1,200,000]
            MC-130s........
    9   MC-130J (AP).......           0          30,000                                        0          30,000
        MISSION SUPPORT
         AIRCRAFT
   12   CIVIL AIR PATROL A/           6           2,695                                        6           2,695
         C.................
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   14   TARGET DRONES......          42         109,841                                       42         109,841
   17   MQ-9...............           0         117,141                                        0         117,141
  17a   COMPASS CALL.......           0               0          0          108,173            0         108,173
            Technical                                           [0]        [108,173]
            adjustment.....
        STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
   18   B-2A...............           0          96,727                                        0          96,727
   19   B-1B...............           0         155,634          0          -34,000            0         121,634
            Excess funding.                                     [0]        [-34,000]
   20   B-52...............           0         109,295                                        0         109,295
   21   LARGE AIRCRAFT                0           4,046                                        0           4,046
         INFRARED
         COUNTERMEASURES...
        TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
   22   A-10...............           0           6,010          4          103,000            4         109,010
            UFR: A-10 Wings                                     [4]        [103,000]
   23   F-15...............           0         417,193                                        0         417,193
   24   F-16...............           0         203,864                                        0         203,864
   25   F-22A..............           0         161,630                                        0         161,630
   26   F-22A (AP).........           0          15,000                                        0          15,000
   27   F-35 MODIFICATIONS.           0          68,270                                        0          68,270
   28   INCREMENT 3.2B.....          72         105,756                                       72         105,756
   30   KC-46A TANKER......           0           6,213                                        0           6,213
        AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
   31   C-5................           0          36,592                                        0          36,592
   32   C-5M...............           0           6,817                                        0           6,817
   33   C-17A..............           0         125,522                                        0         125,522
   34   C-21...............           0          13,253                                        0          13,253
   35   C-32A..............           0          79,449                                        0          79,449
   36   C-37A..............           0          15,423          3          191,300            3         206,723
            UFR: Procure C-                                     [3]        [191,300]
            37B............
   37   C-130J.............           0          10,727          0          -10,727            0               0
            Technical                                           [0]        [-10,727]
            adjustments....
        TRAINER AIRCRAFT
   38   GLIDER MODS........           0             136                                        0             136
   39   T-6................           0          35,706                                        0          35,706
   40   T-1................           0          21,477                                        0          21,477
   41   T-38...............           0          51,641                                        0          51,641
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   42   U-2 MODS...........           0          36,406                                        0          36,406
   43   KC-10A (ATCA)......           0           4,243                                        0           4,243
   44   C-12...............           0           5,846                                        0           5,846
   45   VC-25A MOD.........           0          52,107                                        0          52,107
   46   C-40...............           0          31,119                                        0          31,119
   47   C-130..............           0          66,310          0           29,800            0          96,110
            Propulsion                                          [0]         [26,800]
            improvement....
            UFR: Procures                                       [0]          [3,000]
            AC-130J AGM-114
            Cape...........
   48   C-130J MODS........           0         171,230          0           10,727            0         181,957
            Technical                                           [0]         [10,727]
            adjustments....
   49   C-135..............           0          69,428                                        0          69,428
   50   OC-135B............           0          23,091                                        0          23,091
   51   COMPASS CALL MODS..           0         166,541          0          -63,573            0         102,968
            Technical                                           [0]       [-108,173]
            adjustment.....
            UFR: Avionics                                       [0]         [10,000]
            Viability
            Program (AVP)
            upgrades.......
            UFR: Expected                                       [0]         [10,000]
            disconnect in
            air vehicle....
            UFR: Mission                                        [0]         [24,600]
            and support
            equipment......
   52   COMBAT FLIGHT                 0             495                                        0             495
         INSPECTION (CFIN).
   53   RC-135.............           0         201,559                                        0         201,559
   54   E-3................           0         189,772                                        0         189,772
   55   E-4................           0          30,493                                        0          30,493
   56   E-8................           0          13,232                                        0          13,232
   57   AIRBORNE WARNING              0         164,786                                        0         164,786
         AND CONTROL SYSTEM
   58   FAMILY OF BEYOND              0          24,716          0            6,637            0          31,353
         LINE-OF-SIGHT
         TERMINALS.........
            UFR: Family of                                      [0]          [6,637]
            Advance Beyond
            Line of Sight-
            Terminals......
   59   H-1................           0           3,730          0            8,500            0          12,230
            UFR: UH-1N                                          [0]          [8,500]
            Safety
            Enhancements...
   60   H-60...............           0          75,989                                        0          75,989
   61   RQ-4 MODS..........           0          43,968          0           39,600            0          83,568
            UFR: Replace RQ-                                    [0]         [39,600]
            4 TFT Antennas.
   62   HC/MC-130                     0          67,674                                        0          67,674
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   63   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0          59,068                                        0          59,068
   65   MQ-9 MODS..........           0         264,740                                        0         264,740
   66   CV-22 MODS.........           0          60,990                                        0          60,990
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   67   INITIAL SPARES/               0       1,041,569                                        0       1,041,569
         REPAIR PARTS......
        COMMON SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   68   AIRCRAFT                      0          75,846                                        0          75,846
         REPLACEMENT
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
   69   OTHER PRODUCTION              0           8,524                                        0           8,524
         CHARGES...........
   71   T-53A TRAINER......           0             501                                        0             501
        POST PRODUCTION
         SUPPORT
   72   B-2A...............           0             447                                        0             447
   73   B-2A...............           0          38,509                                        0          38,509
   74   B-52...............           0             199                                        0             199
   75   C-17A..............           0          12,028                                        0          12,028
   78   RC-135.............           0          29,700                                        0          29,700
   79   F-15...............           0          20,000                                        0          20,000
   80   F-15...............           0           2,524                                        0           2,524
   81   F-16...............           0          18,051                                        0          18,051
   82   F-22A..............           0         119,566                                        0         119,566
   83   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0          85,000                                        0          85,000
   85   RQ-4 POST                     0          86,695                                        0          86,695
         PRODUCTION CHARGES
   86   CV-22 MODS.........           0           4,500                                        0           4,500
        INDUSTRIAL
         PREPAREDNESS
   87   INDUSTRIAL                    0          14,739                                        0          14,739
         RESPONSIVENESS....
   88   C-130J.............           0         102,000          0         -102,100            0            -100
            Technical                                           [0]       [-102,000]
            adjustments....
        WAR CONSUMABLES
   89   WAR CONSUMABLES....           0          37,647                                        0          37,647
        OTHER PRODUCTION
         CHARGES
   90   OTHER PRODUCTION              0       1,339,160                                        0       1,339,160
         CHARGES...........
   92   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0             600                                        0             600
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
   93   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          53,212                                        0          53,212
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT              188      15,430,849         39        5,139,437          227      20,570,286
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        MISSILE REPLACEMENT
         EQUIPMENT--BALLIST
         IC
    1   MISSILE REPLACEMENT           0          99,098          0           20,000            0         119,098
         EQ-BALLISTIC......
            UFR: (NUC) TE                                       [0]         [20,000]
            Replacement
            Disconnect.....
        TACTICAL
    2   JOINT AIR-SURFACE           360         441,367                                      360         441,367
         STANDOFF MISSILE..
    3   LRASM0.............          15          44,728          0           17,000           15          61,728
            UFR: Long Range                                     [0]         [17,000]
            Anti-Ship
            Missile (LRASM)
    4   SIDEWINDER (AIM-9X)         310         125,350                                      310         125,350
    5   AMRAAM.............         205         304,327                                      205         304,327
    6   PREDATOR HELLFIRE           399          34,867                                      399          34,867
         MISSILE...........
    7   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB       5,039         266,030                                    5,039         266,030
        INDUSTRIAL
         FACILITIES
    8   INDUSTR'L                     0             926                                        0             926
         PREPAREDNS/POL
         PREVENTION........
        CLASS IV
    9   ICBM FUZE MOD......           0           6,334                                        0           6,334
   10   MM III                        0          80,109          0           11,000            0          91,109
         MODIFICATIONS.....
            UFR: (NUC)                                          [0]         [11,000]
            Upgrade Minimum
            Essential
            Emergency
            Communications
            Network (MEECN)
            (MMPU).........
   11   AGM-65D MAVERICK...           0             289                                        0             289
   13   AIR LAUNCH CRUISE             0          36,425                                        0          36,425
         MISSILE (ALCM)....
   14   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB           0          14,086                                        0          14,086
        MISSILE SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   15   INITIAL SPARES/               0         101,153                                        0         101,153
         REPAIR PARTS......
        SPECIAL PROGRAMS
   20   SPECIAL UPDATE                0          32,917                                        0          32,917
         PROGRAMS..........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
   21   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0         708,176                                        0         708,176
        TOTAL MISSILE             6,328       2,296,182          0           48,000        6,328       2,344,182
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        SPACE PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        SPACE PROGRAMS
    1   ADVANCED EHF.......           0          56,974                                        0          56,974
    2   AF SATELLITE COMM             0          57,516                                        0          57,516
         SYSTEM............
    3   COUNTERSPACE                  0          28,798                                        0          28,798
         SYSTEMS...........
    4   FAMILY OF BEYOND              0         146,972          0           12,528            0         159,500
         LINE-OF-SIGHT
         TERMINALS.........
            UFR: Family of                                      [0]         [12,528]
            Advance Beyond
            Line of Sight-
            Terminals......
    5   WIDEBAND GAPFILLER            0          80,849                                        0          80,849
         SATELLITES(SPACE).
    6   GPS III SPACE                 0          85,894                                        0          85,894
         SEGMENT...........
    7   GLOBAL POSTIONING             0           2,198                                        0           2,198
         (SPACE)...........
    8   SPACEBORNE EQUIP              0          25,048                                        0          25,048
         (COMSEC)..........
   10   MILSATCOM..........           0          33,033                                        0          33,033
   11   EVOLVED EXPENDABLE            0         957,420                                        0         957,420
         LAUNCH CAPABILITY.
   12   EVOLVED EXPENDABLE            3         606,488                                        3         606,488
         LAUNCH VEH(SPACE).
   13   SBIR HIGH (SPACE)..           0         981,009          0           73,800            0       1,054,809
            UFR: SBIRS                                          [0]         [73,800]
            equipment......
   14   SBIR HIGH (SPACE)             0         132,420                                        0         132,420
         (AP)..............
   15   NUDET DETECTION               0           6,370                                        0           6,370
         SYSTEM............
   16   SPACE MODS.........           0          37,203          0           21,000            0          58,203
            UFR: Fix                                            [0]         [21,000]
            Enterprise
            Space Battle
            Management
            Command &
            Control (BMC2).
   17   SPACELIFT RANGE               0         113,874                                        0         113,874
         SYSTEM SPACE......
        SPARES
   18   INITIAL SPARES/               0          18,709                                        0          18,709
         REPAIR PARTS......
        TOTAL SPACE                   3       3,370,775          0          107,328            3       3,478,103
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE
        ROCKETS
    1   ROCKETS............           0         147,454                                        0         147,454
        CARTRIDGES
    2   CARTRIDGES.........           0         161,744                                        0         161,744
        BOMBS
    3   PRACTICE BOMBS.....           0          28,509                                        0          28,509
    4   GENERAL PURPOSE               0         329,501                                        0         329,501
         BOMBS.............
    5   MASSIVE ORDNANCE              0          38,382                                        0          38,382
         PENETRATOR (MOP)..
    6   JOINT DIRECT ATTACK      10,330         319,525                                   10,330         319,525
         MUNITION..........
    7   B61................          30          77,068                                       30          77,068
    8   B61 (AP)...........           0          11,239                                        0          11,239
        OTHER ITEMS
    9   CAD/PAD............           0          53,469                                        0          53,469
   10   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0           5,921                                        0           5,921
         DISPOSAL (EOD)....
   11   SPARES AND REPAIR             0             678                                        0             678
         PARTS.............
   12   MODIFICATIONS......           0           1,409                                        0           1,409
   13   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           5,047                                        0           5,047
         MILLION...........
        FLARES
   15   FLARES.............           0         143,983                                        0         143,983
        FUZES
   16   FUZES..............           0          24,062                                        0          24,062
        SMALL ARMS
   17   SMALL ARMS.........           0          28,611                                        0          28,611
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT        10,360       1,376,602          0                0       10,360       1,376,602
         OF AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        PASSENGER CARRYING
         VEHICLES
    1   PASSENGER CARRYING            0          15,651          0            1,100            0          16,751
         VEHICLES..........
            UFR: Set the                                        [0]          [1,100]
            Theater
            initiative,
            PACOM..........
        CARGO AND UTILITY
         VEHICLES
    2   MEDIUM TACTICAL               0          54,607                                        0          54,607
         VEHICLE...........
    3   CAP VEHICLES.......           0           1,011                                        0           1,011
    4   CARGO AND UTILITY             0          28,670                                        0          28,670
         VEHICLES..........
        SPECIAL PURPOSE
         VEHICLES
    5   SECURITY AND                  0          59,398          0           10,610            0          70,008
         TACTICAL VEHICLES.
            UFR: Set the                                        [0]         [10,610]
            Theater
            initiative,
            PACOM..........
    6   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0          19,784                                        0          19,784
         VEHICLES..........
        FIRE FIGHTING
         EQUIPMENT
    7   FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH           0          14,768                                        0          14,768
         RESCUE VEHICLES...
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
    8   MATERIALS HANDLING            0          13,561          0            4,200            0          17,761
         VEHICLES..........
            UFR: Set the                                        [0]          [4,200]
            Theater (StT)
            PACOM..........
        BASE MAINTENANCE
         SUPPORT
    9   RUNWAY SNOW REMOV &           0           3,429          0           13,230            0          16,659
         CLEANING EQUIP....
            UFR: Set the                                        [0]         [13,230]
            Theater (StT)
            PACOM..........
   10   BASE MAINTENANCE              0          60,075          0              449            0          60,524
         SUPPORT VEHICLES..
            UFR: Set the                                        [0]            [449]
            Theater (StT)
            PACOM..........
        COMM SECURITY
         EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
   11   COMSEC EQUIPMENT...           0         115,000          0            8,000            0         123,000
            UFR: Cyber                                          [0]          [8,000]
            Squadron
            Initiative.....
        INTELLIGENCE
         PROGRAMS
   13   INTERNATIONAL INTEL           0          22,335                                        0          22,335
         TECH &
         ARCHITECTURES.....
   14   INTELLIGENCE                  0           5,892                                        0           5,892
         TRAINING EQUIPMENT
   15   INTELLIGENCE COMM             0          34,072                                        0          34,072
         EQUIPMENT.........
        ELECTRONICS
         PROGRAMS
   16   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          66,143          0           57,200            0         123,343
         & LANDING SYS.....
            UFR: Cyber                                          [0]          [8,000]
            Squadron
            Initiative
            (WSCR).........
            UFR: Deployable                                     [0]         [33,000]
            Radar Approach
            Control........
            UFR: D-ILS                                          [0]         [16,200]
            Procurement....
   17   NATIONAL AIRSPACE             0          12,641                                        0          12,641
         SYSTEM............
   18   BATTLE CONTROL                0           6,415          0            1,400            0           7,815
         SYSTEM--FIXED.....
            UFR: Battle                                         [0]          [1,400]
            Control System
            (BCS) Tech
            Refresh........
   19   THEATER AIR CONTROL           0          23,233                                        0          23,233
         SYS IMPROVEMENTS..
   20   WEATHER OBSERVATION           0          40,116          0           30,000            0          70,116
         FORECAST..........
            UFR:                                                [0]         [30,000]
            Installation
            and
            Notification
            Warning System
            (INWS) (ANG)...
   21   STRATEGIC COMMAND             0          72,810                                        0          72,810
         AND CONTROL.......
   22   CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN             0           9,864                                        0           9,864
         COMPLEX...........
   23   MISSION PLANNING              0          15,486                                        0          15,486
         SYSTEMS...........
   25   INTEGRATED STRAT              0           9,187                                        0           9,187
         PLAN & ANALY
         NETWORK (ISPAN)...
        SPCL COMM-
         ELECTRONICS
         PROJECTS
   26   GENERAL INFORMATION           0          51,826          0            6,300            0          58,126
         TECHNOLOGY........
            UFR: AFSPC                                          [0]          [6,300]
            Cyber Request
            for CMF Initial
            Skills Training
            (IST) Pipeline.
   27   AF GLOBAL COMMAND &           0           3,634                                        0           3,634
         CONTROL SYS.......
   28   MOBILITY COMMAND              0          10,083                                        0          10,083
         AND CONTROL.......
   29   AIR FORCE PHYSICAL            0         201,866                                        0         201,866
         SECURITY SYSTEM...
   30   COMBAT TRAINING               0         115,198                                        0         115,198
         RANGES............
   31   MINIMUM ESSENTIAL             0             292                                        0             292
         EMERGENCY COMM N..
   32   WIDE AREA                     0          62,087                                        0          62,087
         SURVEILLANCE (WAS)
   33   C3 COUNTERMEASURES.           0          37,764                                        0          37,764
   34   GCSS-AF FOS........           0           2,826                                        0           2,826
   35   DEFENSE ENTERPRISE            0           1,514                                        0           1,514
         ACCOUNTING AND
         MGMT SYSTEM.......
   36   THEATER BATTLE MGT            0           9,646                                        0           9,646
         C2 SYSTEM.........
   37   AIR & SPACE                   0          25,533                                        0          25,533
         OPERATIONS CTR-WPN
         SYS...............
        AIR FORCE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   40   BASE INFORMATION              0          28,159                                        0          28,159
         TRANSPT INFRAST
         (BITI) WIRED......
   41   AFNET..............           0         160,820          0          195,600            0         356,420
            UFR: ARAD                                           [0]         [26,000]
            Enterprise
            Software.......
            UFR: Inst                                           [0]        [169,600]
            Processing
            Nodes in FY18..
   42   JOINT                         0           5,135                                        0           5,135
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SUPPORT ELEMENT
         (JCSE)............
   43   USCENTCOM..........           0          18,719                                        0          18,719
        ORGANIZATION AND
         BASE
   44   TACTICAL C-E                  0         123,206                                        0         123,206
         EQUIPMENT.........
   45   COMBAT SURVIVOR               0           3,004                                        0           3,004
         EVADER LOCATER....
   46   RADIO EQUIPMENT....           0          15,736                                        0          15,736
   47   CCTV/AUDIOVISUAL              0           5,480                                        0           5,480
         EQUIPMENT.........
   48   BASE COMM                     0         130,539                                        0         130,539
         INFRASTRUCTURE....
        MODIFICATIONS
   49   COMM ELECT MODS....           0          70,798                                        0          70,798
        PERSONAL SAFETY &
         RESCUE EQUIP
   51   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          52,964          0           84,700            0         137,664
         MILLION...........
            UFR:                                                [0]         [83,700]
            Battlefield
            Airman Combat
            Equipment......
            UFR: Procure                                        [0]          [1,000]
            Parachute
            Phantom Oxygen
            System.........
        DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS
         HANDLING EQ
   52   MECHANIZED MATERIAL           0          10,381                                        0          10,381
         HANDLING EQUIP....
        BASE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   53   BASE PROCURED                 0          15,038                                        0          15,038
         EQUIPMENT.........
   54   ENGINEERING AND EOD           0          26,287                                        0          26,287
         EQUIPMENT.........
   55   MOBILITY EQUIPMENT.           0           8,470          0           36,680            0          45,150
            UFR: Basic                                          [0]         [36,680]
            Expeditionary
            Airfield
            Resources spare
            requirements in
            support of the
            Set the
            Theater, PACOM.
   56   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          28,768                                        0          28,768
         MILLION...........
        SPECIAL SUPPORT
         PROJECTS
   58   DARP RC135.........           0          25,985                                        0          25,985
   59   DCGS-AF............           0         178,423                                        0         178,423
   61   SPECIAL UPDATE                0         840,980                                        0         840,980
         PROGRAM...........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
   62   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0      16,601,513                                        0      16,601,513
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   64   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          26,675          0            2,930            0          29,605
         PARTS.............
            UFR: Basic                                          [0]          [2,930]
            Expeditionary
            Airfield
            Resources spare
            requirements in
            support of the
            Set the
            Theater, PACOM.
        TOTAL OTHER                   0      19,603,497          0          452,399            0      20,055,896
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT,
         DEFENSE-WIDE
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         OSD
   42   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,             20          36,999                                       20          36,999
         OSD...............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         NSA
   41   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0           5,938                                        0           5,938
         SECURITY PROGRAM
         (ISSP)............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         WHS
   45   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0          10,529                                        0          10,529
         WHS...............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DISA
    7   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0          24,805                                        0          24,805
         SECURITY..........
    8   TELEPORT PROGRAM...           0          46,638                                        0          46,638
    9   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          15,541                                        0          15,541
         MILLION...........
   10   NET CENTRIC                   0           1,161                                        0           1,161
         ENTERPRISE
         SERVICES (NCES)...
   11   DEFENSE INFORMATION           0         126,345                                        0         126,345
         SYSTEM NETWORK....
   12   CYBER SECURITY                0           1,817                                        0           1,817
         INITIATIVE........
   13   WHITE HOUSE                   0          45,243                                        0          45,243
         COMMUNICATION
         AGENCY............
   14   SENIOR LEADERSHIP             0         294,139                                        0         294,139
         ENTERPRISE........
   16   JOINT REGIONAL                0         188,483                                        0         188,483
         SECURITY STACKS
         (JRSS)............
   17   JOINT SERVICE                 0         100,783                                        0         100,783
         PROVIDER..........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DLA
   19   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           2,951                                        0           2,951
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DSS
   23   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           1,073                                        0           1,073
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DCAA
    1   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           1,475                                        0           1,475
         MILLION...........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         TJS
   43   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0           9,341                                        0           9,341
         TJS...............
   44   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0             903                                        0             903
         TJS--CE2T2........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         MISSILE DEFENSE
         AGENCY
   27   THAAD..............          34         451,592         24          319,400           58         770,992
            UFR: Procures                                      [24]        [319,400]
            additional
            THAAD
            Interceptors...
   28   AEGIS BMD..........          34         425,018                                       34         425,018
   29   AEGIS BMD (AP).....           0          38,738                                        0          38,738
   30   BMDS AN/TPY-2                 0             947                                        0             947
         RADARS............
   33   AEGIS ASHORE PHASE            0          59,739                                        0          59,739
         III...............
   34   IRON DOME..........           1          42,000          0           50,000            1          92,000
            Increase for Co-                                    [0]         [50,000]
            production of
            Iron Dome Tamir
            interceptors...
   35   AEGIS BMD HARDWARE           21         160,330                                       21         160,330
         AND SOFTWARE......
   78   DAVID'S SLING......           0               0          0          120,000            0         120,000
            Increase to                                         [0]        [120,000]
            DSWS Co-
            production.....
   79   ARROW UPPER TIER...           0               0          0          120,000            0         120,000
            Increase Arrow                                      [0]        [120,000]
            3 Co-production
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DHRA
    3   PERSONNEL                     0          14,588                                        0          14,588
         ADMINISTRATION....
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DEFENSE THREAT
         REDUCTION AGENCY
   25   VEHICLES...........           0             204                                        0             204
   26   OTHER MAJOR                   0          12,363                                        0          12,363
         EQUIPMENT.........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DODEA
   21   AUTOMATION/                   0           1,910                                        0           1,910
         EDUCATIONAL
         SUPPORT &
         LOGISTICS.........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DCMA
    2   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           4,347                                        0           4,347
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DMACT
   20   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           3          13,464                                        3          13,464
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
   46   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0         657,759                                        0         657,759
        AVIATION PROGRAMS
   49   ROTARY WING                   0         158,988          0          -13,500            0         145,488
         UPGRADES AND
         SUSTAINMENT.......
            SOCOM requested                                     [0]        [-13,500]
            transfer.......
   50   UNMANNED ISR.......           0          13,295                                        0          13,295
   51   NON-STANDARD                  0           4,892                                        0           4,892
         AVIATION..........
   52   U-28...............           0           5,769          1           14,800            1          20,569
            UFR: Aircraft                                       [1]         [14,800]
            loss
            replacement....
   53   MH-47 CHINOOK......           0          87,345                                        0          87,345
   55   CV-22 MODIFICATION.           0          42,178                                        0          42,178
   57   MQ-9 UNMANNED                 0          21,660                                        0          21,660
         AERIAL VEHICLE....
   59   PRECISION STRIKE              0         229,728                                        0         229,728
         PACKAGE...........
   60   AC/MC-130J.........           0         179,934                                        0         179,934
   61   C-130 MODIFICATIONS           0          28,059                                        0          28,059
        SHIPBUILDING
   62   UNDERWATER SYSTEMS.           0          92,606          0          -12,800            0          79,806
            SOCOM requested                                     [0]        [-12,800]
            transfer.......
        AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
   63   ORDNANCE ITEMS SURFACE
         SYSTEMS...........
   66   OTHER ITEMS ASSAULT
         MISSILE SYS
    8   JAVELIN (AAWS-M)             47           8,112                                       47           8,112
         SYSTEM SUMMARY....
    9   TOW 2 SYSTEM                 49           3,907                                       49           3,907
         SUMMARY...........
   11   GUIDED MLRS ROCKET        1,542         191,522                                    1,542         191,522
         (GMLRS)...........
   13   HIGH MOBILITY                 0          41,000                                        0          41,000
         ARTILLERY ROCKET
         SYSTEM (HIMARS....
   14   LETHAL MINIATURE            120           8,669                                      120           8,669
         AERIAL MISSILE
         SYSTEM (LMAMS.....
        MODIFICATIONS
   18   STINGER MODS.......           0          28,000                                        0          28,000
        TOTAL MISSILE             4,685         559,283          0                0        4,685         559,283
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         W&TCV, ARMY
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    1   BRADLEY PROGRAM....          60         200,000                                       60         200,000
    2   ARMORED MULTI                65         253,903                                       65         253,903
         PURPOSE VEHICLE
         (AMPV)............
        MODIFICATION OF
         TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    6   BRADLEY PROGRAM               0          30,000                                        0          30,000
         (MOD).............
    8   PALADIN INTEGRATED           12         125,736                                       12         125,736
         MANAGEMENT (PIM)..
   14   M1 ABRAMS TANK                0         138,700                                        0         138,700
         (MOD).............
   15   ABRAMS UPGRADE               36         442,800                                       36         442,800
         PROGRAM...........
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           173       1,191,139          0                0          173       1,191,139
         OF W&TCV, ARMY....
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, ARMY
        SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
         AMMUNITION
    3   CTG, HANDGUN, ALL             0               5                                        0               5
         TYPES.............
    4   CTG, .50 CAL, ALL             0             121                                        0             121
         TYPES.............
    5   CTG, 20MM, ALL                0           1,605                                        0           1,605
         TYPES.............
    7   CTG, 30MM, ALL                0          35,000                                        0          35,000
         TYPES.............
        ARTILLERY
         AMMUNITION
   15   PROJ 155MM EXTENDED         266          23,234                                      266          23,234
         RANGE M982........
   16   ARTILLERY                     0          20,023                                        0          20,023
         PROPELLANTS, FUZES
         AND PRIMERS, ALL..
        MINES
   17   MINES & CLEARING              0          11,615                                        0          11,615
         CHARGES, ALL TYPES
        ROCKETS
   19   SHOULDER LAUNCHED             0          25,000                                        0          25,000
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
   20   ROCKET, HYDRA 70,             0          75,820                                        0          75,820
         ALL TYPES.........
        OTHER AMMUNITION
   24   SIGNALS, ALL TYPES.           0           1,013                                        0           1,013
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           266         193,436          0                0          266         193,436
         OF AMMUNITION,
         ARMY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         ARMY
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
   10   FAMILY OF HEAVY               0          25,874                                        0          25,874
         TACTICAL VEHICLES
         (FHTV)............
   12   HVY EXPANDED MOBILE           0          38,628                                        0          38,628
         TACTICAL TRUCK EXT
         SERV..............
   14   MODIFICATION OF IN            0          64,647                                        0          64,647
         SVC EQUIP.........
   15   MINE-RESISTANT                0          17,508                                        0          17,508
         AMBUSH-PROTECTED
         (MRAP) MODS.......
        COMM--JOINT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   20   SIGNAL                        0           4,900                                        0           4,900
         MODERNIZATION
         PROGRAM...........
        COMM--COMBAT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   41   TRACTOR RIDE.......           0           1,000                                        0           1,000
        COMM--BASE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   62   INSTALLATION INFO             0           2,500                                        0           2,500
         INFRASTRUCTURE MOD
         PROGRAM...........
        ELECT EQUIP--TACT
         INT REL ACT
         (TIARA)
   68   DCGS-A (MIP).......           0          39,515                                        0          39,515
   70   TROJAN (MIP).......           0          21,310                                        0          21,310
   71   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0           2,300                                        0           2,300
         (INTEL SPT) (MIP).
   72   CI HUMINT AUTO                0          14,460                                        0          14,460
         REPRTING AND
         COLL(CHARCS)......
   75   BIOMETRIC TACTICAL            0           5,180                                        0           5,180
         COLLECTION DEVICES
         (MIP).............
        ELECT EQUIP--
         ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         (EW)
   80   FAMILY OF                     0          16,935                                        0          16,935
         PERSISTENT
         SURVEILLANCE
         CAPABILITIE.......
   81   COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/          0          18,874                                        0          18,874
         SECURITY
         COUNTERMEASURES...
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL SURV.
         (TAC SURV)
   84   NIGHT VISION                  0             377                                        0             377
         DEVICES...........
   85   SMALL TACTICAL                0              60                                        0              60
         OPTICAL RIFLE
         MOUNTED MLRF......
   87   INDIRECT FIRE                 0          57,500                                        0          57,500
         PROTECTION FAMILY
         OF SYSTEMS........
   93   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0           3,974                                        0           3,974
         (LLDR)............
   95   MORTAR FIRE CONTROL           0           2,947                                        0           2,947
         SYSTEM............
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL C2
         SYSTEMS
   98   AIR & MSL DEFENSE             0           9,100                                        0           9,100
         PLANNING & CONTROL
         SYS...............
        CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
         EQUIPMENT
  119   BASE DEFENSE                  0           3,726                                        0           3,726
         SYSTEMS (BDS).....
        COMBAT SERVICE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  136   HEATERS AND ECU'S..           0             270                                        0             270
  142   FIELD FEEDING                 0             145                                        0             145
         EQUIPMENT.........
  143   CARGO AERIAL DEL &            0           1,980                                        0           1,980
         PERSONNEL
         PARACHUTE SYSTEM..
        MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
  148   COMBAT SUPPORT                0          25,690                                        0          25,690
         MEDICAL...........
        MAINTENANCE
         EQUIPMENT
  149   MOBILE MAINTENANCE            0           1,124                                        0           1,124
         EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS.
        CONSTRUCTION
         EQUIPMENT
  153   HYDRAULIC EXCAVATOR           0           3,850                                        0           3,850
  157   HIGH MOBILITY                 0           1,932                                        0           1,932
         ENGINEER EXCAVATOR
         (HMEE)............
        GENERATORS
  164   GENERATORS AND                0             569                                        0             569
         ASSOCIATED EQUIP..
        TRAINING EQUIPMENT
  168   TRAINING DEVICES,             0           2,700                                        0           2,700
         NONSYSTEM.........
        TEST MEASURE AND
         DIG EQUIPMENT
         (TMD)
  173   INTEGRATED FAMILY             0           7,500                                        0           7,500
         OF TEST EQUIPMENT
         (IFTE)............
        OTHER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  176   RAPID EQUIPPING               0           8,500                                        0           8,500
         SOLDIER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
        TOTAL OTHER                   0         405,575          0                0            0         405,575
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        JOINT IMPROVISED-
         THREAT DEFEAT FUND
        NETWORK ATTACK
    1   RAPID ACQUISITION             0         483,058                                        0         483,058
         AND THREAT
         RESPONSE..........
        TOTAL JOINT                   0         483,058          0                0            0         483,058
         IMPROVISED-THREAT
         DEFEAT FUND.......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   27   STUASL0 UAV........           0           3,900                                        0           3,900
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   34   H-53 SERIES........           0             950                                        0             950
   35   SH-60 SERIES.......           0          15,382                                        0          15,382
   37   EP-3 SERIES........           0           7,220                                        0           7,220
   47   SPECIAL PROJECT               0          19,855                                        0          19,855
         AIRCRAFT..........
   51   COMMON ECM                    0          75,530                                        0          75,530
         EQUIPMENT.........
   62   QRC................           0          15,150                                        0          15,150
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   64   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          18,850                                        0          18,850
         PARTS.............
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIP & FACILITIES
   66   AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIAL           0             463                                        0             463
         FACILITIES........
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT                0         157,300          0                0            0         157,300
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        WEAPONS
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        STRATEGIC MISSILES
    3   TOMAHAWK...........          66         100,086                                       66         100,086
        TACTICAL MISSILES
    7   STANDARD MISSILE...           8          35,208                                        8          35,208
   11   HELLFIRE...........         110           8,771                                      110           8,771
   12   LASER MAVERICK.....           0           5,040                                        0           5,040
        MODIFICATION OF
         MISSILES
   17   ESSM...............           1           1,768                                        1           1,768
        GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
   35   SMALL ARMS AND                0           1,500                                        0           1,500
         WEAPONS...........
        TOTAL WEAPONS               185         152,373          0                0          185         152,373
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMO, NAVY & MC
        NAVY AMMUNITION
    1   GENERAL PURPOSE               0          74,021                                        0          74,021
         BOMBS.............
    2   JDAM...............       4,717         106,941                                    4,717         106,941
    3   AIRBORNE ROCKETS,             0           1,184                                        0           1,184
         ALL TYPES.........
    7   AIR EXPENDABLE                0          15,700                                        0          15,700
         COUNTERMEASURES...
    8   JATOS..............           0             540                                        0             540
   12   OTHER SHIP GUN                0          13,789                                        0          13,789
         AMMUNITION........
   13   SMALL ARMS &                  0           1,963                                        0           1,963
         LANDING PARTY AMMO
   14   PYROTECHNIC AND               0             765                                        0             765
         DEMOLITION........
   16   AMMUNITION LESS               0             866                                        0             866
         THAN $5 MILLION...
        MARINE CORPS
         AMMUNITION
   20   MORTARS............           0           1,290                                        0           1,290
   23   DIRECT SUPPORT                0           1,355                                        0           1,355
         MUNITIONS.........
   24   INFANTRY WEAPONS              0           1,854                                        0           1,854
         AMMUNITION........
   33   ARTILLERY MUNITIONS           0           5,319                                        0           5,319
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         4,717         225,587          0                0        4,717         225,587
         OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         NAVY
        OTHER SHIPBOARD
         EQUIPMENT
   25   UNDERWATER EOD                0          12,348                                        0          12,348
         PROGRAMS..........
        SMALL BOATS
   32   STANDARD BOATS.....           0          18,000                                        0          18,000
        SHIP SONARS
   46   SSN ACOUSTIC                  0          43,500                                        0          43,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
        AVIATION ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   78   NAVAL MISSION                 0           2,550                                        0           2,550
         PLANNING SYSTEMS..
        OTHER SHORE
         ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   80   TACTICAL/MOBILE C4I           0           7,900                                        0           7,900
         SYSTEMS...........
   81   DCGS-N.............           0           6,392                                        0           6,392
        CRYPTOLOGIC
         EQUIPMENT
  101   CRYPTOLOGIC                   0           2,280                                        0           2,280
         COMMUNICATIONS
         EQUIP.............
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  119   AVIATION SUPPORT              0          29,245                                        0          29,245
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SHIP MISSILE
         SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
  121   SHIP MISSILE                  0           2,436                                        0           2,436
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
        OTHER ORDNANCE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  126   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0          31,970                                        0          31,970
         DISPOSAL EQUIP....
        CIVIL ENGINEERING
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  132   GENERAL PURPOSE               0             496                                        0             496
         TRUCKS............
  134   FIRE FIGHTING                 0           2,304                                        0           2,304
         EQUIPMENT.........
  135   TACTICAL VEHICLES..           0           2,336                                        0           2,336
        SUPPLY SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  141   SUPPLY EQUIPMENT...           0             164                                        0             164
  143   FIRST DESTINATION             0             420                                        0             420
         TRANSPORTATION....
        COMMAND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  147   COMMAND SUPPORT               0          21,650                                        0          21,650
         EQUIPMENT.........
  152   OPERATING FORCES              0          15,800                                        0          15,800
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  154   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0           1,000                                        0           1,000
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  155   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          15,890                                        0          15,890
         EQUIPMENT.........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           2,200                                        0           2,200
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
  161   SPARES AND REPAIR             0           1,178                                        0           1,178
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL OTHER                   0         220,059          0                0            0         220,059
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT, MARINE
         CORPS
        ARTILLERY AND OTHER
         WEAPONS
    6   HIGH MOBILITY                 0           5,360                                        0           5,360
         ARTILLERY ROCKET
         SYSTEM............
        GUIDED MISSILES
   11   JAVELIN............          11           2,833                                       11           2,833
   12   FOLLOW ON TO SMAW..           0              49                                        0              49
   13   ANTI-ARMOR WEAPONS            0           5,024                                        0           5,024
         SYSTEM-HEAVY (AAWS-
         H)................
        REPAIR AND TEST
         EQUIPMENT
   17   REPAIR AND TEST               0           8,241                                        0           8,241
         EQUIPMENT.........
        OTHER SUPPORT (TEL)
   19   MODIFICATION KITS..           0             750                                        0             750
        COMMAND AND CONTROL
         SYSTEM (NON-TEL)
   20   ITEMS UNDER $5                0             200                                        0             200
         MILLION (COMM &
         ELEC).............
        RADAR + EQUIPMENT
         (NON-TEL)
   24   RQ-21 UAS..........           0           8,400                                        0           8,400
        INTELL/COMM
         EQUIPMENT (NON-
         TEL)
   26   FIRE SUPPORT SYSTEM           0              50                                        0              50
   27   INTELLIGENCE                  0           3,000                                        0           3,000
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
        OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
         TEL)
   37   COMMAND POST                  0           5,777                                        0           5,777
         SYSTEMS...........
   38   RADIO SYSTEMS......           0           4,590                                        0           4,590
        ENGINEER AND OTHER
         EQUIPMENT
   53   EOD SYSTEMS........           0          21,000                                        0          21,000
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT,           11          65,274          0                0           11          65,274
         MARINE CORPS......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   17   MQ-9...............          32         271,080                                       32         271,080
        AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
   33   C-17A..............           0          26,850                                        0          26,850
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   48   C-130J MODS........           0           8,400                                        0           8,400
   51   COMPASS CALL MODS..           0          56,720                                        0          56,720
   56   E-8................           0           3,000                                        0           3,000
   62   HC/MC-130                     0         153,080                                        0         153,080
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   63   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0          10,381                                        0          10,381
   65   MQ-9 MODS..........           0          56,400                                        0          56,400
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   67   INITIAL SPARES/               0         129,450                                        0         129,450
         REPAIR PARTS......
        COMMON SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   68   AIRCRAFT                      0          25,417                                        0          25,417
         REPLACEMENT
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT               32         740,778          0                0           32         740,778
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        TACTICAL
    6   PREDATOR HELLFIRE         3,230         294,480                                    3,230         294,480
         MISSILE...........
    7   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB       2,273          90,920                                    2,273          90,920
        CLASS IV
   11   AGM-65D MAVERICK...           0          10,000                                        0          10,000
        TOTAL MISSILE             5,503         395,400          0                0        5,503         395,400
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        SPACE PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        SPACE PROGRAMS
   10   MILSATCOM..........           0           2,256                                        0           2,256
        TOTAL SPACE                   0           2,256          0                0            0           2,256
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE
        ROCKETS
    1   ROCKETS............           0          49,050                                        0          49,050
        CARTRIDGES
    2   CARTRIDGES.........           0          11,384                                        0          11,384
        BOMBS
    6   JOINT DIRECT ATTACK      16,990         390,577                                   16,990         390,577
         MUNITION..........
        FLARES
   15   FLARES.............           0           3,498                                        0           3,498
        FUZES
   16   FUZES..............           0          47,000                                        0          47,000
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT        16,990         501,509          0                0       16,990         501,509
         OF AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        PASSENGER CARRYING
         VEHICLES
    1   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           3,855                                        0           3,855
         VEHICLES..........
        CARGO AND UTILITY
         VEHICLES
    4   CARGO AND UTILITY             0           1,882                                        0           1,882
         VEHICLES..........
        SPECIAL PURPOSE
         VEHICLES
    5   SECURITY AND                  0           1,100                                        0           1,100
         TACTICAL VEHICLES.
    6   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0          32,479                                        0          32,479
         VEHICLES..........
        FIRE FIGHTING
         EQUIPMENT
    7   FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH           0          22,583                                        0          22,583
         RESCUE VEHICLES...
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
    8   MATERIALS HANDLING            0           5,353                                        0           5,353
         VEHICLES..........
        BASE MAINTENANCE
         SUPPORT
    9   RUNWAY SNOW REMOV &           0          11,315                                        0          11,315
         CLEANING EQUIP....
   10   BASE MAINTENANCE              0          40,451                                        0          40,451
         SUPPORT VEHICLES..
        INTELLIGENCE
         PROGRAMS
   13   INTERNATIONAL INTEL           0           8,873                                        0           8,873
         TECH &
         ARCHITECTURES.....
   15   INTELLIGENCE COMM             0           2,000                                        0           2,000
         EQUIPMENT.........
        ELECTRONICS
         PROGRAMS
   16   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          56,500                                        0          56,500
         & LANDING SYS.....
   19   THEATER AIR CONTROL           0           4,970                                        0           4,970
         SYS IMPROVEMENTS..
        SPCL COMM-
         ELECTRONICS
         PROJECTS
   29   AIR FORCE PHYSICAL            0           3,000                                        0           3,000
         SECURITY SYSTEM...
        ORGANIZATION AND
         BASE
   48   BASE COMM                     0          55,000                                        0          55,000
         INFRASTRUCTURE....
        PERSONAL SAFETY &
         RESCUE EQUIP
   51   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           8,469                                        0           8,469
         MILLION...........
        BASE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   53   BASE PROCURED                 0           7,500                                        0           7,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
   54   ENGINEERING AND EOD           0          80,427                                        0          80,427
         EQUIPMENT.........
   56   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0         110,405                                        0         110,405
         MILLION...........
        SPECIAL SUPPORT
         PROJECTS
   58   DARP RC135.........           0             700                                        0             700
   59   DCGS-AF............           0           9,200                                        0           9,200
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0       3,542,825                                        0       3,542,825
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        TOTAL OTHER                   0       4,008,887          0                0            0       4,008,887
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT,
         DEFENSE-WIDE
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DISA
    8   TELEPORT PROGRAM...           0           1,979                                        0           1,979
   18   DEFENSE INFORMATION           0          12,000                                        0          12,000
         SYSTEMS NETWORK...
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          43,653                                        0          43,653
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        AVIATION PROGRAMS
   46   MANNED ISR.........           0          15,900                                        0          15,900
   47   MC-12..............           0          20,000                                        0          20,000
   50   UNMANNED ISR.......           0          38,933                                        0          38,933
   51   NON-STANDARD                  0           9,600                                        0           9,600
         AVIATION..........
   52   U-28...............           0           8,100                                        0           8,100
   53   MH-47 CHINOOK......           0          10,270                                        0          10,270
   57   MQ-9 UNMANNED                 0          19,780                                        0          19,780
         AERIAL VEHICLE....
   61   C-130 MODIFICATIONS           0           3,750                                        0           3,750
        AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
   63   ORDNANCE ITEMS PERSONNEL/                  20,216                               20,216
                                 TRAINING TECHNOLOGY.
   27    0602786A               WARFIGHTER TECHNOLOGY....            39,559                               39,559
   28    0602787A               MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.......            83,434                               83,434
  236    222222                 UNDISTRIBUTED APPLIED                     0            15,000             15,000
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Modernizing Army                                  [15,000]
                                    capabilities and
                                    Third Offset.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH           889,182            25,000            914,182
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   29    0603001A               WARFIGHTER ADVANCED                  44,863                               44,863
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   30    0603002A               MEDICAL ADVANCED                     67,780                               67,780
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   31    0603003A               AVIATION ADVANCED                   160,746           -20,000            140,746
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Platform design &                                [-20,000]
                                    structure systems.
   32    0603004A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                84,079                               84,079
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   33    0603005A               COMBAT VEHICLE AND                  125,537                              125,537
                                 AUTOMOTIVE ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   34    0603006A               SPACE APPLICATION                    12,231                               12,231
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   35    0603007A               MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND               6,466                                6,466
                                 TRAINING ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   36    0603009A               TRACTOR HIKE.............            28,552                               28,552
   37    0603015A               NEXT GENERATION TRAINING             16,434                               16,434
                                 & SIMULATION SYSTEMS.
   39    0603125A               COMBATING TERRORISM--                26,903                               26,903
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   40    0603130A               TRACTOR NAIL.............             4,880                                4,880
   41    0603131A               TRACTOR EGGS.............             4,326                                4,326
   42    0603270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   31,296                               31,296
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   43    0603313A               MISSILE AND ROCKET                   62,850                               62,850
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   44    0603322A               TRACTOR CAGE.............            12,323                               12,323
   45    0603461A               HIGH PERFORMANCE                    182,331            40,000            222,331
                                 COMPUTING MODERNIZATION
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      Program increase.....                             [40,000]
   46    0603606A               LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 17,948                               17,948
                                 BARRIER ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   47    0603607A               JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS              5,796                                5,796
                                 PROGRAM.
   48    0603710A               NIGHT VISION ADVANCED                47,135                               47,135
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   49    0603728A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                10,421                               10,421
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   50    0603734A               MILITARY ENGINEERING                 32,448            -5,000             27,448
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Combat engineering                                [-5,000]
                                    system.
   51    0603772A               ADVANCED TACTICAL                    52,206                               52,206
                                 COMPUTER SCIENCE AND
                                 SENSOR TECHNOLOGY.
   52    0603794A               C3 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY...            33,426                               33,426
  237    333333                 UNDISTRIBUTED ADVANCED                    0            20,000             20,000
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Modernizing Army                                  [20,000]
                                    capabilities and
                                    Third Offset.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 1,070,977            35,000          1,105,977
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   53    0603305A               ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE                   9,634                                9,634
                                 SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.
   55    0603327A               AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE              33,949                               33,949
                                 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
   56    0603619A               LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 72,909                               72,909
                                 BARRIER--ADV DEV.
   57    0603627A               SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND                  7,135                                7,135
                                 TARGET DEFEATING SYS--
                                 ADV DEV.
   58    0603639A               TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER              41,452            24,450             65,902
                                 AMMUNITION.
         .....................      UFR: Munitions and CM                             [24,450]
                                    development.
   59    0603645A               ARMORED SYSTEM                       32,739            70,000            102,739
                                 MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
         .....................      UFR: Supports                                     [70,000]
                                    development of
                                    critical ground
                                    combat vehicle
                                    technologies.
   60    0603747A               SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                  10,157                               10,157
                                 SURVIVABILITY.
   61    0603766A               TACTICAL ELECTRONIC                  27,733             1,620             29,353
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
                                 DEV.
         .....................      UFR: Funds of the                                  [1,620]
                                    Advanced Miniaturized
                                    Data Acquisition
                                    System-Next.
   62    0603774A               NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS                 12,347                               12,347
                                 ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
   63    0603779A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                10,456                               10,456
                                 TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
   64    0603790A               NATO RESEARCH AND                     2,588                                2,588
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   65    0603801A               AVIATION--ADV DEV........            14,055                               14,055
   66    0603804A               LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               35,333                               35,333
                                 EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
   67    0603807A               MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV.            33,491                               33,491
   68    0603827A               SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED            20,239                               20,239
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   69    0604017A               ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT.....            39,608             5,000             44,608
         .....................      UFR: Accelerate armed                              [5,000]
                                    Robotic Wingman
                                    development.
   70    0604100A               ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES.             9,921                                9,921
   71    0604114A               LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE               76,728                               76,728
                                 DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
   72    0604115A               TECHNOLOGY MATURATION               115,221                              115,221
                                 INITIATIVES.
   73    0604117A               MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR            20,000                               20,000
                                 DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
   74    0604118A               TRACTOR BEAM.............            10,400                               10,400
   75    0604120A               ASSURED POSITIONING,                164,967               126            165,093
                                 NAVIGATION AND TIMING
                                 (PNT).
         .....................      UFR: Fully funds Anti-                               [126]
                                    Jam Antenna
                                    development and
                                    testing.
   76    0604121A               SYNTHETIC TRAINING                    1,600                                1,600
                                 ENVIRONMENT REFINEMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPING.
   77    0604319A               INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION             11,303                               11,303
                                 CAPABILITY INCREMENT 2-
                                 INTERCEPT (IFPC2).
   78    0305251A               CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS                56,492                               56,492
                                 FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
   79    1206308A               ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS                   20,432                               20,432
                                 INTEGRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   890,889           101,196            992,085
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
   80    0604201A               AIRCRAFT AVIONICS........            30,153            12,000             42,153
         .....................      UFR: Funds                                        [12,000]
                                    implementation of
                                    Assured Position,
                                    Navigation, and
                                    Timing (A-PNT).
   81    0604270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   71,671                               71,671
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   83    0604290A               MID-TIER NETWORKING                  10,589                               10,589
                                 VEHICULAR RADIO (MNVR).
   84    0604321A               ALL SOURCE ANALYSIS                   4,774                                4,774
                                 SYSTEM.
   85    0604328A               TRACTOR CAGE.............            17,252            13,000             30,252
         .....................      UFR: Provides the                                 [13,000]
                                    Army's Cyber Mission
                                    Force (CMF) with
                                    classified cyber
                                    tools.
   86    0604601A               INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS.            87,643             6,000             93,643
         .....................      UFR: Acceleration of                               [6,000]
                                    qualification of
                                    XM914 and XM913.
   87    0604604A               MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES.             6,039                                6,039
   88    0604611A               JAVELIN..................            21,095                               21,095
   89    0604622A               FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL             10,507                               10,507
                                 VEHICLES.
   90    0604633A               AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL......             3,536                                3,536
   92    0604642A               LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED                7,000                                7,000
                                 VEHICLES.
   93    0604645A               ARMORED SYSTEMS                      36,242                               36,242
                                 MODERNIZATION (ASM)--ENG
                                 DEV.
   94    0604710A               NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG           108,504            17,500            126,004
                                 DEV.
         .....................      UFR: Develop Thermal                              [17,500]
                                    Weapon Sights.
   95    0604713A               COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING,             3,702                                3,702
                                 AND EQUIPMENT.
   96    0604715A               NON-SYSTEM TRAINING                  43,575                               43,575
                                 DEVICES--ENG DEV.
   97    0604741A               AIR DEFENSE COMMAND,                 28,726                               28,726
                                 CONTROL AND
                                 INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
   98    0604742A               CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION              18,562                               18,562
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
   99    0604746A               AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT              8,344                                8,344
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  100    0604760A               DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE             11,270                               11,270
                                 SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG
                                 DEV.
  101    0604768A               BRILLIANT ANTI-ARMOR                 10,000                               10,000
                                 SUBMUNITION (BAT).
  102    0604780A               COMBINED ARMS TACTICAL               18,566                               18,566
                                 TRAINER (CATT) CORE.
  103    0604798A               BRIGADE ANALYSIS,                   145,360                              145,360
                                 INTEGRATION AND
                                 EVALUATION.
  104    0604802A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--             145,232            16,178            161,410
                                 ENG DEV.
         .....................      UFR: 105mm Anti-                                   [8,000]
                                    Personnel / Wall
                                    Breach Ammunition.
         .....................      UFR: Devops the 40mm                               [4,178]
                                    Low Velocity M320
                                    Door Breaching
                                    cartridge.
         .....................      UFR: Testing for the                               [4,000]
                                    Anti-Tank Confined
                                    Space Tandem Warhead.
  105    0604804A               LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               90,965                               90,965
                                 EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
  106    0604805A               COMMAND, CONTROL,                     9,910                                9,910
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
                                 ENG DEV.
  107    0604807A               MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL             39,238                               39,238
                                 BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
                                 EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
  108    0604808A               LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER--           34,684                               34,684
                                 ENG DEV.
  109    0604818A               ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND &             164,409                              164,409
                                 CONTROL HARDWARE &
                                 SOFTWARE.
  110    0604820A               RADAR DEVELOPMENT........            32,968                               32,968
  111    0604822A               GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE              49,554                               49,554
                                 BUSINESS SYSTEM (GFEBS).
  112    0604823A               FIREFINDER...............            45,605                               45,605
  113    0604827A               SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR             16,127                               16,127
                                 DEM/VAL.
  114    0604852A               SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY               98,600            35,000            133,600
                                 ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
         .....................      UFR: Expands                                      [25,000]
                                    installation of
                                    Active Protection
                                    Systems.
         .....................      UFR: Modular Active                               [10,000]
                                    Protection System.
  115    0604854A               ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD...             1,972             2,000              3,972
         .....................      UFR: Funds research                                [2,000]
                                    for 55 cal tube.
  116    0605013A               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               81,776                               81,776
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  117    0605018A               INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND            172,361                              172,361
                                 PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
  118    0605028A               ARMORED MULTI-PURPOSE               199,778                              199,778
                                 VEHICLE (AMPV).
  119    0605029A               INTEGRATED GROUND                     4,418                                4,418
                                 SECURITY SURVEILLANCE
                                 RESPONSE CAPABILITY
                                 (IGSSR-C).
  120    0605030A               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               15,877                               15,877
                                 CENTER (JTNC).
  121    0605031A               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               44,150                               44,150
                                 (JTN).
  122    0605032A               TRACTOR TIRE.............            34,670            78,900            113,570
         .....................      UFR: Develops                                     [78,900]
                                    Offensive Cyber
                                    Operations
                                    capabilities.
  123    0605033A               GROUND-BASED OPERATIONAL              5,207                                5,207
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--
                                 EXPEDITIONARY (GBOSS-E).
  124    0605034A               TACTICAL SECURITY SYSTEM              4,727                                4,727
                                 (TSS).
  125    0605035A               COMMON INFRARED                     105,778                              105,778
                                 COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
  126    0605036A               COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS             6,927                                6,927
                                 DESTRUCTION (CWMD).
  127    0605037A               EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND                 214                                  214
                                 DETAINEE PROCESSING.
  128    0605038A               NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL                   16,125                               16,125
                                 CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE
                                 VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR
                                 SUITE.
  129    0605041A               DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL                 55,165                               55,165
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  130    0605042A               TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO               20,076                               20,076
                                 SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
  131    0605047A               CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM..            20,322           -20,300                 22
         .....................      Consolidate                                      [-20,300]
                                    requirements.
  132    0605049A               MISSILE WARNING SYSTEM               55,810           155,000            210,810
                                 MODERNIZATION (MWSM).
         .....................      UFR: Supports                                    [155,000]
                                    Directed Requirement
                                    for Limited Interim
                                    Missile Warning
                                    System to detect
                                    Enemy (MANPADS).
  133    0605051A               AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY               30,879                               30,879
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  134    0605052A               INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION            175,069                              175,069
                                 CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK
                                 1.
  135    0605053A               GROUND ROBOTICS..........            70,760                               70,760
  137    0605380A               AMF JOINT TACTICAL RADIO              8,965                                8,965
                                 SYSTEM (JTRS).
  138    0605450A               JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND                  34,626                               34,626
                                 MISSILE (JAGM).
  140    0605457A               ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND             336,420          -200,000            136,420
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
         .....................      Early to need........                           [-200,000]
  143    0605766A               NATIONAL CAPABILITIES                 6,882             2,500              9,382
                                 INTEGRATION (MIP).
         .....................      UFR: Funds                                         [2,500]
                                    development for
                                    Remote Ground
                                    Terminal.
  144    0605812A               JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                 23,467                               23,467
                                 VEHICLE (JLTV)
                                 ENGINEERING AND
                                 MANUFACTURING
                                 DEVELOPMENT PH.
  145    0605830A               AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT               6,930                                6,930
                                 EQUIPMENT.
  146    0210609A               PALADIN INTEGRATED                    6,112                                6,112
                                 MANAGEMENT (PIM).
  147    0303032A               TROJAN--RH12.............             4,431                                4,431
  150    0304270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   14,616                               14,616
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  151    1205117A               TRACTOR BEARS............            17,928                               17,928
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   3,012,840           117,778          3,130,618
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  152    0604256A               THREAT SIMULATOR                     22,862                               22,862
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  153    0604258A               TARGET SYSTEMS                       13,902                               13,902
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  154    0604759A               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....           102,901                              102,901
  155    0605103A               RAND ARROYO CENTER.......            20,140                               20,140
  156    0605301A               ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL.....           246,663             4,362            251,025
         .....................      UFR: Increases                                     [4,362]
                                    funding for
                                    facilities
                                    sustainment from 75%
                                    to 83%.
  157    0605326A               CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION             29,820                               29,820
                                 PROGRAM.
  159    0605601A               ARMY TEST RANGES AND                307,588                              307,588
                                 FACILITIES.
  160    0605602A               ARMY TECHNICAL TEST                  49,242                               49,242
                                 INSTRUMENTATION AND
                                 TARGETS.
  161    0605604A               SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY              41,843                               41,843
                                 ANALYSIS.
  162    0605606A               AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION...             4,804                                4,804
  163    0605702A               METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TO             7,238                                7,238
                                 RDT&E ACTIVITIES.
  164    0605706A               MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS            21,890                               21,890
  165    0605709A               EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN              12,684                               12,684
                                 ITEMS.
  166    0605712A               SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL               51,040                               51,040
                                 TESTING.
  167    0605716A               ARMY EVALUATION CENTER...            56,246                               56,246
  168    0605718A               ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD             1,829                                1,829
                                 COLLABORATION & INTEG.
  169    0605801A               PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES...            55,060                               55,060
  170    0605803A               TECHNICAL INFORMATION                33,934                               33,934
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  171    0605805A               MUNITIONS                            43,444                               43,444
                                 STANDARDIZATION,
                                 EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
  172    0605857A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                 5,087                                5,087
                                 TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
  173    0605898A               ARMY DIRECT REPORT                   54,679                               54,679
                                 HEADQUARTERS--R&D--MHA.
  174    0606001A               MILITARY GROUND-BASED                 7,916                                7,916
                                 CREW TECHNOLOGY.
  175    0606002A               RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC              61,254                               61,254
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE TEST
                                 SITE.
  176    0303260A               DEFENSE MILITARY                      1,779                                1,779
                                 DECEPTION INITIATIVE.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL RDT&E MANAGEMENT         1,253,845             4,362          1,258,207
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  178    0603778A               MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT              8,929                                8,929
                                 PROGRAM.
  179    0603813A               TRACTOR PULL.............             4,014                                4,014
  180    0605024A               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY                4,094                                4,094
                                 SUPPORT.
  181    0607131A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                15,738                               15,738
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAMS.
  182    0607133A               TRACTOR SMOKE............             4,513                                4,513
  183    0607134A               LONG RANGE PRECISION                102,014            42,731            144,745
                                 FIRES (LRPF).
         .....................      UFR: Accelerates LRPF                             [42,731]
                                    procurement from FY25.
  184    0607135A               APACHE PRODUCT                       59,977                               59,977
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  185    0607136A               BLACKHAWK PRODUCT                    34,416                               34,416
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  186    0607137A               CHINOOK PRODUCT                     194,567                              194,567
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  187    0607138A               FIXED WING PRODUCT                    9,981                                9,981
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  188    0607139A               IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE             204,304                              204,304
                                 PROGRAM.
  189    0607140A               EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES                 1,023                                1,023
                                 FROM NIE.
  190    0607141A               LOGISTICS AUTOMATION.....             1,504                                1,504
  191    0607142A               AVIATION ROCKET SYSTEM               10,064             8,000             18,064
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT AND
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      UFR: Qualifies M282                                [8,000]
                                    for use by AH-64
                                    aircraft.
  192    0607143A               UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM             38,463                               38,463
                                 UNIVERSAL PRODUCTS.
  193    0607665A               FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS.....             6,159                                6,159
  194    0607865A               PATRIOT PRODUCT                      90,217            90,000            180,217
                                 IMPROVEMENT.
         .....................      UFR: Funds Terminal                               [90,000]
                                    High Altitude Area
                                    Defense (THAAD)/
                                    Missile Segment
                                    Enhanced (MSE)
                                    integration.
  195    0202429A               AEROSTAT JOINT PROJECT--              6,749                                6,749
                                 COCOM EXERCISE.
  196    0203728A               JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP                 33,520                               33,520
                                 OPERATION COORDINATION
                                 SYSTEM (JADOCS).
  197    0203735A               COMBAT VEHICLE                      343,175             8,000            351,175
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
         .....................      Laser warning sensor                               [4,000]
                                    suite.
         .....................      UFR: Accelerate the                                [4,000]
                                    development of the
                                    M88A2E1.
  198    0203740A               MANEUVER CONTROL SYSTEM..             6,639                                6,639
  199    0203743A               155MM SELF-PROPELLED                 40,784                               40,784
                                 HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS.
  200    0203744A               AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS/              39,358                               39,358
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAMS.
  201    0203752A               AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT               145                                  145
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  202    0203758A               DIGITIZATION.............             4,803                                4,803
  203    0203801A               MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE                   2,723            26,000             28,723
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      UFR: Supports                                     [26,000]
                                    research for the
                                    Stinger Product
                                    Improvement Program
                                    (PIP).
  204    0203802A               OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT                 5,000                                5,000
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
  205    0203808A               TRACTOR CARD.............            37,883                               37,883
  207    0205410A               MATERIALS HANDLING                    1,582                                1,582
                                 EQUIPMENT.
  208    0205412A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                   195                                  195
                                 TECHNOLOGY--OPERATIONAL
                                 SYSTEM DEV.
  209    0205456A               LOWER TIER AIR AND                   78,926                               78,926
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE (AMD)
                                 SYSTEM.
  210    0205778A               GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH              102,807                              102,807
                                 ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
  213    0303028A               SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE            13,807            21,845             35,652
                                 ACTIVITIES.
         .....................      UFR: Funds Offensive                              [21,845]
                                    Cyber capabilities
                                    development.
  214    0303140A               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                 132,438                              132,438
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  215    0303141A               GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                64,370                               64,370
                                 SYSTEM.
  217    0303150A               WWMCCS/GLOBAL COMMAND AND            10,475                               10,475
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM.
  220    0305172A               COMBINED ADVANCED                     1,100                                1,100
                                 APPLICATIONS.
  222    0305204A               TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              9,433                                9,433
                                 VEHICLES.
  223    0305206A               AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE               5,080                                5,080
                                 SYSTEMS.
  224    0305208A               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           24,700           -20,000              4,700
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
         .....................      Change in tactical                               [-20,000]
                                    requirements.
  225    0305219A               MQ-1C GRAY EAGLE UAS.....             9,574                                9,574
  226    0305232A               RQ-11 UAV................             2,191                                2,191
  227    0305233A               RQ-7 UAV.................            12,773                               12,773
  228    0307665A               BIOMETRICS ENABLED                    2,537                                2,537
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  229    0310349A               WIN-T INCREMENT 2--                   4,723            -4,000                723
                                 INITIAL NETWORKING.
         .....................      Change in tactical                                [-4,000]
                                    requirements.
  230    0708045A               END ITEM INDUSTRIAL                  60,877                               60,877
                                 PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
  231    1203142A               SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT            11,959                               11,959
                                 (SPACE).
  232    1208053A               JOINT TACTICAL GROUND                10,228                               10,228
                                 SYSTEM.
  234    9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......             7,154                                7,154
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              1,877,685           172,576          2,050,261
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                   9,425,440           480,912          9,906,352
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, ARMY.
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, NAVY
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601103N               UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 118,130             5,000            123,130
                                 INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Program increase.....                              [5,000]
    2    0601152N               IN-HOUSE LABORATORY                  19,438                               19,438
                                 INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
    3    0601153N               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           458,333                              458,333
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           595,901             5,000            600,901
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    4    0602114N               POWER PROJECTION APPLIED             13,553                               13,553
                                 RESEARCH.
    5    0602123N               FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED            125,557                              125,557
                                 RESEARCH.
    6    0602131M               MARINE CORPS LANDING                 53,936                               53,936
                                 FORCE TECHNOLOGY.
    7    0602235N               COMMON PICTURE APPLIED               36,450                               36,450
                                 RESEARCH.
    8    0602236N               WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT               48,649                               48,649
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
    9    0602271N               ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS              79,598                               79,598
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   10    0602435N               OCEAN WARFIGHTING                    42,411            15,000             57,411
                                 ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Research vessel refit                             [15,000]
   11    0602651M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS              6,425                                6,425
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   12    0602747N               UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED             56,094            25,000             81,094
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Program increase.....                             [25,000]
   13    0602750N               FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           156,805                              156,805
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   14    0602782N               MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY               32,733                               32,733
                                 WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
   15    0602792N               INNOVATIVE NAVAL                    171,146           -10,000            161,146
                                 PROTOTYPES (INP) APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      General decrease.....                            [-10,000]
   16    0602861N               SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY               62,722                               62,722
                                 MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
                                 ACITIVITIES.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH           886,079            30,000            916,079
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   19    0603123N               FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED            26,342                               26,342
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   20    0603271N               ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS               9,360                                9,360
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   21    0603640M               USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY            154,407            -5,000            149,407
                                 DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
         .....................      Futures directorate..                             [-5,000]
   22    0603651M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             13,448                               13,448
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   23    0603673N               FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           231,772            -5,000            226,772
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Capable manpower,                                 [-5,000]
                                    enterprise and
                                    platform enablers.
   24    0603680N               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             57,797                               57,797
                                 PROGRAM.
   25    0603729N               WARFIGHTER PROTECTION                 4,878                                4,878
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   27    0603758N               NAVY WARFIGHTING                     64,889                               64,889
                                 EXPERIMENTS AND
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   28    0603782N               MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY               15,164            15,000             30,164
                                 WARFARE ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Maritime                                          [15,000]
                                    intelligence,
                                    surveillance, and
                                    reconaissance
                                    technology.
   29    0603801N               INNOVATIVE NAVAL                    108,285            15,000            123,285
                                 PROTOTYPES (INP)
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Underwater unmanned                               [15,000]
                                    vehicle prototypes.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   686,342            20,000            706,342
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   30    0603207N               AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL                   48,365                               48,365
                                 APPLICATIONS.
   31    0603216N               AVIATION SURVIVABILITY...             5,566                                5,566
   33    0603251N               AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.........               695                                  695
   34    0603254N               ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT..             7,661                                7,661
   35    0603261N               TACTICAL AIRBORNE                     3,707                                3,707
                                 RECONNAISSANCE.
   36    0603382N               ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS              61,381                               61,381
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   37    0603502N               SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER           154,117           -26,000            128,117
                                 MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
         .....................      PLUS experimentation.                             [10,000]
         .....................      Reduce Barracuda.....                            [-16,000]
         .....................      Reduce Snakehead.....                            [-20,000]
   38    0603506N               SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO                 14,974                               14,974
                                 DEFENSE.
   39    0603512N               CARRIER SYSTEMS                       9,296                                9,296
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   40    0603525N               PILOT FISH...............           132,083                              132,083
   41    0603527N               RETRACT LARCH............            15,407                               15,407
   42    0603536N               RETRACT JUNIPER..........           122,413                              122,413
   43    0603542N               RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL.....               745                                  745
   44    0603553N               SURFACE ASW..............             1,136                                1,136
   45    0603561N               ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM           100,955                              100,955
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   46    0603562N               SUBMARINE TACTICAL                   13,834                               13,834
                                 WARFARE SYSTEMS.
   47    0603563N               SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED                36,891                               36,891
                                 DESIGN.
   48    0603564N               SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN &            12,012            30,000             42,012
                                 FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
         .....................      Aircraft carrier                                  [30,000]
                                    preliminary design.
   49    0603570N               ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER              329,500                              329,500
                                 SYSTEMS.
   50    0603573N               ADVANCED SURFACE                     29,953                               29,953
                                 MACHINERY SYSTEMS.
   51    0603576N               CHALK EAGLE..............           191,610                              191,610
   52    0603581N               LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP                 40,991            -7,000             33,991
                                 (LCS).
         .....................      Excess program                                    [-7,000]
                                    support.
   53    0603582N               COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION            24,674                               24,674
   54    0603595N               OHIO REPLACEMENT.........           776,158                              776,158
   55    0603596N               LCS MISSION MODULES......           116,871                              116,871
   56    0603597N               AUTOMATED TEST AND                    8,052                                8,052
                                 ANALYSIS.
   57    0603599N               FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT......           143,450                              143,450
   58    0603609N               CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS...             8,909                                8,909
   60    0603635M               MARINE CORPS GROUND                   1,428                                1,428
                                 COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM.
   61    0603654N               JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE              53,367                               53,367
                                 ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
   63    0603713N               OCEAN ENGINEERING                     8,212                                8,212
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   64    0603721N               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.            20,214                               20,214
   65    0603724N               NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM......            50,623                               50,623
   66    0603725N               FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT...             2,837                                2,837
   67    0603734N               CHALK CORAL..............           245,143                              245,143
   68    0603739N               NAVY LOGISTIC                         2,995                                2,995
                                 PRODUCTIVITY.
   69    0603746N               RETRACT MAPLE............           306,101                              306,101
   70    0603748N               LINK PLUMERIA............           253,675                              253,675
   71    0603751N               RETRACT ELM..............            55,691                               55,691
   72    0603764N               LINK EVERGREEN...........            48,982                               48,982
   74    0603790N               NATO RESEARCH AND                     9,099                                9,099
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   75    0603795N               LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY...            33,568                               33,568
   76    0603851M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             29,873                               29,873
                                 TESTING.
   77    0603860N               JOINT PRECISION APPROACH            106,391                              106,391
                                 AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
                                 VAL.
   78    0603925N               DIRECTED ENERGY AND                 107,310                              107,310
                                 ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
   79    0604112N               GERALD R. FORD CLASS                 83,935                               83,935
                                 NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
                                 (CVN 78--80).
   81    0604272N               TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL             46,844                               46,844
                                 INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
                                 (TADIRCM).
   83    0604286M               MARINE CORPS ADDITIVE                 6,200                                6,200
                                 MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   85    0604320M               RAPID TECHNOLOGY                      7,055            10,000             17,055
                                 CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE.
         .....................      Increase rapid                                    [10,000]
                                    acquisition
                                    capability for Marine
                                    Corps Warfighting Lab.
   86    0604454N               LX (R)...................             9,578                                9,578
   87    0604536N               ADVANCED UNDERSEA                    66,543           -52,900             13,643
                                 PROTOTYPING.
         .....................      Funding early to need                            [-52,900]
   89    0604659N               PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS             31,315                               31,315
                                 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
   90    0604707N               SPACE AND ELECTRONIC                 42,851                               42,851
                                 WARFARE (SEW)
                                 ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
                                 SUPPORT.
   91    0604786N               OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE              160,694                              160,694
                                 WARFARE WEAPON
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   93    0303354N               ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT--             8,278                                8,278
                                 MIP.
   94    0304240M               ADVANCED TACTICAL                     7,979                                7,979
                                 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
   95    0304270N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                      527                                  527
                                 DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 4,218,714           -45,900          4,172,814
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
   96    0603208N               TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT.            16,945                               16,945
   97    0604212N               OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT...            26,786                               26,786
   98    0604214N               AV-8B AIRCRAFT--ENG DEV..            48,780                               48,780
   99    0604215N               STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT....             2,722                                2,722
  100    0604216N               MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER              5,371                                5,371
                                 UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
  101    0604218N               AIR/OCEAN EQUIPMENT                     782                                  782
                                 ENGINEERING.
  102    0604221N               P-3 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM             1,361                                1,361
  103    0604230N               WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM...            14,167                               14,167
  104    0604231N               TACTICAL COMMAND SYSTEM..            55,695                               55,695
  105    0604234N               ADVANCED HAWKEYE.........           292,535                              292,535
  106    0604245N               H-1 UPGRADES.............            61,288                               61,288
  107    0604261N               ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS..            37,167                               37,167
  108    0604262N               V-22A....................           171,386            15,000            186,386
         .....................      UFR: MV-22 Common                                 [15,000]
                                    Configuration CC-RAM
                                    improvements.
  109    0604264N               AIR CREW SYSTEMS                     13,235            20,000             33,235
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Physiological Episode                             [10,000]
                                    prize competition.
         .....................      Physiological                                     [10,000]
                                    episodes.
  110    0604269N               EA-18....................           173,488                              173,488
  111    0604270N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   54,055             3,000             57,055
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      UFR: Intrepid Tiger                                [3,000]
                                    UH-1Y Jettison
                                    Capability.
  112    0604273N               EXECUTIVE HELO                      451,938                              451,938
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  113    0604274N               NEXT GENERATION JAMMER              632,936                              632,936
                                 (NGJ).
  114    0604280N               JOINT TACTICAL RADIO                  4,310                                4,310
                                 SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
  115    0604282N               NEXT GENERATION JAMMER               66,686                               66,686
                                 (NGJ) INCREMENT II.
  116    0604307N               SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT            390,238                              390,238
                                 SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
  117    0604311N               LPD-17 CLASS SYSTEMS                    689                                  689
                                 INTEGRATION.
  118    0604329N               SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)           112,846                              112,846
  119    0604366N               STANDARD MISSILE                    158,578                              158,578
                                 IMPROVEMENTS.
  120    0604373N               AIRBORNE MCM.............            15,734                               15,734
  122    0604378N               NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE                25,445                               25,445
                                 CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
                                 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
  124    0604501N               ADVANCED ABOVE WATER                 87,233                               87,233
                                 SENSORS.
  125    0604503N               SSN-688 AND TRIDENT                 130,981                              130,981
                                 MODERNIZATION.
  126    0604504N               AIR CONTROL..............            75,186                               75,186
  127    0604512N               SHIPBOARD AVIATION                  177,926                              177,926
                                 SYSTEMS.
  128    0604518N               COMBAT INFORMATION CENTER             8,062                                8,062
                                 CONVERSION.
  129    0604522N               AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE              32,090                               32,090
                                 RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
  130    0604558N               NEW DESIGN SSN...........           120,087                              120,087
  131    0604562N               SUBMARINE TACTICAL                   50,850                               50,850
                                 WARFARE SYSTEM.
  132    0604567N               SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/                67,166                               67,166
                                 LIVE FIRE T&E.
  133    0604574N               NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER                4,817                                4,817
                                 RESOURCES.
  134    0604580N               VIRGINIA PAYLOAD MODULE              72,861                               72,861
                                 (VPM).
  135    0604601N               MINE DEVELOPMENT.........            25,635                               25,635
  136    0604610N               LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO                  28,076                               28,076
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  137    0604654N               JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE               7,561                                7,561
                                 ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
  138    0604703N               PERSONNEL, TRAINING,                 40,828                               40,828
                                 SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
                                 FACTORS.
  139    0604727N               JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON                   435                                  435
                                 SYSTEMS.
  140    0604755N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT           161,713             3,000            164,713
                                 & CONTROL).
         .....................      UFR: Ship C2 Systems                               [3,000]
                                    for Amphibs.
  141    0604756N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE                   212,412                              212,412
                                 (ENGAGE: HARD KILL).
  142    0604757N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE                   103,391                              103,391
                                 (ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW).
  143    0604761N               INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING.            34,855                               34,855
  144    0604771N               MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT......             9,353                                9,353
  145    0604777N               NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM.....            92,546                               92,546
  146    0604800M               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                152,934            91,200            244,134
                                 (JSF)--EMD.
         .....................      SDD plus up..........                             [91,200]
  147    0604800N               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                108,931            66,700            175,631
                                 (JSF)--EMD.
         .....................      SDD plus up..........                             [66,700]
  148    0604810M               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                144,958                              144,958
                                 FOLLOW ON MODERNIZATION
                                 (FOM)--MARINE CORPS.
  149    0604810N               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                143,855                              143,855
                                 FOLLOW ON MODERNIZATION
                                 (FOM)--NAVY.
  150    0605013M               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               14,865                               14,865
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  151    0605013N               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY              152,977           -35,045            117,932
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Navy ePS consolidate                             [-11,200]
                                    requirements.
         .....................      NSIPS consolidate                                [-23,845]
                                    requirements.
  152    0605024N               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY                3,410                                3,410
                                 SUPPORT.
  153    0605212N               CH-53K RDTE..............           340,758                              340,758
  154    0605215N               MISSION PLANNING.........            33,430                               33,430
  155    0605217N               COMMON AVIONICS..........            58,163                               58,163
  156    0605220N               SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR              22,410                               22,410
                                 (SSC).
  157    0605327N               T-AO 205 CLASS...........             1,961                                1,961
  158    0605414N               UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION           222,208                              222,208
                                 (UCA).
  159    0605450N               JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND                  15,473                               15,473
                                 MISSILE (JAGM).
  160    0605500N               MULTI-MISSION MARITIME               11,795                               11,795
                                 AIRCRAFT (MMA).
  161    0605504N               MULTI-MISSION MARITIME              181,731                              181,731
                                 (MMA) INCREMENT III.
  162    0605611M               MARINE CORPS ASSAULT                178,993                              178,993
                                 VEHICLES SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  163    0605813M               JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                 20,710                               20,710
                                 VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  164    0204202N               DDG-1000.................           140,500           -50,000             90,500
         .....................      Unjustified cost                                 [-50,000]
                                    growth.
  168    0304785N               TACTICAL CRYPTOLOGIC                 28,311                               28,311
                                 SYSTEMS.
  170    0306250M               CYBER OPERATIONS                      4,502                                4,502
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   6,362,102           113,855          6,475,957
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  171    0604256N               THREAT SIMULATOR                     91,819                               91,819
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  172    0604258N               TARGET SYSTEMS                       23,053                               23,053
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  173    0604759N               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....            52,634            13,000             65,634
         .....................      UFR: Critical                                     [13,000]
                                    infrastructure
                                    investments for major
                                    range and test
                                    facilities.
  174    0605126N               JOINT THEATER AIR AND                   141                                  141
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE
                                 ORGANIZATION.
  175    0605152N               STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  3,917                                3,917
                                 SUPPORT--NAVY.
  176    0605154N               CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES            50,432                               50,432
  179    0605804N               TECHNICAL INFORMATION                   782                                  782
                                 SERVICES.
  180    0605853N               MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL &              94,562            -5,500             89,062
                                 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
         .....................      Unjustified cost                                  [-5,500]
                                    growth.
  181    0605856N               STRATEGIC TECHNICAL                   4,313                                4,313
                                 SUPPORT.
  182    0605861N               RDT&E SCIENCE AND                     1,104                                1,104
                                 TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT.
  183    0605863N               RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT             105,666                              105,666
                                 SUPPORT.
  184    0605864N               TEST AND EVALUATION                 373,667                              373,667
                                 SUPPORT.
  185    0605865N               OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 20,298                               20,298
                                 EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
  186    0605866N               NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC            17,341                               17,341
                                 WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
  188    0605873M               MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE            21,751                               21,751
                                 SUPPORT.
  189    0605898N               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......            44,279                               44,279
  190    0606355N               WARFARE INNOVATION                   28,841                               28,841
                                 MANAGEMENT.
  191    0902498N               MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS               1,749                                1,749
                                 (DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
                                 ACTIVITIES).
  194    1206867N               SEW SURVEILLANCE/                     9,408                                9,408
                                 RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT                 945,757             7,500            953,257
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  196    0607658N               COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT               92,571            29,000            121,571
                                 CAPABILITY (CEC).
         .....................      UFR: Accelerate                                   [18,000]
                                    Tactical Data
                                    Distribution
                                    Initiative.
         .....................      UFR: IFF Mode 5                                   [11,000]
                                    acceleration.
  197    0607700N               DEPLOYABLE JOINT COMMAND              3,137                                3,137
                                 AND CONTROL.
  198    0101221N               STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS             135,219                              135,219
                                 SYSTEM SUPPORT.
  199    0101224N               SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY             36,242                               36,242
                                 PROGRAM.
  200    0101226N               SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC                   12,053                               12,053
                                 WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.
  201    0101402N               NAVY STRATEGIC                       18,221                               18,221
                                 COMMUNICATIONS.
  203    0204136N               F/A-18 SQUADRONS.........           224,470                              224,470
  204    0204163N               FLEET TELECOMMUNICATIONS             33,525                               33,525
                                 (TACTICAL).
  205    0204228N               SURFACE SUPPORT..........            24,829                               24,829
  206    0204229N               TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK               133,617                              133,617
                                 MISSION PLANNING CENTER
                                 (TMPC).
  207    0204311N               INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE              38,972                               38,972
                                 SYSTEM.
  208    0204413N               AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL                   3,940                                3,940
                                 SUPPORT UNITS
                                 (DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
  209    0204460M               GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED             54,645                               54,645
                                 RADAR (G/ATOR).
  210    0204571N               CONSOLIDATED TRAINING                66,518                               66,518
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
  211    0204574N               CRYPTOLOGIC DIRECT                    1,155                                1,155
                                 SUPPORT.
  212    0204575N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW)              51,040                               51,040
                                 READINESS SUPPORT.
  213    0205601N               HARM IMPROVEMENT.........            87,989            10,000             97,989
         .....................      UFR: Weapons                                      [10,000]
                                    Improvement.
  214    0205604N               TACTICAL DATA LINKS......            89,852                               89,852
  215    0205620N               SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM            29,351                               29,351
                                 INTEGRATION.
  216    0205632N               MK-48 ADCAP..............            68,553                               68,553
  217    0205633N               AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS....           119,099                              119,099
  218    0205675N               OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER           127,445                              127,445
                                 SYSTEMS.
  219    0206313M               MARINE CORPS                        123,825                              123,825
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
  220    0206335M               COMMON AVIATION COMMAND               7,343                                7,343
                                 AND CONTROL SYSTEM
                                 (CAC2S).
  221    0206623M               MARINE CORPS GROUND                  66,009                               66,009
                                 COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
                                 SYSTEMS.
  222    0206624M               MARINE CORPS COMBAT                  25,258                               25,258
                                 SERVICES SUPPORT.
  223    0206625M               USMC INTELLIGENCE/                   30,886                               30,886
                                 ELECTRONIC WARFARE
                                 SYSTEMS (MIP).
  224    0206629M               AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT                   58,728                               58,728
                                 VEHICLE.
  225    0207161N               TACTICAL AIM MISSILES....            42,884             9,000             51,884
         .....................      UFR: Weapons                                       [9,000]
                                    Improvement.
  226    0207163N               ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           25,364                               25,364
                                 TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
  232    0303138N               CONSOLIDATED AFLOAT                  24,271                               24,271
                                 NETWORK ENTERPRISE
                                 SERVICES (CANES).
  233    0303140N               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  50,269                               50,269
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  236    0305192N               MILITARY INTELLIGENCE                 6,352                                6,352
                                 PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
  237    0305204N               TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              7,770                                7,770
                                 VEHICLES.
  238    0305205N               UAS INTEGRATION AND                  39,736                               39,736
                                 INTEROPERABILITY.
  239    0305208M               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           12,867                               12,867
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  240    0305208N               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           46,150                               46,150
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  241    0305220N               MQ-4C TRITON.............            84,115                               84,115
  242    0305231N               MQ-8 UAV.................            62,656                               62,656
  243    0305232M               RQ-11 UAV................             2,022                                2,022
  245    0305234N               SMALL (LEVEL 0) TACTICAL              4,835                                4,835
                                 UAS (STUASL0).
  246    0305239M               RQ-21A...................             8,899                                8,899
  247    0305241N               MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR            99,020                               99,020
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  248    0305242M               UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS              18,578                               18,578
                                 (UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
  249    0305421N               RQ-4 MODERNIZATION.......           229,404                              229,404
  250    0308601N               MODELING AND SIMULATION               5,238                                5,238
                                 SUPPORT.
  251    0702207N               DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-              38,227                               38,227
                                 IF).
  252    0708730N               MARITIME TECHNOLOGY                   4,808                                4,808
                                 (MARITECH).
  253    1203109N               SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS             37,836                               37,836
                                 (SPACE).
  255    9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......         1,364,347           200,000          1,564,347
         .....................      Classified project                               [200,000]
                                    0428.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              3,980,140           248,000          4,228,140
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  17,675,035           378,455         18,053,490
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, NAVY.
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, AF
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601102F               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           342,919                              342,919
    2    0601103F               UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 147,923                              147,923
                                 INITIATIVES.
    3    0601108F               HIGH ENERGY LASER                    14,417                               14,417
                                 RESEARCH INITIATIVES.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           505,259                 0            505,259
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    4    0602102F               MATERIALS................           124,264                              124,264
    5    0602201F               AEROSPACE VEHICLE                   124,678             5,000            129,678
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
         .....................      Hypersonic wind                                    [5,000]
                                    tunnels.
    6    0602202F               HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS                 108,784            25,000            133,784
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
         .....................      Advanced training                                 [25,000]
                                    environments.
    7    0602203F               AEROSPACE PROPULSION.....           192,695             8,000            200,695
         .....................      Program increase.....                              [5,500]
         .....................      UFR: S&T TOA to 1.9%.                              [2,500]
    8    0602204F               AEROSPACE SENSORS........           152,782                              152,782
    9    0602298F               SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY                8,353                                8,353
                                 MANAGEMENT-- MAJOR
                                 HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
   10    0602601F               SPACE TECHNOLOGY.........           116,503                              116,503
   11    0602602F               CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS...           112,195                              112,195
   12    0602605F               DIRECTED ENERGY                     132,993             8,300            141,293
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      UFR: S&T TOA to 1.9%.                              [8,300]
   13    0602788F               DOMINANT INFORMATION                167,818                              167,818
                                 SCIENCES AND METHODS.
   14    0602890F               HIGH ENERGY LASER                    43,049                               43,049
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH         1,284,114            46,300          1,330,414
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   15    0603112F               ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR               37,856                               37,856
                                 WEAPON SYSTEMS.
   16    0603199F               SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND              22,811                               22,811
                                 TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
   17    0603203F               ADVANCED AEROSPACE                   40,978                               40,978
                                 SENSORS.
   18    0603211F               AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/           115,966             5,700            121,666
                                 DEMO.
         .....................      UFR: S&T TOA to 1.9%.                              [5,700]
   19    0603216F               AEROSPACE PROPULSION AND            104,499            13,500            117,999
                                 POWER TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      UFR: S&T TOA to 1.9%.                             [13,500]
   20    0603270F               ELECTRONIC COMBAT                    60,551             5,000             65,551
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Software engineering                               [5,000]
                                    capabilities.
   21    0603401F               ADVANCED SPACECRAFT                  58,910            15,000             73,910
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      UFR: Commercial SSA                               [15,000]
                                    consortia/testbed.
   22    0603444F               MAUI SPACE SURVEILLANCE              10,433                               10,433
                                 SYSTEM (MSSS).
   23    0603456F               HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS                  33,635                               33,635
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   24    0603601F               CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS                167,415                              167,415
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   25    0603605F               ADVANCED WEAPONS                     45,502                               45,502
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   26    0603680F               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             46,450                               46,450
                                 PROGRAM.
   27    0603788F               BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE                49,011                               49,011
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   794,017            39,200            833,217
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   28    0603260F               INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED                 5,652                                5,652
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   30    0603742F               COMBAT IDENTIFICATION                24,397                               24,397
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   31    0603790F               NATO RESEARCH AND                     3,851                                3,851
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   33    0603851F               INTERCONTINENTAL                     10,736                               10,736
                                 BALLISTIC MISSILE--DEM/
                                 VAL.
   34    0603859F               POLLUTION PREVENTION--DEM/                2                                    2
                                 VAL.
   35    0604015F               LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER         2,003,580                            2,003,580
   36    0604201F               INTEGRATED AVIONICS                  65,458            35,400            100,858
                                 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      UFR: GPS Receiver                                 [35,400]
                                    Development.
   37    0604257F               ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND              68,719            14,700             83,419
                                 SENSORS.
         .....................      UFR: Hyperspectral                                [14,700]
                                    Chip Development.
   38    0604288F               NATIONAL AIRBORNE OPS                 7,850                                7,850
                                 CENTER (NAOC) RECAP.
   39    0604317F               TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER......             3,295                                3,295
   40    0604327F               HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED               17,365                               17,365
                                 TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
                                 (HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
   41    0604414F               CYBER RESILIENCY OF                  32,253            10,200             42,453
                                 WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS.
         .....................      UFR: Cyber Security &                             [10,200]
                                    Resiliency for Weapon
                                    Systems.
   44    0604776F               DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION            26,222                               26,222
                                 ENTERPRISE R&D.
   46    0604858F               TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM..           840,650            95,000            935,650
         .....................      UFR: Directed Energy                              [70,000]
                                    Prototyping.
         .....................      UFR: Hypersonics                                  [10,000]
                                    Prototyping.
         .....................      UFR: Long-Endurance                               [15,000]
                                    Aerial Platform Ahead
                                    Prototyping.
   47    0605230F               GROUND BASED STRATEGIC              215,721                              215,721
                                 DETERRENT.
   49    0207110F               NEXT GENERATION AIR                 294,746           147,000            441,746
                                 DOMINANCE.
         .....................      UFR: Penetrating                                 [147,000]
                                    Counter air (PCA)
                                    Risk Reduction.
   50    0207455F               THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG-              10,645                               10,645
                                 RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
   52    0305236F               COMMON DATA LINK                     41,509                               41,509
                                 EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA).
   53    0306250F               CYBER OPERATIONS                    226,287                              226,287
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   54    0306415F               ENABLED CYBER ACTIVITIES.            16,687                               16,687
   55    0408011F               SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT              4,500                                4,500
                                 CONTROL.
   56    0901410F               CONTRACTING INFORMATION              15,867           -15,867
                                 TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
         .....................      Consolidate                                      [-15,867]
                                    requirements.
   57    1203164F               NAVSTAR GLOBAL                      253,939            98,500            352,439
                                 POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER
                                 EQUIPMENT) (SPACE).
         .....................      UFR: Military GPS                                 [98,500]
                                    User Equipment INC2.
   58    1203710F               EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS....            10,000                               10,000
   59    1206422F               WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON.           112,088                              112,088
   60    1206425F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            34,764                               34,764
                                 SYSTEMS.
   61    1206434F               MIDTERM POLAR MILSATCOM              63,092                               63,092
                                 SYSTEM.
   62    1206438F               SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.             7,842           120,800            128,642
         .....................      UFR: Space Defense                               [113,800]
                                    Force Packaging.
         .....................      UFR: Space Enterprise                              [7,000]
                                    Defense
                                    Implementation.
   63    1206730F               SPACE SECURITY AND                   41,385                               41,385
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   64    1206760F               PROTECTED TACTICAL                   18,150                               18,150
                                 ENTERPRISE SERVICE
                                 (PTES).
   65    1206761F               PROTECTED TACTICAL                   24,201                               24,201
                                 SERVICE (PTS).
   66    1206855F               PROTECTED SATCOM SERVICES            16,000                               16,000
                                 (PSCS)--AGGREGATED.
   67    1206857F               OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE             87,577                               87,577
                                 SPACE.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 4,605,030           505,733          5,110,763
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
   68    0604200F               FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON                5,100                                5,100
                                 ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
   69    0604201F               INTEGRATED AVIONICS                 101,203                              101,203
                                 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
   70    0604222F               NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT..             3,009                                3,009
   71    0604270F               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                    2,241                                2,241
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   72    0604281F               TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS               38,250                               38,250
                                 ENTERPRISE.
   73    0604287F               PHYSICAL SECURITY                    19,739                               19,739
                                 EQUIPMENT.
   74    0604329F               SMALL DIAMETER BOMB                  38,979                               38,979
                                 (SDB)--EMD.
   78    0604429F               AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC                   7,091                                7,091
                                 ATTACK.
   80    0604602F               ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE                    46,540                               46,540
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   81    0604604F               SUBMUNITIONS.............             2,705                                2,705
   82    0604617F               AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT.....            31,240                               31,240
   84    0604706F               LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS.....             9,060                                9,060
   85    0604735F               COMBAT TRAINING RANGES...            87,350                               87,350
   86    0604800F               F-35--EMD................           292,947           172,000            464,947
         .....................      SDD plus up..........                            [172,000]
   88    0604932F               LONG RANGE STANDOFF                 451,290                              451,290
                                 WEAPON.
   89    0604933F               ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION..           178,991                              178,991
   90    0605030F               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               12,736                               12,736
                                 CENTER (JTNC).
   91    0605031F               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK                9,319                                9,319
                                 (JTN).
   92    0605213F               F-22 MODERNIZATION                   13,600                               13,600
                                 INCREMENT 3.2B.
   94    0605221F               KC-46....................            93,845                               93,845
   95    0605223F               ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING..           105,999                              105,999
   96    0605229F               COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER.           354,485                              354,485
  100    0605458F               AIR & SPACE OPS CENTER              119,745          -104,800             14,945
                                 10.2 RDT&E.
         .....................      Restructure of                                  [-104,800]
                                    program.
  101    0605931F               B-2 DEFENSIVE MANAGEMENT            194,570                              194,570
                                 SYSTEM.
  102    0101125F               NUCLEAR WEAPONS                      91,237                               91,237
                                 MODERNIZATION.
  103    0207171F               F-15 EPAWSS..............           209,847                              209,847
  104    0207328F               STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON...             3,400                                3,400
  105    0207701F               FULL COMBAT MISSION                  16,727                               16,727
                                 TRAINING.
  109    0307581F               JSTARS RECAP.............           417,201                              417,201
  110    0401310F               C-32 EXECUTIVE TRANSPORT              6,017                                6,017
                                 RECAPITALIZATION.
  111    0401319F               PRESIDENTIAL AIRCRAFT               434,069                              434,069
                                 RECAPITALIZATION (PAR).
  112    0701212F               AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS...            18,528                               18,528
  113    1203176F               COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER               24,967                               24,967
                                 LOCATOR.
  114    1203940F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            10,029                               10,029
                                 OPERATIONS.
  115    1206421F               COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS.....            66,370                               66,370
  116    1206425F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            48,448                               48,448
                                 SYSTEMS.
  117    1206426F               SPACE FENCE..............            35,937            26,900             62,837
         .....................      UFR: Space Fence Site                             [26,900]
                                    1 & Ground Based
                                    Operational
                                    Surveillance System.
  118    1206431F               ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM              145,610                              145,610
                                 (SPACE).
  119    1206432F               POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE)..            33,644                               33,644
  120    1206433F               WIDEBAND GLOBAL SATCOM               14,263            37,000             51,263
                                 (SPACE).
         .....................      UFR: Fix wideband Ka                              [37,000]
                                    Anti-jam Enhancement
                                    (KAJE).
  121    1206441F               SPACE BASED INFRARED                311,844            12,800            324,644
                                 SYSTEM (SBIRS) HIGH EMD.
         .....................      UFR: Fix upgrades                                 [12,800]
                                    Space Based Infrared
                                    System.
  122    1206442F               EVOLVED SBIRS............            71,018                               71,018
  123    1206853F               EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH           297,572                              297,572
                                 VEHICLE PROGRAM (SPACE)--
                                 EMD.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   4,476,762           143,900          4,620,662
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  124    0604256F               THREAT SIMULATOR                     35,405                               35,405
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  125    0604759F               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....            82,874            20,000            102,874
         .....................      Advanced weapons                                  [15,000]
                                    system testing
                                    capabilities.
         .....................      UFR: Weapon System                                 [5,000]
                                    Cyber Resiliency-TE.
  126    0605101F               RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE...            34,346                               34,346
  128    0605712F               INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST             15,523                               15,523
                                 & EVALUATION.
  129    0605807F               TEST AND EVALUATION                 678,289            27,400            705,689
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................      UFR: 4th Gen Mods....                             [23,000]
         .....................      UFR: Weapon System                                 [4,400]
                                    Cyber Resiliency-TE.
  130    0605826F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               219,809                              219,809
                                 POWER.
  131    0605827F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL VIG           223,179                              223,179
                                 & COMBAT SYS.
  132    0605828F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               138,556                              138,556
                                 REACH.
  133    0605829F               ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER,               221,393                              221,393
                                 NETWORK, & BUS SYS.
  134    0605830F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               152,577                              152,577
                                 BATTLE MGMT.
  135    0605831F               ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY           196,561                              196,561
                                 INTEGRATION.
  136    0605832F               ACQ WORKFORCE- ADVANCED              28,322                               28,322
                                 PRGM TECHNOLOGY.
  137    0605833F               ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR              126,611                              126,611
                                 SYSTEMS.
  140    0605898F               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......             9,154                                9,154
  141    0605976F               FACILITIES RESTORATION              135,507                              135,507
                                 AND MODERNIZATION--TEST
                                 AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.
  142    0605978F               FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT--             28,720                               28,720
                                 TEST AND EVALUATION
                                 SUPPORT.
  143    0606017F               REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND            35,453           100,000            135,453
                                 MATURATION.
         .....................      UFR: Modeling and                                 [70,000]
                                    Simulation Joint
                                    Simulation
                                    Environment.
         .....................      UFR:AS2030 Planning                               [30,000]
                                    for Development.
  146    0308602F               ENTEPRISE INFORMATION                29,049                               29,049
                                 SERVICES (EIS).
  147    0702806F               ACQUISITION AND                      14,980                               14,980
                                 MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
  148    0804731F               GENERAL SKILL TRAINING...             1,434                                1,434
  150    1001004F               INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES.             4,569                                4,569
  151    1206116F               SPACE TEST AND TRAINING              25,773                               25,773
                                 RANGE DEVELOPMENT.
  152    1206392F               SPACE AND MISSILE CENTER            169,887                              169,887
                                 (SMC) CIVILIAN WORKFORCE.
  153    1206398F               SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS               9,531                                9,531
                                 CENTER--MHA.
  154    1206860F               ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH                20,975            13,300             34,275
                                 PROGRAM (SPACE).
         .....................      UFR: Rocket System                                [13,300]
                                    Launch Program (RSLP).
  155    1206864F               SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP).            25,398                               25,398
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT               2,663,875           160,700          2,824,575
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  157    0604222F               NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT..            27,579                               27,579
  158    0604233F               SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE             5,776                                5,776
                                 FLIGHT TRAINING.
  159    0604445F               WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE...            16,247                               16,247
  161    0605018F               AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL              21,915           -21,915
                                 AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
         .....................      Consolidate                                      [-21,915]
                                    requirements.
  162    0605024F               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY               33,150                               33,150
                                 EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
  163    0605117F               FOREIGN MATERIEL                     66,653                               66,653
                                 ACQUISITION AND
                                 EXPLOITATION.
  164    0605278F               HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E....            38,579                               38,579
  165    0606018F               NC3 INTEGRATION..........            12,636                               12,636
  166    0101113F               B-52 SQUADRONS...........           111,910                              111,910
  167    0101122F               AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE                     463                                  463
                                 MISSILE (ALCM).
  168    0101126F               B-1B SQUADRONS...........            62,471                               62,471
  169    0101127F               B-2 SQUADRONS............           193,108                              193,108
  170    0101213F               MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS......           210,845                              210,845
         .....................      Requested transfer:                              [-20,000]
                                    Ground and Comms
                                    Equipment.
         .....................      Requested transfer:                               [20,000]
                                    ICBM Cryptography
                                    Upgrade II.
  171    0101313F               INTEGRATED STRATEGIC                 25,736                               25,736
                                 PLANNING AND ANALYSIS
                                 NETWORK (ISPAN)--
                                 USSTRATCOM.
  173    0101316F               WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC             6,272             4,000             10,272
                                 COMMUNICATIONS.
         .....................      UFR: NC3--Global                                   [4,000]
                                    Assured
                                    Communications CBA
                                    Execution.
  174    0101324F               INTEGRATED STRATEGIC                 11,032                               11,032
                                 PLANNING & ANALYSIS
                                 NETWORK.
  176    0102110F               UH-1N REPLACEMENT PROGRAM           108,617                              108,617
  177    0102326F               REGION/SECTOR OPERATION               3,347                                3,347
                                 CONTROL CENTER
                                 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
  179    0205219F               MQ-9 UAV.................           201,394                              201,394
  182    0207131F               A-10 SQUADRONS...........            17,459                               17,459
  183    0207133F               F-16 SQUADRONS...........           246,578            25,000            271,578
         .....................      UFR: F-16 MIDS-JTRS..                             [25,000]
  184    0207134F               F-15E SQUADRONS..........           320,271                              320,271
  185    0207136F               MANNED DESTRUCTIVE                   15,106                               15,106
                                 SUPPRESSION.
  186    0207138F               F-22A SQUADRONS..........           610,942                              610,942
  187    0207142F               F-35 SQUADRONS...........           334,530                              334,530
  188    0207161F               TACTICAL AIM MISSILES....            34,952            20,000             54,952
         .....................      Pulsed rocket motor                               [20,000]
                                    technologies.
  189    0207163F               ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           61,322                               61,322
                                 TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
  191    0207227F               COMBAT RESCUE--PARARESCUE               693                                  693
  193    0207249F               PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS              1,714                                1,714
                                 PROCUREMENT.
  194    0207253F               COMPASS CALL.............            14,040            20,200             34,240
         .....................      UFR: Baseline 3 (BL3)                             [20,200]
                                    Advanced Radar
                                    Countermeasure System.
  195    0207268F               AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT           109,243                              109,243
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  197    0207325F               JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE                 29,932                               29,932
                                 STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
  198    0207410F               AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS               26,956                               26,956
                                 CENTER (AOC).
  199    0207412F               CONTROL AND REPORTING                 2,450                                2,450
                                 CENTER (CRC).
  200    0207417F               AIRBORNE WARNING AND                151,726                              151,726
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM (AWACS).
  201    0207418F               TACTICAL AIRBORNE CONTROL             3,656                                3,656
                                 SYSTEMS.
  203    0207431F               COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE              13,420                               13,420
                                 SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
  204    0207444F               TACTICAL AIR CONTROL                 10,623                               10,623
                                 PARTY-MOD.
  205    0207448F               C2ISR TACTICAL DATA LINK.             1,754                                1,754
  206    0207452F               DCAPES...................            17,382                               17,382
  207    0207573F               NATIONAL TECHNICAL                    2,307                                2,307
                                 NUCLEAR FORENSICS.
  208    0207590F               SEEK EAGLE...............            25,397                               25,397
  209    0207601F               USAF MODELING AND                    10,175                               10,175
                                 SIMULATION.
  210    0207605F               WARGAMING AND SIMULATION             12,839                               12,839
                                 CENTERS.
  211    0207697F               DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND              4,190                                4,190
                                 EXERCISES.
  212    0208006F               MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS.            85,531                               85,531
  213    0208007F               TACTICAL DECEPTION.......             3,761                                3,761
  214    0208087F               AF OFFENSIVE CYBERSPACE              35,693                               35,693
                                 OPERATIONS.
  215    0208088F               AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE              20,964                               20,964
                                 OPERATIONS.
  218    0301017F               GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED              3,549                                3,549
                                 ON NETWORK (GSIN).
  219    0301112F               NUCLEAR PLANNING AND                  4,371                                4,371
                                 EXECUTION SYSTEM (NPES).
  227    0301401F               AIR FORCE SPACE AND CYBER             3,721                                3,721
                                 NON-TRADITIONAL ISR FOR
                                 BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
  228    0302015F               E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE               35,467                               35,467
                                 OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
  230    0303131F               MINIMUM ESSENTIAL                    48,841                               48,841
                                 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
                                 NETWORK (MEECN).
         .....................      Requested transfer:                              [-21,100]
                                    Global ASNT Incr 2
                                    and CVR.
         .....................      Requested transfer:                               [21,100]
                                    Global ASNT Increment
                                    1.
  231    0303140F               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  42,973                               42,973
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  232    0303141F               GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                   105                                  105
                                 SYSTEM.
  233    0303142F               GLOBAL FORCE MANAGEMENT--             2,147                                2,147
                                 DATA INITIATIVE.
  236    0304260F               AIRBORNE SIGINT                     121,948                              121,948
                                 ENTERPRISE.
  237    0304310F               COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC                   3,544                                3,544
                                 ANALYSIS.
  240    0305020F               CCMD INTELLIGENCE                     1,542                                1,542
                                 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
  241    0305099F               GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC                    4,453                                4,453
                                 MANAGEMENT (GATM).
  243    0305111F               WEATHER SERVICE..........            26,654                               26,654
  244    0305114F               AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL,                  6,306                                6,306
                                 APPROACH, AND LANDING
                                 SYSTEM (ATCALS).
  245    0305116F               AERIAL TARGETS...........            21,295                               21,295
  248    0305128F               SECURITY AND                            415                                  415
                                 INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
  250    0305146F               DEFENSE JOINT                         3,867                                3,867
                                 COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  257    0305202F               DRAGON U-2...............            34,486                               34,486
  259    0305206F               AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE               4,450                                4,450
                                 SYSTEMS.
  260    0305207F               MANNED RECONNAISSANCE                14,269                               14,269
                                 SYSTEMS.
  261    0305208F               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           27,501                               27,501
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  262    0305220F               RQ-4 UAV.................           214,849                              214,849
  263    0305221F               NETWORK-CENTRIC                      18,842                               18,842
                                 COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
  265    0305238F               NATO AGS.................            44,729                               44,729
  266    0305240F               SUPPORT TO DCGS                      26,349                               26,349
                                 ENTERPRISE.
  269    0305600F               INTERNATIONAL                         3,491                                3,491
                                 INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY
                                 AND ARCHITECTURES.
  271    0305881F               RAPID CYBER ACQUISITION..             4,899                                4,899
  275    0305984F               PERSONNEL RECOVERY                    2,445                                2,445
                                 COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2).
  276    0307577F               INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA             8,684                                8,684
                                 (IMD).
  278    0401115F               C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON...            10,219                               10,219
  279    0401119F               C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS                22,758                               22,758
                                 (IF).
  280    0401130F               C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF).......            34,287                               34,287
  281    0401132F               C-130J PROGRAM...........            26,821            -6,400             20,421
         .....................      Available prior year                              [-6,400]
                                    funds.
  282    0401134F               LARGE AIRCRAFT IR                     5,283                                5,283
                                 COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
  283    0401218F               KC-135S..................             9,942                                9,942
  284    0401219F               KC-10S...................             7,933                                7,933
  285    0401314F               OPERATIONAL SUPPORT                   6,681                                6,681
                                 AIRLIFT.
  286    0401318F               CV-22....................            22,519            14,000             36,519
         .....................      UFR: CV-22 Aircraft                                [7,000]
                                    Survivability and
                                    Availability.
         .....................      UFR: CV-22 Integrated                              [7,000]
                                    Modula Avionics.
  287    0401840F               AMC COMMAND AND CONTROL               3,510                                3,510
                                 SYSTEM.
  288    0408011F               SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT              8,090                                8,090
                                 CONTROL.
  289    0702207F               DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-               1,528                                1,528
                                 IF).
  290    0708055F               MAINTENANCE, REPAIR &                31,677                               31,677
                                 OVERHAUL SYSTEM.
  291    0708610F               LOGISTICS INFORMATION                33,344                               33,344
                                 TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
  292    0708611F               SUPPORT SYSTEMS                       9,362                                9,362
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  293    0804743F               OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING....             2,074                                2,074
  294    0808716F               OTHER PERSONNEL                         107                                  107
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  295    0901202F               JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY              2,006                                2,006
                                 AGENCY.
  296    0901218F               CIVILIAN COMPENSATION                 3,780                                3,780
                                 PROGRAM.
  297    0901220F               PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION.             7,472                                7,472
  298    0901226F               AIR FORCE STUDIES AND                 1,563                                1,563
                                 ANALYSIS AGENCY.
  299    0901538F               FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT                 91,211                               91,211
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  300    1201921F               SERVICE SUPPORT TO                   14,255                               14,255
                                 STRATCOM--SPACE
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  301    1202247F               AF TENCAP................            31,914                               31,914
  302    1203001F               FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS              32,426                               32,426
                                 TERMINALS (FAB-T).
  303    1203110F               SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK            18,808                               18,808
                                 (SPACE).
  305    1203165F               NAVSTAR GLOBAL                       10,029                               10,029
                                 POSITIONING SYSTEM
                                 (SPACE AND CONTROL
                                 SEGMENTS).
  306    1203173F               SPACE AND MISSILE TEST               25,051            40,000             65,051
                                 AND EVALUATION CENTER.
         .....................      UFR: Space Enterprise                             [40,000]
                                    Defense
                                    Implementation.
  307    1203174F               SPACE INNOVATION,                    11,390                               11,390
                                 INTEGRATION AND RAPID
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
  308    1203179F               INTEGRATED BROADCAST                  8,747                                8,747
                                 SERVICE (IBS).
  309    1203182F               SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM               10,549                               10,549
                                 (SPACE).
  310    1203265F               GPS III SPACE SEGMENT....           243,435            40,300            283,735
         .....................      UFR: GPS satellite                                [40,300]
                                    simulator (GSS).
  311    1203400F               SPACE SUPERIORITY                    12,691                               12,691
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  312    1203614F               JSPOC MISSION SYSTEM.....            99,455            48,500            147,955
         .....................      UFR: Space Enterprise                             [48,500]
                                    Defense
                                    Implementation.
  313    1203620F               NATIONAL SPACE DEFENSE               18,052            68,000             86,052
                                 CENTER.
         .....................      UFR: Fix Enterprise                               [68,000]
                                    Space BMC2.
  314    1203699F               SHARED EARLY WARNING                  1,373                                1,373
                                 (SEW).
  315    1203906F               NCMC--TW/AA SYSTEM.......             5,000                                5,000
  316    1203913F               NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM               31,508                               31,508
                                 (SPACE).
  317    1203940F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            99,984            40,800            140,784
                                 OPERATIONS.
         .....................      UFR: Space Fence Site                             [40,800]
                                    1 & Ground Based
                                    Operational
                                    Surveillance System.
  318    1206423F               GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM           510,938                              510,938
                                 III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
                                 SEGMENT.
  320    9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......        14,938,002            36,000         14,974,002
         .....................      Program increase.....                             [36,000]
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL             20,585,302           328,485         20,913,787
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  34,914,359         1,224,318         36,138,677
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, AF.
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, DW
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601000BR              DTRA BASIC RESEARCH......            37,201                               37,201
    2    0601101E               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           432,347                              432,347
    3    0601110D8Z             BASIC RESEARCH                       40,612                               40,612
                                 INITIATIVES.
    4    0601117E               BASIC OPERATIONAL MEDICAL            43,126                               43,126
                                 RESEARCH SCIENCE.
    5    0601120D8Z             NATIONAL DEFENSE                     74,298            25,000             99,298
                                 EDUCATION PROGRAM.
         .....................      Evidence based                                     [5,000]
                                    military child STEM
                                    education.
         .....................      Manufacturing                                     [20,000]
                                    Engineering Education
                                    Program.
    6    0601228D8Z             HISTORICALLY BLACK                   25,865             2,000             27,865
                                 COLLEGES AND
                                 UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
                                 INSTITUTIONS.
         .....................      STEM support for                                   [2,000]
                                    minority women.
    7    0601384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              43,898                               43,898
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           697,347            27,000            724,347
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    8    0602000D8Z             JOINT MUNITIONS                      19,111                               19,111
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
    9    0602115E               BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY....           109,360                              109,360
   11    0602234D8Z             LINCOLN LABORATORY                   49,748                               49,748
                                 RESEARCH PROGRAM.
   12    0602251D8Z             APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE             49,226                               49,226
                                 ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
                                 PRIORITIES.
   13    0602303E               INFORMATION &                       392,784                              392,784
                                 COMMUNICATIONS
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   14    0602383E               BIOLOGICAL WARFARE                   13,014                               13,014
                                 DEFENSE.
   15    0602384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             201,053                              201,053
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   16    0602668D8Z             CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH..            14,775                               14,775
   17    0602702E               TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY......           343,776           -15,000            328,776
         .....................      General decrease.....                            [-15,000]
   18    0602715E               MATERIALS AND BIOLOGICAL            224,440                              224,440
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   19    0602716E               ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY...           295,447           -10,000            285,447
         .....................      Unjustified growth...                            [-10,000]
   20    0602718BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS             157,908                              157,908
                                 DESTRUCTION APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
   21    0602751D8Z             SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                  8,955                                8,955
                                 INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
   22    1160401BB              SOF TECHNOLOGY                       34,493                               34,493
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH         1,914,090           -25,000          1,889,090
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   23    0603000D8Z             JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED             25,627                               25,627
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   24    0603122D8Z             COMBATING TERRORISM                  76,230                               76,230
                                 TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
   25    0603133D8Z             FOREIGN COMPARATIVE                  24,199                               24,199
                                 TESTING.
   26    0603160BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS             268,607                              268,607
                                 DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   27    0603176C               ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND                12,996                               12,996
                                 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
   29    0603178C               WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.......             5,495                                5,495
   31    0603180C               ADVANCED RESEARCH........            20,184                               20,184
   32    0603225D8Z             JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS              18,662                               18,662
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   35    0603286E               ADVANCED AEROSPACE                  155,406                              155,406
                                 SYSTEMS.
   36    0603287E               SPACE PROGRAMS AND                  247,435                              247,435
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   37    0603288D8Z             ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS.....            13,154            -5,000              8,154
         .....................      General decrease.....                             [-5,000]
   38    0603289D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                  37,674                               37,674
                                 ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
   39    0603291D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                  15,000                               15,000
                                 ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS--
                                 MHA.
   40    0603294C               COMMON KILL VEHICLE                 252,879                              252,879
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   41    0603342D8W             DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT              29,594                               29,594
                                 EXPERIMENTAL (DIUX).
   42    0603375D8Z             TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION....            59,863                               59,863
   43    0603384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             145,359                              145,359
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--
                                 ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
   44    0603527D8Z             RETRACT LARCH............           171,120                              171,120
   45    0603618D8Z             JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED            14,389                               14,389
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   46    0603648D8Z             JOINT CAPABILITY                    105,871                              105,871
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   47    0603662D8Z             NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS             12,661                               12,661
                                 CAPABILITIES.
   48    0603680D8Z             DEFENSE-WIDE                        136,159            55,000            191,159
                                 MANUFACTURING SCIENCE
                                 AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
         .....................      Improve productivity                              [20,000]
                                    of defense industrial
                                    base.
         .....................      Partnership between                               [15,000]
                                    MEP centers and
                                    Manufacturing USA
                                    Institutes.
         .....................      Manufacturing USA                                 [20,000]
                                    institutes.
   49    0603680S               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             40,511                               40,511
                                 PROGRAM.
   50    0603699D8Z             EMERGING CAPABILITIES                57,876                               57,876
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   51    0603712S               GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D                10,611                               10,611
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   53    0603716D8Z             STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL              71,832            10,000             81,832
                                 RESEARCH PROGRAM.
         .....................      Readiness increase...                             [10,000]
   54    0603720S               MICROELECTRONICS                    219,803            80,000            299,803
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
                                 AND SUPPORT.
         .....................      Supply chain                                      [80,000]
                                    assurance.
   55    0603727D8Z             JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM             6,349                                6,349
   56    0603739E               ADVANCED ELECTRONICS                 79,173                               79,173
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
   57    0603760E               COMMAND, CONTROL AND                106,787                              106,787
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
   58    0603766E               NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE             439,386                              439,386
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   59    0603767E               SENSOR TECHNOLOGY........           210,123                              210,123
   60    0603769D8Z             DISTRIBUTED LEARNING                 11,211                               11,211
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   62    0603781D8Z             SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                 15,047                               15,047
                                 INSTITUTE.
   63    0603826D8Z             QUICK REACTION SPECIAL               69,203                               69,203
                                 PROJECTS.
   64    0603833D8Z             ENGINEERING SCIENCE &                25,395                               25,395
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   65    0603941D8Z             TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE            89,586                               89,586
                                 & TECHNOLOGY.
   66    0604055D8Z             OPERATIONAL ENERGY                   38,403            10,000             48,403
                                 CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
         .....................      Readiness increase...                             [10,000]
   67    0303310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS.............            33,382                               33,382
   68    1160402BB              SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY              72,605                               72,605
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 3,445,847           150,000          3,595,847
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 PROTOTYPES
   69    0603161D8Z             NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL             32,937                               32,937
                                 PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                 EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
   70    0603600D8Z             WALKOFF..................           101,714                              101,714
   72    0603821D8Z             ACQUISITION ENTERPRISE                2,198                                2,198
                                 DATA & INFORMATION
                                 SERVICES.
   73    0603851D8Z             ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY               54,583            10,000             64,583
                                 TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      Readiness increase...                             [10,000]
   74    0603881C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           230,162                              230,162
                                 TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
   75    0603882C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           828,097            21,996            850,093
                                 MIDCOURSE DEFENSE
                                 SEGMENT.
         .....................      UFR: Discrimination..                             [21,996]
   76    0603884BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             148,518                              148,518
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
   77    0603884C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           247,345            57,862            305,207
                                 SENSORS.
         .....................      UFR: Discrimination..                             [57,862]
   78    0603890C               BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS....           449,442            29,444            478,886
         .....................      UFR: Discrimination..                             [23,342]
         .....................      UFR: High Fidelity                                 [6,102]
                                    Modeling and
                                    Simulation.
   79    0603891C               SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA....           320,190                              320,190
   80    0603892C               AEGIS BMD................           852,052                              852,052
   83    0603896C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           430,115                              430,115
                                 COMMAND AND CONTROL,
                                 BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
                                 COMMUNICATI.
   84    0603898C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            48,954                               48,954
                                 JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
   85    0603904C               MISSILE DEFENSE                      53,265                               53,265
                                 INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS
                                 CENTER (MDIOC).
   86    0603906C               REGARDING TRENCH.........             9,113                                9,113
   87    0603907C               SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR              130,695                              130,695
                                 (SBX).
   88    0603913C               ISRAELI COOPERATIVE                 105,354           268,450            373,804
                                 PROGRAMS.
         .....................      Arrow................                             [71,460]
         .....................      Arrow Upper Tier                                 [105,000]
                                    flight test.
         .....................      Arrow-Upper Tier.....                             [28,140]
         .....................      David's Sling........                             [63,850]
   89    0603914C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           305,791                              305,791
                                 TEST.
   90    0603915C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           410,425                              410,425
                                 TARGETS.
   91    0603920D8Z             HUMANITARIAN DEMINING....            10,837                               10,837
   92    0603923D8Z             COALITION WARFARE........            10,740                               10,740
   93    0604016D8Z             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                 3,837            10,000             13,837
                                 CORROSION PROGRAM.
         .....................      DOD Corrosion Program                             [10,000]
   94    0604115C               TECHNOLOGY MATURATION               128,406                              128,406
                                 INITIATIVES.
   95    0604132D8Z             MISSILE DEFEAT PROJECT...            98,369                               98,369
   96    0604181C               HYPERSONIC DEFENSE.......            75,300                               75,300
   97    0604250D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE               1,175,832                            1,175,832
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
   98    0604294D8Z             TRUSTED & ASSURED                    83,626                               83,626
                                 MICROELECTRONICS.
   99    0604331D8Z             RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM           100,000                              100,000
  100    0604342D8Z             DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY OFFSET                 0           200,000            200,000
         .....................      Directed energy......                            [200,000]
  101    0604400D8Z             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                 3,967                                3,967
                                 (DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM
                                 COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
  102    0604682D8Z             WARGAMING AND SUPPORT FOR             3,833                                3,833
                                 STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (SSA).
  104    0604826J               JOINT C5 CAPABILITY                  23,638                               23,638
                                 DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
                                 AND INTEROPERABILITY
                                 ASSESSMENTS.
  105    0604873C               LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION           357,659                              357,659
                                 RADAR (LRDR).
  106    0604874C               IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE           465,530            80,000            545,530
                                 INTERCEPTORS.
         .....................      UFR: C3 Booster                                   [80,000]
                                    Development.
  107    0604876C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            36,239                               36,239
                                 TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
                                 TEST.
  108    0604878C               AEGIS BMD TEST...........           134,468            26,351            160,819
         .....................      UFR: Anti-Air Warfare                             [26,351]
                                    Capability.
  109    0604879C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            84,239                               84,239
                                 SENSOR TEST.
  110    0604880C               LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3)..            30,486            67,275             97,761
         .....................      UFR: Anti-Air Warfare                             [67,275]
                                    Capability.
  111    0604881C               AEGIS SM-3 BLOCK IIA CO-              9,739                                9,739
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  112    0604887C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            76,757                               76,757
                                 MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
  113    0604894C               MULTI-OBJECT KILL VEHICLE             6,500                                6,500
  114    0303191D8Z             JOINT ELECTROMAGNETIC                 2,902                                2,902
                                 TECHNOLOGY (JET) PROGRAM.
  115    0305103C               CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE               986                                  986
  116    1206893C               SPACE TRACKING &                     34,907                               34,907
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.
  117    1206895C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            16,994            27,500             44,494
                                 SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
         .....................      UFR: Space Based                                  [27,500]
                                    Sensor.
  262    888888                 GROUND-LAUNCHED                           0            65,000             65,000
                                 INTERMEDIATE RANGE
                                 MISSILE.
         .....................      Ground-Launched                                   [65,000]
                                    Intermediate Range
                                    Missile.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 7,736,741           863,878          8,600,619
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
                                 AND PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION
  118    0604161D8Z             NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL             12,536                               12,536
                                 PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                 EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
  119    0604165D8Z             PROMPT GLOBAL STRIKE                201,749                              201,749
                                 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT.
  120    0604384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             406,789                              406,789
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
  122    0604771D8Z             JOINT TACTICAL                       15,358                               15,358
                                 INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
                                 SYSTEM (JTIDS).
  123    0605000BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS               6,241                                6,241
                                 DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  124    0605013BL              INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               12,322                               12,322
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  125    0605021SE              HOMELAND PERSONNEL                    4,893                                4,893
                                 SECURITY INITIATIVE.
  126    0605022D8Z             DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY                 3,162                                3,162
                                 PROGRAM.
  127    0605027D8Z             OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT               21,353            -2,000             19,353
                                 INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Find COTS solution...                             [-2,000]
  128    0605070S               DOD ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS                6,266                                6,266
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  129    0605075D8Z             DCMO POLICY AND                       2,810                                2,810
                                 INTEGRATION.
  130    0605080S               DEFENSE AGENCY                       24,436                               24,436
                                 INITIATIVES (DAI)--
                                 FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
  131    0605090S               DEFENSE RETIRED AND                  13,475                               13,475
                                 ANNUITANT PAY SYSTEM
                                 (DRAS).
  133    0605210D8Z             DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC              11,870           -11,870
                                 PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
         .....................      Consolidate                                      [-11,870]
                                    requirements.
  134    0605294D8Z             TRUSTED & ASSURED                    61,084                               61,084
                                 MICROELECTRONICS.
  135    0303141K               GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                 2,576                                2,576
                                 SYSTEM.
  136    0305304D8Z             DOD ENTERPRISE ENERGY                 3,669                                3,669
                                 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
                                 (EEIM).
  137    0305310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: SYSTEM                  8,230                                8,230
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                     818,819           -13,870            804,949
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  138    0604774D8Z             DEFENSE READINESS                     6,941                                6,941
                                 REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS).
  139    0604875D8Z             JOINT SYSTEMS                         4,851                                4,851
                                 ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT.
  140    0604940D8Z             CENTRAL TEST AND                    211,325                              211,325
                                 EVALUATION INVESTMENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP).
  141    0604942D8Z             ASSESSMENTS AND                      30,144           100,000            130,144
                                 EVALUATIONS.
         .....................      Classified assessment                            [100,000]
  142    0605001E               MISSION SUPPORT..........            63,769                               63,769
  143    0605100D8Z             JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT            91,057                               91,057
                                 TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
  144    0605104D8Z             TECHNICAL STUDIES,                   22,386                               22,386
                                 SUPPORT AND ANALYSIS.
  145    0605126J               JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND             36,581                               36,581
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE
                                 ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
  147    0605142D8Z             SYSTEMS ENGINEERING......            37,622                               37,622
  148    0605151D8Z             STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  5,200                                5,200
                                 SUPPORT--OSD.
  149    0605161D8Z             NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL              5,232                                5,232
                                 SECURITY.
  150    0605170D8Z             SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND              12,583                               12,583
                                 INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
  151    0605200D8Z             GENERAL SUPPORT TO USD               31,451                               31,451
                                 (INTELLIGENCE).
  152    0605384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             104,348                              104,348
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
  161    0605790D8Z             SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION             2,372                                2,372
                                 RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
                                 BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
                                 TRANSFER.
  162    0605798D8Z             DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY                   24,365                               24,365
                                 ANALYSIS.
  163    0605801KA              DEFENSE TECHNICAL                    54,145                               54,145
                                 INFORMATION CENTER
                                 (DTIC).
  164    0605803SE              R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD                30,356                               30,356
                                 ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
                                 EVALUATION.
  165    0605804D8Z             DEVELOPMENT TEST AND                 20,571             5,000             25,571
                                 EVALUATION.
         .....................      Software testing                                   [5,000]
                                    capabilities.
  166    0605898E               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......            14,017                               14,017
  167    0605998KA              MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE                4,187                                4,187
                                 TECHNICAL INFORMATION
                                 CENTER (DTIC).
  168    0606100D8Z             BUDGET AND PROGRAM                    3,992                                3,992
                                 ASSESSMENTS.
  169    0606225D8Z             ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND                   1,000                                1,000
                                 RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
  170    0203345D8Z             DEFENSE OPERATIONS                    2,551                                2,551
                                 SECURITY INITIATIVE
                                 (DOSI).
  171    0204571J               JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL                7,712                                7,712
                                 SUPPORT.
  174    0303166J               SUPPORT TO INFORMATION                  673                                  673
                                 OPERATIONS (IO)
                                 CAPABILITIES.
  175    0303260D8Z             DEFENSE MILITARY                      1,006                                1,006
                                 DECEPTION PROGRAM OFFICE
                                 (DMDPO).
  177    0305172K               COMBINED ADVANCED                    16,998                               16,998
                                 APPLICATIONS.
  180    0305245D8Z             INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES            18,992                               18,992
                                 AND INNOVATION
                                 INVESTMENTS.
  181    0306310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: RDT&E                   1,231                                1,231
                                 MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
  183    0804767J               COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT            44,500                               44,500
                                 AND TRAINING
                                 TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
                                 MHA.
  184    0901598C               MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA.......            29,947                               29,947
  186    9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......            63,312                               63,312
  187    0903235K               JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER                5,113                                5,113
                                 (JSP).
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT               1,010,530           105,000          1,115,530
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  188    0604130V               ENTERPRISE SECURITY                   4,565                                4,565
                                 SYSTEM (ESS).
  189    0605127T               REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL                1,871                                1,871
                                 OUTREACH (RIO) AND
                                 PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
                                 INFORMATION MANA.
  190    0605147T               OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN                   298                                  298
                                 ASSISTANCE SHARED
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEM
                                 (OHASIS).
  191    0607210D8Z             INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS             10,882                               10,882
                                 AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
  192    0607310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: OPERATIONAL             7,222                                7,222
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
  193    0607327T               GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY              14,450                               14,450
                                 COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
                                 TSCMIS).
  194    0607384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              45,677                               45,677
                                 DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
  195    0208043J               PLANNING AND DECISION AID             3,037                                3,037
                                 SYSTEM (PDAS).
  196    0208045K               C4I INTEROPERABILITY.....            59,490                               59,490
  198    0301144K               JOINT/ALLIED COALITION                6,104                                6,104
                                 INFORMATION SHARING.
  202    0302016K               NATIONAL MILITARY COMMAND             1,863                                1,863
                                 SYSTEM-WIDE SUPPORT.
  203    0302019K               DEFENSE INFO                         21,564                               21,564
                                 INFRASTRUCTURE
                                 ENGINEERING AND
                                 INTEGRATION.
  204    0303126K               LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS--           15,428                               15,428
                                 DCS.
  205    0303131K               MINIMUM ESSENTIAL                    15,855                               15,855
                                 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
                                 NETWORK (MEECN).
  206    0303135G               PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE             4,811                                4,811
                                 (PKI).
  207    0303136G               KEY MANAGEMENT                       33,746                               33,746
                                 INFRASTRUCTURE (KMI).
  208    0303140D8Z             INFORMATION SYSTEMS                   9,415                                9,415
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  209    0303140G               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                 227,652                              227,652
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  210    0303150K               GLOBAL COMMAND AND                   42,687                               42,687
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM.
  211    0303153K               DEFENSE SPECTRUM                      8,750                                8,750
                                 ORGANIZATION.
  214    0303228K               JOINT INFORMATION                     4,689                                4,689
                                 ENVIRONMENT (JIE).
  216    0303430K               FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE                50,000                               50,000
                                 SERVICES INFORMATION
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
  222    0305103K               CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE             1,686                                1,686
  227    0305186D8Z             POLICY R&D PROGRAMS......             6,526                                6,526
  228    0305199D8Z             NET CENTRICITY...........            18,455                               18,455
  230    0305208BB              DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            5,496                                5,496
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  233    0305208K               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            3,049                                3,049
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  236    0305327V               INSIDER THREAT...........             5,365                                5,365
  237    0305387D8Z             HOMELAND DEFENSE                      2,071                                2,071
                                 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
                                 PROGRAM.
  243    0307577D8Z             INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA            13,111                               13,111
                                 (IMD).
  245    0708012S               PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS.             1,770                                1,770
  246    0708047S               DEFENSE PROPERTY                      2,924                                2,924
                                 ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
  248    1105219BB              MQ-9 UAV.................            37,863            13,000             50,863
         .....................      MQ-9 Capability                                   [13,000]
                                    Enhancement.
  251    1160403BB              AVIATION SYSTEMS.........           259,886            13,500            273,386
         .....................      SOCOM requested                                   [13,500]
                                    transfer.
  252    1160405BB              INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS                  8,245                                8,245
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  253    1160408BB              OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS.            79,455            16,000             95,455
         .....................      UFR: Enhanced                                     [16,000]
                                    Precision Strike.
  254    1160431BB              WARRIOR SYSTEMS..........            45,935                               45,935
  255    1160432BB              SPECIAL PROGRAMS.........             1,978                                1,978
  256    1160434BB              UNMANNED ISR.............            31,766                               31,766
  257    1160480BB              SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES....             2,578                                2,578
  258    1160483BB              MARITIME SYSTEMS.........            42,315            18,100             60,415
         .....................      SOCOM requested                                   [12,800]
                                    transfer.
         .....................      UFR: Develop Dry                                   [5,300]
                                    Combat Submersible.
  259    1160489BB              GLOBAL VIDEO SURVEILLANCE             4,661                                4,661
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  260    1160490BB              OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS             12,049                               12,049
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  261    1203610K               TELEPORT PROGRAM.........               642                                  642
  262    9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......         3,689,646                            3,689,646
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              4,867,528            60,600          4,928,128
                                 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  20,490,902         1,167,608         21,658,510
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, DW.
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
                                 DEFENSE
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
    1    0605118OTE             OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 83,503                               83,503
                                 EVALUATION.
    2    0605131OTE             LIVE FIRE TEST AND                   59,500                               59,500
                                 EVALUATION.
    3    0605814OTE             OPERATIONAL TEST                     67,897                               67,897
                                 ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT                 210,900                 0            210,900
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST &            210,900                              210,900
                                 EVAL, DEFENSE.
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  UNDISTRIBUTED
         .....................  UNDISTRIBUTED
  999    999999                 UNDISTRIBUTED............                 0            64,100             64,100
         .....................      ERI costs transfer                                [64,100]
                                    from OCO to base.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED...                 0            64,100             64,100
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......                 0            64,100             64,100
         .....................
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RDT&E..............        82,716,636         3,315,393         86,032,029
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4202. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  SEC. 4202. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of
                                                    Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Senate
  Line      Program  Element                Item            FY 2018  Request   Senate  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, ARMY
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   55    0603327A                AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE              15,000                              15,000
                                  SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
   60    0603747A                SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                   3,000                               3,000
                                  SURVIVABILITY.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    18,000                 0            18,000
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         ......................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION
  122    0605032A                TRACTOR TIRE.............             5,000                               5,000
  125    0605035A                COMMON INFRARED                      21,540                              21,540
                                  COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
  133    0605051A                AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY               30,100                              30,100
                                  DEVELOPMENT.
  147    0303032A                TROJAN--RH12.............             1,200                               1,200
         ......................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                      57,840                 0            57,840
                                  DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION.
         ......................
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  203    0203801A                MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE                  15,000                              15,000
                                  PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                  PROGRAM.
  222    0305204A                TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              7,492                               7,492
                                  VEHICLES.
  223    0305206A                AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE              15,000                              15,000
                                  SYSTEMS.
  228    0307665A                BIOMETRICS ENABLED                    6,036                               6,036
                                  INTELLIGENCE.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                 43,528                 0            43,528
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     119,368                 0           119,368
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, ARMY.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, NAVY
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   41    0603527N                RETRACT LARCH............            22,000                              22,000
   81    0604272N                TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL              5,710                               5,710
                                  INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
                                  (TADIRCM).
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    27,710                 0            27,710
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......            89,855                              89,855
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  207    0204311N                INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE              11,600                              11,600
                                  SYSTEM.
  211    0204574N                CRYPTOLOGIC DIRECT                    1,200                               1,200
                                  SUPPORT.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                102,655                 0           102,655
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     130,365                 0           130,365
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, NAVY.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, AF
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   29    0603438F                SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.             7,800                               7,800
   53    0306250F                CYBER OPERATIONS                      5,400                               5,400
                                  TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    13,200                 0            13,200
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......           112,408                             112,408
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  196    0207277F                ISR INNOVATIONS..........             5,750                               5,750
  214    0208087F                AF OFFENSIVE CYBERSPACE               4,000                               4,000
                                  OPERATIONS.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                122,158                 0           122,158
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     135,358                 0           135,358
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, AF.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, DW
         ......................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                  DEVELOPMENT
   24    0603122D8Z              COMBATING TERRORISM                  25,000                              25,000
                                  TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    25,000                 0            25,000
                                  TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......           196,176                             196,176
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  253    1160408BB               OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS.             1,920                               1,920
  256    1160434BB               UNMANNED ISR.............             3,000                               3,000
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                201,096                 0           201,096
                                  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     226,096                 0           226,096
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, DW.
         ......................
         ......................  UNDISTRIBUTED
         ......................  UNDISTRIBUTED
  999    999999                  UNDISTRIBUTED............                             -64,100           -64,100
         ......................      ERI costs transfer                              [-64,100]
                                     from OCO to base.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED...                             -64,100           -64,100
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......                             -64,100           -64,100
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RDT&E..............           611,187           -64,100           547,087
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
 

SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2018                           Senate
  Line                           Item                              Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................       1,455,366         112,179          1,567,545
             UFR: Convert IBCT to ABCT.......................                         [27,000]
             UFR: Readiness to execute NMS...................                         [44,179]
             UFR: Stryker Vehicle training...................                         [20,000]
             UFR: Support 16th ABCT..........................                         [21,000]
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................         105,147          12,873            118,020
             UFR: Readiness to execute NMS...................                         [12,873]
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         604,117         147,218            751,335
             UFR: NETCOM HQ..................................                             [13]
             UFR: Readiness to execute NMS...................                        [147,205]
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................         793,217          43,005            836,222
             UFR: 3% increase to Decisive Action training....                          [5,244]
             UFR: Readiness to execute NMS...................                         [28,327]
             UFR: Support Equipment..........................                          [9,434]
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................       1,169,478                          1,169,478
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................       1,496,503                          1,496,503
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................       3,675,901          49,500          3,725,401
             UFR: Funding to support 6k additional                                       [680]
             endstrength.....................................
             UFR: Organizational Clothing & Indiv. Equipment                          [44,215]
             maintenance.....................................
             UFR: Support Equipment..........................                          [4,605]
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         466,720           4,872            471,592
             UFR: Medical equipment..........................                          [4,872]
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................       1,443,516          77,669          1,521,185
             UFR: Depot Maintenance..........................                         [77,669]
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................       8,080,357          90,719          8,171,076
             UFR: Engineering Services.......................                         [36,949]
             UFR: IT Services NEC C4IM.......................                         [22,000]
             UFR: Support 6k additional endstrength..........                         [31,770]
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.       3,401,155         601,817          4,002,972
             UFR: Address facility restoration backlog.......                         [70,427]
             UFR: FSRM increases.............................                        [481,210]
             UFR: Support 6k additional endstrength..........                         [50,180]
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............         443,790                            443,790
  180    US AFRICA COMMAND...................................         225,382                            225,382
  190    US EUROPEAN COMMAND.................................         141,352                            141,352
  200    US SOUTHERN COMMAND.................................         190,811                            190,811
  210    US FORCES KOREA.....................................          59,578                             59,578
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      23,752,390       1,139,852         24,892,242
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  220    STRATEGIC MOBILITY..................................         346,667           1,124            347,791
             UFR: Readiness increase.........................                          [1,124]
  230    ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS...........................         422,108           5,238            427,346
             UFR: Readiness increase.........................                          [5,238]
  240    INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS.............................           7,750                              7,750
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         776,525           6,362            782,887
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  250    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         137,556                            137,556
  260    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          58,872           1,392             60,264
             UFR: Recruit training...........................                          [1,392]
  270    ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING...........................          58,035           1,886             59,921
             UFR: One Station Unit Training..................                          [1,886]
  280    SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..............         505,089             673            505,762
             UFR: Supports commissions for increase end                                  [673]
             strength........................................
  290    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................       1,015,541          15,293          1,030,834
             UFR: Supports increased capacity................                         [15,293]
  300    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................       1,124,115                          1,124,115
  310    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         220,688                            220,688
  320    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         618,164           3,526            621,690
             UFR: Supports increased capacity................                          [1,526]
             UFR: Supports Initial Entry Training............                          [2,000]
  330    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         613,586          10,673            624,259
             UFR: Supports increased capacity................                         [10,673]
  340    EXAMINING...........................................         171,223                            171,223
  350    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................         214,738             350            215,088
             UFR: Supports increased capacity................                            [350]
  360    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................         195,099                            195,099
  370    JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS...............         176,116                            176,116
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       5,108,822          33,793          5,142,615
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  390    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         555,502          96,563            652,065
             UFR: Supports transportation equipment..........                         [96,563]
  400    CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES...........................         894,208                            894,208
  410    LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.........................         715,462                            715,462
  420    AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...............................         446,931                            446,931
  430    ADMINISTRATION......................................         493,616                            493,616
  440    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................       2,084,922          10,000          2,094,922
             UFR: Army Regional Cyber Centers capabilities...                         [10,000]
  450    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................         259,588                            259,588
  460    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         326,387                            326,387
  470    OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT...............................       1,087,602         -41,400          1,046,202
             UFR: Funds DFAS increases.......................                          [3,600]
             Under execution.................................                        [-45,000]
  480    ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES..............................         210,514           3,500            214,014
             UFR: Supports JAG increase needs................                          [3,500]
  490    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................         243,584          13,153            256,737
             UFR: Supports engineering services..............                         [13,153]
  500    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS............         284,592                            284,592
  510    INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS.................         415,694                            415,694
  520    MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS......................          46,856                             46,856
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,242,222                          1,242,222
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................       9,307,680          81,816          9,389,496
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.................      38,945,417       1,261,823         40,207,240
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................          11,461             286             11,747
             UFR: ARNG Operational Demand Model to 82%.......                            [286]
  020    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         577,410          15,643            593,053
             UFR: ARNG Operational Demand Model to 82%.......                         [15,643]
  030    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................         117,298           4,718            122,016
             UFR: Operational Demand Model to 82%............                          [4,718]
  040    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................         552,016          12,918            564,934
             UFR: Operational Demand Model to 82%............                         [12,918]
  050    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................          80,302           1,159             81,461
             UFR: Increases aviation contract support........                            [845]
             UFR: Operational Demand Model to 82%............                            [314]
  060    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         399,035           4,600            403,635
             UFR: Support additional capacity................                          [4,600]
  070    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         102,687                            102,687
  080    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................          56,016                             56,016
  090    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................         599,947             550            600,497
             UFR: Support 6k additional endstrength..........                            [550]
  100    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         273,940          30,750            304,690
             UFR: Address facility restoration backlog.......                          [4,465]
             UFR: Increased facilities sustainment...........                         [26,285]
  110    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............          22,909                             22,909
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       2,793,021          70,624          2,863,645
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  120    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          11,116                             11,116
  130    ADMINISTRATION......................................          17,962                             17,962
  140    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................          18,550           2,400             20,950
             UFR: Equipment support..........................                          [2,400]
  150    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................           6,166                              6,166
  160    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          60,027                             60,027
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         113,821           2,400            116,221
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.............       2,906,842          73,024          2,979,866
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................         777,883          16,979            794,862
             UFR: Readiness increase.........................                         [16,979]
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................         190,639                            190,639
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         807,557          13,099            820,656
             UFR: Operational Demand Model to 82%............                         [13,099]
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................          85,476          13,093             98,569
             UFR: Operational Demand Model to 82%............                         [13,093]
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................          36,672           2,225             38,897
             UFR: Increased aviation readiness...............                          [2,225]
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................         956,381          29,998            986,379
             UFR: Aviation readiness for AH64................                         [24,828]
             UFR: Aviation readiness for TAB.................                          [2,040]
             UFR: Aviation readinss for ECAB.................                          [3,130]
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         777,756             100            777,856
             UFR: Supports increased capacity................                            [100]
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................          51,506                             51,506
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................         244,942                            244,942
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................       1,144,726           3,850          1,148,576
             UFR: Support increase end-strength..............                          [3,850]
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         781,895          94,839            876,734
             UFR: Address facility restoration backlog.......                         [20,108]
             UFR: Facilities Sustainment improvement.........                         [74,731]
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............         999,052             240            999,292
             UFR: Support increase end-strength..............                            [240]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,854,485         174,423          7,028,908
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  130    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................           7,703                              7,703
  140    ADMINISTRATION......................................          79,236                             79,236
  150    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................          85,160                             85,160
  160    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................           8,654                              8,654
  170    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         268,839           8,500            277,339
             UFR: Behavior Health Specialists................                          [8,500]
  180    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................           3,093                              3,093
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         452,685           8,500            461,185
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.................       7,307,170         182,923          7,490,093
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................       5,544,165                          5,544,165
  020    FLEET AIR TRAINING..................................       2,075,000                          2,075,000
  030    AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES......          46,801                             46,801
  040    AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...................         119,624                            119,624
  050    AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.................................         552,536          42,000            594,536
             UFR: Fund to Max Executable.....................                         [42,000]
  060    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................       1,088,482                          1,088,482
  070    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................          40,584                             40,584
  080    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................         723,786         120,000            843,786
             UFR: Fund to Max Executable.....................                        [120,000]
  090    MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...................       4,067,334          22,000          4,089,334
             UFR: Combat Logistics Maintenance Funding TAO-                           [22,000]
             187.............................................
  100    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................         977,701                            977,701
  110    SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..............................       7,165,858                          7,165,858
  120    SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.......................       2,193,851                          2,193,851
  130    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........       1,288,094                          1,288,094
  150    SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE......................         206,678                            206,678
  160    WARFARE TACTICS.....................................         621,581           1,000            622,581
             UFR: Operational range Clearance and                                      [1,000]
             Environmental Compliance........................
  170    OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............         370,681                            370,681
  180    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................       1,437,966                          1,437,966
  190    EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT..         162,705                            162,705
  210    COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS................          65,108                             65,108
  220    COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.........          86,892                             86,892
  230    MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.............           8,427                              8,427
  240    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................         385,212                            385,212
  260    FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE.............................       1,278,456                          1,278,456
  280    WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.................................         745,680           5,000            750,680
             UFR: Munitions wholeness........................                          [5,000]
  290    OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................         380,016                            380,016
  300    ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..............................         914,428         -32,000            882,428
             Under execution.................................                        [-32,000]
  310    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........       1,905,679         542,181          2,447,860
             NHHC Reduction..................................                        [-29,000]
             UFR: 88% of Facility Sustainment requirements...                        [293,181]
             UFR: FSRM Increases.............................                        [218,000]
             UFR: MPT&E Management System IT Modernization...                         [60,000]
  320    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................       4,333,688          51,000          4,384,688
             UFR: FSRM Increases.............................                         [28,000]
             UFR: Operational range Clearance and                                     [11,000]
             Environmental Compliance........................
             UFR: Port Operations Service Craft Maintenance..                         [12,000]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      38,787,013         751,181         39,538,194
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  330    SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE.......................         417,450          10,000            427,450
             UFR: Strategic Sealift..........................                         [10,000]
  360    SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS......................         198,341                            198,341
  370    EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...............          66,849                             66,849
  390    COAST GUARD SUPPORT.................................          21,870                             21,870
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         704,510          10,000            714,510
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  400    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         143,924                            143,924
  410    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................           8,975                              8,975
  420    RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.....................         144,708                            144,708
  430    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         812,708                            812,708
  450    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         180,448                            180,448
  460    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         234,596                            234,596
  470    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         177,517                            177,517
  480    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................         103,154                            103,154
  490    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................          72,216                             72,216
  500    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          53,262                             53,262
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       1,931,508               0          1,931,508
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  510    ADMINISTRATION......................................       1,135,429                          1,135,429
  530    CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........         149,365                            149,365
  540    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........         386,749                            386,749
  590    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         165,301                            165,301
  610    PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM SUPPORT..........         311,616                            311,616
  620    ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT...............         665,580                            665,580
  660    INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES.................         659,143                            659,143
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................         543,193                            543,193
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................       4,016,376               0          4,016,376
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.................      45,439,407         761,181         46,200,588
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATIONAL FORCES..................................         967,949                            967,949
  020    FIELD LOGISTICS.....................................       1,065,090           3,100          1,068,190
             UFR: Long Endurance Small UAS...................                          [3,100]
  030    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................         286,635                            286,635
  040    MARITIME PREPOSITIONING.............................          85,577                             85,577
  050    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................         181,518                            181,518
  060    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION............         785,264          43,791            829,055
             UFR: Facilities Sustainment to 80%..............                         [43,791]
  070    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................       2,196,252                          2,196,252
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       5,568,285          46,891          5,615,176
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  080    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          16,163                             16,163
  090    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................           1,154                              1,154
  100    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         100,398                            100,398
  110    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................          46,474                             46,474
  120    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         405,039                            405,039
  130    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         201,601                            201,601
  140    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................          32,045                             32,045
  150    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          24,394                             24,394
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................         827,268               0            827,268
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  160    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          28,827                             28,827
  170    ADMINISTRATION......................................         378,683                            378,683
  190    ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................          77,684                             77,684
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          52,661                             52,661
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         537,855               0            537,855
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.........       6,933,408          46,891          6,980,299
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................         596,876                            596,876
  020    INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................           5,902                              5,902
  030    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................          94,861                             94,861
  040    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................             381                                381
  050    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................          13,822                             13,822
  060    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................             571                                571
  070    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS...............................          16,718                             16,718
  080    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................         118,079                            118,079
  090    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................             308                                308
  100    ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..............................          28,650                             28,650
  110    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          86,354                             86,354
  120    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         103,596                            103,596
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       1,066,118               0          1,066,118
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  130    ADMINISTRATION......................................           1,371                              1,371
  140    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........          13,289                             13,289
  160    ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................           3,229                              3,229
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          17,889               0             17,889
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.............       1,084,007                          1,084,007
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATING FORCES....................................         103,468                            103,468
  020    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................          18,794                             18,794
  030    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          32,777           1,077             33,854
             UFR: Facilities Sustainment to 80%..............                          [1,077]
  040    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         111,213                            111,213
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................         266,252           1,077            267,329
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  060    ADMINISTRATION......................................          12,585                             12,585
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          12,585               0             12,585
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE...........         278,837           1,077            279,914
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................         694,702          13,200            707,902
             UFR: NC3 & Other Nuclear Requirements...........                          [9,000]
             UFR: PACAF Contingency Response Group...........                          [4,200]
  020    COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES...........................       1,392,326         184,100          1,576,426
             Air and Space Operations Center.................                        [104,800]
             UFR: Airmen Readiness Training..................                          [8,900]
             UFR: Cyber Requirements.........................                         [70,400]
  030    AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)......       1,128,640         144,300          1,272,940
             UFR: Airmen Readiness Training..................                         [93,100]
             UFR: Contract Adversary Air.....................                         [51,200]
  040    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................       2,755,367         160,600          2,915,967
             UFR: Airmen Readiness Training..................                          [7,100]
             UFR: WSS funded at 89%..........................                        [153,500]
  050    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.       3,292,553                          3,292,553
  060    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       6,555,186         328,500          6,883,686
             UFR: E-4B Maintenance personnel.................                          [1,000]
             UFR: EC-130H Compass Call.......................                         [20,000]
             UFR: Sustain 3 additional C-37B.................                         [11,300]
             UFR: Weapon Systems Sustainment.................                        [296,200]
  070    FLYING HOUR PROGRAM.................................       4,135,330                          4,135,330
  080    BASE SUPPORT........................................       5,985,232         999,483          6,984,715
             UFR: Cyber Requirements.........................                        [152,600]
             UFR: Facility Restoration Modernization.........                        [493,883]
             UFR: Funds mission readiness at installations...                        [146,000]
             UFR: Funds Operational Communications and JIE                           [190,000]
             conversion......................................
             UFR: PACAF Contingency Response Group...........                          [6,700]
             UFR: Transient Alert Contracts..................                         [10,300]
  090    GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................         847,516          84,700            932,216
             UFR: Cyber Requirements.........................                         [10,700]
             UFR: NC3 & Other Nuclear Requirements...........                         [66,000]
             UFR: SBIRS Requirements.........................                          [8,000]
  100    OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS.......................       1,131,817          41,200          1,173,017
             UFR: Cyber Requirements.........................                         [18,300]
             UFR: Eagle Vision sustainment...................                          [6,100]
             UFR: PACAF Contingency Response Group...........                         [16,800]
  120    LAUNCH FACILITIES...................................         175,457                            175,457
  130    SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...............................         353,458                            353,458
  160    US NORTHCOM/NORAD...................................         189,891                            189,891
  170    US STRATCOM.........................................         534,236                            534,236
  180    US CYBERCOM.........................................         357,830                            357,830
  190    US CENTCOM..........................................         168,208                            168,208
  200    US SOCOM............................................           2,280                              2,280
  210    US TRANSCOM.........................................             533                                533
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,091,655                          1,091,655
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      30,792,217       1,956,083         32,748,300
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  220    AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..................................       1,570,697           1,800          1,572,497
             UFR: sustain 3 additional C-37B.................                          [1,800]
  230    MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS...........................         130,241          46,450            176,691
             UFR: PACAF Contingency Response Group...........                         [16,900]
             UFR: Set the Theater (StT) PACOM................                         [29,550]
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................       1,700,938          48,250          1,749,188
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  270    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         113,722                            113,722
  280    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          24,804                             24,804
  290    RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC)..............          95,733                             95,733
  320    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         395,476                            395,476
  330    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................         501,599                            501,599
  340    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         287,500                            287,500
  350    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................          91,384                             91,384
  370    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         166,795                            166,795
  380    EXAMINING...........................................           4,134                              4,134
  390    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................         222,691                            222,691
  400    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................         171,974                            171,974
  410    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          60,070                             60,070
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       2,135,882               0          2,135,882
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  420    LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................         805,453                            805,453
  430    TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................         127,379                            127,379
  470    ADMINISTRATION......................................         911,283                            911,283
  480    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................         432,172                            432,172
  490    OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................       1,175,658                          1,175,658
  500    CIVIL AIR PATROL....................................          26,719                             26,719
  530    INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...............................          76,878                             76,878
  540    AIR FORCE WIDE UNDISTRIBUTED........................               0         129,100            129,100
             UFR: C&Y Tech Sustainment.......................                          [6,000]
             UFR: Child and Youth Compliance.................                         [35,000]
             UFR: Food Service Capabilities..................                         [43,200]
             UFR: MWR Resiliency Capabilities................                         [40,000]
             UFR: Violence Prevention Program................                          [4,900]
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,244,653                          1,244,653
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................       4,800,195         129,100          4,929,295
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............      39,429,232       2,133,433         41,562,665
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................       1,801,007                          1,801,007
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................         210,642                            210,642
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         403,867                            403,867
  040    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         124,951                            124,951
  050    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....         240,835          25,800            266,635
             UFR: Weapon Systems Sustainment.................                         [25,800]
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................         371,878          34,000            405,878
             UFR: Restore maintenance and repair.............                         [34,000]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       3,153,180          59,800          3,212,980
 
 
         ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
  070    ADMINISTRATION......................................          74,153                             74,153
  080    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          19,522                             19,522
  090    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC)..............          12,765                             12,765
  100    OTHER PERS SUPPORT (DISABILITY COMP)................           7,495                              7,495
  110    AUDIOVISUAL.........................................             392                                392
         SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES..         114,327               0            114,327
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE...........       3,267,507          59,800          3,327,307
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS.................................       3,175,055                          3,175,055
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................         746,082          66,000            812,082
             UFR: Facility and Communication Infrastructure..                         [66,000]
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         867,063                            867,063
  040    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         325,090          56,000            381,090
             UFR: Sustainment, Restoration, Modernization                             [56,000]
             (SRM)...........................................
  050    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       1,100,829          58,700          1,159,529
             UFR: Increase Weapons System Sustainment........                         [58,700]
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................         583,664          68,000            651,664
             UFR: Facility Restoration Modernization.........                         [68,000]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,797,783         248,700          7,046,483
 
 
         ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES
  070    ADMINISTRATION......................................          44,955                             44,955
  080    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          97,230         -45,000             52,230
             Advertising Reduction...........................                        [-45,000]
         SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.         142,185         -45,000             97,185
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..................       6,939,968         203,700          7,143,668
 
 
         OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................         440,853                            440,853
  020    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CE2T2........................         551,511                            551,511
  040    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.........       5,008,274                          5,008,274
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,000,638               0          6,000,638
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  050    DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY......................         144,970           5,000            149,970
             Increase for curriculum development.............                          [5,000]
  060    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................          84,402                             84,402
  080    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/TRAINING AND RECRUITING..         379,462                            379,462
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................         608,834           5,000            613,834
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  090    CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.............................         183,000          25,000            208,000
             Starbase........................................                         [25,000]
  110    DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY.......................         597,836                            597,836
  120    DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY..................       1,439,010                          1,439,010
  130    DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY....................         807,754                            807,754
  140    DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..................       2,009,702                          2,009,702
  160    DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY.......................          24,207                             24,207
  170    DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY............................         400,422                            400,422
  180    DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..............................         217,585                            217,585
  190    DEFENSE PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING AGENCY.................         131,268                            131,268
  200    DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.................         722,496                            722,496
  210    DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE............................         683,665                            683,665
  230    DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION..........          34,712                             34,712
  240    DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY.....................         542,604                            542,604
  260    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............       2,794,389          35,000          2,829,389
             Impact aid for children with severe disabilities                         [10,000]
             Impact aid for schools with military dependent                           [25,000]
             students........................................
  270    MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY..............................         504,058                            504,058
  290    OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT.......................          57,840                             57,840
  300    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..................       1,612,244           9,000          1,621,244
             CDC Study.......................................                          [7,000]
             Readiness increase..............................                          [1,000]
             Study on Air Force aircraft capacity and                                  [1,000]
             capabilities....................................
  310    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/ADMIN & SVC-WIDE                   94,273                             94,273
          ACTIVITIES.........................................
  320    WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES....................         436,776                            436,776
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................      14,806,404                         14,806,404
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................      28,100,245          69,000         28,169,245
 
         TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.......      34,709,717          74,000         34,783,717
 
 
         MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
         US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE
  010    US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE...          14,538                             14,538
         SUBTOTAL US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES,            14,538               0             14,538
          DEFENSE............................................
 
 
         OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID
  010    OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID.......         104,900                            104,900
         SUBTOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC           104,900               0            104,900
          AID................................................
 
 
         FORMER SOVIET UNION (FSU) THREAT REDUCTION
  010    FORMER SOVIET UNION (FSU) THREAT REDUCTION..........         324,600                            324,600
         SUBTOTAL FORMER SOVIET UNION (FSU) THREAT REDUCTION.         324,600               0            324,600
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
  050    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY.....................         215,809                            215,809
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY............         215,809               0            215,809
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY
  070    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY.....................         281,415                            281,415
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY............         281,415               0            281,415
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE
  090    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE................         293,749                            293,749
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE.......         293,749               0            293,749
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
  110    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE..................           9,002                              9,002
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE.........           9,002               0              9,002
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES
  130    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES.......         208,673                            208,673
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED             208,673               0            208,673
          SITES..............................................
 
         TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS..................       1,452,686                          1,452,686
 
 
         UNDISTRIBUTED
         UNDISTRIBUTED
  999    UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................               0       1,411,595          1,411,595
             ERI costs transferred to base (except Ukraine                         [2,121,300]
             assistance).....................................
             Foreign Currency Fluctuations...................                       [-313,315]
             Fuel Savings....................................                       [-396,390]
         SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED..............................               0       1,411,595          1,411,595
 
         TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.................................               0       1,411,595          1,411,595
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE.......................     188,694,198       6,209,447        194,903,645
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2018                           Senate
  Line                           Item                              Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................         828,225                            828,225
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................          25,474                             25,474
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................       1,778,644                          1,778,644
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................         260,575                            260,575
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................         284,422                            284,422
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................       2,784,525                          2,784,525
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         502,330                            502,330
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................         104,149                            104,149
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................          80,249                             80,249
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.          32,000                             32,000
  140    ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES...............................       6,151,378                          6,151,378
  150    COMMANDERS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM...............           5,000                              5,000
  160    RESET...............................................         864,926                            864,926
  180    US AFRICA COMMAND...................................         186,567                            186,567
  190    US EUROPEAN COMMAND.................................          44,250                             44,250
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      13,932,714               0         13,932,714
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  230    ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS...........................          56,500                             56,500
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................          56,500               0             56,500
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  390    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         755,029                            755,029
  400    CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES...........................          16,567                             16,567
  410    LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.........................           6,000                              6,000
  420    AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...............................           5,207                              5,207
  460    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         107,091                            107,091
  490    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................         165,280                            165,280
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,082,015                          1,082,015
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................       2,137,189               0          2,137,189
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.................      16,126,403               0         16,126,403
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  020    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................           4,179                              4,179
  040    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................           2,132                              2,132
  060    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................             779                                779
  090    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................          17,609                             17,609
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          24,699               0             24,699
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.............          24,699               0             24,699
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................          41,731                             41,731
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................             762                                762
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................          11,855                             11,855
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................             204                                204
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................          27,583                             27,583
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................           5,792                              5,792
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................          18,507                             18,507
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............             937                                937
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................         107,371               0            107,371
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  150    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................             740                                740
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................             740               0                740
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.................         108,111               0            108,111
 
 
         AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
         MINISTRY OF DEFENSE
  010    SUSTAINMENT.........................................       2,660,855                          2,660,855
  020    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................          21,000                             21,000
  030    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................         684,786                            684,786
  040    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................         405,117                            405,117
         SUBTOTAL MINISTRY OF DEFENSE........................       3,771,758               0          3,771,758
 
 
         MINISTRY OF INTERIOR
  050    SUSTAINMENT.........................................         955,574                            955,574
  060    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................          39,595                             39,595
  070    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................          75,976                             75,976
  080    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................          94,612                             94,612
         SUBTOTAL MINISTRY OF INTERIOR.......................       1,165,757               0          1,165,757
 
         TOTAL AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND..............       4,937,515               0          4,937,515
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................         412,710                            412,710
  030    AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES......           1,750                              1,750
  040    AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...................           2,989                              2,989
  050    AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.................................         144,030                            144,030
  060    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................         211,196                            211,196
  070    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................           1,921                              1,921
  080    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................         102,834                            102,834
  090    MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...................         855,453                            855,453
  100    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................          19,627                             19,627
  110    SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..............................       2,483,179                          2,483,179
  130    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........          58,886                             58,886
  150    SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE......................           4,400                              4,400
  160    WARFARE TACTICS.....................................          21,550                             21,550
  170    OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............          21,104                             21,104
  180    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................         605,936                            605,936
  190    EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT..          11,433                             11,433
  280    WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.................................         325,011                            325,011
  290    OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................           9,598                              9,598
  310    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          31,898                             31,898
  320    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         228,246                            228,246
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       5,553,751               0          5,553,751
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  360    SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS......................           1,869                              1,869
  370    EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...............          11,905                             11,905
  390    COAST GUARD SUPPORT.................................         161,885                            161,885
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         175,659               0            175,659
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  430    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................          43,369                             43,369
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          43,369               0             43,369
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  510    ADMINISTRATION......................................           3,217                              3,217
  540    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........           7,356                              7,356
  590    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          67,938                             67,938
  620    ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT...............           9,446                              9,446
  660    INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES.................           1,528                              1,528
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          12,751                             12,751
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         102,236               0            102,236
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.................       5,875,015               0          5,875,015
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATIONAL FORCES..................................         710,790                            710,790
  020    FIELD LOGISTICS.....................................         242,150                            242,150
  030    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................          52,000                             52,000
  070    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................          17,529                             17,529
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       1,022,469               0          1,022,469
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  120    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................          29,421                             29,421
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          29,421               0             29,421
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  160    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          61,600                             61,600
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................           3,150                              3,150
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          64,750               0             64,750
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.........       1,116,640               0          1,116,640
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  030    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................          14,964                             14,964
  080    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................           9,016                              9,016
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          23,980               0             23,980
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.............          23,980               0             23,980
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATING FORCES....................................           2,548                              2,548
  040    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................             819                                819
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................           3,367               0              3,367
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE...........           3,367               0              3,367
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................         248,235                            248,235
  020    COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES...........................       1,394,962                          1,394,962
  030    AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)......           5,450                              5,450
  040    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         699,860                            699,860
  050    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         113,131                            113,131
  060    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       2,039,551                          2,039,551
  070    FLYING HOUR PROGRAM.................................       2,059,363                          2,059,363
  080    BASE SUPPORT........................................       1,088,946                          1,088,946
  090    GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................          15,274                             15,274
  100    OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS.......................         198,090                            198,090
  120    LAUNCH FACILITIES...................................             385                                385
  130    SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...............................          22,020                             22,020
  160    US NORTHCOM/NORAD...................................             381                                381
  170    US STRATCOM.........................................             698                                698
  180    US CYBERCOM.........................................          35,239                             35,239
  190    US CENTCOM..........................................         159,520                            159,520
  200    US SOCOM............................................          19,000                             19,000
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          58,098                             58,098
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       8,158,203               0          8,158,203
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  220    AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..................................       1,430,316                          1,430,316
  230    MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS...........................         213,827                            213,827
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................       1,644,143               0          1,644,143
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  270    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................             300                                300
  280    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................             298                                298
  290    RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC)..............              90                                 90
  320    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................          25,675                             25,675
  330    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................             879                                879
  340    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................           1,114                              1,114
  350    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................           1,426                              1,426
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          29,782               0             29,782
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  420    LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................         151,847                            151,847
  430    TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................           8,744                              8,744
  470    ADMINISTRATION......................................           6,583                              6,583
  480    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................         129,508                            129,508
  490    OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................          84,110                             84,110
  530    INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...............................             120                                120
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          53,255                             53,255
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         434,167               0            434,167
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............      10,266,295               0         10,266,295
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................          52,323                             52,323
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................           6,200                              6,200
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          58,523               0             58,523
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE...........          58,523               0             58,523
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
         OPERATING FORCES
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................           3,468                              3,468
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................          11,932                             11,932
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          15,400               0             15,400
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..................          15,400               0             15,400
 
 
         OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................           4,841                              4,841
  040    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.........       3,305,234           6,300          3,311,534
             UFR: Joint Task Force Platform Expansion........                          [6,300]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       3,310,075           6,300          3,316,375
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  110    DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY.......................           9,853                              9,853
  120    DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY..................          21,317                             21,317
  140    DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..................          64,137                             64,137
  160    DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY.......................         115,000                            115,000
  180    DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..............................          13,255                             13,255
  200    DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.................       2,312,000         250,000          2,562,000
             Reduction to Coalition Support Funds............                       [-100,000]
             Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative..........                        [350,000]
  260    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............          31,000                             31,000
  300    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..................          34,715                             34,715
  320    WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES....................           3,179                              3,179
 9999    CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,797,549                          1,797,549
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................       4,402,005         250,000          4,652,005
 
         TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.......       7,712,080         256,300          7,968,380
 
 
         UNDISTRIBUTED
         UNDISTRIBUTED
  999    UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................               0      -2,121,300         -2,121,300
             ERI costs transferred from OCO to base (except                       [-2,121,300]
             Ukraine assistance).............................
         SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED..............................               0      -2,121,300         -2,121,300
 
         TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.................................               0      -2,121,300         -2,121,300
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE.......................      46,268,028      -1,865,000         44,403,028
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL

TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
 

SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2018  Request     Senate  Change    Senate  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS...................        133,881,636            -154,913         133,726,723
     Defense Innovation Board software review.......                                  1,000
     ERI costs transferred to base..................                                214,300
     Marine Corps endstrength increase (1k).........                                100,000
     Public-Private partnership on military spousal                                   1,000
     employment.....................................
     UFR: ANG funds training man days...............                                170,800
     UFR: Army endtrength increase (6k).............                                321,000
     UFR: Army readiness requirements...............                                107,987
     UFR: ATFP Enhancement--2nd Pier Sentry (Mahan                                   12,000
     Report)........................................
     Unobligated Balances...........................                            [-1,083,000]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS..........        133,881,636            -154,913         133,726,723
 
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS.          7,804,427              16,000           7,820,427
     UFR: Army endtrength increase (6k).............                                 16,000
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND                7,804,427              16,000           7,820,427
 CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
 
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................        141,686,063            -138,913         141,547,150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2018  Request     Senate  Change    Senate  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS...................          4,276,276            -214,300           4,061,976
     ERI costs transferred to base budget...........                              [-214,300]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS..........          4,276,276            -214,300           4,061,976
 
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................          4,276,276            -214,300           4,061,976
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
 

SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2018                           Senate
    Line                           Item                            Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
       010   Industrial Operations...........................          43,140                             43,140
       020   Supply Management--Army.........................          40,636          50,100             90,736
                 ERI costs transfer from OCO to base.........                         [50,100]
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............          83,776          50,100            133,876
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
       010   Supplies and Materials..........................          66,462                             66,462
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........          66,462               0             66,462
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
       020   Supply Chain Management--Def....................          47,018                             47,018
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.....          47,018               0             47,018
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
       010   Working Capital Fund, DECA......................       1,389,340                          1,389,340
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA.............       1,389,340               0          1,389,340
 
             TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................       1,586,596          50,100          1,636,696
 
             CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
         1   Chem Demilitarization--O&M......................         104,237                            104,237
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............         104,237               0            104,237
 
             RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
         2   Chem Demilitarization--RDT&E....................         839,414                            839,414
             SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND                839,414               0            839,414
              EVALUATION.....................................
 
             PROCUREMENT
         3   Chem Demilitarization--Proc.....................          18,081                             18,081
             SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................          18,081               0             18,081
 
             TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION.......         961,732               0            961,732
 
             DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
             DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG ACTIVITIES
       010   Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,           674,001                            674,001
              Defense........................................
             SUBTOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG              674,001               0            674,001
              ACTIVITIES.....................................
 
             DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
       020   Drug Demand Reduction Program...................         116,813                            116,813
             SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM..........         116,813               0            116,813
 
             TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES,           790,814               0            790,814
              DEF............................................
 
             OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
       010   Operation And Maintenance.......................         334,087                            334,087
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............         334,087               0            334,087
 
             RDT&E
       020   RDT&E...........................................           2,800                              2,800
             SUBTOTAL RDT&E..................................           2,800               0              2,800
 
             TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL...........         336,887               0            336,887
 
             DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
       010   In-House Care...................................       9,457,768                          9,457,768
       020   Private Sector Care.............................      15,317,732                         15,317,732
       030   Consolidated Health Support.....................       2,193,045                          2,193,045
       040   Information Management..........................       1,803,733                          1,803,733
       050   Management Activities...........................         330,752                            330,752
       060   Education and Training..........................         737,730                            737,730
       070   Base Operations/Communications..................       2,255,163                          2,255,163
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................      32,095,923               0         32,095,923
 
             RDT&E
       080   R&D Research....................................           9,796                              9,796
       090   R&D Exploratry Development......................          64,881                             64,881
       100   R&D Advanced Development........................         246,268                            246,268
       110   R&D Demonstration/Validation....................          99,039                             99,039
       120   R&D Engineering Development.....................         170,602                            170,602
       130   R&D Management and Support......................          69,191                             69,191
       140   R&D Capabilities Enhancement....................          13,438                             13,438
             SUBTOTAL RDT&E..................................         673,215               0            673,215
 
             PROCUREMENT
       150   PROC Initial Outfitting.........................          26,978                             26,978
       160   PROC Replacement & Modernization................         360,831                            360,831
       180   PROC Joint Operational Medicine Information                8,326                              8,326
              System.........................................
       190   PROC DoD Healthcare Management System                    499,193                            499,193
              Modernization..................................
             SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................         895,328               0            895,328
 
             TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................      33,664,466               0         33,664,466
 
             NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND
             OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND LEASE
       050   LG Med Spd Ro/Ro Maintenance....................         135,800                            135,800
       060   DoD Mobilization Alterations....................          11,197                             11,197
       070   TAH Maintenance.................................          54,453                             54,453
             SUBTOTAL OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND LEASE......         201,450               0            201,450
 
             RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
       080   Research And Development........................          18,622                             18,622
             SUBTOTAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT...............          18,622               0             18,622
 
             READY RESERVE FORCES
       090   Ready Reserve Force.............................         289,255           7,000            296,255
                 UFR: Strategic Sealift service life                                   [7,000]
                 extension...................................
             SUBTOTAL READY RESERVE FORCES...................         289,255           7,000            296,255
 
             TOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND.............         509,327           7,000            516,327
 
             TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS......................      37,849,822          57,100         37,906,922
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2018                           Senate
    Line                           Item                            Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
       020   Supply Management--Army.........................          50,111         -50,111                  0
                 ERI costs transfer from OCO to base.........                        [-50,111]
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............          50,111         -50,111                  0
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
       010   Energy Management--Def..........................          70,000                             70,000
       020   Supply Chain Management--Def....................          28,845                             28,845
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.....          98,845               0             98,845
 
             TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................         148,956         -50,111             98,845
 
             DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
             DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG ACTIVITIES
       010   Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,           196,300                            196,300
              Defense........................................
             SUBTOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG              196,300               0            196,300
              ACTIVITIES.....................................
 
             TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES,           196,300               0            196,300
              DEF............................................
 
             OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
       010   Operation And Maintenance.......................          24,692                             24,692
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............          24,692               0             24,692
 
             TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL...........          24,692               0             24,692
 
             DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
       010   In-House Care...................................          61,857                             61,857
       020   Private Sector Care.............................         331,968                            331,968
       030   Consolidated Health Support.....................           1,980                              1,980
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................         395,805               0            395,805
 
             TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................         395,805               0            395,805
 
             COUNTER-ISLAMIC ISIS TRAIN & EQUIP FUND
             COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
       010   Iraq............................................       1,269,000                          1,269,000
       020   Syria...........................................         500,000                            500,000
             SUBTOTAL COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND             1,769,000               0          1,769,000
              (CTEF).........................................
 
             TOTAL COUNTER-ISLAMIC ISIS TRAIN & EQUIP FUND...       1,769,000               0          1,769,000
 
             TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS......................       2,534,753         -50,111          2,484,642
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
 

SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              Budget                          Senate
          Account                 State/ Country           Installation              Project Title            Request     Senate  Change    Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
MILCON, ARMY
MILCON, ARMY                 ALABAMA                  Fort Rucker             Training Support Facility.          38,000                          38,000
MILCON, ARMY                 ARIZONA                  Davis-Monthan AFB       General Instruction                 22,000                          22,000
                                                                               Building.
MILCON, ARMY                 ARIZONA                  Fort Huachuca           Ground Transport Equipment          30,000                          30,000
                                                                               Building.
MILCON, ARMY                 CALIFORNIA               Fort Irwin              Land Acquisition..........           3,000                           3,000
MILCON, ARMY                 COLORADO                 Fort Carson, Colorado   Ammunition Supply Point...          21,000                          21,000
MILCON, ARMY                 COLORADO                 Fort Carson, Colorado   Battlefield Weather                  8,300                           8,300
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, ARMY                 FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               Multipurpose Range Complex          18,000                          18,000
MILCON, ARMY                 GEORGIA                  Fort Benning            Air Traffic Control Tower                0          10,800          10,800
                                                                               (ATCT).
MILCON, ARMY                 GEORGIA                  Fort Benning            Training Support Facility.          28,000                          28,000
MILCON, ARMY                 GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Access Control Point......          33,000                          33,000
MILCON, ARMY                 GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Automation-Aided                    18,500                          18,500
                                                                               Instructional Building.
MILCON, ARMY                 GERMANY                  Stuttgart               Commissary................          40,000                          40,000
MILCON, ARMY                 GERMANY                  Weisbaden               Administrative Building...          43,000                          43,000
MILCON, ARMY                 HAWAII                   Fort Shafter            Command and Control                 90,000                          90,000
                                                                               Facility, Incr 3.
MILCON, ARMY                 HAWAII                   Pohakuloa Training      Operational Readiness                    0          25,000          25,000
                                                       Area                    Training Complex
                                                                               (Barracks).
MILCON, ARMY                 INDIANA                  Crane Army Ammunition   Shipping and Receiving              24,000                          24,000
                                                       Plant                   Building.
MILCON, ARMY                 KOREA                    Kunsan AB               Unmanned Aerial Vehicle             53,000                          53,000
                                                                               Hangar.
MILCON, ARMY                 NEW YORK                 U.S. Military Academy   Cemetery..................          22,000                          22,000
MILCON, ARMY                 SOUTH CAROLINA           Fort Jackson            Reception Barracks                  60,000                          60,000
                                                                               Complex, Ph1.
MILCON, ARMY                 SOUTH CAROLINA           Shaw AFB                Mission Training Complex..          25,000                          25,000
MILCON, ARMY                 TEXAS                    Camp Bullis             Vehicle Maintenance Shop..          13,600                          13,600
MILCON, ARMY                 TEXAS                    Fort Hood               Vehicle Maintenance Shop..               0          33,000          33,000
MILCON, ARMY                 TEXAS                    Fort Hood, Texas        Battalion Headquarters              37,000                          37,000
                                                                               Complex.
MILCON, ARMY                 TURKEY                   Turkey Various          Forward Operating Site....           6,400                           6,400
MILCON, ARMY                 VIRGINIA                 Fort Belvoir            Secure Admin/Operations             14,124                          14,124
                                                                               Facility, Incr 3.
MILCON, ARMY                 VIRGINIA                 Joint Base Langley-     Aircraft Maintenance                34,000                          34,000
                                                       Eustis                  Instructional Bldg.
MILCON, ARMY                 VIRGINIA                 Joint Base Myer-        Security Fence............          20,000                          20,000
                                                       Henderson
MILCON, ARMY                 WASHINGTON               Joint Base Lewis-       Confinement Facility......          66,000         -66,000               0
                                                       Mcchord
MILCON, ARMY                 WASHINGTON               Yakima                  Fire Station..............          19,500                          19,500
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          72,770                          72,770
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Host Nation Support.......          28,700                          28,700
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   31,500                          31,500
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..               0          15,700          15,700
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, ARMY                                                                                      920,394          18,500         938,894
                             .......................  ......................
MIL CON, NAVY
MIL CON, NAVY                ARIZONA                  Yuma                    Enlisted Dining Facility &          36,358                          36,358
                                                                               Community Bldgs.
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Barstow                 Combat Vehicle Repair               36,539                          36,539
                                                                               Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton,         Ammunition Supply Point             61,139                          61,139
                                                       California              Upgrade.
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Coronado                P988 Undersea Rescue                     0          36,000          36,000
                                                                               Command (URC) Operations
                                                                               Building.
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Lemoore                 F/A 18 Avionics Repair              60,828                          60,828
                                                                               Facility Replacement.
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Marine Corps Air        F-35 Simulator Facility...               0          47,574          47,574
                                                       Station Miramar
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Miramar                 Aircraft Maintenance                39,600                          39,600
                                                                               Hangar (INC 2).
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               San Diego               P440 Pier 8 Replacement...               0         108,000         108,000
MIL CON, NAVY                CALIFORNIA               Twentynine Palms,       Potable Water Treatment/            55,099                          55,099
                                                       California              Blending Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA     NSA Washington          Washington Navy Yard AT/FP          60,000         -60,000               0
                                                                               Land Acquisition.
MIL CON, NAVY                DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA     NSA Washington          Electronics Science and             37,882                          37,882
                                                                               Technology Laboratory.
MIL CON, NAVY                DJIBOUTI                 Camp Lemonier,          Aircraft Parking Apron              13,390                          13,390
                                                       Djibouti                Expansion.
MIL CON, NAVY                FLORIDA                  Mayport                 P426 Littoral Combat Ship                0          81,000          81,000
                                                                               (LCS) Support Facility
                                                                               (LSF).
MIL CON, NAVY                FLORIDA                  Mayport                 P427 Littoral Combat Ship                0          29,000          29,000
                                                                               (LCS) Training Facility
                                                                               (LTF).
MIL CON, NAVY                FLORIDA                  Mayport                 Missile Magazines.........           9,824                           9,824
MIL CON, NAVY                FLORIDA                  Mayport                 Advanced Wastewater                 74,994                          74,994
                                                                               Treatment Plant (AWWTP).
MIL CON, NAVY                GEORGIA                  Marine Corps Logistics  Combat Vehicle Warehouse..               0          43,308          43,308
                                                       Base Albany
MIL CON, NAVY                GREECE                   Souda Bay               Strategic Aircraft Parking          22,045                          22,045
                                                                               Apron Expansion.
MIL CON, NAVY                GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Water Well Field..........          56,088                          56,088
MIL CON, NAVY                GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   MALS Facilities...........          49,431                          49,431
MIL CON, NAVY                GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Corrosion Control Hangar..          66,747                          66,747
MIL CON, NAVY                GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Aircraft Maintenance                75,233                          75,233
                                                                               Hangar #2.
MIL CON, NAVY                GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Navy-Commercial Tie-In              37,180                          37,180
                                                                               Hardening.
MIL CON, NAVY                HAWAII                   Joint Base Pearl        Sewer Lift Station &                73,200                          73,200
                                                       Harbor-Hickam           Relief Sewer Line.
MIL CON, NAVY                HAWAII                   Kaneohe Bay             LHD Pad Conversions MV-22           19,012                          19,012
                                                                               Landing Pads.
MIL CON, NAVY                HAWAII                   Marine Corps Base       Mokapu Gate Entry Control                0          26,492          26,492
                                                       Kaneohe Bay             AT/FP Compliance.
MIL CON, NAVY                HAWAII                   Wahiawa                 Communications/Crypto               65,864                          65,864
                                                                               Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                JAPAN                    Iwakuni                 KC130J Enlisted Aircrew             21,860                          21,860
                                                                               Trainer Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                MAINE                    Kittery                 Paint, Blast, and Rubber            61,692                          61,692
                                                                               Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     Water Treatment Plant               65,784                          65,784
                                                       Carolina                Replacement Hadnot Pt.
MIL CON, NAVY                NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     Bachelor Enlisted Quarters          37,983                          37,983
                                                       Carolina
MIL CON, NAVY                NORTH CAROLINA           Cherry Point Marine     F-35B Vertical Lift Fan             15,671                          15,671
                                                       Corps Air Station       Test Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                NORTH CAROLINA           Marine Corps Base       Radio BN Complex, Phase 2.               0          64,292          64,292
                                                       Lejeune
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Dam Neck                ISR Operations Facility             29,262                          29,262
                                                                               Expansion.
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Joint Expeditionary     ACU-4 Electrical Upgrades.           2,596                           2,596
                                                       Base Little Creek--
                                                       Story
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Marine Corps Base       TBS Fire Station Building                0          23,738          23,738
                                                       Quantico                533 Replacement.
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Norfolk                 Chambers Field Magazine             34,665                          34,665
                                                                               Recap Ph 1.
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Portsmouth              Ship Repair Training                72,990                          72,990
                                                                               Facility.
MIL CON, NAVY                VIRGINIA                 Yorktown                Bachelor Enlisted Quarters          36,358                          36,358
MIL CON, NAVY                WASHINGTON               Indian Island           Missile Magazines.........          44,440                          44,440
MIL CON, NAVY                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   23,842                          23,842
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, NAVY                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..               0          18,500          18,500
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, NAVY                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......         219,069           9,000         228,069
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MIL CON, NAVY                                                                                   1,616,665         426,904       2,043,569
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, AIR FORCE
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             Repair Central Heat/Power           41,000                          41,000
                                                                               Plant Boiler PH 4.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A OSS/Weapons/Intel             11,800                          11,800
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A AGE Facility /                21,000                          21,000
                                                                               Fillstand.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A R-11 Fuel Truck                9,600                           9,600
                                                                               Shelter.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A Satellite Dining               8,000                           8,000
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A Consolidated                  27,000                          27,000
                                                                               Munitions Admin Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A ADAL Conventional              2,500                           2,500
                                                                               Munitions Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A Extend Utiliduct to           48,000                          48,000
                                                                               South Loop.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ARKANSAS                 Little Rock AFB         Dormitory - 168 PN........               0          20,000          20,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            AUSTRALIA                Darwin                  APR--Bulk Fuel Storage              76,000                          76,000
                                                                               Tanks.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            COLORADO                 Buckley Air Force Base  SBIRS Operations Facility.          38,000                          38,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            COLORADO                 Fort Carson, Colorado   13 ASOS Expansion.........          13,000                          13,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            COLORADO                 U.S. Air Force Academy  Air Force CyberWorx.......          30,000                          30,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ESTONIA                  Amari Air Base          ERI: POL Capacity Phase II               0           4,700           4,700
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ESTONIA                  Amari Air Base          ERI: Tactical Fighter                    0           9,200           9,200
                                                                               Aircraft Parking Apron.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               Dormitories (288 RM)......               0          44,000          44,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               F-35A Armament Research              8,700                           8,700
                                                                               Fac Addition (B614).
MILCON, AIR FORCE            FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               Long-Range Stand-Off                38,000                          38,000
                                                                               Acquisition Fac.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            FLORIDA                  Macdill AFB             KC-135 Beddown OG/MXG HQ..           8,100                           8,100
MILCON, AIR FORCE            FLORIDA                  Tyndall AFB             Fire/Crash Rescue Station.               0          17,000          17,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            GEORGIA                  Robins AFB              Commercial Vehicle Visitor           9,800                           9,800
                                                                               Control Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Increase POL Storage                0          12,500          12,500
                                                                               Capacity.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Construct Parallel                  0          30,000          30,000
                                                                               Taxiway.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Airfield Upgrades....               0          12,900          12,900
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ICELAND                  Keflavik                ERI: Airfield Upgrades....               0          14,400          14,400
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ITALY                    Aviano AB               Guardian Angel Operations           27,325                          27,325
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            KANSAS                   Mcconnell AFB           Combat Arms Facility......          17,500                          17,500
MILCON, AIR FORCE            LATVIA                   Lielvarde Air Base      ERI: Expand Strategic Ramp               0           3,850           3,850
                                                                               Parking.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            LUXEMBOURG               Sanem                   ERI: ECAOS Deployable                    0          67,400          67,400
                                                                               Airbase System Storage.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            MARIANA ISLANDS          Tinian                  APR Land Acquisition......          12,900                          12,900
MILCON, AIR FORCE            MARYLAND                 Joint Base Andrews      PAR Land Acquisition......          17,500                          17,500
MILCON, AIR FORCE            MARYLAND                 Joint Base Andrews      Presidential Aircraft              254,000        -196,000          58,000
                                                                               Recap Complex.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            MASSACHUSETTS            Hanscom AFB             Vandenberg Gate Complex...          11,400                          11,400
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NEVADA                   Nellis AFB              Red Flag 5th Gen Facility           23,000                          23,000
                                                                               Addition.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NEVADA                   Nellis AFB              Virtual Warfare Center              38,000                          38,000
                                                                               Operations Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NEW MEXICO               Cannon AFB              Dangerous Cargo Pad                 42,000                          42,000
                                                                               Relocate CATM.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NEW MEXICO               Holloman AFB            RPA Fixed Ground Control             4,250                           4,250
                                                                               Station Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NEW MEXICO               Kirtland AFB            Replace Fire Station 3....               0           9,300           9,300
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NORTH DAKOTA             Minot AFB               Indoor Firing Range.......          27,000                          27,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NORWAY                   Rygge                   ERI: Replace/Expand Quick                0          10,300          10,300
                                                                               Reaction Alert Pad.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            OHIO                     Wright-Patterson AFB    Fire/Crash Rescue Station.               0           6,800           6,800
MILCON, AIR FORCE            OKLAHOMA                 Altus AFB               Fire Rescue Center........               0          16,000          16,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            OKLAHOMA                 Altus AFB               KC-46A FTU Fuselage                  4,900                           4,900
                                                                               Trainer Phase 2.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            QATAR                    Al Udeid, Qatar         Consolidated Squadron               15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Operations Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ROMANIA                  Campia Turzii           ERI: Upgrade Utilities                   0           2,950           2,950
                                                                               Infrastructure.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Malacky                 ERI: Increase POL Storage                0          20,000          20,000
                                                                               Capacity.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Malacky                 ERI: Airfield Upgrades....               0           4,000           4,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Sliac Airport           ERI: Airfield Upgrades....               0          22,000          22,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio  Camp Bullis Dining                  18,500                          18,500
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio  Air Traffic Control Tower.          10,000                          10,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio  BMT Recruit Dormitory 7...          90,130                          90,130
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio  BMT Classrooms/Dining               38,000                          38,000
                                                                               Facility 4.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TURKEY                   Incirlik AB             Dormitory--216 PN.........          25,997                          25,997
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         EIC RC-135 Intel and Squad          38,000                          38,000
                                                       Fairford                Ops Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         EIC RC-135 Runway Overrun            5,500                           5,500
                                                       Fairford                Reconfiguration.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         EIC RC-135 Infrastructure.           2,150                           2,150
                                                       Fairford
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         Consolidated Corrosion              20,000                          20,000
                                                       Lakenheath              Control Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A F-15 Parking........          10,800                          10,800
                                                       Lakenheath
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Flight Simulator              22,000                          22,000
                                                       Lakenheath              Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Field Training                12,492                          12,492
                                                       Lakenheath              Detachment Facility.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Infrastructure......           6,700                           6,700
                                                       Lakenheath
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A 6-Bay Hangar........          24,000                          24,000
                                                       Lakenheath
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Squadron Operations           41,000                          41,000
                                                       Lakenheath              and AMU.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            UTAH                     Hill AFB                UTTR Consolidated Mission           28,000                          28,000
                                                                               Control Center.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   KC-46A Main Operating Base         269,000         -16,000         253,000
                                                       Locations               4.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......               0          56,400          56,400
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          97,852                          97,852
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..               0          56,630          56,630
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Unspecified Minor                   31,400                          31,400
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WYOMING                  F. E. Warren AFB        Consolidated Helo/TRF Ops/          62,000                          62,000
                                                                               AMU and Alert Fac.
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, AIR FORCE                                                                               1,738,796         228,330       1,967,126
                             .......................  ......................
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton,         SOF Marine Battalion                 9,958                           9,958
                                                       California              Company/Team Facilities.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton,         SOF Motor Transport                  7,284                           7,284
                                                       California              Facility Expansion.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton,         Ambulatory Care Center              26,400                          26,400
                                                       California              Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF Basic Training Command          96,077                          96,077
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF SEAL Team Ops Facility          66,218                          66,218
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF Logistics Support Unit          46,175                          46,175
                                                                               One Ops Fac. #3.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF SEAL Team Ops Facility          50,265                          50,265
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            COLORADO                 Schriever AFB           Ambulatory Care Center/             10,200                          10,200
                                                                               Dental Add./Alt..
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            CONUS CLASSIFIED         Classified Location     Battalion Complex, PH 1...          64,364                          64,364
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               SOF Simulator Facility....           5,000                           5,000
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               Upgrade Open Storage Yard.           4,100                           4,100
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            FLORIDA                  Hurlburt Field          SOF Simulator & Fuselage            11,700                          11,700
                                                                               Trainer Facility.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            FLORIDA                  Hurlburt Field          SOF Combat Aircraft                 34,700                          34,700
                                                                               Parking Apron.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Blood Donor Center                  10,350                          10,350
                                                                               Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GERMANY                  Rhine Ordnance          Medical Center Replacement         106,700                         106,700
                                                       Barracks                Incr 7.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GERMANY                  Spangdahlem AB          Spangdahlem Elementary              79,141                          79,141
                                                                               School Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GERMANY                  Stuttgart               Robinson Barracks Elem.             46,609                          46,609
                                                                               School Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GREECE                   Souda Bay               Construct Hydrant System..          18,100                          18,100
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            GUAM                     Andersen AFB            Construct Truck Load &              23,900                          23,900
                                                                               Unload Facility.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            HAWAII                   Kunia                   NSAH Kunia Tunnel Entrance           5,000                           5,000
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            ITALY                    Sigonella               Construct Hydrant System..          22,400                          22,400
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            ITALY                    Vicenza                 Vicenza High School                 62,406                          62,406
                                                                               Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Iwakuni                 Construct Bulk Storage              30,800                          30,800
                                                                               Tanks PH 1.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Kadena AB               SOF Special Tactics                 27,573                          27,573
                                                                               Operations Facility.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Kadena AB               SOF Maintenance Hangar....           3,972                           3,972
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Okinawa                 Replace Mooring System....          11,900                          11,900
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Sasebo                  Upgrade Fuel Wharf........          45,600                          45,600
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Torii Commo Station     SOF Tactical Equipment              25,323                          25,323
                                                                               Maintenance Fac.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Yokota AB               Hangar/Aircraft                     12,034                          12,034
                                                                               Maintenance Unit.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Yokota AB               Operations and Warehouse             8,590                           8,590
                                                                               Facilities.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Yokota AB               Simulator Facility........           2,189                           2,189
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            JAPAN                    Yokota AB               Airfield Apron............          10,800                          10,800
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            MARYLAND                 Bethesda Naval          Medical Center Addition/           123,800                         123,800
                                                       Hospital                Alteration Incr 2.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            MARYLAND                 Fort Meade              NSAW Recapitalize Building         313,968                         313,968
                                                                               #2 Incr 3.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            MISSOURI                 Fort Leonard Wood       Hospital Replacement Ph 1.         250,000        -200,000          50,000
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            MISSOURI                 Fort Leonard Wood       Blood Processing Center             11,941                          11,941
                                                                               Repalcement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            MISSOURI                 St Louis                Next NGA West (N2W)                381,000        -331,000          50,000
                                                                               Complex Ph1.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NEW MEXICO               Cannon AFB              SOF C-130 AGE Facility....           8,228                           8,228
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     SOF Human Performance               10,800                          10,800
                                                       Carolina                Training Center.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     SOF Motor Transport                 20,539                          20,539
                                                       Carolina                Maintenance Expansion.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     Ambulatory Care Center              15,300                          15,300
                                                       Carolina                Addition/Alteration.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     Ambulatory Care Center/             21,400                          21,400
                                                       Carolina                Dental Clinic.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune, North     Ambulatory Care Center/             22,000                          22,000
                                                       Carolina                Dental Clinic.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF Support Battalion               13,518                          13,518
                                                                               Admin Facility.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF Human Performance               20,260                          20,260
                                                                               Training Ctr.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF Tactical Equipment              20,000                          20,000
                                                                               Maintenance Facility.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF Telecomm Reliability             4,000                           4,000
                                                                               Improvements.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            NORTH CAROLINA           Seymour Johnson AFB     Construct Tanker Truck              20,000                          20,000
                                                                               Delivery System.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            PUERTO RICO              Punta Borinquen         Ramey Unit School                   61,071                          61,071
                                                                               Replacement.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            SOUTH CAROLINA           Shaw AFB                Consolidate Fuel                    22,900                          22,900
                                                                               Facilities.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            TEXAS                    Fort Bliss              Blood Processing Center...           8,300                           8,300
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            TEXAS                    Fort Bliss              Hospital Replacement Incr          251,330                         251,330
                                                                               8.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            UNITED KINGDOM           Menwith Hill Station    RAFMH Main Gate                     11,000                          11,000
                                                                               Rehabilitation.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            UTAH                     Hill AFB                Replace POL Facilities....          20,000                          20,000
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Joint Expeditionary     SOF SATEC Range Expansion.          23,000                          23,000
                                                       Base Little Creek--
                                                       Story
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Norfolk                 Replace Hazardous                   18,500                          18,500
                                                                               Materials Warehouse.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Pentagon                Security Updates..........          13,260                          13,260
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Pentagon                Pentagon Corr 8 Pedestrian           8,140                           8,140
                                                                               Access Control Pt.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Pentagon                S.E. Safety Traffic and             28,700                          28,700
                                                                               Parking Improvements.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            VIRGINIA                 Portsmouth              Replace Harardous                   22,500                          22,500
                                                                               Materials Warehouse.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    8,000                           8,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          26,147                          26,147
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          39,746                          39,746
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,000                           3,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    7,384                           7,384
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..               0           1,900           1,900
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           1,150                           1,150
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........          23,012                          23,012
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    2,039                           2,039
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Energy Resilience and              150,000          26,500         176,500
                                                       Locations               Conserv. Invest. Prog..
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Contingency Construction..          10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,000                           3,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          13,500                          13,500
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERCIP Design..............          10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,000                           3,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          20,000                          20,000
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          40,220                          40,220
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Exercise Related Minor              11,490                          11,490
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......               0           1,150           1,150
                                                       Locations
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           1,942                           1,942
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MIL CON, DEF-WIDE                                                                               3,114,913        -501,450       2,613,463
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, ARNG
MILCON, ARNG                 DELAWARE                 New Castle              Combined Support                    36,000                          36,000
                                                                               Maintenance Shop.
MILCON, ARNG                 IDAHO                    Mission Training        Enlisted Barracks,                       0           9,000           9,000
                                                       Center Gowen            Transient Training.
MILCON, ARNG                 IDAHO                    Orchard Trainig Area    Digital Air/Ground                  22,000                          22,000
                                                                               Integration Range.
MILCON, ARNG                 IOWA                     Camp Dodge              Vehicle Maintenance                      0           8,500           8,500
                                                                               Instructional Facility.
MILCON, ARNG                 KANSAS                   Fort Leavenworth        Enlisted Barracks,                       0          19,000          19,000
                                                                               Transient Training.
MILCON, ARNG                 MAINE                    Presque Isle            National Guard Readiness            17,500                          17,500
                                                                               Center.
MILCON, ARNG                 MARYLAND                 Sykesville              National Guard Readiness            19,000                          19,000
                                                                               Center.
MILCON, ARNG                 MINNESOTA                Arden Hills             National Guard Readiness            39,000                          39,000
                                                                               Center.
MILCON, ARNG                 MISSOURI                 Springfield             Aircraft Maintenance                     0          32,000          32,000
                                                                               Hangar (Addition).
MILCON, ARNG                 NEW MEXICO               Las Cruces              National Guard Readiness             8,600                           8,600
                                                                               Center Addition.
MILCON, ARNG                 VIRGINIA                 Fort Belvoir            National Guard Readiness                 0          15,000          15,000
                                                                               Center.
MILCON, ARNG                 VIRGINIA                 Fort Pickett            Training Aids Center......           4,550                           4,550
MILCON, ARNG                 WASHINGTON               Tumwater                National Guard Readiness            31,000                          31,000
                                                                               Center.
MILCON, ARNG                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   16,731                          16,731
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MILCON, ARNG                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          16,271                          16,271
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, ARNG                                                                                      210,652          83,500         294,152
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, ANG
MILCON, ANG                  CALIFORNIA               March AFB               TFI Construct RPA Flight            15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Training Unit.
MILCON, ANG                  COLORADO                 Peterson AFB            Space Control Facility....           8,000                           8,000
MILCON, ANG                  CONNECTICUT              Bradley IAP             Construct Base Entry                 7,000                           7,000
                                                                               Complex.
MILCON, ANG                  INDIANA                  Hulman Regional         Construct Small Arms Range               0           8,000           8,000
                                                       Airport
MILCON, ANG                  KENTUCKY                 Louisville IAP          Add/Alter Response Forces            9,000                           9,000
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, ANG                  MISSISSIPPI              Jackson International   Construct Small Arms Range               0           8,000           8,000
                                                       Airport
MILCON, ANG                  MISSOURI                 Rosecrans Memorial      Replace Communications              10,000                          10,000
                                                       Airport                 Facility.
MILCON, ANG                  NEW YORK                 Hancock Field           Add To Flight Training               6,800                           6,800
                                                                               Unit, Building 641.
MILCON, ANG                  OHIO                     Toledo Express Airport  NORTHCOM--Construct Alert           15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Hangar.
MILCON, ANG                  OKLAHOMA                 Tulsa International     Construct Small Arms Range               0           8,000           8,000
                                                       Airport
MILCON, ANG                  OREGON                   Klamath Falls IAP       Construct Corrosion                 10,500                          10,500
                                                                               Control Hangar.
MILCON, ANG                  OREGON                   Klamath Falls IAP       Construct Indoor Range....           8,000                           8,000
MILCON, ANG                  SOUTH DAKOTA             Joe Foss Field          Aircraft Maintenance Shops          12,000                          12,000
MILCON, ANG                  TENNESSEE                McGhee-Tyson Airport    Replace KC-135 Maintenance          25,000                          25,000
                                                                               Hangar and Shops.
MILCON, ANG                  WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......               0           2,000           2,000
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ANG                  WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          18,000                          18,000
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ANG                  WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   17,191                          17,191
                                                       Locations               Construction.
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, ANG                                                                                       161,491          26,000         187,491
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, ARMY R
MILCON, ARMY R               CALIFORNIA               Fallbrook               Army Reserve Center.......          36,000                          36,000
MILCON, ARMY R               DELAWARE                 Newark                  Army Reserve Center.......               0          19,500          19,500
MILCON, ARMY R               OHIO                     Wright-Patterson AFB    Area Maintenance Support                 0           9,100           9,100
                                                                               Activity.
MILCON, ARMY R               PUERTO RICO              Aguadilla               Army Reserve Center.......          12,400                          12,400
MILCON, ARMY R               WASHINGTON               Joint Base Lewis-       Army Reserve Center.......               0          30,000          30,000
                                                       McChord
MILCON, ARMY R               WISCONSIN                Fort McCoy              AT/MOB Dining Facility-             13,000                          13,000
                                                                               1428 PN.
MILCON, ARMY R               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           6,887                           6,887
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ARMY R               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    5,425                           5,425
                                                       Locations               Construction.
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, ARMY R                                                                                     73,712          58,600         132,312
                             .......................  ......................
MIL CON, NAVY RES
MIL CON, NAVY RES            CALIFORNIA               Lemoore                 Naval Operational Support           17,330                          17,330
                                                                               Center Lemoore.
MIL CON, NAVY RES            GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Naval Operational Support           17,797                          17,797
                                                                               Center Fort Gordon.
MIL CON, NAVY RES            NEW JERSEY               Joint Base Mcguire-Dix- Aircraft Apron, Taxiway &           11,573                          11,573
                                                       Lakehurst               Support Facilities.
MIL CON, NAVY RES            TEXAS                    Fort Worth              KC130-J EACTS Facility....          12,637                          12,637
MIL CON, NAVY RES            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    1,504                           1,504
                                                       Locations               Construction.
MIL CON, NAVY RES            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,430                           4,430
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MIL CON, NAVY RES                                                                                  65,271               0          65,271
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, AF RES
MILCON, AF RES               FLORIDA                  Patrick AFB             Guardian Angel Facility...          25,000                          25,000
MILCON, AF RES               GEORGIA                  Robins AFB              Consolidated Mission                     0          32,000          32,000
                                                                               Complex Phase 2.
MILCON, AF RES               GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Reserve Medical Training             5,200                           5,200
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AF RES               HAWAII                   Joint Base Pearl        Consolidated Training                5,500                           5,500
                                                       Harbor-Hickam           Facility.
MILCON, AF RES               MASSACHUSETTS            Westover ARB            Indoor Small Arms Range...          10,000                          10,000
MILCON, AF RES               MASSACHUSETTS            Westover ARB            Maintenance Facility Shops               0          51,100          51,100
MILCON, AF RES               MINNESOTA                Minneapolis-St Paul     Indoor Small Arms Range...               0           9,000           9,000
                                                       IAP
MILCON, AF RES               NORTH CAROLINA           Seymour Johnson AFB     KC-46A ADAL for Alt                  6,400                           6,400
                                                                               Mission Storage.
MILCON, AF RES               TEXAS                    NAS JRB Fort Worth      Munitions Training/Admin                 0           3,100           3,100
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AF RES               UTAH                     Hill AFB                Add/Alter Life Support               3,100                           3,100
                                                                               Facility.
MILCON, AF RES               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........               0          13,500          13,500
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AF RES               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,725                           4,725
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AF RES               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,610                           3,610
                                                       Locations               Construction.
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, AF RES                                                                                     63,535         108,700         172,235
                             .......................  ......................
NATO SEC INV PRGM
NATO SEC INV PRGM            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Nato Security           Nato Security Investment           154,000                         154,000
                                                       Investment Program      Program.
      SUBTOTAL NATO SEC INV PRGM                                                                                 154,000               0         154,000
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION                                                                              8,119,429         449,084       8,568,513
                             .......................  ......................
FAMILY HOUSING
FAM HSG CON, ARMY
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Family Housing New                   6,100                           6,100
                                                                               Construction.
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            GERMANY                  Baumholder              Construction Improvements.          34,156                          34,156
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            GERMANY                  South Camp Vilseck      Family Housing New                  22,445                          22,445
                                                                               Construction (36 units).
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            KOREA                    Camp Humphreys          Family Housing New                  34,402                          34,402
                                                                               Construction Incr 2.
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            KWAJALEIN                Kwajalein Atoll         Family Housing Replacement          31,000         -31,000               0
                                                                               Construction.
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            MASSACHUSETTS            Natick                  Family Housing Replacement          21,000                          21,000
                                                                               Construction.
FAM HSG CON, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........          33,559                          33,559
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG CON, ARMY                                                                                 182,662         -31,000         151,662
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          37,089                          37,089
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................           8,930                           8,930
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          12,816                          12,816
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............             400                             400
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............          57,708                          57,708
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          60,251                          60,251
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................         148,538                         148,538
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, ARMY            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privitization               20,893                          20,893
                                                       Locations               Support.
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG O&M, ARMY                                                                                 346,625               0         346,625
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG CON, N/MC
FAM HSG CON, N/MC            BAHRAIN ISLAND           SW Asia                 Construct On-Base GFOQ....           2,138                           2,138
FAM HSG CON, N/MC            MARIANA ISLANDS          Guam                    Replace Andersen Housing            40,875         -40,875               0
                                                                               PH II.
FAM HSG CON, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Construction Improvements.          36,251                          36,251
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG CON, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,418                           4,418
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG CON, N/MC                                                                                  83,682         -40,875          42,807
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          62,167                          62,167
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          14,529                          14,529
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          50,989                          50,989
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............             336                             336
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................          15,649                          15,649
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          61,921                          61,921
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............          95,104                          95,104
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, N/MC            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privatization               27,587                          27,587
                                                       Locations               Support.
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG O&M, N/MC                                                                                 328,282               0         328,282
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG CON, AF
FAM HSG CON, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Construction Improvements.          80,617                          80,617
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG CON, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,445                           4,445
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG CON, AF                                                                                    85,062               0          85,062
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG O&M, AF
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privatization.....          21,569                          21,569
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          47,504                          47,504
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          53,464                          53,464
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................          13,517                          13,517
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          29,424                          29,424
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............           1,839                           1,839
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          16,818                          16,818
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, AF              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............         134,189                         134,189
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG O&M, AF                                                                                   318,324               0         318,324
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG O&M, DW
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................           4,100                           4,100
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............             407                             407
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................             268                             268
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          12,390                          12,390
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............             655                             655
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............             641                             641
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          39,716                          39,716
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............               6                               6
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................              14                              14
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................              86                              86
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............             567                             567
                                                       Locations
FAM HSG O&M, DW              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................             319                             319
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG O&M, DW                                                                                    59,169               0          59,169
                             .......................  ......................
FAM HSG IMPROVE FUND
FAM HSG IMPROVE FUND         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Administrative Expenses--            2,726                           2,726
                                                       Locations               FHIF.
      SUBTOTAL FAM HSG IMPROVE FUND                                                                                2,726               0           2,726
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING                                                                                     1,406,532         -71,875       1,334,657
                             .......................  ......................
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
DOD BRAC--ARMY
DOD BRAC--ARMY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Base Realignment &      Base Realignment and                58,000                          58,000
                                                       Closure, Army           Closure.
      SUBTOTAL DOD BRAC--ARMY                                                                                     58,000               0          58,000
                             .......................  ......................
DOD BRAC--NAVY
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Base Realignment &      Base Realignment & Closure          93,474                          93,474
                                                       Closure, Navy
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-172: NWS Seal Beach,             5,355                           5,355
                                                       Locations               Concord, CA.
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-138: NAS Brunswick, ME             647                             647
                                                       Locations
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-157: MCSA Kansas City,              40                              40
                                                       Locations               MO.
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-84: JRB Willow Grove &           4,737                           4,737
                                                       Locations               Cambria Reg AP.
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Undistributed.............           7,210                           7,210
                                                       Locations
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-100: Planing, Design             8,428                           8,428
                                                       Locations               and Management.
DOD BRAC--NAVY               WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DON-101: Various Locations          23,753                          23,753
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL DOD BRAC--NAVY                                                                                    143,644               0         143,644
                             .......................  ......................
DOD BRAC--AIR FORCE
DOD BRAC--AIR FORCE          WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DoD BRAC Activities--Air            54,223                          54,223
                                                       Locations               Force.
      SUBTOTAL DOD BRAC--AIR FORCE                                                                                54,223               0          54,223
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE                                                                 255,867                         255,867
                             .......................  ......................
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unaccompanied Housing   Administrative Expenses--              623                             623
                                                       Improvement Fund        UHIF.
      SUBTOTAL UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND                                                                                623               0             623
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND                                                                                   623                             623
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC                                                    9,782,451         377,209      10,159,660
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              Budget                          Senate
          Account                 State/ Country           Installation              Project Title            Request     Senate  Change    Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
MILCON, ARMY
MILCON, ARMY                 GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA     Guantanamo Bay          OCO: Barracks.............         115,000                         115,000
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..          15,700         -15,700               0
                                                       Locations
MILCON, ARMY                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   OCO: Planning and Design..           9,000                           9,000
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, ARMY                                                                                      139,700         -15,700         124,000
                             .......................  ......................
MIL CON, NAVY
MIL CON, NAVY                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..          18,500         -18,500               0
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MIL CON, NAVY                                                                                      18,500         -18,500
                             .......................  ......................
MILCON, AIR FORCE
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ESTONIA                  Amari Air Base          ERI: POL Capacity Phase II           4,700          -4,700               0
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ESTONIA                  Amari Air Base          ERI: Tactical Fighter                9,200          -9,200               0
                                                                               Aircraft Parking Apron.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Increase POL Storage           12,500         -12,500               0
                                                                               Capacity.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Construct Parallel             30,000         -30,000               0
                                                                               Taxiway.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            HUNGARY                  Kecskemet AB            ERI: Airfield Upgrades....          12,900         -12,900               0
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ICELAND                  Keflavik                ERI: Airfield Upgrades....          14,400         -14,400               0
MILCON, AIR FORCE            JORDAN                   Azraq                   OCO: MSAB Development.....         143,000                         143,000
MILCON, AIR FORCE            LATVIA                   Lielvarde Air Base      ERI: Expand Strategic Ramp           3,850          -3,850               0
                                                                               Parking.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            LUXEMBOURG               Sanem                   ERI: ECAOS Deployable               67,400         -67,400               0
                                                                               Airbase System Storage.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            NORWAY                   Rygge                   ERI: Replace/Expand Quick           10,300         -10,300               0
                                                                               Reaction Alert Pad.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            ROMANIA                  Campia Turzii           ERI: Upgrade Utilities               2,950          -2,950               0
                                                                               Infrastructure.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Malacky                 ERI: Increase POL Storage           20,000         -20,000               0
                                                                               Capacity.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Malacky                 ERI: Airfield Upgrades....           4,000          -4,000               0
MILCON, AIR FORCE            SLOVAKIA                 Sliac Airport           ERI: Airfield Upgrades....          22,000         -22,000               0
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TURKEY                   Incirlik AB             OCO: Replace Perimeter               8,100                           8,100
                                                                               Fence.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            TURKEY                   Incirlik AB             OCO: Relocate Base Main             14,600                          14,600
                                                                               Access Control Point.
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..          56,630         -56,630               0
                                                       Locations
MILCON, AIR FORCE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   OCO--Planning and Design..          41,500                          41,500
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MILCON, AIR FORCE                                                                                 478,030        -270,830         207,200
                             .......................  ......................
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE
MIL CON, DEF-WIDE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERI: Planning and Design..           1,900          -1,900               0
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL MIL CON, DEF-WIDE                                                                                   1,900          -1,900
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION                                                                                638,130        -306,930         331,200
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC                                                      638,130        -306,930         331,200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Senate
                          Program                           FY 2018  Request   Senate  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary by Appropriation
  Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
  Appropriation Summary:
    Energy Programs
      Nuclear energy......................................           133,000               0             133,000
 
    Atomic Energy Defense Activities
      National nuclear security administration:
        Weapons activities................................        10,239,344         273,600          10,512,944
        Defense nuclear nonproliferation..................         1,793,310         250,297           2,043,607
        Naval reactors....................................         1,479,751          38,000           1,517,751
        Federal Salaries and Expenses.....................           418,595               0             418,595
      Total, National nuclear security administration.....        13,931,000         561,897          14,492,897
 
      Environmental and other defense activities:
        Other defense activities..........................           815,512               0             815,512
        Defense nuclear waste disposal....................            30,000               0              30,000
      Total, Environmental & other defense activities.....           845,512               0             845,512
    Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities...............        14,776,512         561,897          15,338,409
  Subtotal, Energy And Water Development and Related              14,909,512         561,897          15,471,409
   Agencies...............................................
 
    Defense EM funded.....................................         5,537,186               0           5,537,186
      Uranium enrichment D&D fund contribution............                 0               0                   0
Total, Discretionary Funding..............................        20,446,698         561,897          21,008,595
 
Nuclear Energy
  Idaho sitewide safeguards and security..................           133,000                             133,000
Total, Nuclear Energy.....................................           133,000               0             133,000
Defense (050) function.....................(non-add)......        ( 133,000)                            -133,000
 
 
Weapons Activities
  Directed stockpile work
    Life extension programs and major alterations
      B61 Life extension program..........................           788,572                             788,572
      W76 Life extension program..........................           224,134                             224,134
      W88 Alt 370.........................................                 0                                   0
      W88 Alteration program..............................           332,292                             332,292
      W80-4 Life extension program........................           399,090                             399,090
    Total, Life extension programs and major alterations..         1,744,088               0           1,744,088
 
    Stockpile systems
      B61 Stockpile systems...............................            59,729                              59,729
      W76 Stockpile systems...............................            51,400                              51,400
      W78 Stockpile systems...............................            60,100                              60,100
      W80 Stockpile systems...............................            80,087                              80,087
      B83 Stockpile systems...............................            35,762                              35,762
      W87 Stockpile systems...............................            83,200                              83,200
      W88 Stockpile systems...............................           131,576                             131,576
    Total, Stockpile systems..............................           501,854               0             501,854
 
    Weapons dismantlement and disposition
      Operations and maintenance..........................            52,000                              52,000
 
    Stockpile services
      Production support..................................           470,400                             470,400
      Research and development support....................            31,150                              31,150
      R&D certification and safety........................           196,840          20,900             217,740
            Program increase for technology maturation....                           [20,900]
      Management, technology, and production..............           285,400                             285,400
    Total, Stockpile services.............................           983,790          20,900           1,004,690
 
    Strategic materials
      Uranium sustainment.................................            20,579                              20,579
      Plutonium sustainment...............................           210,367                             210,367
      Tritium sustainment.................................           198,152                             198,152
      Domestic uranium enrichment.........................            60,000                              60,000
      Strategic materials sustainment.....................           206,196                             206,196
    Total, Strategic materials............................           695,294               0             695,294
  Total, Directed stockpile work..........................         3,977,026          20,900           3,997,926
 
  Research, development, test evaluation (RDT&E)
    Science
      Advanced certification..............................            57,710                              57,710
      Primary assessment technologies.....................            89,313                              89,313
      Dynamic materials properties........................           122,347                             122,347
      Advanced radiography................................            37,600                              37,600
      Secondary assessment technologies...................            76,833                              76,833
      Academic alliances and partnerships.................            52,963                              52,963
      Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical Experiments...            50,755          15,000              65,755
            Radiography project completion................                           [15,000]
    Total, Science........................................           487,521          15,000             502,521
 
    Engineering
      Enhanced surety.....................................            39,717          12,300              52,017
            Program increase for technology maturation....                           [12,300]
      Weapon systems engineering assessment technology....            23,029                              23,029
      Nuclear survivability...............................            45,230                              45,230
      Enhanced surveillance...............................            45,147                              45,147
      Stockpile Responsiveness............................            40,000          10,000              50,000
            Program increase..............................                           [10,000]
    Total, Engineering....................................           193,123          22,300             215,423
 
    Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield
      Ignition............................................            79,575                              79,575
      Support of other stockpile programs.................            23,565                              23,565
      Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support....            77,915                              77,915
      Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion............             7,596                               7,596
      Joint program in high energy density laboratory                  9,492                               9,492
       plasmas............................................
      Facility operations and target production...........           334,791          12,000             346,791
            Support increased shot rates..................                           [12,000]
    Total, Inertial confinement fusion and high yield.....           532,934          12,000             544,934
 
    Advanced simulation and computing
      Advanced simulation and computing...................           709,244                             709,244
      Construction:
        18-D-670, Exascale Class Computer Cooling                     22,000                              22,000
         Equipment, LNL...................................
        18-D-620, Exascale Computing Facility                          3,000                               3,000
         Modernization Project............................
      Total, Construction.................................            25,000               0              25,000
    Total, Advanced simulation and computing..............           734,244               0             734,244
 
    Advanced manufacturing development
      Additive manufacturing..............................            12,000          12,000              24,000
            Program increase for research and                                        [12,000]
             infrastructure...............................
      Component manufacturing development.................            38,644          36,400              75,044
            Improve production efficiency.................                           [36,400]
      Process technology development......................            29,896                              29,896
    Total, Advanced manufacturing development.............            80,540          48,400             128,940
  Total, RDT&E............................................         2,028,362          97,700           2,126,062
 
  Infrastructure and operations
    Operating
      Operations of facilities
        Operations of facilities..........................           868,000                             868,000
        Kansas City National Security Campus..............                 0                                   0
        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory............                 0                                   0
        Los Alamos National Laboratory....................                 0                                   0
        Nevada National Security Site.....................                 0                                   0
        Pantex............................................                 0                                   0
        Sandia National Laboratories......................                 0                                   0
        Savannah River Site...............................                 0                                   0
        Y-12 National security complex....................                 0                                   0
      Total, Operations of facilities.....................           868,000               0             868,000
 
      Safety and environmental operations.................           116,000                             116,000
      Maintenance and repair of facilities................           360,000          50,000             410,000
            Reduce deferred maintenance backlog...........                           [50,000]
      Recapitalization....................................           427,342         100,000             527,342
            Reduce deferred maintenance backlog...........                          [100,000]
    Construction:
      18-D-660, Fire Station, Y-12........................            28,000                              28,000
      18-D-650, Tritium Production Capability, SRS........             6,800                               6,800
      17-D-640, U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS....            22,100                              22,100
      17-D-630, Expand Electrical Distribution System,                 6,000                               6,000
       LLNL...............................................
      17-D-126, PF-4 reconfiguration project, LANL........                 0                                   0
      17-D-125, RLOUB reconfiguration project, LANL.......                 0                                   0
      16-D-621 TA-3 substation replacement, LANL..........                 0                                   0
      16-D-515 Albuquerque complex project................            98,000                              98,000
      15-D-613 Emergency Operations Center, Y-12..........             7,000                               7,000
      15-D-302, TA-55 Reinvestment project, Phase 3, LANL.                 0                                   0
      11-D-801 TA-55 Reinvestment project Phase 2, LANL...                 0                                   0
      07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility             2,100                               2,100
       upgrade project, LANL..............................
      07-D-220-04 Transuranic liquid waste facility, LANL.            17,895                              17,895
      06-D-141 Uranium processing facility Y-12, Oak                 663,000                             663,000
       Ridge, TN..........................................
      Chemistry and metallurgy replacement (CMRR)
        04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy research                   180,900                             180,900
         facility replacement project, LANL...............
        04-D-125--04 RLUOB equipment installation.........                 0                                   0
        04-D-125--05 PF -4 equipment installation.........                 0                                   0
      Total, Chemistry and metallurgy replacement (CMRR)..           180,900               0             180,900
    Total, Construction...................................         1,031,795               0           1,031,795
  Total, Infrastructure and operations....................         2,803,137         150,000           2,953,137
  Secure transportation asset
    Operations and equipment..............................           219,464                             219,464
    Program direction.....................................           105,600                             105,600
  Total, Secure transportation asset......................           325,064               0             325,064
 
  Defense nuclear security
    Operations and maintenance............................           686,977           5,000             691,977
          Reduce deferred maintenance backlog.............                            [5,000]
    Security improvements program.........................                 0                                   0
 
    Construction:
      17-D-710 West end protected area reduction project,                  0                                   0
       Y-12...............................................
      14-D-710 Device assembly facility argus installation                 0                                   0
       project, NNSS, NV..................................
  Total, Defense nuclear security.........................           686,977           5,000             691,977
 
  Information technology and cybersecurity................           186,728                             186,728
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................           232,050                             232,050
Subtotal, Weapons activities..............................        10,239,344         273,600          10,512,944
 
  Adjustments
    Use of prior year balances............................                 0                                   0
Subtotal, Weapons activities..............................        10,239,344         273,600          10,512,944
 
  Rescission
    Rescission of prior year balances.....................                 0                                   0
Total, Weapons Activities.................................        10,239,344         273,600          10,512,944
 
 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
  Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs
    Global material security
      International nuclear security......................            46,339          20,000              66,339
            Enhanced nuclear security.....................                           [20,000]
      Radiological security...............................           146,340          20,000             166,340
            Protection and safe disposal of radioactive                              [20,000]
             sources......................................
      Domestic radiologic security........................                 0                                   0
      International radiologic security...................                 0                                   0
      Nuclear smuggling detection.........................           144,429          60,000             204,429
            Radiation detection...........................                           [60,000]
    Total, Global material security.......................           337,108         100,000             437,108
 
    Material management and minimization
      HEU reactor conversion..............................           125,500                             125,500
      Nuclear material removal............................            32,925                              32,925
      Material disposition................................           173,669                             173,669
    Total, Material management & minimization.............           332,094               0             332,094
 
    Nonproliferation and arms control.....................           129,703          70,297             200,000
          Verification....................................                           [70,297]
    Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D..................           446,095                             446,095
 
    Nonproliferation construction
      U. S. Construction:
        18-D-150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project....             9,000                               9,000
        99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication                  270,000          80,000             350,000
         Facility, SRS....................................
              Increase to continue construction of MOX....                           [80,000]
      Total, Nonproliferation construction................           279,000          80,000             359,000
  Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs........         1,524,000         250,297           1,774,297
 
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................            40,950                              40,950
  Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program..           277,360                             277,360
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................         1,842,310         250,297           2,092,607
  Adjustments
    Use of prior year balances............................                 0                                   0
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................         1,842,310         250,297           2,092,607
  Rescission..............................................                                                     0
    Rescission of prior year balances.....................           -49,000                             -49,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................         1,793,310         250,297           2,043,607
 
 
Naval Reactors
  Naval reactors development..............................           473,267                             473,267
  Ohio replacement reactor systems development............                 0                                   0
  Columbia-Class reactor systems development..............           156,700                             156,700
  S8G Prototype refueling.................................           190,000                             190,000
  Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............           466,884          38,000             504,884
        Reduce deferred maintenance backlog...............                           [38,000]
  Construction:...........................................                                                     0
    17-D-911, BL Fire System Upgrade......................                 0                                   0
    15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage Expansion 3.............            13,700                              13,700
    15-D-903 KL Fire System Upgrade.......................            15,000                              15,000
    15-D-902 KS Engineroom team trainer facility..........                 0                                   0
    14-D-902 KL Materials characterization laboratory                      0                                   0
     expansion, KAPL......................................
    14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization project,           116,000                             116,000
     NRF..................................................
    10-D-903, Security upgrades, KS.......................                 0                                   0
  Total, Construction.....................................           144,700               0             144,700
  Program direction.......................................            48,200                              48,200
Subtotal, Naval Reactors..................................         1,479,751          38,000           1,517,751
 
  Rescission
    Rescission of prior year balances.....................                 0                                   0
Total, Naval Reactors.....................................         1,479,751          38,000           1,517,751
 
 
Federal Salaries and Expenses
  Program direction.......................................           418,595                             418,595
       Rescission.........................................                 0                                   0
Total, Federal Salaries and Expenses......................           418,595               0             418,595
 
 
Defense Environmental Cleanup
  Closure sites:
    Closure sites administration..........................             4,889                               4,889
 
  Hanford site:
    River corridor and other cleanup operations:
      River corridor and other cleanup operations.........            58,692                              58,692
 
    Central plateau remediation:
      Central plateau remediation.........................           637,879                             637,879
 
    Richland community and regulatory support.............             5,121                               5,121
    Construction
      18-D-404 WESF Modifications and Capsule Storage.....             6,500                               6,500
      15-D-401 Containerized sludge removal annex, RL.....             8,000                               8,000
    Total, Construction...................................            14,500                              14,500
  Total, Hanford site.....................................           716,192                             716,192
 
  Idaho National Laboratory:
    SNF stabilization and disposition--2012...............            19,975                              19,975
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition.............           170,101                             170,101
    Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and                  111,352                             111,352
     disposition..........................................
    Soil and water remediation--2035......................            44,727                              44,727
    Idaho community and regulatory support................             4,071                               4,071
  Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................           350,226                             350,226
 
  NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................             1,175                               1,175
    Nuclear facility D&D Separations Process Research Unit             1,800                               1,800
    Nevada................................................            60,136                              60,136
    Sandia National Laboratories..........................             2,600                               2,600
    Los Alamos National Laboratory........................           191,629                             191,629
  Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites..................           257,340                             257,340
  Oak Ridge Reservation:
    OR Nuclear facility D & D
      OR-0041--D&D - Y-12.................................            29,369                              29,369
      OR-0042--D&D -ORNL..................................            48,110                              48,110
      Construction
        17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility..........             5,000                               5,000
        14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility...            17,100                              17,100
    Total, OR Nuclear facility D & D......................            99,579                              99,579
 
    U233 Disposition Program..............................            33,784                              33,784
    OR cleanup and disposition
      OR cleanup and disposition..........................            66,632                              66,632
 
    OR community & regulatory support.....................             4,605                               4,605
 
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition
      Oak Ridge technology development....................             3,000                               3,000
  Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................           207,600                             207,600
 
  Office of River Protection:
    Waste treatment and immobilization plant
         Construction:
         01-D-416 A-D WTP Subprojects A-D.................           655,000                             655,000
         01-D-416 E--Pretreatment Facility................            35,000                              35,000
         Total, 01-D-416 Construction.....................           690,000                             690,000
 
         WTP Commissioning................................             8,000                               8,000
    Total, Waste treatment & immobilization plant.........           698,000                             698,000
 
    Tank farm activities
      Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition.           713,311                             713,311
      Construction:
        15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system,              93,000                              93,000
         ORP..............................................
    Total, Tank farm activities...........................           806,311                             806,311
  Total, Office of River protection.......................         1,504,311                           1,504,311
 
  Savannah River Sites:
    Savannah River risk management operations:
      Nuclear material stabilization and disposition......                 0                                   0
      SNF stabilization and disposition...................                 0                                   0
      Soil and water remediation-2035.....................                 0                                   0
      Solid waste stabilization and disposition...........                 0                                   0
    Total, Savannah River risk management operations......                 0                                   0
 
    Nuclear Material Management
        Nuclear Material Management.......................           323,482                             323,482
 
    Environmental Cleanup
         Environmental Cleanup............................           159,478                             159,478
      Construction:
        08-D-402, Emergency Operations Center.............               500                                 500
    Total, Environmental Cleanup..........................           159,978                             159,978
 
    SR community and regulatory support...................            11,249                              11,249
 
    Radioactive liquid tank waste:
      Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and                597,258                             597,258
       disposition........................................
      Construction:
        18-D-401, SDU #8/9................................               500                                 500
        17-D-402--Saltstone Disposal Unit #7..............            40,000                              40,000
        15-D-402--Saltstone Disposal Unit #6, SRS.........                 0                                   0
        05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, Savannah            150,000                             150,000
         River Site.......................................
  Total, Savannah River Site..............................         1,282,467                           1,282,467
 
  Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
    Operations and maintenance............................           206,617                             206,617
    Recovery activities...................................                 0                                   0
    Central characterization project......................            22,500                              22,500
    Transportation........................................            21,854                              21,854
    Construction:
      15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation             46,000                              46,000
       system, WIPP.......................................
      15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP........................            19,600                              19,600
    Total, Construction...................................            65,600                              65,600
  Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant......................           316,571                             316,571
 
  Program direction.......................................           300,000                             300,000
  Program support.........................................             6,979                               6,979
  WCF Mission Related Activities..........................            22,109                              22,109
  Minority Serving Institution Partnership................             6,000                               6,000
 
  Safeguards and Security:
    Oak Ridge Reservation.................................            16,500                              16,500
    Paducah...............................................            14,049                              14,049
    Portsmouth............................................            12,713                              12,713
    Richland/Hanford Site.................................            75,600                              75,600
    Savannah River Site...................................           142,314                             142,314
    Waste Isolation Pilot Project.........................             5,200                               5,200
    West Valley...........................................             2,784                               2,784
  Total, Safeguards and Security..........................           269,160                             269,160
 
  Cyber Security..........................................            43,342                              43,342
  Technology development..................................            25,000                              25,000
  HQEF-0040--Excess Facilities............................           225,000                             225,000
  CB-0101 Economic assistance to the state of NM..........                 0                                   0
Subtotal, Defense environmental cleanup...................         5,537,186                           5,537,186
 
  Rescission:
    Rescission of prior year balances.....................                 0
Total, Defense Environmental Cleanup......................         5,537,186                           5,537,186
 
 
Other Defense Activities
  Environment, health, safety and security
    Environment, health, safety and security..............           130,693                             130,693
    Program direction.....................................            68,765                              68,765
  Total, Environment, Health, safety and security.........           199,458               0             199,458
 
  Independent enterprise assessments
    Independent enterprise assessments....................            24,068                              24,068
    Program direction.....................................            50,863                              50,863
  Total, Independent enterprise assessments...............            74,931               0              74,931
 
  Specialized security activities.........................           237,912                             237,912
 
  Office of Legacy Management
    Legacy management.....................................           137,674                             137,674
    Program direction.....................................            16,932                              16,932
  Total, Office of Legacy Management......................           154,606               0             154,606
 
  Defense related administrative support
    Chief financial officer...............................            48,484                              48,484
    Chief information officer.............................            91,443                              91,443
    Management............................................                 0                                   0
    Project management oversight and Assessments..........             3,073                               3,073
  Total, Defense related administrative support...........           143,000               0             143,000
 
  Office of hearings and appeals..........................             5,605                               5,605
Subtotal, Other defense activities........................           815,512               0             815,512
  Rescission:
    Rescission of prior year balances (LM)................                 0                                   0
    Rescission of prior year balances (EHS&S).............                 0                                   0
    Rescission of prior year balances (OHA)...............                 0                                   0
    Rescission of prior year balances (SSA)...............                 0                                   0
    Rescission of prior year balances (EA)................                 0                                   0
    Rescission of prior year balances (ESA)...............                 0                                   0
  Total, Rescission.......................................                 0               0                   0
Total, Other Defense Activities...........................           815,512               0             815,512
 
 
Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal
  Yucca mountain and interim storage......................            30,000                              30,000
 
Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund
  Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund Contribution................                 0                                   0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

                      Departmental Recommendations

    One legislative proposal on the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 was submitted as an 
executive communication to the President of the Senate by the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs of the 
Department of Defense and subsequently referred to the 
committee. Information on this executive communications appears 
below. This executive communication is available for review at 
the committee.
    Executive Communication No. EC-1677
    Dated June 6, 2017
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on June 6, 2017

                            Committee Action

    The committee vote to report the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 passed by roll call 
vote, 27-0, as follows: In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, 
Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, 
Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, Strange, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    The other 7 roll call votes on motions and amendments to 
the bill which were considered during the course of the full 
committee markup are as follows:
    1. MOTION: To conduct full committee markup of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 in closed 
session because of classified and proprietary information 
expected to be discussed.
    Passed by roll call vote 18-9
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Graham, Sasse, 
Strange, Reed, Nelson, Donnelly, Hirono, and King
    Opposed: Senators Cruz, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, 
Blumenthal, Kaine, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    2. MOTION: To include a provision that would vest in the 
Chief of Staff of each of the Armed Forces the responsibility 
for establishing, approving, and modifying the criteria, 
standards, and qualifications for military specialty codes 
within that Armed Force.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 15-12
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
Strange, and King
    Opposed: Senators Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, Heinrich, 
Warren, and Peters
    3. MOTION: To include a provision that would remove 
Department of Defense exemptions from Program and Program 
Management requirements in Section 503(c) of title 31, United 
States Code, and Program Improvement Management Officer 
requirements in Section 1123(a)(3) of title 31, United States 
Code.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 10-17
    In favor: Senators Ernst, Perdue, Cruz, McCaskill, 
Gillibrand, Donnelly, King, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Tillis, Sullivan, Graham, Sasse, Strange, Reed, Nelson, 
Shaheen, Blumenthal, Hirono, and Kaine
    4. MOTION: To include a provision that would allow each 
secretary of a military department to transfer funds designated 
for military museums to the World War I Centennial Commission.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
    In favor: Senators Cruz, Strange, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, 
Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Graham, Sasse, King, 
and Heinrich
    5. MOTION: To include a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to reestablish port of call exchanges 
between the United States and Taiwan.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 21-6
    In Favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
Strange, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, 
Heinrich, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators Reed, Nelson, Hirono, Kaine, King, and 
Warren
    6. MOTION: To strike the portions of a provision that would 
allow the Department of Defense to conduct all personnel 
background and security investigations adjudicated by the 
Consolidated Adjudication Facility of the Department.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 9-18
    In favor: Senators McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, 
Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
Strange, Reed, Nelson, Donnelly, and Heinrich
    7. MOTION: To include a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the oversight of 
Department of Defense assistance for the Lebanese Armed Forces 
and the Lebanese Internal Security Forces.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 8-19
    In favor: Senators Cotton, Ernst, Perdue, Cruz, Sasse, 
Donnelly, Kaine, and King
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Rounds, 
Tillis, Sullivan, Graham, Strange, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Heinrich, Warren, and 
Peters

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget 
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not 
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included 
in material presented during Senate floor debate on the 
legislation.

                           Regulatory Impact

    Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the 
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds 
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National 
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2018.

                        Changes in Existing Laws

    Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law 
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in 
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the 
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such 
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and 
reduce the expenditure of funds.

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                              ----------                              

                     ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF MR. ROUNDS

    I strongly support the National Defense Authorization Act 
reported out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I commend 
Chairman McCain and Ranking Member Reed for their outstanding 
bipartisan cooperation in once again moving this crucial bill 
to the full Senate. However, I strongly oppose a section of the 
bill that would adversely affect my constituents who are 
military retirees as well as those in many other states. These 
retirees may be disproportionately and unfairly impacted by 
increases in TRICARE prescription drug copay increases in the 
bill. Specifically, provisions in this bill would increase 
cost-sharing amounts for the TRICARE pharmacy benefits program 
for years 2018 through 2026.
    The committee report does not state the rationale for these 
increases. Such increases in the Senate passed NDAA 2017, which 
fortunately did not survive conference, had the stated 
rationale that the increases would generate savings which could 
be used to improve health outcomes and the experience of care 
for beneficiaries of the military health system. I fully 
support improving care for beneficiaries of the military health 
system. However, increased TRICARE pharmacy copays must be 
carefully considered to make certain that they do not 
disproportionately impact one part of the beneficiary 
population. Unfortunately that would be the case for South 
Dakota and other largely rural states with large military 
retiree populations that live too far from Military Treatment 
Facilities to draw free prescriptions available there. Instead, 
these military retirees and their families are compelled to use 
the TRICARE mail order system or retail pharmacies and in both 
cases, they would have to pay higher copays.
    For example, the copay for a generic drug ordered through 
the TRICARE mail order system would increase by $10 dollars in 
Fiscal Year 2018. While this does not seem like a lot of money, 
these costs can add up rapidly if a military retiree and his or 
her family members are required to make multiple copays for 
multiple prescriptions every month.
    Simply put--our military retirees who live distant from a 
Military Treatment Facility should not be unfairly forced to 
pay higher copays on prescription drugs just because of where 
they choose to live.

                                                       Mike Rounds.

                                  [all]
```